24 October 2012
A Word About Veteran's Employment
As North Carolina’s servicemen and women return from protecting our freedoms around the world, many are coming home to a job market that is anything but welcoming.
In January of 2009 my wife and I moved to Raleigh, following my last deployment, to Afghanistan. While I had a college degree, over 15 years of military experience, six on active duty, and a resume that reflected both military leadership and civilian management experience, I still struggled to find meaningful employment. I volunteered for a start up veteran’s charity that currently remains unable to pay their employees. Additionally, I served as press secretary to a local political party. And yet none of my connections or efforts helped me to score a career oriented job.
I worked for a few months managing a holiday store, eventually I took a private security job that required downsizing our family budget and stressed my marriage but enabled us to stay afloat.
Today, veteran unemployment—at 10 percent—is two full percentage points higher than the national average, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Military personnel returning from Iraq and Afghanistan have the hardest time finding work. Here in North Carolina alone, more than 40,000 veterans are currently without jobs.
The government has responded to the problem of high unemployment among veterans with ineffectual programs narrowly targeting unemployed veterans. Sadly, this has not done enough to help our veterans—and there’s no shortage of news reports telling of the fate of hundreds of thousands of vets who are frustrated and disheartened at being shut out of the work force after returning from deployment. The government needs to focus on implementing broad pro-growth policies to get the economy moving again for everyone. As John F Kennedy reflected fifty years ago: “A rising tide lifts all boats.”
To make matters worse, planned cuts to defense, scheduled for 2013 and beyond, will only worsen the problem. Officials estimate that the U.S. Army could see layoffs of up to 24,000 enlisted personnel, including up to 5,000 officers, while the U.S. Marine Corps could shrink by some 20,000. This means more young veterans will soon be competing for work, in a very tough jobs environment.
In addition to the lack of job security in the military and lack of opportunity in the economy in general, veterans face a culture of waste and inefficiency at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) that results in long waits, delayed benefits, mishandled documents and poor service to veterans. Currently, the VA has 890,000 pension and compensation claims that remain unfulfilled—a number that has more than doubled since 2008. Today, it takes 240 days to process the average claim—60 days longer than a decade ago.
Runaway government spending makes it all the more difficult to address these problems in the future. In a nationwide Concerned Veterans for America (CVA) poll conducted in late September, 72 percent of veterans named the economy and the debt as their top concerns in 2012. These veterans recognize that a weak economy and towering national debt only serve to compromise our nation’s long-term security. This leads to a continued lack of opportunity for work and prosperity for military families as well as the country in general.
We can do better than this. We must do better.
CVA is bringing attention to these and other issues facing our country’s returning service members — many of whom have had little say in our country’s leadership because of dysfunctional military voting procedures that disenfranchise service members. The “We Can Do Better” bus tour, slated to swing through North Carolina on October 22-23, will allow veterans to hear directly from leaders in the veterans’ community about these and other critical issues.
We at CVA invite you to join us, whether on the road or at the ballot box, in urging Washington to focus on a comprehensive agenda of fiscal restraint and pro-growth policies that allow businesses to expand and create jobs by holding the line on taxes, cutting burdensome regulations, and getting out of the way of the private sector.
We owe our military servicemen and women better. We can do better. Join us in urging our leaders to deliver the future that North Carolina’s 765,900 veterans, and all Americans, deserve.
John Byrnes is a writer, a veteran and a member of Concerned Veterans for America. He served in the USMC in the 1990s, and was deployed to Somalia for Operation Restore Hope. He returned to service in 2000 When he joined the New York Army National Guard. He was deployed to Ground Zero on September 11 2001, and has since served in Iraq and Afghanistan. He currently serves in the North Carolina Army National Guard, and lives in Raleigh with his wife.
Learn more at: http://concernedveteransforamerica.org/.
Originally printed in the Fayetteville Observer:
http://www.fayobserver.com/articles/2012/10/21/1211431?sac=fo.opinion
30 June 2012
A Very Brief Summation of Conservative Objections to Obamacare
In response to a friend who could not see any downside to ObamaCare, I have to say that anyone who says they can’t see the down side of a major piece of legislation, forged in compromise between the various factions of one party with a handful of defectors from the opposing party, hasn’t looked at the law or the facts. Even when Congress acts in ways I approve of , I know that there is a downside, and that a significant portion of the citizenry strenuously objects.
The foundational concept of economics is scarcity. There are simply never enough resources to do everything. Even the wealthiest persons and the wealthiest societies must prioritize where to spend their resources. For example, Even Bill Gates cannot maintain his lifestyle and feed everyone in Africa, even his resources are not enough to do both. How we organize our society to use resources defines our economy.
Modern economies exist along a continuum, stretching from capitalism through socialism to communism. Neither pure capitalism, where a laissez faire market makes decisions with no governmental interference nor pure communism where no markets operate and the government makes all economic choices, actually exist.
