Wednesday, May 31, 2006

So, what about Murtha?

Like I've said here before, don't read anything into the fact that a particular subject hasn't been discussed here. In other words, just because I haven't posted about Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., doesn't mean I haven't noticed.

Here are some thoughts I have about Mr. Murtha's conduct with respect to members a Marine patrol in Iraq that he claims massacred defenseless civilians in cold blood:

1) Murtha's own conduct demonstrates the truth of his premise: Just because one is or was a Marine doesn't mean that one behaves honorably all the time or that one even has any honor left at all. Sometimes, dirtbags slip through the cracks and sometimes things happen and good Marines do bad things ... or just plain go bad.

2) War is a terrible thing, and it puts young men in awful situations. We don't know about this one because we weren't there. We need to wait and let the facts pan out. As some one who worked in the military justice system, I found that things generally worked out. Marine juries are fair. And they also resent political prosecutions. Remember Tailhook.

3) Even assuming that what Murtha says is true, Americans have done worse in previous wars. This is an uncomfortable fact, and it's not meant as an indictment of American fighting men but rather a plea for perspective. The difference now is that we have the MSM working in conjunction with the Democrat Party to undermine our war effort. Make no mistake about it. This is exactly what both are trying to do.

4) Just because you served in the Marine Corps, or any branch of the military for that matter, doesn't mean you can't become a treacherous, self-aggrandizing, old bastard. People shouldn't demand a special position in society because of prior service, even valorous service. Military service is a privilege and an honor, not a step up to a podium. And serving in the military doesn't make one's opinions any more valuable than another American's. Period. I am sick of the tired argument made by an insecure populace that only those who have served in the military have a right to have opinions regarding national security. This is garbage. We have an epidemic of personal-experience worship in this culture, and such thinking inappropriately elevates one's personal experiences (which, aside from being limited by definition, might be perceived to be true while being absolutely false) to a debate-free pinnacle.

5) Most Marines and other members of the military are honorable. Indeed, the overwhelming majority are. They deserve our loyalty and our presumption that they have not engaged in criminal wrongdoing. Most who have served are a pretty loyal bunch, and they do not appreciate some one who uses his service as a platform to denigrate theirs. In wartime, such conduct is arguably treasonous.

6) For Murtha, his personal ambition and political agenda apparently trump his loyalty to the USMC, and more fundamentally, to America. There are things that, even if true, should not be said during wartime, or they at least shouldn't be said in a certain way ... or in a certain forum. Most former members of the military, being patriots, understand this. Murtha does not, proving again that one's prior honorable service doesn't equate to being an honorable man today. Murtha's premature indictment of the Marines in a time of war is in truth an indictment of himself.

7) Murtha is beholden to, and a tool of, the Leftist establishment that controls the Democrat Party. These people do not want America to succeed militarily in Iraq, or anywhere for that matter. As such, they can never be entrusted with leadership in a time of war. Never. Those who think differently need their heads examined.

I write the foregoing because I remain,

Semper Fidelis ...