By Tim Robertson
I went to a party last week. There were drinks, appetizers and good friends. But it wasn’t a birthday, a bachelor party or any of the normal fun things that we are accustomed to doing. It was a going away party for a friend. He’s not moving for a job or going away to school, he’s going back to Iraq.
My friend is 30 years old and possibly the nicest person and hardest worker I have ever known. He signed an army contract when he was 23 and has already served a full tour in Iraq. However, the army employs an eight year contract, so he must return.
Mounting causalities in an endless war require that he, in the midst of rebuilding his life after service, rejoin the ranks of the endangered and fight again in what is increasingly appearing to be a futile war.
It’s easy to make some kind of judgment about the war, our leadership and our country’s position in the world. However, it’s hard to rationalize anything that puts your friends in the line of fire.
When speaking of life as a soldier in Iraq, he rarely refers to how the sound of bombs is a good thing because you don’t hear them if they kill you. Apparently, good sounds to hear are bombs exploding in the distance and the whistles of a rockets passing over camp.
He is sick about returning. The demons he’s been trying to deal with for the last few years can no longer be satisfied; he will see them again. He will have to renew the process of trying to forget the difficulties of being a soldier in about 18 months, when he’s allowed to return to the states. If he’s lucky enough to survive.
In the political struggle over whether or not to remain in Iraq, something that is largely forgotten is the mind-set of our troops. It’s easy to put a sign in your front yard or a yellow ribbon on the back of your vehicle saying that you support our troops, but wouldn’t actual support mean seeing them not risk death or not subjecting them to seeing the death of their friends and Iraqi civilians?
Politics are always tricky, but Louisville’s current U.S. House Representative, Anne Northup, supported this war from the beginning by voting on party lines. Anyone we choose to represent our district should be more concerned with our people, particularly the ones risking their lives, than politics. Is the safety of our citizens not more important than two shiny new bridges?
I appreciate a lot of the things that Northup has been able to do for our community, due largely to her entrenchment in the House. But her connections with the establishment are about to become a lot less important, given that her party will no longer control the House. While it is impressive that Northup managed to gain respect in the House, her insistence on party-line voting makes me question who she’s really fighting for.
Given the politicized nature of our current Congress, it seems like a pretty good idea to elect someone who is not constrained by ten years of agreeing, deal-making and voting to send our friends, sons, daughters and parents to war.
We’ve tried something and it hasn’t worked. It’s time to try something else, if for no other reason than to keep great people out of senseless danger.