America has primarily had a democratic capitalist economy throughout history, with growing government regulation of markets since around 1900. Europe, on average, has a stronger socialist tradition and has markedly more government decisions made in the economic sphere, while still retaining quite a bit of a capitalist market. In Europe over the last few decades the government has essentially taken control of the healthcare industry and removed the market’s ability to make decisions based on supply and demand, and the government allocates the resources. In America government interference in the health care market has been slower but growing.
In the last century, medical technology has improved exponentially. Diseases, disorders and injuries that were once life threatening are now routinely cured. In western civilization, infant mortality has virtually vanished and average life spans have almost doubled. The technological means to treat illness and injury have created a longer lived populace. No one has yet found a way to pay for all of this. Health care is now said to occupy 18% of the US economy. A few more cancers subdued with new treatments and that percentage will grow. Larger, and aging populations along with better treatments mean more and more people demanding health care. Eventually, if technology advances enough, economic demand for health care will become completely unsustainable. More 90 year olds, 25 years retired, demanding their latest cancer be cured, their lives prolonged, will subsume the economy.
Conservatives believe that the best way to solve the problem is through the market. Let an open market system value health care and it should make efficient decisions about how to allocate resources. Market economics also allows for the best re-investment in R&D, which is why the US’s much criticized health care system still counts as the most technically advanced.
According to liberals, the market is not fair. It is, by their narrative, essentially unjust because the wealthy do better than the poor. Even with America’s evolving system of insurances and HMOs, poor folk are can be priced out of newer and more expensive treatments.
For conservatives, the issue is complex but the principles are simple. While the market may make decisions that seem unfair to certain observers, it makes them efficiently and facelessly. If the insurance market was more de-regulated, allowed to cross state lines, used only as insurance, and not as a complete health care funding apparatus, costs would become more generally affordable.
ObamaCare means to further regulate the market. But Hayek and history have shown that when governments attempt to supplant markets several negatives accrue. First the government becomes more powerful. No more does the market decide that nonagenarians who still have wealth can be treated for melanoma. Now a bureaucrat decides that no melanoma patients over 93.25 years will be funded for melanoma treatments. Second, the government is never as efficient as the market at making decisions, so it will use resources far less efficiently. Ultimately inefficiency will create even more unfairness than the market.
ObamaCare’s mandate/tax provision means that the government is now essentially telling everyone how much they are required to spend on Health Care. The act also defines what everyone must receive as part of their health care plan. Hence, the religious community’s objections to cover abortion and abortifacients. So the conservatives see downsides in inefficiency, in growth of government power, in loss of freedom of choice.
I’m sure there are positives, especially for those who believe in a different philosophy of government. I simply don’t believe they outweigh the negatives. It seems either extremely biased or extremely uninformed to deny any downside to ObamaCare.
The foundational concept of economics is scarcity. There are simply never enough resources to do everything. Even the wealthiest persons and the wealthiest societies must prioritize where to spend their resources. For example, Even Bill Gates cannot maintain his lifestyle and feed everyone in Africa, even his resources are not enough to do both. How we organize our society to use resources defines our economy.
Modern economies exist along a continuum, stretching from capitalism through socialism to communism. Neither pure capitalism, where a laissez faire market makes decisions with no governmental interference nor pure communism where no markets operate and the government makes all economic choices, actually exist.
America has primarily had a democratic capitalist economy throughout history, with growing government regulation of markets since around 1900. Europe, on average, has a stronger socialist tradition and has markedly more government decisions made in the economic sphere, while still retaining quite a bit of a capitalist market. In Europe over the last few decades the government has essentially taken control of the healthcare industry and removed the market’s ability to make decisions based on supply and demand, and the government allocates the resources. In America government interference in the health care market has been slower but growing.
In the last century, medical technology has improved exponentially. Diseases, disorders and injuries that were once life threatening are now routinely cured. In western civilization, infant mortality has virtually vanished and average life spans have almost doubled. The technological means to treat illness and injury have created a longer lived populace. No one has yet found a way to pay for all of this. Health care is now said to occupy 18% of the US economy. A few more cancers subdued with new treatments and that percentage will grow. Larger, and aging populations along with better treatments mean more and more people demanding health care. Eventually, if technology advances enough, economic demand for health care will become completely unsustainable. More 90 year olds, 25 years retired, demanding their latest cancer be cured, their lives prolonged, will subsume the economy.
Conservatives believe that the best way to solve the problem is through the market. Let an open market system value health care and it should make efficient decisions about how to allocate resources. Market economics also allows for the best re-investment in R&D, which is why the US’s much criticized health care system still counts as the most technically advanced.
According to liberals, the market is not fair. It is, by their narrative, essentially unjust because the wealthy do better than the poor. Even with America’s evolving system of insurances and HMOs, poor folk are can be priced out of newer and more expensive treatments.
For conservatives, the issue is complex but the principles are simple. While the market may make decisions that seem unfair to certain observers, it makes them efficiently and facelessly. If the insurance market was more de-regulated, allowed to cross state lines, used only as insurance, and not as a complete health care funding apparatus, costs would become more generally affordable.
