Raving Conservative


Wednesday, November 02, 2005

War Speech

The following is the speech I intend to give if I ever have the great misfortune of taking our country to war.

“I come to you, the American people to ask you to make a great sacrifice. To uphold the noble spirit that has marked our nation since its’ founding. To suffer loss and celebrate heroism.

“Our nation is under attack. Everything we hold dear is being threatened by our enemies who have sworn to defeat us, to destroy us, and by the allies that offer them aid and comfort in this foul endeavor. They will accept no outcome save for total victory, and we can accept nothing less from ourselves.

“I do not ask this lightly of you. War is nothing if not brutal, cruel, and violent beyond imagining. We will suffer losses. Some of our very finest citizens will die; others will live, but will be crippled or mutilated. Parents will lose children, children will lose parents, and siblings will lose siblings. The pain of each and every death will be felt to the core of those they most affect, and the rest of us can only share init on the most superficial level.

“We will have heroes. Brave men and women who fight and sacrifice for the good not just of this great nation, but for the men and women they fight beside. More than any idea or love of a nation or an ideal it is the love of our families and for the ones we fight with that drives our brave soldiers to heroism. By placing others before themselves these heroes will save lives, kill the enemy, and defend the American from the tyranny of our enemies.

“It is not just the tragic loss of life that will strain our nation. War strains resources. It breaks the budget and diverts materials from other useful, necessary means. More than that it saps the spirit of any people. As the death toll mounts and our prosperity suffers some among us will lose the will to fight. Some will even turn on our soldiers and demand that the sacrifices they, and we as a people, have made be made pointless by prematurely ending the war, by capitulating and appeasing the ones who would see us destroyed. When this happens I can assure you my resolve to see this through to victory will not be shaken.

“I ask you now to consider carefully what you want for yourselves, your children, and your children’s children. Once you have done that you need to decide if what you want is worth fighting for and protecting with your own life if need be.

“War is the most trying and tragic task any nation can undertake. It has been thrust upon us by our enemies, and with your permission I will see it through to final victory.”

This is not exactly the usual motivational “let’s kick ass and take names” war speech Presidents usually give, but then again it’s not supposed to be. War sucks no matter how you cut it. It is one of those unfortunate necessary evils the world thrusts upon every nation from time to time, and when it comes the only choices are fight or be destroyed/conquered. It is never a thing that should be entered into lightly for any reason. These are PEOPLE we will be killing and losing on the battlefield. Nothing is more anathema to me than such a tragic waste of life, but it is a sacrifice we cannot always avoid.

When war is thrust upon us we must honor the heroes, especially the fallen ones. Their sacrifice should strengthen our resole to prevent their lives from being wasted for nothing. We betrayed the fallen heroes of the Vietnam when we pulled out and let the communist north overrun the south. It was a great forfeit on our part that only emboldened our enemies and is pointed at to this day as an example of how weak our resolve becomes when American lives are lost. I can’t help but wonder whether 9/11 would have ever happened if we had stuck it out crushed the North like we were so capable of doing. I can’t help but wonder what further atrocities await us if we pull out of Iraq prematurely and hand it over to the terrorists who are busy killing soldiers and civilians right now.

I hate war, and I would just as soon never fight one. However, I hate terrorists even more, and I will never give in to them so they can think they can come to my home and kill my brethren. I will not allow it to happen if I have any ability to prevent it. We are at war now, and I am willing to fight it out to completion. It’s not just my duty as an American citizen; it’s my duty as an American soldier. If I die in this war then I die knowing that I am doing a good thing for not only my own people, but for the Iraqi people who have not had a taste of freedom in decades.

Would I sacrifice my son to free Iraq? I’m somebody’s son, and I am willing to sacrifice myself.


  • "Would I sacrifice my son to free Iraq? I’m somebody’s son, and I am willing to sacrifice myself."

    Unfortunately, the terrorists are also willing to sacrifice themselves.

    But I certainly believe you, Daniel. I have no doubt that you would gladly die for our sake - even my sake.

    The question is, then: Is your going over to kill and be killed the best solution to the problem? Those of us opposed to the war believe this invasion is only making things worse.

    Think of it locally. We have some people here in the US that we might call terrorists. They're willing to kill to stop abortions or to stop this president, for instance.

    Because we have these scattered terrorists here, would it be wise to begin bombing, say, Montana? Would that stop the terrorists or would they just move?

