Since 02-01-07
Who Cares? by Oliver North
Since 02-01-07
From:
Waspscpo@aol.com [mailto:Waspscpo@aol.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 1:16 PM
To: undisclosed-recipients:
Subject: Commentary: Who Cares? by Oliver North
http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/20070128-104106-7755r_page2.htm
Who
cares?
By Oliver North
January 29, 2007
CAMP LEJEUNE, N.C.
The Marines and their families here at this sprawling base on the Carolina
coast didn't have much to say about the president's State of the Union address.
For many of them, his address the week before had been more important. It was
then that they learned many more of them would be heading for Iraq -- and that
the tour of duty for those already there would be extended.
But amazingly enough, not one of them, despite Democratic bombast and
mainstream media remonstrations to the contrary, expressed any anger at the
commander in chief for the added sacrifice.
Camp Lejeune is the home base for the 1st Battalion, 6th Marines, the unit
our Fox News "War Stories" team was embedded with in Iraq for much of last
month. For them, Al Anbar Province, Iraq is the "front line."
For most of their families, Camp Lejeune is the "home front." We returned
here to interview them, and several of the wounded, recuperating in the Wounded
Warrior Barracks. Their elan and perseverance give new meaning to the
president's words on Tuesday night: "In such courage and compassion... we see
the spirit and character of America -- and these qualities are not in short
supply."
Despite having spent most of my life in, and with, the armed forces and
their families, it was personally moving to hear these young wives and mothers
describe with grace and dignity -- devoid of resentment -- how they were dealing
with the news of their husbands' delayed return.
Equally compelling were the comments of the Marines themselves. None of them
expressed anger or frustration with President Bush or their leaders. Several
noted they had volunteered to go back to Iraq -- some for a third trip to the
war. Two wounded warriors baldly said that, despite their injuries, they looked
forward to getting back to "finish the fight."
After the president's State of the Union address, Democrats claimed "the
majority of the nation no longer supports the way this war is being fought, nor
does the majority of our military." Regrettably, no one in the so-called
mainstream has bothered to challenge this unsubstantiated allegation about the
members of our armed forces. There certainly isn't a shred of evidence to
validate that sentiment here -- or with any of the scores of soldiers, sailors,
airmen, Guardsmen or Marines with whom I stay in contact from my eight trips to
the war.
To the extent that there is discontent in our military, it is aimed at how
the war has been misreported by my "colleagues" in the media and is depicted by
politicians in Washington.
In the days since the president's address, it's clear the media's fixation
on failure and the politicos' penchant for posturing on the war is unabated.
Though Mr. Bush has repeatedly made it clear "the consequences of failure would
be grievous and far-reaching," there is little indication the potentates on the
Potomac really care for anything except reaping political advantage. Nurtured by
a media willing as ever to ignore successes, the solons of the Senate followed
up the State of the Union address with a bevy of draft resolutions rebuking the
commander in chief for sending additional troops to the war zone.
The political posturing doesn't stop with attacks on the White House. When Lt.
Gen. David Petraeus, the new U.S. commander in Iraq, was asked by members of the
Senate Armed Services Committee if such a nonbinding measure would have the
effect of aiding and abetting the enemy, he replied, "Yes, sir." For his
straightforward, common-sense response, he was admonished by an erstwhile
Republican to avoid being "too political." This "gentleman of the Senate," fond
of referring to himself as his state's "senior senator," has of course
introduced his own pet resolution disputing the president's claim to be
commander in chief.
A few hours after this odious exchange, an officer with whom I had spent
many months in Iraq called me. "Do these people know what they are doing?" he
inquired, clearly agitated. "Which people?" I asked.
"These politicians who think we can win a war by committee. Do they even
know that in the last two weeks we have set AQI (al Qaeda in Iraq) and the Mahdi
Army both back on their heels?" he said. I was silent, so he continued, "Is
there anyone in Washington who understands what this means? AQI terrorists are
running like rats out of Ramadi. And the Mahdi Army is being cleaned out of
Baghdad. Do they know how much harder all this rhetoric makes our job?" '
My response was equivocal. "It's hard to tell what a member of Congress
knows," I replied. Having just returned from visiting wounded troops anxious to
return to their units and the families of those who have been extended in Iraq,
I didn't have the heart to say that the more important question is: "Does anyone
in Congress care?"
Oliver North is a nationally syndicated columnist and the host of "War
Stories" on the Fox News Channel.
----------------------------------------------------------
Contributed,
YNCS Don Harribine, USN(ret)