ObamaCare means to further regulate the market. But Hayek and history have shown that when governments attempt to supplant markets several negatives accrue. First the government becomes more powerful. No more does the market decide that nonagenarians who still have wealth can be treated for melanoma. Now a bureaucrat decides that no melanoma patients over 93.25 years will be funded for melanoma treatments. Second, the government is never as efficient as the market at making decisions, so it will use resources far less efficiently. Ultimately inefficiency will create even more unfairness than the market.
ObamaCare’s mandate/tax provision means that the government is now essentially telling everyone how much they are required to spend on Health Care. The act also defines what everyone must receive as part of their health care plan. Hence, the religious community’s objections to cover abortion and abortifacients. So the conservatives see downsides in inefficiency, in growth of government power, in loss of freedom of choice.
I’m sure there are positives, especially for those who believe in a different philosophy of government. I simply don’t believe they outweigh the negatives. It seems either extremely biased or extremely uninformed to deny any downside to ObamaCare.
11 September 2011
9-11 Speech to NC Guard in Charlotte
Good morning!
For those of you who don’t know me, I’m SSG Byrnes. It’s a beautiful morning outside here in Charlotte. Ten years ago today, it started off as a beautiful morning in NYC. The sun was out, it was a warm late summer day, just like this.
It was Election day in New York, primary day.
I had only been back in the military about a year. I was an adult student at Hunter College in upper Manhattan, and I had joined the National Guard after a break in service from active duty, too help pay for tuition. That Tuesday, after a morning swim, I sat down early for a 9:10 Am class. Moments later, fire engines, sirens wailing, began rolling outside the window.
After a few minutes a young woman in the rear of the class room looked up from her cell phone and said:
“ An airplane just hit the World Trade Center.”
And the world changed.
Some of the soldiers who stand here were only children that day. You have grown up in a post 9-11 world. It is a different world.
My Armory was 2 miles downtown from Hunter College. I jumped in a Taxi, the driver offered to take me over the bridge to Queens. I showed him my Military ID and promised bodily harm if he didn’t get me to the Armory.
I was one of the first soldiers from my company to arrive, but there were already a few soldiers standing guard, with Bayonets attached. By 10 AM I was in uniform. My CO sent me out to get city maps, we had none. I doubled timed to Barnes and Noble, running against the Human current still pushing north from lower Manhattan. Civilians stared at me in fear and awe.
Most of the day was spent in frustrating formations, getting new head counts. Watching the events unfold, in horror, two miles away and feeling powerless. Eventually as the sun went down my company moved out to help secure lower Manhattan. After we were posted by fireteam, we took turns walking the last block down to ground zero to view the devastation. It remains to this day the single most horrific sight I have ever seen.
For the next two weeks we stood a 12 hour shift every night, securing ground zero. By day we often helped out with traffic management, crowd control, and the bucket brigades. We averaged only three or four hours of sleep.
Almost every New Yorker lost friends, family, or acquaintances that day. Five of my school friends from Grade School, HS, or College, perished. Our armory became the family support center for families of the the nearly 3000 murdered NYers. My platoon leader lost his sister, it took, a long time for him to accept the loss. Her funeral, weeks later was the saddest I have ever been to, as shared grief focused on one woman.
We worried for comrades too. Like all Guard units we had a number of firefighters and police. While almost all the police in my unit chose to respond with the Guard, the firefighters all reported in to their fire companies that day. When SSG Sean Goodridge, and Sgt Chris Engeldrum appeared on our lines our relief was overwhelming.
Chris Engeldrum died three years later in an IED attack in Baghdad, on November 29 2004, he was killed alongside Spc Wilfredo Urbina who stood next to me that morning when Chris “finally showed up.”
I don’t imagine there are many soldiers here who don’t know the sense of grief from losing a battle buddy, if you don’t I hope you stay lucky. Loss is part of a soldier’s life especially now. Just as fear of terror attacks is now part of the American fabric, though being Americans we bear it with courage.
Today we mourn not only those who died on September 11, 2001, but the thousands of Soldiers and service members we have lost fighting to prevent further attacks. Soldiers are the kind of men and women who don’t forget. We don’t forget our comrades, and we don’t forget why we have to do this job.
Since that fateful day 10 years ago we have been a nation at war. Many of you joined the military since then. Everyone here has made a choice to join, re-enlist or extend since, everyone here has volunteered knowing we are a nation at war. 9-11 changed my life, as it surely changed the life of every soldier here.
We have all experienced the sense of pride, mixed with humility when a civilian thanks us for serving. That is a good mix.
Proud of our service, humbled by the gratitude of our fellow citizens.
I want to thank you too.
I was incredibly grateful ten years ago that I was in the National Guard, that I was able to respond in a meaningful way. I am incredibly grateful that I have the opportunity to spend this morning with fellow soldiers as well. I understand I am not welcome this morning at ground zero, I was not invited! Of course I wasn’t invited ten years ago either I just went. But Thank You, as a soldier, an American and a New Yorker thank you for having the courage of your convictions to serve in a wartime Army. And thank you for helping to ensure that we never forget.
