Other Soldiers Have Voices, Too
Tommy Christopher
Contributor
Posted:
09/27/08
I was a little surprised to see my colleague, Dave, characterize Barack Obama's "I've got a bracelet, too..." line as a gaffe. This is the interesting thing about point of view. 
Usually, we can see the other guy's point, even if we don't write about it. That's how we form an effective argument, by anticipating and evaluating counter-arguments. Dave, in particular, is fairly even-handed in his analysis. In this case, however, we both seem to have missed the other guy's point.
It has long roiled me when Republican politicians presume to tell the world what our troops are thinking (but only the soldiers who agree with them), when military regulations restrict the soldiers from doing so themselves. In my view, it is the basest form of exploitation, and John McCain is a leading practitioner. When he offers the soldiers' entreaty to "Let us win," he does so without qualification, without saying, "Some of the soldiers" feel this way.
In doing so, he ignores and disrespects the voices of the soldiers, especially those silenced forever, who feel differently. He also disrespects the soldier he is quoting, who is doing his duty for his country by risking his life to carry out the mission given to him, not to be exploited for political gain.
Every soldier has sworn to carry out his mission, regardless of his personal feelings, and John McCain owes them better than to exploit their sacrifices to score points in a debate.
Obama's rejoinder was not some sort of childish one-upsmanship. It was a reminder to John McCain that our soldiers have as diverse opinions about the war as we do. That no soldier "dies in vain." That because these men and women pledge to give up their lives in any way that we see fit, we owe it to them to make that decision wisely, and not based on cynical political grandstanding.
Usually, we can see the other guy's point, even if we don't write about it. That's how we form an effective argument, by anticipating and evaluating counter-arguments. Dave, in particular, is fairly even-handed in his analysis. In this case, however, we both seem to have missed the other guy's point.
It has long roiled me when Republican politicians presume to tell the world what our troops are thinking (but only the soldiers who agree with them), when military regulations restrict the soldiers from doing so themselves. In my view, it is the basest form of exploitation, and John McCain is a leading practitioner. When he offers the soldiers' entreaty to "Let us win," he does so without qualification, without saying, "Some of the soldiers" feel this way.
In doing so, he ignores and disrespects the voices of the soldiers, especially those silenced forever, who feel differently. He also disrespects the soldier he is quoting, who is doing his duty for his country by risking his life to carry out the mission given to him, not to be exploited for political gain.
Every soldier has sworn to carry out his mission, regardless of his personal feelings, and John McCain owes them better than to exploit their sacrifices to score points in a debate.
Obama's rejoinder was not some sort of childish one-upsmanship. It was a reminder to John McCain that our soldiers have as diverse opinions about the war as we do. That no soldier "dies in vain." That because these men and women pledge to give up their lives in any way that we see fit, we owe it to them to make that decision wisely, and not based on cynical political grandstanding.
Tommy Christopher co-hosts "Unusable Signal",on BlogTalkRadio, every Tues and Thurs at 9pm, Wed, Fri, and Sat at 11pm. (Eastern) Click here for the Unusable Signal homepage.