Klatuu
01-19-2007, 01:26 PM
By Mark Daily
Sunday, October 29, 2006
WHY I JOINED
Current mood: optimistic
Why I Joined:
This question has been asked of me so many times in so many different
contexts that I thought it would be best if I wrote my reasons for joining
the Army on my page for all to see. First, the more accurate question is why
I volunteered to go to Iraq. After all, I joined the Army a week after we
declared war on Saddam's government with the intention of going to Iraq.
Now, after years of training and preparation, I am finally here.
Much has changed in the last three years. The criminal Ba'ath regime has
been replaced by an insurgency fueled by Iraq's neighbors who hope to
partition Iraq for their own ends. This is coupled with the ever present
transnational militant Islamist movement which has seized upon Iraq as the
greatest way to kill Americans, along with anyone else they happen to be
standing near. What was once a paralyzed state of fear is now the staging
ground for one of the largest transformations of power and ideology the
Middle East has experienced since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Thanks
to Iran, Syria, and other enlightened local actors, this transformation will
be plagued by interregional hatred and genocide. And I am now in the center
of this.
Is this why I joined?
Yes. Much has been said about America's intentions in overthrowing Saddam
Hussein and seeking to establish a new state based upon political
representation and individual rights. Many have framed the paradigm through
which they view the conflict around one-word explanations such as "oil" or
"terrorism," favoring the one which best serves their political persuasion.
I did the same thing, and anyone who knew me before I joined knows that I am
quite aware and at times sympathetic to the arguments against the war in
Iraq. If you think the only way a person could bring themselves to volunteer
for this war is through sheer desperation or blind obedience then consider
me the exception (though there are countless like me).
I joined the fight because it occurred to me that many modern day
"humanists" who claim to possess a genuine concern for human beings
throughout the world are in fact quite content to allow their fellow "global
citizens" to suffer under the most hideous state apparatuses and conditions.
Their excuses used to be my excuses. When asked why we shouldn't confront
the Ba'ath party, the Taliban or the various other tyrannies throughout this
world, my answers would allude to vague notions of cultural tolerance
(forcing women to wear a veil and stay indoors is such a quaint cultural
tradition), the sanctity of national sovereignty (how eager we
internationalists are to throw up borders to defend dictatorships!) or even
a creeping suspicion of America's intentions. When all else failed, I would
retreat to my fragile moral ecosystem that years of living in peace and
liberty had provided me. I would write off war because civilian casualties
were guaranteed, or temporary alliances with illiberal forces would be made,
or tank fuel was toxic for the environment. My fellow "humanists" and I
would relish contently in our self righteous declaration of opposition
against all military campaigns against dictatorships, congratulating one
another for refusing to taint that aforementioned fragile moral ecosystem
that many still cradle with all the revolutionary tenacity of the members of
Rage Against the Machine and Greenday. Others would point to America's
historical support of Saddam Hussein, sighting it as hypocritical that we
would now vilify him as a thug and a tyrant. Upon explaining that we did so
to ward off the fiercely Islamist Iran, which was correctly identified as
the greater threat at the time, eyes are rolled and hypocrisy is declared.
Forgetting that America sided with Stalin to defeat Hitler, who was promptly
confronted once the Nazis were destroyed, America's initial engagement with
Saddam and other regional actors is identified as the ultimate argument
against America's moral crusade.
And maybe it is. Maybe the reality of politics makes all political action
inherently crude and immoral. Or maybe it is these adventures in
philosophical masturbation that prevent people from ever taking any kind of
effective action against men like Saddam Hussein. One thing is for certain,
as disagreeable or as confusing as my decision to enter the fray may be,
consider what peace vigils against genocide have accomplished lately.
Consider that there are 19 year old soldiers from the Midwest who have never
touched a college campus or a protest who have done more to uphold the
universal legitimacy of representative government and individual rights by
placing themselves between Iraqi voting lines and homicidal religious
fanatics. Often times it is less about how clean your actions are and more
about how pure your intentions are.
So that is why I joined. In the time it took for you to read this
explanation, innocent people your age have suffered under the crushing
misery of tyranny. Every tool of philosophical advancement and communication
that we use to develop our opinions about this war are denied to countless
human beings on this planet, many of whom live under the regimes that have,
in my opinion, been legitimately targeted for destruction. Some have allowed
their resentment of the President to stir silent applause for setbacks in
Iraq. Others have ironically decried the war because it has tied up our
forces and prevented them from confronting criminal regimes in Sudan,
Uganda, and elsewhere.
I simply decided that the time for candid discussions of the oppressed was
over, and I joined.
In digesting this posting, please remember that America's commitment to
overthrow Saddam Hussein and his sons existed before the current
administration and would exist into our future children's lives had we not
acted. Please remember that the problems that plague Iraq today were set in
motion centuries ago and were up until now held back by the most cruel of
cages. Don't forget that human beings have a responsibility to one another
and that Americans will always have a responsibility to the oppressed. Don't
overlook the obvious reasons to disagree with the war but don't cheapen the
moral aspects either. Assisting a formerly oppressed population in
converting their torn society into a plural, democratic one is dangerous and
difficult business, especially when being attacked and sabotaged from
literally every direction. So if you have anything to say to me at the end
of this reading, let it at least include "Good Luck"
Mark Daily
2nd Lt Mark Daily was killed Monday, January 15th, 2007 by an IED in Mosul.
