This article originally appears in The American Thinker
There is a school of thought that believes the idea of loyalty to one’s country is a crass, outmoded concept not worthy of consideration by thinking people. Rather, loyalty if given at all, should be reserved for nebulous and ethereal entities like “humanity” or “the family of man.” International socialism has long advocated this global view of loyalty – except, of course, when the old Soviet Union was in trouble for one of its frequent deviations from civilized behavior. It was at this point that Moscow would crack the whip and leftists from Berlin, to London, to Los Angeles would dutifully parrot the party line, excusing the brutes in the Kremlin for all sorts of very unsocialist and inhuman atrocities.
Thankfully, this view of loyalty is not shared by the vast majority of citizens in the United States. Most Americans recognize the importance of loyalty to the government during a time of war when America’s sons and daughters are in harm’s way. This has never been more evident than when looking at how we view the war in Iraq.
According to the latest polls, barely 40% of the country approves of the way that President Bush is conducting the war in Iraq. But when asked if we should pull our troops out before the job of securing the country and helping the Iraqis achieve a stable, democratic government is complete fully two thirds of Americans say no. This slap in the face to the leftist narrative of how the American people see the war in Iraq seems to have been lost on this past weekend’s partygoers in Washington whose speakers continued to insist that the majority of the people opposed the war and wished the troops to come home.
Leave it to the left to never let the truth stand in the way of a good old fashioned Soviet-style propaganda campaign.
True, there are permutations within permutations in the poll numbers. One of the more remarkable tidbits to be found in these figures is the fact that the belief that the war was a “mistake” because no mass stockpiles of WMD were found has hovered near the 50% mark for more than a year. What makes it remarkable is that even though roughly half the nation thinks going into Iraq was an error, a sizable portion of those people also believe we should stay until the job is done.
The left would point to these Americans and call them confused. I think they should be congratulated for their loyalty. What the left sees as stupidity, I see typical American common sense. Most Americans – even those who opposed going to war in the first place – realize the dire consequences of a precipitous withdrawal from Iraq. The destabilization and possible collapse of the Iraqi government would place America in great danger and would be inimical to our national interest. This fact is so obvious that it calls into question why almost all of the speakers at the anti-war rally in Washington on Saturday called for the immediate withdrawal of American troops.
To understand why one need only look a little closer at the motley collection of socialists, anarchists, anti-globalists, pan-Arabists, post modern deconstructionists, one worlders, and racialists who descended on Washington for their moment in the media spotlight. If there’s one thing the tatterdemalion left has become over these last lost years since the fall of the Soviet Union it is publicity deprived. They are absolutely starved for media attention. Even the anarchists can’t have a decent riot that hardly rates a blurb in The Guardian. Part of the problem is the fractured nature of their “coalition.” The only way they could get the kind of numbers necessary to get anyone to pay any attention to them was by inviting everyone in the world who has a grudge against America.
Hence, most of the podium speakers at the rally were not there to solely promote an anti-war agenda but rather each had their own particular anti-American ax to grind. The racialists called for an end to racism. The tribalists called for an end to capitalism. The primitives called for an end to industrialized civilization. The greenies called for an end to everything else. Yes, they all paid lip service to the anti-war message that brought them together in the first place. But their real reason for bringing their followers to Washington was to garner support from the hard-left moneymen like George Soros and leftist PR gurus like David Fenton who is currently managing Cindy Sheehan’s race toward obscurity. A few dollars here and there gleaned from the Smart Set in Washington will at least keep the mimeograph machines going and pay the rent for a few more months.
Not surprisingly, there was very little talk of loyalty. When “patriotism” was brought up, we were continually assured that yes, these were indeed patriotic Americans who only wanted to exercise their right to dissent from government. Of that, I have little doubt. The question isn’t whether they are patriotic Americans, the questions is are they loyal Americans?
The two terms are related but not mutually exclusive. Patriotism is a feeling, a “love or devotion to one’s country.” Loyalty, by definition, is an action word. It is “allegiance to one’s country” or “faithfulness to one’s government.” Many a traitor has come and gone calling themselves “patriots.” Few would agree that they were being loyal.
How does the left get around this little non-sequitur? They huffily point out that they are being loyal to the “idea” of America or “American ideals.” Since these ideals were present at the founding of the nation, it is perhaps gratifying that so many on the left have finally embraced the idea of strict constructionism – at least when it becomes a convenient explanation for their perfidy in giving aid and comfort to an enemy that is shooting at American soldiers overseas.
For that is what the demonstrators in Washington forgot to mention in all their sloganeering and speechifying; the fact that the insurgents and terrorists in Iraq have only one chance to achieve their goal of overthrowing the Iraqi government and gaining power. And that is only if America walks away before the job is done.
They are hoping that history repeats itself and America abandons an ally to its fate as a result of both timid policy makers and domestic opposition to the war. And since this hope is all that the insurgents have to go on (for they can never defeat the US military on the field of battle), leftist opposition to the war can only be judged as disloyalty. They can call themselves patriots if they want. There is no way we can look into their souls and judge their love or hate for the United States. But we can certainly judge their loyalty based on their actions – actions that have the practical affect of encouraging the insurgents in Iraq to up the body count of Americans to test the mettle of our citizenry to stay the course until the job is well and truly done.
