Send them to fight a war that their own people disagree with, their government does not commit to fully, and you attack their spirit from within. Thankfully our soldiers are made of the stuff which legends are made, and do not need adoration or affirmation to do their job. Although they do not need these things, the fact they don't get them is a terrible act of injustice.
The wars we can understand the most in the last 60 years are the first gulf war, and the war in Afghanistan. We had a clear cut enemy and good reason to go to war in those situations, while in the rest we fought ideals in government, and the fear or threat of violence. We cannot fight an idea or belief especially when they are for the most part supported by their people. It's just like the war on drugs or communism; you cannot police a thought or belief anymore than you can regulate breathing.
How do you wage war on an inanimate object? It is always changing and moves at the speed of light from one place to another. You can change a belief, but you will never beat into submission or defeat it in battle. The only way to change a belief is with another belief or new information.
There are some who will point to the access of the media in the modern era as reason for the clouded and confusing information. Perhaps, but how unsure can anyone be about genocide or tyranny? As a matter of fact we didn't know about the Nazi death camps until the last stages of the war, so by that one can assume if the media of that time had the access they enjoy today the issue of the holocaust would have been clouded as well. I don't think so, and furthermore refuse to believe access of the media in war is a bad thing. There are some difficult and disturbing things that come with any war. They become even more so when the war is against an enemy with an undying belief, cause, or defending their own soil. There is no single tougher enemy than those who fight for their home, their freedom, or will sacrifice everything for their cause. This has been proven throughout history from The Roman Empire to today and all periods before and after; no one can rule another's land without their consent and cooperation.
One last consideration we should examine in all this, lies in what one person considers freedom and what another considers oppression. If I go into your house uninvited and begin telling you how you should run your house from now on; you would most likely get tired of me very quickly and in the very least ask me to leave. If I didn't leave after you asked, you would then either call the police or physically remove me. These are not difficult things to grasp and seem like the proper way to handle a rude and unwanted guest. So why is this so hard to understand when it pertains to the war in Iraq? We are a rude and unwanted guest who will not leave, and the owners of the house are trying to remove us. Even an invited guest, no matter how much appreciated can and will outstay his welcome if he refuses to leave when asked. Ask yourself how you would like it if after the revolutionary war, our allies at the time came in and started telling us how our government should be run? Or even gave us a few choices on what kind of government would be allowed and what people would be acceptable as leaders or officials? Would that anger you? Would you decide that these allies were no better than the oppressor you just fought? Would you take up arms and fight against them if needed? I would and anyone desiring freedom and liberty would as well. Why is foreign rule considered good when we are the foreigners, but wrong when it is another government?
I am a very proud American and consider myself a patriot, so my next words may shock some of you. We are not perfect, we can and do make many mistakes because we are people and given to the same weaknesses, desires, wants, needs, and fears of any other human being. Our purpose and design is a fine example of a government at times, just as it is severely flawed at other times. To say our brand of democracy or government is superior to all others only shows our flaws more clearly. Despite my knowing of our imperfections, I love this country and so should all of you. Loving my country does not mean I think we are always right or better than anyone else. It simply means I love it for all its strengths and weaknesses, and in that love I will embrace our strengths and address our weaknesses. Until we realize what we call freedom another may call anarchy, we will continue down this path. The bottom line is; many of the things we hold of such dire importance in our government will hold no weight in theirs.
In the end the cost of freedom is measured in the hearts of those who desire it, and as such is unique to all, while the price of war is in the lives given and the pain and suffering of those left behind. Thank you for reading, and I hope this can be of some use to all of us.