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/006723.htm
http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/homepage/article_1547859.php
Sunday, October 29, 2006
WHY I JOINED
Current mood: optimistic
Why I Joined:
This question has been asked of me so many times in so many different
contexts that I thought it would be best if I wrote my reasons for joining
the Army on my page for all to see. First, the more accurate question is why
I volunteered to go to Iraq. After all, I joined the Army a week after we
declared war on Saddam's government with the intention of going to Iraq.
Now, after years of training and preparation, I am finally here.
Much has changed in the last three years. The criminal Ba'ath regime has
been replaced by an insurgency fueled by Iraq's neighbors who hope to
partition Iraq for their own ends. This is coupled with the ever present
transnational militant Islamist movement which has seized upon Iraq as the
greatest way to kill Americans, along with anyone else they happen to be
standing near. What was once a paralyzed state of fear is now the staging
ground for one of the largest transformations of power and ideology the
Middle East has experienced since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Thanks
to Iran, Syria, and other enlightened local actors, this transformation will
be plagued by interregional hatred and genocide. And I am now in the center
of this.
Is this why I joined?
Yes. Much has been said about America's intentions in overthrowing Saddam
Hussein and seeking to establish a new state based upon political
representation and individual rights. Many have framed the paradigm through
which they view the conflict around one-word explanations such as "oil" or
"terrorism," favoring the one which best serves their political persuasion.
I did the same thing, and anyone who knew me before I joined knows that I am
quite aware and at times sympathetic to the arguments against the war in
Iraq. If you think the only way a person could bring themselves to volunteer
for this war is through sheer desperation or blind obedience then consider
me the exception (though there are countless like me).
I joined the fight because it occurred to me that many modern day
"humanists" who claim to possess a genuine concern for human beings
throughout the world are in fact quite content to allow their fellow "global
citizens" to suffer under the most hideous state apparatuses and conditions.
Their excuses used to be my excuses. When asked why we shouldn't confront
the Ba'ath party, the Taliban or the various other tyrannies throughout this
world, my answers would allude to vague notions of cultural tolerance
(forcing women to wear a veil and stay indoors is such a quaint cultural
tradition), the sanctity of national sovereignty (how eager we
internationalists are to throw up borders to defend dictatorships!) or even
a creeping suspicion of America's intentions. When all else failed, I would
retreat to my fragile moral ecosystem that years of living in peace and
liberty had provided me. I would write off war because civilian casualties
were guaranteed, or temporary alliances with illiberal forces would be made,
or tank fuel was toxic for the environment. My fellow "humanists" and I
would relish contently in our self righteous declaration of opposition
against all military campaigns against dictatorships, congratulating one
another for refusing to taint that aforementioned fragile moral ecosystem
that many still cradle with all the revolutionary tenacity of the members of
Rage Against the Machine and Greenday. Others would point to America's
historical support of Saddam Hussein, sighting it as hypocritical that we
would now vilify him as a thug and a tyrant. Upon explaining that we did so
to ward off the fiercely Islamist Iran, which was correctly identified as
the greater threat at the time, eyes are rolled and hypocrisy is declared.
Forgetting that America sided with Stalin to defeat Hitler, who was promptly
confronted once the Nazis were destroyed, America's initial engagement with
Saddam and other regional actors is identified as the ultimate argument
against America's moral crusade.
And maybe it is. Maybe the reality of politics makes all political action
inherently crude and immoral. Or maybe it is these adventures in
philosophical masturbation that prevent people from ever taking any kind of
effective action against men like Saddam Hussein. One thing is for certain,
as disagreeable or as confusing as my decision to enter the fray may be,
consider what peace vigils against genocide have accomplished lately.
Consider that there are 19 year old soldiers from the Midwest who have never
touched a college campus or a protest who have done more to uphold the
universal legitimacy of representative government and individual rights by
placing themselves between Iraqi voting lines and homicidal religious
fanatics. Often times it is less about how clean your actions are and more
about how pure your intentions are.
So that is why I joined. In the time it took for you to read this
explanation, innocent people your age have suffered under the crushing
misery of tyranny. Every tool of philosophical advancement and communication
that we use to develop our opinions about this war are denied to countless
human beings on this planet, many of whom live under the regimes that have,
in my opinion, been legitimately targeted for destruction. Some have allowed
their resentment of the President to stir silent applause for setbacks in
Iraq. Others have ironically decried the war because it has tied up our
forces and prevented them from confronting criminal regimes in Sudan,
Uganda, and elsewhere.
I simply decided that the time for candid discussions of the oppressed was
over, and I joined.
In digesting this posting, please remember that America's commitment to
overthrow Saddam Hussein and his sons existed before the current
administration and would exist into our future children's lives had we not
acted. Please remember that the problems that plague Iraq today were set in
motion centuries ago and were up until now held back by the most cruel of
cages. Don't forget that human beings have a responsibility to one another
and that Americans will always have a responsibility to the oppressed. Don't
overlook the obvious reasons to disagree with the war but don't cheapen the
moral aspects either. Assisting a formerly oppressed population in
converting their torn society into a plural, democratic one is dangerous and
difficult business, especially when being attacked and sabotaged from
literally every direction. So if you have anything to say to me at the end
of this reading, let it at least include "Good Luck"
Mark Daily
2nd Lt Mark Daily was killed Monday, January 15th, 2007 by an IED in Mosul.
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/006723.htm
http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/homepage/article_1547859.php