As the democratic process in Iraq moves forward in fits and starts and the Iraqi people slowly and cautiously march toward an uncertain future that may yet include sectarian violence and other setbacks in achieving national unity, the need for our troops to stay and assist them in this historic task will remain great. And to sustain our elected leaders in this hard, slogging task with our loyalty will become more and more critical as time goes by. It no doubt is the greatest test of our fealty to the United States government that many of us will ever have. But it will be absolutely necessary for us to win through to total victory and bring our sons and daughters home in triumph.
9:30 am
Thank you for providing an alternative to the pejorative “unpatriotic”. I believe you have correctly identified a misnomer that has plagued the debate over the GWOT; whether or not one is unpatriotic if opposed to the government’s actions. “Disloyal” certainly seems much more appropriate, while allowing the “dissidents” to lay claim to being patriots, which they seem to be bound and determined to do.
9:39 am
After watching the circus on C-SPAN, I came away totally demoralized. The lefties have the right to say what they want I guess. But they certainly undermine troop moral (even my son has commented on it here in the States).
Politicians are vote whores. We already see some politicians on the right starting to waver because they anticipate the votes will swing against the war,like Vietnam. They are positioning themselves at the expense of a national resolve.
The only way to be successful in the battlefield of Iraq,the war overall,and in order to do our part to protect our sons and daughters who are in harm’s way, to stifle those who oppose victory, is to shout them down so overwhelmingly that there can be no question of where the American eople stand and to make sure that the politicians know that the votes are in victory, not cutting and running. Otherwise the spinless ones in Washington will scatter for cover at the expense of our nationsl security.
10:20 am
The Adventures of the Cosmic Mighty Force
Today’s dose of NIF - News, Interesting & Funny … Kerry-180 time!
10:27 am
“faithfulness to one’s government.†???? I can certainly get behind loyalty to one’s country, a set of ideals or, most relevantly, our troops. However, it is the governments responsibility to be faithful to the people, not the reverse.
Cindy Sheehan and her cadre may be incorrect (and they are on several counts) but simply voicing opposition to a US policy is not disloyal or unpatriotic. That crowd is frequently intellectually lazy (or even dishonest). Those are serious offenses but it is a mistake to confuse (or conflate) those offenses with disloyalty.
I am also deeply skeptical of the notion that these people are “encouraging the insurgents in Iraq to up the body count of Americans to test the mettle of our citizenry to stay the course until the job is well and truly done”. Do you truly believe that if there were no dissenting voices here in the US, the insurgents would be any less committed and dangerous? I do not.
While I ultimately opposed going to war in Iraq, I recognized that the decision was a complicated one with strong arguments on each side. The level of insurgency is much worse than I had anticipated and the high loss of American life has strengthened my opposition to the origin of this war. However, at this point, an immediate pull-out would be a disaster for Iraq and would discard those things gained at the high cost of American troop and Iraqi civilian life (I do not include the life of insugents or Saddam defenders as they deserve death).
11:09 am
Dean,
You ignore history lessons learned during Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh knew the value of public opinion. See
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13121
for an interesting interview on the subject.
As quoted in the referenced interview,Col. Tin had the following comments”
Will they be less committed or dangerous? No, probably not,unless we succeed in giving them pause by our unity, determination and resolve. By doing that you do take away the incentive that longevity will eventually turn the tide in their favor. You eventually take away their ability to wage war.
If you meet a stronger more determined foe who will fight forcefully to the finish, you will probably loose. If you meet a stronger foe that shows he hasn’t the stomach for a long, strong fight, all you have to do is hold your own and bide your time.
11:13 am
Some thoughts I had a few days back:
Anarchy!
A recent headline proudly proclaimed: “Anarchy†followed by pictures of New Orleans looters in the aftermath of Katrina. Sadly, this was just another graphic example of the continuing propaganda efforts advocating the swift and unequivocal overthrow of the United States Government. Fortunately, it has also served to expose this plot for exactly what it is: SEDITION and TREASON.
Who exactly is involved in this ongoing effort to make America a Third World barrio, replete with all the amenities one finds in the Sahara. Try CNN, MSNBC, NY Times, CBS, ABC, NBC, Time, Newsweek, AP, Reuters, BBC, PBS, and on and on and on. Last night on MSNBC they ran the caption “Bush Katrina Actions Criminal?†throughout some inane discussion. Was this an accident? Or, part of a concerted and concentrated effort with one goal………….
So, if anyone’s looking for a Katrina investigation, here’s a suggestion. Follow the Spitzer technique of using a task force of highly trained investigators (in this case IRS, FBI, Justice, Treasury, SEC, etc.) to make an irrefutable case against the propagandists. The evidence is right in front of our eyes, just take off the blinders and turn on the TIVO.
The following areas should produce substantial results, and can produce an added Homeland Security benefit by reducing or eliminating those in the treasonous pursuit of providing aid and comfort to our enemies during a time of war (authorized by the U.S. Congress):
Anti-trust
Fraud
RICO
Conspiracy
Sedition
Treason
A special area at Guantanamo should be used for interrogations and for holding those arrested and awaiting trial or military tribunal.
