The Troops are Heroes
|Why am I not surprised that the LA Times believes that soldiers, even the one injured and killed while serving their country, are not heroes:
Once upon a time, you had to do something truly exceptional to qualify as a full-fledged hero: single-handedly hold off a battalion of enemy soldiers to allow your platoon to escape, or rescue 100 children from a Nazi concentration camp. But today, just showing up at your Army recruiting station makes you an instant hero — and getting yourself hurt or killed doubles your heroism, even if you were sound asleep when your supply convoy went over an IED.
The empty rhetoric of heroism is everywhere these days. You know what I mean. Pat Tillman — the former NFL star — is "an American hero," apparently because he volunteered for duty along with several hundred thousand other people, then had the misfortune to be accidentally shot by his own side. Every wounded service member is a "hero" too: Sen. Hillary Clinton proudly sponsored the "Heroes at Home Act of 2007," intended to improve medical care for wounded military personnel, and the Defense Department recently sponsored the "Hiring Heroes Career Fair" to encourage companies to hire wounded veterans. No soldier left behind!
Bah, humbug. [LA Times, 03AUG07]
I actually read this after I got done reading this article in the Stars & Stripes:
In this Army community, a friend calls before coming over to have a cigarette.
A knock on the door can make a soldier’s spouse jumpy because it could be that knock.
“When it’s 8 o’clock at night and you’re not expecting anybody to come over, and someone just comes up and rings your doorbell, your heart stops,” said Krissi Van Oder, wife of Staff Sgt. Scott Van Order of the 9th Engineer Battalion.
“Or someone will call you on the phone and say, ‘This is sergeant so-and-so; your husband is OK,’ because they’ve had the experience of, ‘Oh my God, why are you calling?’”
“It’s terrible how many things can run through your head in 15 seconds,” Van Order said. “Your husband’s hurt. Somebody you know is hurt. Somebody you know was killed. They’re being extended.”
The 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division — known as the “Dagger Brigade” — has endured the deadliest deployment of any Europe-based U.S. military brigade in Iraq. Fifty-six troops have been killed in combat since the brigade deployed a year ago, mostly from roadside bombs. One death, described as noncombat related, is under investigation.
Some units have suffered more losses than others. The hardest hit — the 1st Battalion, 26th Infantry Regiment — has reported 27 deaths. Next on this tragic list comes the 1st Battalion, 18th Infantry Regiment, with 19 deaths. [Stars & Stripes, 05AUG07]
How can anyone think, for example that the soldiers and families of the 1-26IN battalion that has been extended in Iraq and has already lost 27 soldiers during their deployment, are not heroes? When I was in Iraq my battalion lost 6 soldiers and that was hard enough, but 27 fatalities has to be incredibly painful for all the soldiers and families in that unit. Plus the unit probably has plenty of wounded soldiers as well that are equally heroic. Yet after such sacrifice the unit soldiers on and is soldiering on well judging by the progress made by the US forces in Iraq.
What is most impressive about soldiers today, is that most of them have enlisted after 9/11. The left’s talking point about the poor kid who only enlisted into the military for college money and was forced into Bush’s War has long been proven false. Most enlistments are 3-4 years in length; it has been nearly 6 years since 9/11. I signed up for the military during the "peaceful" Clinton years, the choice was easy and not what I would consider heroic. However, these soldiers enlisting today sign up knowing full well they are going to war. Additionally the NCOs that lead these soldiers continue to reenlist knowing full well that they will be going back into harms way again with another combat deployment likely. This is what I call heroic.
The inspiring nature of today’s fighting men and women is why the left and their media allies have launched their continuing campaign to slime the members of the military serving today by labeling them as uneducated low lives and criminals responsible for committing war crimes all over Iraq and thus are not worthy of the nation’s respect. Of course none of this is true, but this perception is slowly being created by the media. There is no better example than the recent "Scott Thomas" scandal.
The soldiers deployed overseas fighting for their country and the families that support them are heroes and there is no better example than the 1-26IN battalion. My best wishes to the soldiers and families of the 1-26IN battalion, you are all heroes.
Nice new blog. I had added new site link on mine.
Your argument is too sentimental.
My father was a miner – a knock at the door in the middle of the night could signify death or maiming too. Our family had worry for his life as a constant background in our lives too. Was he a hero? Were we heroes for this worry? There are millions of oil rig, construction workers, police and firemen etc who risk their lives. Statistically, the risk of death in many of their occupations is higher than that of soldiers. You should re-examine your ‘We are so uniquely special in facing danger’ line. Millions of non-soldiers risk their lives every day, again often in statistically more dangerous environments (look up the death figures for oil workers – it’s appalling).
Let me ask, to criticize your argument another way: is every soldier of every army in the world a hero, because they have family at home worried about them? Yes or no, please.
Is the soldier who joined after 9/11 and is currently sitting guarding a weather station in Alaska a hero? If you asked him what he did and he said “I guard the weather station. I’m a hero!” wouldn’t we all feel that was somehow ridiculous? Wouldn’t we feel a disconnect between what he was claiming and the reality of what he did?
I think the writer was trying to say that applying the word “hero” indiscriminately to everyone devalues the meaning of the word. Sitting at home worried sick does not make one a hero. Simply joining the army does not make one a hero. Hero is meant to be a unique and special designation. It should mean someone head and shoulders above other military men, someone who not only took the same risks and actions as the others in his unit, but did something fantastically and breathtakingly heroic, such that even his comrades would single him out to say “He’s a hero”. It can happen on mass, in certain battles – certainly all the men in D-Day were heroes. But the guy sorting the mail at Fort Dix gets “hero” tacked on to him? Come on.
The problem with what you are saying is, if everyone is a hero than no one is a hero.
Hugh,
You obviously did not read my posting very closely. I clearly said that “the soldiers deployed overseas fighting for their country and the families that support them are heroes”. Somebody in a weather station in Alaska according to my definition would not qualify as heroic. However, people enlisting now and volunteering to go to war should be considered heroic, at a minimum they should be respected, which many on the left do not.
Somebody who joined the Army now and is fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan to me are heroes. These soldiers make great sacrifices by being away from their families for so long by serving their country and most importantly helping the people of Iraq and Afghanistan escape the clutches of dictatorship and fascism that the terrorists wish to bring them.
Not everyone is equally heroic which is evident by the different types of medals soldiers receive for heroism. Awards are not all about being Audie Murphy either, many soldiers working civil affairs or hunting for IEDs for example do things that are heroic and are recognized with awards as well.
An oil well worker or a coal miner is the equivalent to a soldier in the US. It is just a dangerous occupation. Plenty of soldiers die just in training in the US. A National Training Center rotation before the one my unit went to had four soldiers die. The soldiers serving and dying in Iraq and Afghanistan are heroes and should be recognized as such.
Well, I guess we have different perceptions of what the word hero means, and will have to agree to disagree.
Homer Simpson – "That little boy is a hero!"
Lisa – "Why is he a hero?"
Homer – "Why, he fell down a well!"
Are victims de facto heroes? You seem sure, I'm unsure.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IH07Ak01…
Above is a link to an Asia Times article which critiques the "we have to continue fighting because the troops want to continue fighting" & "stopping now means all previous deaths were in vain" & the even more dangerous for America "we lost Vietnam / Iraq because some of our citizens believed it was a mistake that needed to be stopped." themes, beloved of Republican commentators. Very dangerous because it not only equates freedom of speech with treason, but because it implies voting for anyone other than one party is treason.
If you get past the idiotic title, and useless pop-psychology of Bush at the end, there are some interesting points raised.