    No one is disagreeing that terrorism ought to be stopped. We disagree that our own terrorism is not the way to do it (and with tens of thousands of dead innocent Iraqis - EVEN THOUGH they were killed unintentionally - to the eyes of many, that makes us terrorists).

    [And PLEASE do not hear me calling our soldiers "terrorists" - I'm saying they are perceived as such by many. The terrorists are not terrorists in their own eyes, either.]

    By Blogger Dan Trabue, at 4:45 AM  

  • "Would I sacrifice my son to free Iraq? I’m somebody’s son, and I am willing to sacrifice myself."

    Well, what are still doing here? Get with it, go sacrifice yourself.

    By Blogger Ranando, at 6:05 AM  

  • "Well, what are still doing here? Get with it, go sacrifice yourself."

    I'm actually going to dignify this peice of hateful spew with a response. I have spent the last 4 years volunteering to go to the warzone in either Afghanistan or Iraq. However, enough soldiers who do my job are volunteering that others have been getting instead.

    And Dan, you really should be careful when equating our action to that of the terrorists. Just one example of the prime differences is this: any civilians who have diead as result of our actions (and no its not tens of thousands, last I knew it was les than 1,000, all the rest were killed by the terrorists who keep bombing them and some liar attribute them to us, be careful of your sources) are accidental. The terrorists, on the other hand, are specifically targeting civillians in an effort to get them to blame us for their plight. Fortunately the Iraqi people have the good sense and mental fortitude to blame the real murderers, not us.

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 6:22 AM  

  • However, enough soldiers who do my job are volunteering that others have been getting instead.

    What the hell are you talking about, you will only go if you get to do a certain job, your kidding right?

    By Blogger Ranando, at 7:00 AM  

  • Daniel, you did read that I was specifically NOT comparing our actions to terrorists'? I was comparing how those actions would inevitably be interpreted.

    And if our actions are viewed by the "liberated" to be terroristic and we thereby increase the number of those who use terrorism against us, are we not defeating our own purpose?

    Again, I'm questioning the wisdom of our actions, not the sincerity.

    By Blogger Dan Trabue, at 7:09 AM  

  • "What the hell are you talking about, you will only go if you get to do a certain job, your kidding right?"

    Your ignorance is showing. The Army will only send me if they need me to do my specific job. I cannot volunteer to go in any capacity outside of my MOS. If you don't belive join the Army and find out for yourself.

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 8:49 AM  

  • Dan,
    Something like 90% of Iraqis are actually grateful for what we have done and are doing in Iraq. I know nobody would ever guess this from what the MSM pounds us with, but it's true. Just because a vast minority of people oppose what we are doing does not mean we are seen in any similar light to the terrorists over there.

    This just goes to show that you really CAN'T please everybody.

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 8:52 AM  

  • And something like 75% of the world views Bush as a greater threat to world security than Saddam. That's some pretty bad PR.

    By Blogger Dan Trabue, at 9:06 AM  

  • ["Which country really poses the greatest danger to world peace in 2003? TIME asks for readers' views."--Results to date: North Korea 5.6 %; Iraq 6.5 %; The United States 87.9 %; Total Votes Cast: 673,027 -- "TIME Magazine, " March 10, 2003]

    By Blogger Dan Trabue, at 9:08 AM  

  • Ranando probably doesn't know what an MOS is. For the record it stands for "Military Occupational Specialty" and Dan is right. Unless his particular MOS is needed they will not let him serve in Iraq. And no, I wasn't in the Army, but my husband served for 20 years so I know of what I speak.

    By Blogger Gayle, at 9:56 AM  

  • Dan,
    not to dispairage your stats here, but you have to admit that Newsweek is a biased polling population since it is a known left-leaning magazine with a primarily liberal readership. If you have a Gallup or Rasmussen poll that shows the same thing I will take it under very serious consideration.

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 9:59 AM  

  • By the way, I got carried away with the comments and forgot to say: Great Speach! When are you running for president? :)

    Have you noticed Phantom's absence? No posting or commenting in five days now and no explanation. I am worried about him because he usually notifies people when he's going to be away for awhile.

    By Blogger Gayle, at 10:02 AM  

  • Yeah, I noticed his absence. He said before that he would he would get busy again instaling those generators, so i'm not going to be worried unless he stays vanished for another week.

