Today is the fourth of July, and with it, we remember the sacrifices of those who have gone before us. In particular, we remember the sacrifices of those who fought in the Revolutionary War, which threw out tyranny and oppression in favor of an ideal of freedom.
Out of the 56 people who signed the Declaration of Independence, there were 12 whose homes were ransacked, 5 who were captured by the British, and 9 who were killed in action. They signed that document knowing full well what the consequences of their actions would be. They were people from all walks of life, people well-respected in their communities. They knew full well that they would be considered traitors.
Some of the signers lost all they had. For instance, Francis Lewis lost all of his property and died penniless. John Hart was forced to hide in the woods from the British as they ransacked his home.
These, and the other stories of the people who came before us are too numerous to mention. I would simply mention the I&R Platoon, whose 18 members fought off thousands of German soldiers in the Battle of the Bulge and nearly singlehandedly choked the German offensive right from the start.
I mention these sacrifices today to highlight the huge difference between then and now. Back then, our people were willing to give up all they had -- their lives, their families, their homes. But for Iraq, people are not willing to make that kind of a sacrifice.
This is not an indictment of the American people, but of our policymakers and their failure to properly gauge the level of support that was there for the conflict in Iraq. We should never again commit our forces into battle unless our people collectively are willing to make the kinds of sacrifices that our forefathers made so that we could be here today.
The fact of the matter is that our leaders are not willing to call on our people to make the same kinds of sacrifices that our forefathers were willing to make back then. And the fact of the matter is that our people are not willing to make them. From now on, we should have one acid test for whether we send our troops into battle or not -- are our people willing to give up all they have in order to stop the conflict? Or do they have knee-jerk support for the conflict but are not willing to give up their homes and their lives in order to fight for the cause?
This was the reason why we never should have gone to Iraq in the first place. Polls showed that there was 75% support for the invasion and occupation of that country. But that 75% support did not translate into the kind of collective shared sacrifice that won us the Revolutionary War and other wars throughout our history.
And our planners must be open and honest about what is needed. Every time we decide whether to send our troops into battle, our planners must be realistic and explain that we may be in for the long haul -- maybe years. It took us six years to win the Revolutionary War. It took four to win the Civil War. It took four to win World War II. We were in Vietnam for a decade.
When we went to Iraq, we were told that we would be out of there in weeks. Bush told us two months after the conflict started that "all major combat operations have ceased." We were spoiled by the success of several previous wars that had ended rapidly. We assumed that this one would be the same -- even as there were clear warning signs that we would not be welcome there.
But the fact of the matter is that we are the victims of our own success. Our leaders have totally forgotten what it takes to fight and win wars and to do all they can to prevent them from starting in the first place.