Talk The Talk

Are you a man or woman of eligible military service age? Do you currently support President George W. Bush’s decision to occupy Iraq? If you answered “yes” to both of these questions, then wouldn’t you want to serve your country in Iraq? As soon as you cast your vote for President Bush, shouldn’t you sign up for military service?

With continued questioning over our prolonged stay in the Middle East, the gulf between United States citizens who are for and against the war in Iraq grows larger each day. More than 1,000 soldiers and counting have already lost their lives while serving our country. That does not include the thousands of Iraqis who have died or the military personnel and civilians who have been wounded. On Friday, October 22, the New York Times reported that the resistance in Iraq numbers over 20,000 (this includes sympathizers, foreign fighters, the network of Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, and homegrown insurgents). The earlier reports from military intelligence estimated the insurgency between 2,000 and 7,000. Additionally, British aid worker, Margaret Hassan, who has done nothing more than deliver food and medicine to Iraqis for the past 30 years, begs for her life.

After our country was led into the Iraq War under less than truthful assumptions, it is now difficult to understand the exact nature of our occupancy. Essentially, we broke it, so we own it. If one has a strong argument for the positives of the Iraq War, why wouldn’t one want to help one’s country with military service? If you support a cause, shouldn’t you be willing to take part in that cause?

I hope that we can all agree that war is a method of action that ultimately should never be used, and going to war under false pretenses is inexcusable. It takes courage for a person to voluntarily put his or her life directly in the line of fire. When faced with the question of going to war, most people do not want to leave the comfort of their lavish American lifestyles. Under the circumstances of our country’s volunteer army, it is extremely easy to support the war and easy to let others do the heavy fighting.

The quagmire in Iraq is getting deeper. Support for our troops is unconditional, but if you think you know the real reasoning behind President Bush’s decision to invade Iraq (weapons of mass destruction were never found) and are in support of this decision, then I strongly encourage you to show your patriotism and serve your country in Iraq after you cast your vote for President Bush. If you are willing to talk the talk, then you should be willing to fight the fight. Do your country a favor, you who support the war: Be willing to replace a soldier who wants to return to his or her family. Enough talk. Your first step of action is visiting www.goarmy.com.

The U.S. and Religion: Jesus Would Not Have Approved

“But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, and pray for those who mistreat you. If anyone hits you on one cheek, let him hit the other one too; if someone takes your coat, let him have your shirt as well. Do for others just what you want them to do for you.” One would think today’s Dalai Lama would say this, but in reality Jesus Christ said this in Luke 6:27-31.

While reading the chapter about Christianity in Experiencing the World’s Religions by Michael Molloy for my religion 101 class, I became aware of Jesus Christ’s desire to promote love and nonviolence to the public. I am baffled after learning how Jesus’ emphasis on nonviolence and love has been lost through the ages. Additionally, Judaism and Islam have also overlooked their original message of love and nonviolence. Today, the three major monotheistic religions, Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, are buried in the complete opposite of their roots.

So why does the United States, a country dominated by Christianity and Christian principle, engage in war and use war as a method of political action? Does our country’s separation between church and state enable our leaders to use war as a method of action?

As I continued to read about Jesus’ promotion of love and nonviolence, I often thought I was reading one of the Dalai Lama’s teachings. When our country was attacked with force, our initial reaction was to respond with a stronger force. If we win a battle or the war, should we rejoice and declare that the appropriate method of action was used? Should we lose, will we rethink our choice of action?

It is hard to believe that a country so deeply ingrained by the life of Jesus Christ can be so far from his original ideals for the world. At the present moment, our country needs to carefully reevaluate the ideals that it stands for. Right now, it appears that life is not something we place the highest value upon.

This Article Published In "The Hurricane"

The Presidential Election And Doing Our Duty

When it comes to going to war, whether past or present, no person truly wants to go. We honor and respect every man and woman who has sacrificed their lives and given their time in any capacity to defend our country. However, we generally hold those servicemen and women who have put their lives on the line of fire in higher esteem than those who have never experienced the horror of military combat.

Simply put, when comparing both presidential candidates, Senator John Kerry risked his life on the battlefield in Vietnam, while many others chose legitimate educational deferments or stateside military service in the National Guard, like President George W. Bush. Disregarding the mudslinging about the accuracy of their service records from both the Republicans and Democrats, serving in Vietnam, under fire, in my mind, shows more courage than someone who chose to stay in the United States.

President Bush took the safer path through his honorable service in the National Guard. Some, like John Kerry, even despite his privileged upbringing after graduating from Yale, volunteered for the battlefield.

When you have been on the battlefield and seen the face of the enemy, you know that war is a business of great risks. Having seen war, Senator Kerry has said that he would have been more reluctant to lead our country into war than in the manner that it was done. Not having the first hand experience of war himself, President Bush may have possibly jumped faster on the opportunity to enter war with Iraq.

Someone who has placed a foot on a battlefield and seen the ravages of war may make decisions with a more cautious mind. Most agree that losing one’s life for one’s country is the ultimate sacrifice. Deciding whether or not to send your citizens into battle is an extremely difficult decision for any president. Whether Kerry deserved his medals or not, he deserves the respect for having volunteered to serve in Vietnam and stand up for his beliefs at the war’s end.

This Article Published in "The Hurricane"