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 10:11 AM  

  • Oh, and I'm running in either 2024, 2028, or 2032, depending on if there is an incumbent and who that incumbent is, as well as how soon I am able to raise campaign funds. I'm a Washington outsider with no wealth of my own, so the deck is already stacked against me.

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 10:13 AM  

  • I really hate to inject myself into this interesting discussion, but...the United States aren't the ones kidnapping and lopping off the heads of anyone different than us. We're actually there saving people who are different from us, aren't we? Americans disagree with someone, we don't just show our strength by murder.

    By Blogger Libby, at 10:25 AM  

  • Welcome libby! And you have made an excellent point!

    Thank you!

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 10:27 AM  

  • Daniel stated:
    If you have a Gallup or Rasmussen poll that shows the same thing...

    A quick search turned up:

    "Majorities in all other countries think that as a result of recent military action in Afghanistan and Iraq, the world is a more dangerous place."--"New Gallup International Post War Iraq Poll: Global Opinion from 45 countries," Gallup International, May 16, 2003

    In the international Gallup poll released in January, support for the Bush-Powell war scarcely reached 10 percent anywhere, meaning that it is essentially non-existent among the public.

    ...warning that "many people in the world increasingly think President Bush is a greater threat to world peace" than Saddam Hussein (Washington Post lead story, Also reported in Los Angeles Times, March 23, 2003.)

    On Feb. 24, Glenn Kessler and Mike Allen of The Washington Post wrote: “The messages from US embassies around the globe have become urgent and disturbing: Many people in the world increasingly think President Bush is a greater threat to world peace than Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.”

    Submitted for your consideration.

    By Blogger Dan Trabue, at 10:55 AM  

  • you really are planning ahead, aren't you? :)

    By Blogger Nunzia, at 10:55 AM  

  • Very god Dan, now what I REALLY want to know is how the American people feel about this. Everybody already knows that the rest of the world really doesn't like us. That's just a given.

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 12:14 PM  

  • But if the rest of the world considers us a rogue nation or a bully nation, that SHOULD concern you for from thus an environment terrorism can spring, which was the point I was making.

    IF we are perceived as a bully or out of control nation, then there WILL be those out there interested in taking us down. Once again, I'm talking about the wisdom of our actions, not the sincerity.

    The large number of us opposed to this war (here and globally) think that evidence and common sense dictates that our actions are only going to make things worse.

    And that is why international opinion matters.

    By Blogger Dan Trabue, at 1:00 PM  

  • Dan, I full acknowledge the points you are making about the global environment, however, even during the Clinton years, when we practiced a policy of appeasement with the whole world, most of the world still didn't like us. Are you really suggesting we don't do the right thing just because some other countries might not like it?

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 2:27 PM  

  • I'm suggesting that what some (maybe) 40% of the US public thinks is the right thing may actually be wrong and when 90% of the world stands against you, your position ought to be closely reconsidered.

    There are, of course, some times when you may be right and the majority of a group stand against you. However, this supergroup that has stood against this war has included the majority of the world's religions (all of the major religions except the Southern Baptists and including the Pope!), many great thinkers and wise leaders.

    I'd strongly suggest that given the diversity and strength of the opposition that, in this case, the majority is simply right.

    By Blogger Dan Trabue, at 5:20 AM  

  • Sorry Dan, I have to disagree. Liberating an oppressed people and saving lives (like we did when we stopped the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo) is definitely the right thing to do. Leaving a madman like Saddam in charge of any nation, much less a valuable on is defnitely a threatto the western world.

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 6:18 AM  

  • Daniel, Daniel, Daniel...how many times have you heard me say that NO ONE is talking about not liberating an oppressed people? Pacifists are not passivists!

    I'm suggesting your way is not do-able. There are oppressed peoples in well over a dozen countries today. We can't go in and blast their way to freedom. There ain't enough soldiers and tanks and money.

    And so, I'm asking that if a military solution can't work (and it can't...or feel free to explain how it can) then what solutions WILL we put in place to liberate oppressed peoples?

    I'm suggesting non-violent resistence sorts of solutions are not only a possibility, they are the ONLY practicable possibility.

    By Blogger Dan Trabue, at 7:25 AM  

  • Dan, in some cases you are absolutly right. But when the government oppressing those people is an open enemy to the US them military intervention is a valid option of last resort. In the interest of our own security it must remain an option.

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 7:39 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Listed on BlogShares