Congressman John Murtha, a Democrat from Pennsylvania and
decorated Vietnman War veteran, has called for the immediate withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. Some would argue that he is calling essentially for immediate surrender, and that was precisely my initial reaction. However, because of my respect for the man's military service, and because he outranks me (he retired as a Colonel in the Marine Corps Reserve), I decided that I needed to consider his words more fully before I wrote about his statement.
Every single news report I've read or seen on the story quotes exclusively from the first and last paragraphs of Congressman Murtha's statement, and fails to mention the rest of it. Here are the quotes you will see over and over again:
"The U.S. cannot accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily. It is time to bring them home"..."The war in Iraq is not going as advertised. It's a flawed policy wrapped in illusion. The American public is way ahead of the members of Congress.''
But there is a lot more to Murtha's statement.
You can read it yourself at his own congressional website, as I have. Having done so, I find myself even more deflated and disappointed than my initial reaction upon hearing the news account of his statement.
Among other reasons, I am disappointed because today's soldiers (I use the term generically and include all branches of service) have been denied anything resembling the St. Crispen's Day speech that they so very much deserve. Whether you consider the war to be tragic or triumphal, or a qualified mix of both is of no consequence; the fact is that the tone from the media and the President's political enemies has been muted at best and defeatist consistently, from the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom. The President's declaration that "I can hear you. The rest of the world hears you. And the people who knocked down these buildings will hear all of us soon" was a long time ago, and was delivered before anyone entered combat in the new War on Terror.
I first noticed this in a personal way, and first thought of the contrast with
the St. Crispen's Day speech (from William Shakespeare's play,
Henry V) In the autumn of 2003, I had gotten back in uniform, after ten fat and easy years back in civilian life, as a US Army Reservist. Although I ultimately ended up not getting deployed, at the time, I, my family, and my unit were preparing for call-up to active duty. My Senator, Democrat Bill Nelson, visited a different unit in my town, a National Guard outfit, and I distinctly remember the local news reporting. I remember being ticked off by it. Here we were, my unit anticipating call-up, the Guardsmen from across town already deployed, and what we got from our representative in the Senate was this:
“You can’t rely on these occupations in the future to be done by the Guard and Reserves,” Nelson said Friday in an interview. “They have a specialized niche, and in times of war, that’s one thing. But in times of long, lengthy occupations, you can’t take them away from their employers [and their families]. Otherwise, they’re not going to reenlist.”
Of course, the Senator was voicing a legitimate concern, but that is the sort of thing you say away from the cameras in some sub-committee meeting. It is NOT what you say to an audience of family members of men who that day were engaging the enemy. It is not, to say the least, inspiring. As a Florida reservist, I was disheartened and disappointed that the man who had two decades earlier nominated me to West Point did not instead say, "You are so blessed to be remembered as those who raised and loved and cared for those who cannot be recalled without awe and gratitude for their amazing feats and abilities", or something like that. Over the top? Perhaps, but that's why the St. Crispen's Day is so memorable, while few will recall "Bill Nelson's interview of 2003".
So here is a little from the St. Crispen's Day speech, to contrast with the messages our soldiers get today (I will quote only a small portion.
Click here to read it for yourself. I especially like how the speech is sparked by another character in essence saying, "Hey, King! If we don't have more troops, we can't win.")
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered-
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now-a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.
This leads me, finally, to what Congressman Murtha really said in his complete statement, one which the jihadists would be forgiven if they took to calling it their St. Murtha's Day speech. I believe that because it seems that this a beginning of something. It feels planned, as evidenced by all of the well-worn talking points buried in the statement, and as evidenced by the nearly identical reporting of all of the media on the statement on the very day it was delivered. Congressman Murtha, a decorated veteran, is the cover for all others who will, as night follows day, follow him to what will surely be a loud rallying cry -- for the jihadists.
Murtha implies that we have both too few, and too many, troops in Iraq simultaneously:
"It is evident that continued military action in Iraq is not in the best interest of the United States of America, the Iraqi people or the Persian Gulf Region."
(too many troops)"General Casey said in a September 2005 Hearing, 'the perception of occupation in Iraq is a major driving force behind the insurgency.' General Abizaid said on the same date, 'Reducing the size and visibility of the coalition forces in Iraq is a part of our counterinsurgency strategy.'"