For those of you who don’t know me, I’m SSG Byrnes. It’s a beautiful morning outside here in Charlotte. Ten years ago today, it started off as a beautiful morning in NYC. The sun was out, it was a warm late summer day, just like this.
It was Election day in New York, primary day.
I had only been back in the military about a year. I was an adult student at Hunter College in upper Manhattan, and I had joined the National Guard after a break in service from active duty, too help pay for tuition. That Tuesday, after a morning swim, I sat down early for a 9:10 Am class. Moments later, fire engines, sirens wailing, began rolling outside the window.
After a few minutes a young woman in the rear of the class room looked up from her cell phone and said:
“ An airplane just hit the World Trade Center.”
And the world changed.
Some of the soldiers who stand here were only children that day. You have grown up in a post 9-11 world. It is a different world.
My Armory was 2 miles downtown from Hunter College. I jumped in a Taxi, the driver offered to take me over the bridge to Queens. I showed him my Military ID and promised bodily harm if he didn’t get me to the Armory.
I was one of the first soldiers from my company to arrive, but there were already a few soldiers standing guard, with Bayonets attached. By 10 AM I was in uniform. My CO sent me out to get city maps, we had none. I doubled timed to Barnes and Noble, running against the Human current still pushing north from lower Manhattan. Civilians stared at me in fear and awe.
Most of the day was spent in frustrating formations, getting new head counts. Watching the events unfold, in horror, two miles away and feeling powerless. Eventually as the sun went down my company moved out to help secure lower Manhattan. After we were posted by fireteam, we took turns walking the last block down to ground zero to view the devastation. It remains to this day the single most horrific sight I have ever seen.
For the next two weeks we stood a 12 hour shift every night, securing ground zero. By day we often helped out with traffic management, crowd control, and the bucket brigades. We averaged only three or four hours of sleep.
Almost every New Yorker lost friends, family, or acquaintances that day. Five of my school friends from Grade School, HS, or College, perished. Our armory became the family support center for families of the the nearly 3000 murdered NYers. My platoon leader lost his sister, it took, a long time for him to accept the loss. Her funeral, weeks later was the saddest I have ever been to, as shared grief focused on one woman.
We worried for comrades too. Like all Guard units we had a number of firefighters and police. While almost all the police in my unit chose to respond with the Guard, the firefighters all reported in to their fire companies that day. When SSG Sean Goodridge, and Sgt Chris Engeldrum appeared on our lines our relief was overwhelming.
Chris Engeldrum died three years later in an IED attack in Baghdad, on November 29 2004, he was killed alongside Spc Wilfredo Urbina who stood next to me that morning when Chris “finally showed up.”
I don’t imagine there are many soldiers here who don’t know the sense of grief from losing a battle buddy, if you don’t I hope you stay lucky. Loss is part of a soldier’s life especially now. Just as fear of terror attacks is now part of the American fabric, though being Americans we bear it with courage.
Today we mourn not only those who died on September 11, 2001, but the thousands of Soldiers and service members we have lost fighting to prevent further attacks. Soldiers are the kind of men and women who don’t forget. We don’t forget our comrades, and we don’t forget why we have to do this job.
Since that fateful day 10 years ago we have been a nation at war. Many of you joined the military since then. Everyone here has made a choice to join, re-enlist or extend since, everyone here has volunteered knowing we are a nation at war. 9-11 changed my life, as it surely changed the life of every soldier here.
We have all experienced the sense of pride, mixed with humility when a civilian thanks us for serving. That is a good mix.
Proud of our service, humbled by the gratitude of our fellow citizens.
I want to thank you too.
I was incredibly grateful ten years ago that I was in the National Guard, that I was able to respond in a meaningful way. I am incredibly grateful that I have the opportunity to spend this morning with fellow soldiers as well. I understand I am not welcome this morning at ground zero, I was not invited! Of course I wasn’t invited ten years ago either I just went. But Thank You, as a soldier, an American and a New Yorker thank you for having the courage of your convictions to serve in a wartime Army. And thank you for helping to ensure that we never forget.
21 November 2010
28 October 2010
Grief!
An email from Major Vincent Heintz, a leader and a friend came my way this morning!
Men,
Six years ago today the enemy killed SPC Segun Frederick Akintade at ASR Boa. Time passes. Grief, anger and survivor’s guilt remain. We think about a family that has been shattered forever.
I will always carry a debt of gratitude to the men in that patrol who fought so selflessly to save him. As a company, we remain deeply grateful to the intrepid aviators and docs who rushed forward to keep him alive. As Akintade began to pass, these rescuers defied not just risk but policies and protocols by taking him from the battlefield in the most respectful, decent way possible under hard circumstances.