Lastly, can any rational person possibly comprehend what these people are really after? Do they really want an America that resembles South America, Africa, Cuba, Haiti, etc. What possible purpose could there be in bringing American prosperity down to the Third World level rather than attempting to upgrade the Third World. Do you think they want their children drinking contaminated water and eating spoiled food; waiting a year to have a needed operation; living in squalor and filth; attending authoritarian controlled public schools, etc? Do they want a depression to take their jobs and reduce them to sitting on street corners all day?
WHAT DO THEY WANT? Could someone explain it please……………
11:57 am
WHAT DO THEY WANT? Could someone explain it please……………
bob…they meant for you to stop reading the headlines and follow the story. maybe there is meat to it..maybe not.
Exactly how are they doing this Bob?
your logic escapes me. If any MSM says “U.S debt beocoming a growing monster.” would this be treasonous?
“Anarchy” as a headline is just that. A headline. What should they have said? Actually, what would you say? “All’s well.”????
“Who exactly is involved in this ongoing effort to make America a Third World barrio, replete with all the amenities one finds in the Sahara.” (your quote)
Bob…you are focussing on the messenger. What is the message. The US debt load?
As far as treason in a time of war…hmmmm…Valerie Plame is an interesting true bit of treason right there in front of you. I guarantee you that the CIA did not enjoy the coverage especially when you consider her international connections that have been exposed. Is it NBC’s fault for covering it.? Or should we really look at why it is a story in the first place?
Lastly, Vietnam was not lost by the protesters at home. Though Ho Chi Minh did say that he read the reports of growing protest in the states, the states themselves should have seen this coming from the french involvement a decade earlier. To be honest to those who cite Viet Nam as an example missed the point altogether. What was the US doing there to begin with? Viet Nam has been at war with foreign invaders for a hundred years. What they did was always the same. Wait it out. Eventually, the invaders grow exhausted and leave. George Washington also knew this.
2:07 pm
While I appreciate Marv’s comments, I question both his explicit supposition (the Vietneam was was lost at home) and implicit assumption (the situation in Iraq is directly analogous to Vietnam).
Furthermore, back to the original post, why apply labels of “unpatriotic” or “disloyal” to these anti-war protestors? Can’t they be merely incorrect?
Also, let’s set aside the merits of this particular action in Iraq. Would you view ANY military action whatsoever as requiring the full support of the American people? Regardless of provocation, prospect of favorable result or American body count?
Blind support of the government (“my country right or wrong”) is immoral, unpatriotic, dispectful of the men and women who volunteer to put their lives on the line and ultimately not in the best interest of the country.
4:30 pm
These scum are neither patriotic nor loyal Americans. They are the traitorous enemy within and must be defeated if we are to prosper in a dangerous world.
4:36 pm
CYKING is either a communist or a useful idiot. Either way he stands with our enemies.
4:56 pm
Dean,
Thanks for your appreciation :-). My references to Iraq and Vietnam were only to serve as an example of how public opinion plays a part in troop morale, enemy morale and public perception. I see no other comparisons past that. Iraq certainly is not Vietnam.
If the Government of the United States, as directed by the Constitution of the United States dictates a course of military action, I believe that the government in obligated to prosecute that action to the best of their ability in the best interests of the nation. In return the Government, military included, should expect and deserves the support of its citizens in executing those actions.
Some things do not belong in the public domain. Prosecution of a war is one of those things. At some point we must trust that the government is fulfilling its obligation in the prosecution of that action and in protecting the national interests of the United States and its citizens.
And here is where the labels come in. Yes, they can be simply incorrect. That is their (and my often exercised)right. If they simply disagree with the policy they have the option of acting on the disagreement at the ballot box.
But when they actively work against the strategy and purpose of the Commander In Chief in his prosecution of the war,to the benefit of the enemy, that is, at the least, disloyal.
6:06 pm
It’s not popular to be patriotic anymore. In fact, it will get you nothing but mean and nasty looks; wear a flag pin on your shirt and eyes roll; have a flag ribbon on your car and you risk getting scratches put in it! I hate to say it, but much of today’s anti-patriotic people are either leftovers from the flower-power era of the 60’s or very young people who haven’t experienced life yet.
11:48 am
I find it mazing that we have Neandertals in the United States who believe that a citizen does not have the right to disagree with the government.
This right is enshrind in the Constitution. Cindy Sheehan is not arming Iraqi insurgents nr is she setting roadside bombs. She differs with the government. This is not trason.
Deserting the army and prosecuting a war against the legal government is. So Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jakson et al were raiotrs. not Cindy Sheehan. She has operated within the law.
Any real American should be ashamed the US has a prison like Guantanamo. This is the type of Nazi type justice with the law being twisted to justify detention without trial, refusal to try someone before his peers, denial of legal reprsentation. I mean come on George Bush and company drv a truck through due prcess and the rule of law. Cindy Shehan did not.
3:25 am
adult dating chat…
A WORD ABOUT LOYALTY DURING A TIME OF WAR…