The Unsoldier

great piece in the times week in review yesterday.

in general, i find ridiculous the idea that if you haven't served in the military you're unqualified to speak about, care about, or have a say in the workings of our armed branch of the government. after all, my taxes -- as much as anyone else's -- pay for it. i'm not suggesting i, or any other lay person, should be involved in the crafting of military strategy, but my opinion regarding the use of our armed forces should be given weight equal to someone who has served in the military. my opinion has to be given equal weight -- otherwise this isn't a democracy.

that said, when it comes military strategy i'm happy to defer to people who know what the hell they're talking about. i simply don't. the funny thing is, with regard to the iraq war, strategy is being planned by people who don't know what they're doing either. at all.

all this is to say that i disagree with the notion that bush and the neocons in power were and continue to be so nonchalant about the use of american soldiers because they never served in the military. i never served in the military; many smart and effective members of congress or current and former governors never served in the military; and you can be damn sure they wouldn't be so quick to deploy our troops in deadly engagements.

i think the real impetus behind the decision on how to use our military comes from nothing other than one's philosophical disposition toward the use of force in general, and america's military past in particular. and because it's this and not whether you've served that determines one's likelihood for using force, every citizen's opinion must be given equal weight when determining how and when to use it. and even how much to spend on it.

there are other ways to serve your country. but serve it or not, peaceniks should be listened to. lord knows what warmongers have wrought.