After we came home, I learned that Akintade was not completely sold on the war in Iraq. Was his exceptional performance just the swagger of a young man trying to be a tough guy, politics be damned? Hardly. The men of first platoon in particular will remember Akintade as a modest, steady, centered man who knew his job and did his job. He superbly met the high oath that he took as a Soldier upon enlistment in 2001. He far surpassed the one he took as a new US citizen at Fort Drum in January 2004. Given the ambiguity of the war and his own views, and his humility, how and why did Akintade serve so consistently, so bravely?
After six years, the only reason that I can see is that he served, fought and died to protect his brothers.
Men, stay as safe as you can given your obligations, and stay focused. I thank you for passing this on to other members of A/2-108 IN (OIF II).
-MAJ Heintz
“There are still men out there... When I go home, people ask me, ‘Hey, Hoot, why do you do it, man? Why? You some kind of war junkie? I won’t say a God-damned word. Why? They won’t understand. They won’t understand why we do it. They won’t understand. It’s about the man next to you. And that’s it. That’s all it is... Hey, don’t even think about it, alright? I am better on my own. Hey, we started a whole new week. It’s Monday.”
-Hoot, Blackhawk Down
Men,
Six years ago today the enemy killed SPC Segun Frederick Akintade at ASR Boa. Time passes. Grief, anger and survivor’s guilt remain. We think about a family that has been shattered forever.
I will always carry a debt of gratitude to the men in that patrol who fought so selflessly to save him. As a company, we remain deeply grateful to the intrepid aviators and docs who rushed forward to keep him alive. As Akintade began to pass, these rescuers defied not just risk but policies and protocols by taking him from the battlefield in the most respectful, decent way possible under hard circumstances.
After we came home, I learned that Akintade was not completely sold on the war in Iraq. Was his exceptional performance just the swagger of a young man trying to be a tough guy, politics be damned? Hardly. The men of first platoon in particular will remember Akintade as a modest, steady, centered man who knew his job and did his job. He superbly met the high oath that he took as a Soldier upon enlistment in 2001. He far surpassed the one he took as a new US citizen at Fort Drum in January 2004. Given the ambiguity of the war and his own views, and his humility, how and why did Akintade serve so consistently, so bravely?
After six years, the only reason that I can see is that he served, fought and died to protect his brothers.
Men, stay as safe as you can given your obligations, and stay focused. I thank you for passing this on to other members of A/2-108 IN (OIF II).
-MAJ Heintz
“There are still men out there... When I go home, people ask me, ‘Hey, Hoot, why do you do it, man? Why? You some kind of war junkie? I won’t say a God-damned word. Why? They won’t understand. They won’t understand why we do it. They won’t understand. It’s about the man next to you. And that’s it. That’s all it is... Hey, don’t even think about it, alright? I am better on my own. Hey, we started a whole new week. It’s Monday.”
-Hoot, Blackhawk Down
21 September 2010
I'm reposting an edited version of something I wrote a year ago, I think it still matters!
It has now been more than two years; on August 19, 2008 my friend was murdered. Taliban gunmen assassinated Mohammed Ayoob on his doorstep, in a village along the Kunduz River, in the Kunduz Province of Northern Afghanistan. Ayoob, only twenty years old, served as the supply sergeant for an Afghan Police unit in the district of Chahar Darreh where he lived.
Hardly the toughest soldier, Ayoob sometimes seemed to fear his own shadow. His commanders assigned him to the supply section; the Taliban noted his gentler nature and targeted him. In the end, he was tougher than he realized.
Courageous in the face of death, when three terrorists ambushed him with AK-47 assault rifles, he drew his sidearm, and fired a single round at his killers before falling, the pistol smoking in his hand.
My friend’s death exemplifies the dynamics of the violent struggle for Afghanistan. A small, fringe minority resorts to terror to intimidate the majority. Wherever Afghan and US Forces fail to secure the populace, the Taliban terrorizes the people into obedience. Since I left Afghanistan last fall, the Kunduz Province has slipped further into the Taliban grasp. Ayoob’s murder was merely a single act in their long campaign.
The last time the Taliban ruled Afghanistan, fear and violence reigned. The rule of the Mullahs confined women and girls to their homes. Taliban officials destroyed schools. The Taliban stoned adulterers. They killed apostates who converted to Christianity and then destroyed the iconic Bamiyan Buddha statues. Afghans, with America’s help, overthrew their oppressive regime.
As an American soldier, I was proud to call Ayoob my friend, but language and culture made understanding difficult. I never knew whether he was more concerned with defeating the insurgent than with holding a paying job. I suspected the latter. Ayoob, and his family, lived in a state of poverty. Like most Afghans they scraped by as best they could from year to year.
Whether he fought for patriotism or money, Ayoob chose to stand up to the Taliban. Despite the risks involved, Sgt. Ayoob accepted a job that endangered his life. He demonstrated personal courage and a rejection of the Taliban. Soon after he died, I realized his family stood with him.
