WHAT WOULD YOU DIE FOR?

By Peter Fredson

Many people have willingly sacrificed their lives for unselfish or patriotic reasons. They throw themselves in the path of a truck to save a child, they drown in an effort to save a companion, or throw themselves on a live grenade to save their buddies. In 1941 after listening to reports of the bombing of Pearl Harbor, and the continuing reports of the deeds of Hitler and Mussolini in Europe, I hurried to the local Recruiting Office to volunteer for military service. The idea that I might die only slightly occurred to me as I was young and thought of death as something abstract that eventually occurred to everyone. I was willing to die for my country. In those days liberty, freedom and democracy really meant something to me.

Now more than half a century later I shudder to think of the grave misuse of those words. Today they seem to be satires of what they once were. Bush seems to think that War brings Peace, Submission is Freedom, Sovereignty is slavery, and Democracy is bowing to his imperial orders.

Lying, misdirection, misinformation, deception, stealth, preemption, secrecy and violence seem to be preconditions for his brand of Democracy. Government is controlled by fat-headed thugs in business suits. Our nation is controlled by military-industrial corporations, for corporations and of corporations.

White supremacist Christians want to dominate the world and impose their dogma, slogans, icons and sacred book on everyone. Individual beliefs must give way to collective thought approved by government official during National Months of Prayer and Bible Reading, preceded by maudlin Pledges, flag waving, and reading of the 10 commandments. No one will be left behind in this quest to bring on the apocalypse.

Evangelists are controlling the airwaves, the media, TV and sin becomes the main concern of government organizations. Privacy is an out-moded concept, gone the way of habeas corpus, in favor of indefinite detention, censorship, and intolerable snooping into citizen’s affairs.

Today, while reviewing news items and blog concerning the vigil of Cindy Sheehan, at Crawford, Texas, I was struck by a half dozen statements regarding the privilege of dying for the Chief Executive.

One item was entitled: ENLISTMENT TAKES AWAY RIGHT TO PROTEST WAR. The writer stated that a person has no right to protest a son dying in war if he enlisted voluntarily in the armed forces. Why? Because the President is Commander in Chief who can use the armed forces for anything his heart desires. People who join the army assume the risk of dying even for causes with which they may disagree, but they will go regardless. The writer asked why in the world would the army teach people how to shoot if they wouldn’t shoot and perhaps get shot?

He said: “I guess nobody told Ms. Sheehan that people die in the armed forces sometimes. She must have been absent the day they taught history in history class. When you enlist, your choices and ability to question authority or utilize your own values are taken from you. Actually, you give them away.”

A second writer said: “No one forced Sheehan’s son, Casey, to sign up for the armed forces. Apparently he did so on his own volition, dying for the cause of New Iraq democracy forthcoming,”

A third conservative writer stated: “Amen to those who oppose these un-American protesters mucking up things over by our president’s ranch.
“After all, enough is enough. If they don’t like the way we do things in America, why don’t they move to Cuba? “

Finally, J. Grant Swank, Jr, has a blog entitled: CINDY SHEEHAN IS A GLORY-HOUND ( By J. Grant Swank, Jr. MichNews.com Aug 14, 2005)
“No one made Casey Sheehan sign up. No one. Not even his mother could force him to defend freedom. Casey signed up for the armed forces because he wanted to sign up for the armed forces.”
“Now Mamma Sheehan is showing herself to be a shameless exhibitionist who is stroked by a summer-slow media read. Reporters don’t have that much of substance to give out. So they play up this mouthpiece camped outside US President George W. Bush’s home.”
“Of course, all the anti-Bush drivers are parading their vehicles as a show of support for Sheehan. She’s glorying in the acclaim. Nevertheless, what Sheehan must surely know, being the age that she is, is that this too shall pass. And so shall the summer heat. And the gawkers giving her undo attention. And the reporters’ pads folded up inside their yuppie pouches.”
“This is ridiculous. “
“Sheehan is a brazen egocentric who delights in getting attention because of her son’s death. Yes, it is sad that her son died. So it is sad that the other defenders of freedom died. War is not a Sunday school picnic. People die. They sign up for the armed services knowing that this just might be the supreme sacrifice forthcoming. Those disillusioned by the ravages of war need not apply.”
Other blogs were clones of the above. They all showed the same amount of compassionate conservatism that Bush thugs show. The only difference is that Bush suits are worried at present about public perception concerning death. Previously no Bushite even worried about it. Do or Die. But now somebody’s mother speaks up and gets press attention.

So the Bushites must Swift Boat the dastardly mothers. They must be put in their place, trivialized, demonized, ridiculed, personal attributes scrutinized, slandered, cursed, and other tactics reminding us of Karl Rove in his best days of spinning yarns about the leadership qualities of a petulant, irritable, irresponsible, unconcerned, swaggering and smirking candidate for public office.

Cindy Sheehan asked Bush to explain what were the “noble causes” for which her son died. Now other people are asking Bush to explain the anomalies of his administration.

My own question is: If Bush told the nation the real reasons he invaded Iraq, would troops still be required to die for:
1. Oil
2. Military Bases
3. A super-embassy
4. Control of Middle East resources and peoples.
5. Neocon domination of the world?
6. Unlimited Power and Wealth for corporations.
7. White Supremacist Christianity?

Are those the “noble causes” that Cindy Sheehan asked Bush to explain?

Yes, Bush will undoubtedly make many speeches in the next 5 days, explaining why he must “stay the course.” He will undoubtedly refer to his heroic actions during 9/11 several hundred times. He will undoubtedly have a dozen flags fluttering over him and may even wave one himself. He will undoubtedly say that “all is going well” in Iraq and that he cannot give any date for withdrawal because it would give the enemy some comfort.
But he will never refer to any of the real reasons he invaded Iraq, as it would expose his shameless lust for power and glory, for wealth and imperial position, his desire to be looked upon and revered as a second-rate Jesus who will save the world from EVIL.

None of that is worth any soldier’s death.