Real war on terror or just Chickenhawk posturing?

[missouri dem]

Armchair Cowards
By PAUL CAMPOS
Oct 27, 2004, 04:39

<http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_5572.shtml>

Few things are more absurd than the posturing of armchair generals. At
present, an army of draft-dodging politicians, fierce-sounding media
pundits and pajama-clad bloggers - almost none of whom has ever been
within
1,000 miles of an actual battle - are bombarding us with messages
regarding
how "we" are fighting an enemy who is as great a threat to America as
the
nation has ever faced.

We are told that Iraq is the front line in a global campaign against
this
enemy, who threatens the very existence of Western civilization. The
war on
terror, we are assured, is a battle for our very survival; and success
in
Iraq is crucial to that battle.

A glance at the behavior of those who are making such claims reveals
that
either they don't believe what they say, or (more likely) they have
failed
to consider that their claims, if taken seriously, might require some
sort
of action on their part.

Let's take their claims seriously. A simple question ought to arise far
more often than it has over the course of the past two years: Has even
one
of these rhetorical warriors volunteered for military service? If "we"
are
truly fighting for our survival, what possible justification could
there be
for failing to volunteer to take part in the battle itself? Those who
aren't eligible themselves for military service could demonstrate the
sincerity of their beliefs by exhorting their siblings and children to
join
the armed forces: yet you will need to search long and hard to find
such a
plea among the millions of words published in support of the war.

[indigobusiness]

1. Hear, hear! I've been saying the same thing,

but far less eloquently, for years.