(too many troops)"I have been visiting our wounded troops at Bethesda and Walter Reed hospitals almost every week since the beginning of the War. And what demoralizes them is going to war with not enough troops
(ed: now it's too few troops) and equipment to make the transition to peace; the devastation caused by IEDs; being deployed to Iraq when their homes have been ravaged by hurricanes
(ed: the Congressman knows that this myth spread by the far-left websites right after Hurricane Katrina is not true, yet repeats it here); being on their second or third deployment and leaving their families behind without a network of support.
(ed: as a retired reservist, the Congressman knows that he last statement is also untrue and is a slap in the face of everyone who works in the various Family Support Groups in the services, and an insult to the intelligence of anyone familiar with military culture. The Congressman knows this 'without a network of support' business is simply a lie, and his saying it, more than anything else, convinces me that his statement as a whole has little to do with strategic thinking about America's interests, but is instead a emotionally-driven bit of political theater).
Murtha continues:
"Many say that the Army is broken."
(ed: there, in a nutshell, is the St. Murtha's Day speech. Congressman, what does 'many' mean? Do YOU say it?) "Recruitment is down, even as our military has lowered its standards."
(ed: perhaps some of you can help me out with hard numbers, but it seems to me that neither of those statements is true).
"But the war continues to intensify. Deaths and injuries are growing, with over 2,079 confirmed American deaths."
(ed: Blackfive, Mudville, is this true? I thought the Iraqization of the fighting was starting to work and that American deaths, while tragic, are declining. Perhaps I'm wrong, but if I am correct and the Congressman is not, then the entire premise for his 'stunning and corageous' statement is not only bogus, it is essentially declaring defeat about five minutes after it looks like we won). "Our troops have become the primary target of the insurgency."
(ed: Again, milbloggers, help me out with this. Murtha's rationale for pulling out doesn't seem to me to be grounded in reality. First it was the contractors and aid workers and journalists and even the UN headquarters, then it was civilians, then it was Iraqi police recruits, and now it is fellow Arabs in places like Jordan -- has the US Military ever really, in a significant way, been the 'primary target of the insurgency'?)Just a little more:
"My (Murtha's) plan calls:
To immediately redeploy U.S. troops consistent with the safety of U.S. forces.
(ed: with all respect, Colonel Murtha, after a more thorough read, yes, I do see this as a call to surrender)To create a quick reaction force in the region.
(ed: this sounds suspiciously like taking away the new Iraqi government's sovereignty and placing it in the hands of a multi-national authority. Whenver I hear the words 'quick reaction', I think 'Europe', for some reason)To create an over- the- horizon presence of Marines.
(ed: what the hell for? If you are serious that there might be a reason and possibility that they would actually be used, then why make them go through the dangerous step of deploying 'over the horizon', when they are already there right now with infrastructure in place? Or is it that you don't really mean there is any possibility of them ever being used?)To diplomatically pursue security and stability in Iraq
(ed: I cannot comment on a sentence that doesn't actually say anything).Thus ends my analysis of Congresman Murtha's (COL Murtha, USMCR ret.'s) statement.
As jihadists around the world repeat and celebrate their St. Murtha's Day speech, allow me, without comment, to repeat
the almost completely forgotten words of our soldiers' Commander-in-Chief, delivered at a joint session of Congress in September of 2001:
After all that has just passed -- all the lives taken, and all the possibilities and hopes that died with them -- it is natural to wonder if America's future is one of fear. Some speak of an age of terror. I know there are struggles ahead, and dangers to face. But this country will define our times, not be defined by them. As long as the United States of America is determined and strong, this will not be an age of terror; this will be an age of liberty, here and across the world.... I will not forget this wound to our country or those who inflicted it. I will not yield; I will not rest; I will not relent in waging this struggle for freedom and security for the American people.
The course of this conflict is not known, yet its outcome is certain. Freedom and fear, justice and cruelty, have always been at war, and we know that God is not neutral between them.
Brothers and sisters in arms, that last quote is your St. Crispen's Day speech. I think after Murtha's speech and what is absolutely certain to follow, it is the last you are going to get.