Muslims must be buried within twenty four hours of death. The day after Ayoob died, my team, continued our own anti-Taliban efforts in the district. On the way back to our base we passed Ayoob's funeral. In a nation where few people have cars, I saw dozens of cars, packed with hundred’s of friends and relatives at the hilltop cemetery where they laid Ayoob to rest. Attendance at Ayoob’s funeral represented a public rejection of the Taliban.
Ayoob’s friends and family are hardly unique in their rejection of the Taliban. Last year, Afghan presidential elections were held for the second time this decade. While insurgents intimidated millions of Afghans into staying home, millions more risked heir lives to vote.
Today, in the US, politicians quote recent polls worded insure that a majority of Americans reflect the belief that Afghanistan is no longer worth fighting for. The left worked to prevent the surge strategy. President Obama campaigned for office on the claim that Iraq had distracted us from fighting the “right war” in Afghanistan.
The mid-term elections are little more than a month away.
Americans may be weary of the war after nine years. Surely though, we are not more weary than the Afghans; they have known only war and terror for decades. The difference is that millions of Afghans know this war is worth fighting.
Like the loved ones of Mohammed Ayoob, they clearly want to end the violence. Their communities have been torn apart by decades of violence, but they will not surrender to terror to achieve peace. They know that the peace of the terrified is no peace at all.
Here at home, Americans are bombarded by the objections of the political left, and spoon-fed the dubious opinions of mainstream media pundits, but hopefully we will remember our own recent past. Eight years ago the Taliban allowed al-Quaeda to plan and train in Afghanistan. Al-Quaeda used that sanctuary to attack America here at home.
Today liberals, and an increasing number of conservatives are willing to allow that same Taliban to reclaim rule over Afghanistan. Today when Pakistan is much weaker and more susceptible to the Taliban in its own borders, this would spell disaster. Disaster for Afghans, and disaster for America; our enemies, safe in their sanctuary will plot once again to export their violence to our shores.
It has now been more than two years; on August 19, 2008 my friend was murdered. Taliban gunmen assassinated Mohammed Ayoob on his doorstep, in a village along the Kunduz River, in the Kunduz Province of Northern Afghanistan. Ayoob, only twenty years old, served as the supply sergeant for an Afghan Police unit in the district of Chahar Darreh where he lived.
Hardly the toughest soldier, Ayoob sometimes seemed to fear his own shadow. His commanders assigned him to the supply section; the Taliban noted his gentler nature and targeted him. In the end, he was tougher than he realized.
Courageous in the face of death, when three terrorists ambushed him with AK-47 assault rifles, he drew his sidearm, and fired a single round at his killers before falling, the pistol smoking in his hand.
My friend’s death exemplifies the dynamics of the violent struggle for Afghanistan. A small, fringe minority resorts to terror to intimidate the majority. Wherever Afghan and US Forces fail to secure the populace, the Taliban terrorizes the people into obedience. Since I left Afghanistan last fall, the Kunduz Province has slipped further into the Taliban grasp. Ayoob’s murder was merely a single act in their long campaign.
The last time the Taliban ruled Afghanistan, fear and violence reigned. The rule of the Mullahs confined women and girls to their homes. Taliban officials destroyed schools. The Taliban stoned adulterers. They killed apostates who converted to Christianity and then destroyed the iconic Bamiyan Buddha statues. Afghans, with America’s help, overthrew their oppressive regime.
As an American soldier, I was proud to call Ayoob my friend, but language and culture made understanding difficult. I never knew whether he was more concerned with defeating the insurgent than with holding a paying job. I suspected the latter. Ayoob, and his family, lived in a state of poverty. Like most Afghans they scraped by as best they could from year to year.
Whether he fought for patriotism or money, Ayoob chose to stand up to the Taliban. Despite the risks involved, Sgt. Ayoob accepted a job that endangered his life. He demonstrated personal courage and a rejection of the Taliban. Soon after he died, I realized his family stood with him.
Muslims must be buried within twenty four hours of death. The day after Ayoob died, my team, continued our own anti-Taliban efforts in the district. On the way back to our base we passed Ayoob's funeral. In a nation where few people have cars, I saw dozens of cars, packed with hundred’s of friends and relatives at the hilltop cemetery where they laid Ayoob to rest. Attendance at Ayoob’s funeral represented a public rejection of the Taliban.
Ayoob’s friends and family are hardly unique in their rejection of the Taliban. Last year, Afghan presidential elections were held for the second time this decade. While insurgents intimidated millions of Afghans into staying home, millions more risked heir lives to vote.
Today, in the US, politicians quote recent polls worded insure that a majority of Americans reflect the belief that Afghanistan is no longer worth fighting for. The left worked to prevent the surge strategy. President Obama campaigned for office on the claim that Iraq had distracted us from fighting the “right war” in Afghanistan.
The mid-term elections are little more than a month away.
Americans may be weary of the war after nine years. Surely though, we are not more weary than the Afghans; they have known only war and terror for decades. The difference is that millions of Afghans know this war is worth fighting.
Like the loved ones of Mohammed Ayoob, they clearly want to end the violence. Their communities have been torn apart by decades of violence, but they will not surrender to terror to achieve peace. They know that the peace of the terrified is no peace at all.
