...with the passage of time a more realistic assessment of the qualities of President Obama and his predecessor are being made. When I began this blog in July last year, I wrote ...I offer this link from The American Interest magazine to a well articulated argument that (arch buffoon/war criminal/warmongerer) GW Bush, is in fact likely to be remembered as a great president who rolled back jihadism and defined the struggle against terror in terms that the terrorists could understand. I stand by that...Consider too, this recent reflection from DefenseTech re left wing criticism of Bush regarding a lack of empathy with grieving families of war dead......Yes, President Obama's Oct. 29 trip to Dover Air Force base in the dark of night to greet a C-17 carrying fallen Americans killed in Afghanistan was a vivid example of the reality of that war and should pause to those who call for increased commitment there. And it was honorable of Obama to see for himself the human cost of his decisions — as every commander and chief should. But to reflexively defend the photo op engineered to create news about the president’s “sobering reminder” by claiming that the man who got us into Afghanistan in the first place never faced them is just plain bunk.
I had the honor to speak with nearly a dozen families of Marines killed in Iraq and Afghanistan a few years ago as part of a project with the Military Times newspapers. We wrote a wide-ranging investigative piece on the conduct of the services during the killed-in-action notification process and the support they provided along the way.
It was an intimidating assignment, but one I cherish to this day. For, unlike Dowd, who I doubt has ever spoken with the family of a fallen servicemember, I was forced to confront the world I obliquely reported from afar — to hear the quavering voices of mothers whose sons had been obliterated by roadside bombs.
And you know who else did that very same thing dozens of times in his eight years as president? The same man Dowd falsely accuses of declining to confront the reality of his war dead.
In my conversations with those who sacrificed a son, a husband, a brother, or a boyfriend, all were universally grateful for George W. Bush’s sincere — and private — conversations with them either before or directly after an event or speech at a military base. As a routine, Bush would meet behind closed doors with family members who’d lost loved ones as part of his stop at military installations.
These were not simply pro-war, anti-war, pro-Bush or anti-Bush families — they were all of the above. Some were against the Iraq war; others were steadfast, despite their unimaginable sacrifice, for victory there. But to a man and women, these grieving Americans appreciated the president’s heartfelt compassion and deep understanding of their sacrifice — and of the weight of the decision to send potentially more of America’s young to their deaths.
I had the honor to speak with nearly a dozen families of Marines killed in Iraq and Afghanistan a few years ago as part of a project with the Military Times newspapers. We wrote a wide-ranging investigative piece on the conduct of the services during the killed-in-action notification process and the support they provided along the way.
It was an intimidating assignment, but one I cherish to this day. For, unlike Dowd, who I doubt has ever spoken with the family of a fallen servicemember, I was forced to confront the world I obliquely reported from afar — to hear the quavering voices of mothers whose sons had been obliterated by roadside bombs.
And you know who else did that very same thing dozens of times in his eight years as president? The same man Dowd falsely accuses of declining to confront the reality of his war dead.
In my conversations with those who sacrificed a son, a husband, a brother, or a boyfriend, all were universally grateful for George W. Bush’s sincere — and private — conversations with them either before or directly after an event or speech at a military base. As a routine, Bush would meet behind closed doors with family members who’d lost loved ones as part of his stop at military installations.
These were not simply pro-war, anti-war, pro-Bush or anti-Bush families — they were all of the above. Some were against the Iraq war; others were steadfast, despite their unimaginable sacrifice, for victory there. But to a man and women, these grieving Americans appreciated the president’s heartfelt compassion and deep understanding of their sacrifice — and of the weight of the decision to send potentially more of America’s young to their deaths.
5 comments:
Not related to this topic, but you
might enjoy
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/13/paleocene_hot_jungles_were_ok/
On the subject - no chance of peace or a decent society there
while islam dominates - flag it now.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/13/paleocene_hot_jungles_were_ok/
ot_jungles_were_ok/
Bravo, brother. One for the Dom or the Herald and all their adolescent 'reporters' who don't know what's happening in the world. And you know that I am not a fan of US military adventurism...
George Bush may have made some mistakes in his presidency, but he is far more of a man that obama ever can be. He understood the price of sending America to war, and more importantly George Bush understood the greater price for not going to war.
Post a Comment