« Opening Day | Main | Heating Up Again »

April 13, 2004

Heroes

Greyhawk at Mudville Gazette notes an Andy Rooney column that informs us Our Soldiers in Iraq Aren't Heroes. While I think Rooney is accurate in certain particulars, I've got to agree with Greyhawk that the real thrust of this column is Rooney attempting to seize the moral high ground by implying that the troops don't favor the war in Iraq.

I should note up front that I have no idea what the troops actually think about the war. Perhaps they uniformly oppose it. Perhaps they uniformly support it. More likely, they have as diverse a set of opinions about the war as any group of Americans. Rooney wants to imply that soldiers would prefer to come home, and therefore the war should be ended as quickly as possible. One would hope Rooney could at least remember back to his own time in World War II, when soldiers also wanted to come home as soon as possible. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that Rooney wasn't calling for us to get out of Europe early back then.

Rooney points out that many soldiers joined the Guard and Reserve (and the active force, too, if the truth be known) for education benefits without planning on going to war. To which I can only say, if you're smart enough to go to college, you ought to be smart enough to do a little research and realize that service in any branch of the military may entail going to war. Furthermore, I think Rooney's assertion denegrates the many members of the Guard and Reserve who have picked up the rifle and are doing their duty because they understand what they signed up for. There are certainly many reluctant warriors among them, but the majority of them are doing their duty and doing it to the best of their ability. They deserve better than to be used as pawns in a political game by hack writers like Rooney.

Rooney then calls our attention to the suicides in Iraq. There's no doubt they're tragic, but by failing to note that the suicide rate in Iraq is lower than the suicide rate among the general American population, he's once again being disingenuous. The Army puts a great deal of emphasis on suicide prevention, and while it is by no means perfect, it does a remarkably good job of keeping soldiers alive more often than not. When it fails it is very sad, but it hardly indicates that our soldiers are in such dire straits as Rooney would have us believe.

Now it's true that not every soldier is a hero. They're people just like the rest of America; going to Iraq doesn't suddenly make them heroes. Anyone who has served in the military remembers the dirtbags as well as the studs. It's a fact of life. But to turn around and say that "[m]ost are victims, not heroes," is risible. Granted, for Rooney being a victim is probably the greatest possible status anyone can aspire to in life, but I don't think that's the assessment of most Americans. If we're going to generalize about the soldiers who have gone to Iraq and Afghanistan for us, let's try to be accurate: they're good men and women who are doing a difficult job under difficult circumstances, and the vast majority of them are getting the job done well.

Rooney, like many on the Left, get annoyed when they perceive Republicans wrapping themselves in the flag for electoral benefit. Yet how is what Rooney is doing any better? He's hoping to paint the soldiers as silent supporters for his cause and use the respect that most people feel for soldiers to promote his cause. It's a sorry tactic regardless of who uses it.

Posted at April 13, 2004 10:19 AM

Andrew Olmsted

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://andrewolmsted.com/cgi-bin/MoveableType/mt-tb.cgi/591

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Heroes:

» Our Soldiers In Iraq Aren't Heroes? from Mudville Gazette
Read, then feel free to respond to Andy in the comments. Get a good discussion going and maybe we'll invite him over by email. Our Soldiers in Iraq Aren't Heroes 4/12/2004 By ANDY ROONEY Most of the reporting from Iraq... [Read More]

Tracked on April 13, 2004 12:34 PM

Comments


I happen to disagree with Andy Rooney's comments too, but Andrew's characterization of Rooney as someone to whom a "victim is the greatest status available" (paraphrasing) is way off. Its not even really that inaccurate to call him a left-winger. While he has been anti-Iraq war and anti-Bush in the last year or so, he's run afoul of left-wing PC types before (for instance, he claimed that AIDS victims and lung cancer sufferes were responsbile for their own problems).

In fact, Rooney likes to play the curmudgeon and has also been targetted by feminist groups before. I think this is just part of his curmudgeon style.

Also, how many people know that Andy Rooney was awarded a Bronze Star in WW -II ? He was a combat journalist, not a fighter, but did go on dangerous missions, such as bomber missions, D-Day etc. Even in his book on WW-II, he insists that he's no hero (despite his medal), the real heroes were the people who did the fighting.

So a rather poorly written article by Rooney, but Andrew's counter-claims seem as badly phrased.

Posted by: N Sykes at April 15, 2004 12:42 PM