Here at home, Americans are bombarded by the objections of the political left, and spoon-fed the dubious opinions of mainstream media pundits, but hopefully we will remember our own recent past. Eight years ago the Taliban allowed al-Quaeda to plan and train in Afghanistan. Al-Quaeda used that sanctuary to attack America here at home.
Today liberals, and an increasing number of conservatives are willing to allow that same Taliban to reclaim rule over Afghanistan. Today when Pakistan is much weaker and more susceptible to the Taliban in its own borders, this would spell disaster. Disaster for Afghans, and disaster for America; our enemies, safe in their sanctuary will plot once again to export their violence to our shores.
20 September 2010
Tolerating The Intolerable?
Who will miss Western Culture when it is gone? Will the liberals and leftists who espouse tolerance for all belief systems, except right of center western political thought, miss their liberty? Will they lament it, when non-western right of center religious and political systems, and leftist non-religious political systems finally overcome us, because we were so tolerant? We have gotten to the point where we let the fox in the hen house, and refuse to see the danger for fear of being labeled anti-foxists.
The WTC mosque controversy is a glaring example. A vast majority of Americans and of New Yorkers have voiced their opinion against building the Mosque so close to Ground Zero. A vocal minority side with Imam Rauf and his Cordoba Initiative. Rauf and his allies have framed the debate largely in terms of tolerance, or in terms of Constitutional protection of religious freedom. In fact many on the left have implied that the First Amendment guarantee of Freedom of Religion, mandates acceptance, and absolves Islam from criticism. Nonsense, that First Amendment also guarantees our right to voice our concerns about the Mosque, and about Islam in general.
In fact, putting aside the salt in the wound aspect, that placing the Mosque in downtown New York City has for many, the controversy really is about the reach and influence of Islam in America’s future. How much tolerance are we required to extend to Islam, and what is the intent of Islam?
As a religion, Islam’s followers are generally entitled to practice their beliefs. American legal history, does require that they do so in compliance with our Constitution and our laws. While the courts are often required to sort out fine points of religious freedom in the US, egregious violations of our legal tradition have been found to be unacceptable. Hence Indian drug use, and Mormon polygamy are not legal, religious freedom notwithstanding.
Islam should expect a similar reception. Stoning, slavery, corporal punishment for wives etc., are outside the legal norms we practice. In the name of tolerance, however, some liberals have sought to weaken our norms, asserting that we should not force our legal values on Muslims, hence a recent NJ judge's decision not to grant a restraining order against a Moroccan husband (fortunately overturned on appeal). The creation of Sharia only zones in Great Britain, Canada, and France, has encouraged Muslims and apologists to seek similar legal allowances in enclaves in St. Paul Minnesota and Dearborn Michigan. It has troubled police and neighbors where it has been allowed.
So why not? Isn’t “live and let live” part of our values? Isn’t religious tolerance inscribed in the constitution?
How do we deal with Islam, or is it Islamism? Islamism is the name that is catching on to describe those factions of Islam, both radical and mainstream that pursue jihad. Jihad is one of the pillars of Islam; the requirement to “struggle” for one’s faith. This concept of struggling has been described as both internal (within the self) and external. Jihad is used by Muslimsto describe the historical spread of Islam across much of Asia and Africa, by war, trade and assimilation.
Islam is a complex multi-faceted faith with sects and strains, just like all the other great religions. Jihad is central to all of its sects. The external Jihad is deeply entrenched in enough of those strains that it can hardly be called radical. What is now termed radical Islam, consists of those factions which seek a violent spread of Islam today.
Mainstream Islam, as it defines itself, today in the West, does not eschew external jihad, merely violence. We have accepted the Council on American Islamic Relations and Imam Rauf’s Cordoba Initiative as ideals of peaceful mainstream Islam in the US today, and yet they have obviously Jihadist doctrines.
"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."
Omar Ahmad, Co-Founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations
In America, we have a Constitution that created a three-branch form of government - legislative, executive and judiciary. The role of the judiciary is to ensure that the other two branches comply with the Constitution. What Muslims want is a judiciary that ensures that the laws are not in conflict with the Quran and the Hadith.
Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf
“Well so what?” ask many Americans. After all many religions are evangelical, seeking new converts and aspiring to grow, and even to dominate.
Islam is different . Islam as a religion, includes a complete set of social, economic, political and legal prescriptions. It calls on its adherents to create theocratic states governed by Sharia, Islamic law. While Imam Rauf can soft pedal Sharia as divinely inspired law, akin to the appeal to the creator in our Declaration of Independence, the fact is that Sharia law as it is practices throughout the world is deeply at odds with Western Humanism, whether secular or Judeo-Christian.
Sharia is the law of the land in Saudi Arabia. Sharia allows slavery. Sharia oppresses women, making wives property of their husbands. Sharia calls for the execution of homosexuals. Sharia calls for the stoning of apostates. Etc etc.
