And many of us are, and all of us should be.
Today, on Keith Olberman, Lawrence O'Donnell expanded on a point he has been making in print, online (at Huffington) and on other shows. He said that we are at a point in Iraq where we cannot win, and we cannot leave. He said the people in power are combat cowards, they are not serving. We are at a point now where we are asking soldiers to be the last man to die for a mistake.
At the end of the interview O'Donnell said: "And we should think about this, especially now, as we are approaching Thanksgiving, a family holiday." The camera went to Keith who said essentially that he was not going to ask anymore questions that might just distract from or dilute the powerful point that O'Donnel had just made. Then the camera switched back to O'Donnell. His eyes were read, his mouth was tight, and he looked down as he tried to choke back tears. The camera switched back to Keith quickly.
It was all about Charlie Rangel's bill to reinstate the draft with no deferments except for illness and conscientious objection.
O'Donnell was making the point that Rangel's bill opens the debate about who should make the sacrifice when those in power and in the media, those who have never fought in any war and have gone to great lengths avoiding any combat, send our sons and daughters to war. And he made the point that so many of the soldiers serving in Iraq are indeed not our sons and daughters, they are people none of us know, and none of us would have anything to do with. "We have isolated the military," O'Donnell said, "and the military is at war, but America is not. And they know it."
While there is no likelihood that the draft will be reinstated, I now feel that this is a debate that we should have. We should point at the faces of the war hawks and say: "Where are your sons and daughters? And where have you been? If you think we should stay in Iraq, then you have a moral obligation to commit yourself and your family to serve there."
Let's face it. As morally reprehensible as it sounds, many have aquiesced and allowed Iraq to go on because the military is made up of professional soldiers who knew what they were getting into when they signed up. But are we really so morally bankrupt that the lousy 20 or 30 thousand bucks that soldiers are getting is worth their lives? Their lives for nothing?
Frankly, I have changed my mind about political pragmatism on this issue. I think this is a debate we should have. I think it would help move the country into a more resolute stance to get out of Iraq.