Americans simply don’t want to live under Sharia. Liberals, in the media, and in academia have so elevated tolerance as a value that we develop a lack of clarity about what Islam as a belief system promotes. It promotes a non-democratic non-western government and society.
“We could deal with those Islamists except for one thing: A large segment of our fashionable opinion-makers… think that Islamists aren’t as bad as all that; and if they are, then we are still worse, and what we stand for isn’t really worth defending. So the public doesn’t know what to think, and a few self-appointed custodians push them into all manner of doubt and guilt by accusing anyone who criticizes, or — horrors! — laughs at Islamists of Islamophobia, racism, fascism, etc. etc.”
David Pryce Jones
If Islam, were not a religion, if it was an otherwise all encompassing belief system, we could talk more freely about its challenges to democracy. Communism was (and still is)a belief system that prescribes an entire set of beliefs about how people should interact, how they should be governed, and even what they should believe about God (he is an imaginary figure). Most Americans, even if they happen to be Marxist in their outlook, do not begrudge an honest discussion about Communism and the advantages and disadvantages of the system, surely even American liberals are not saying that communism is beyond criticism, by virtue of our freedoms of speech, conscience and association. Liberals are rabid attack dogs when challenging any perceived fascism, a much abused word that still includes a definition of Totalitarianism. Atheists and Agnostics are often quite critical of Christianity and Judaism, often because that’s where they started out. But Islam is sacrosanct. As Pryce Jones noted in today’s society criticism of Islam as a thought system=Islamophobia=Racism=Fascism=Evil.
I think that far leftist thought is often rooted in guilt and self loathing. When we no longer care enough about our own culture and traditions to defend them, we have nothing left to fight for. Tolerance is as beautiful a thing as prejudice is ugly, but blind tolerance is blind to threats. Will the last liberal standing please give the Jihadists the keys
The WTC mosque controversy is a glaring example. A vast majority of Americans and of New Yorkers have voiced their opinion against building the Mosque so close to Ground Zero. A vocal minority side with Imam Rauf and his Cordoba Initiative. Rauf and his allies have framed the debate largely in terms of tolerance, or in terms of Constitutional protection of religious freedom. In fact many on the left have implied that the First Amendment guarantee of Freedom of Religion, mandates acceptance, and absolves Islam from criticism. Nonsense, that First Amendment also guarantees our right to voice our concerns about the Mosque, and about Islam in general.
In fact, putting aside the salt in the wound aspect, that placing the Mosque in downtown New York City has for many, the controversy really is about the reach and influence of Islam in America’s future. How much tolerance are we required to extend to Islam, and what is the intent of Islam?
As a religion, Islam’s followers are generally entitled to practice their beliefs. American legal history, does require that they do so in compliance with our Constitution and our laws. While the courts are often required to sort out fine points of religious freedom in the US, egregious violations of our legal tradition have been found to be unacceptable. Hence Indian drug use, and Mormon polygamy are not legal, religious freedom notwithstanding.
Islam should expect a similar reception. Stoning, slavery, corporal punishment for wives etc., are outside the legal norms we practice. In the name of tolerance, however, some liberals have sought to weaken our norms, asserting that we should not force our legal values on Muslims, hence a recent NJ judge's decision not to grant a restraining order against a Moroccan husband (fortunately overturned on appeal). The creation of Sharia only zones in Great Britain, Canada, and France, has encouraged Muslims and apologists to seek similar legal allowances in enclaves in St. Paul Minnesota and Dearborn Michigan. It has troubled police and neighbors where it has been allowed.
So why not? Isn’t “live and let live” part of our values? Isn’t religious tolerance inscribed in the constitution?
How do we deal with Islam, or is it Islamism? Islamism is the name that is catching on to describe those factions of Islam, both radical and mainstream that pursue jihad. Jihad is one of the pillars of Islam; the requirement to “struggle” for one’s faith. This concept of struggling has been described as both internal (within the self) and external. Jihad is used by Muslimsto describe the historical spread of Islam across much of Asia and Africa, by war, trade and assimilation.
Islam is a complex multi-faceted faith with sects and strains, just like all the other great religions. Jihad is central to all of its sects. The external Jihad is deeply entrenched in enough of those strains that it can hardly be called radical. What is now termed radical Islam, consists of those factions which seek a violent spread of Islam today.
Mainstream Islam, as it defines itself, today in the West, does not eschew external jihad, merely violence. We have accepted the Council on American Islamic Relations and Imam Rauf’s Cordoba Initiative as ideals of peaceful mainstream Islam in the US today, and yet they have obviously Jihadist doctrines.
"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."
Omar Ahmad, Co-Founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations
In America, we have a Constitution that created a three-branch form of government - legislative, executive and judiciary. The role of the judiciary is to ensure that the other two branches comply with the Constitution. What Muslims want is a judiciary that ensures that the laws are not in conflict with the Quran and the Hadith.
Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf
“Well so what?” ask many Americans. After all many religions are evangelical, seeking new converts and aspiring to grow, and even to dominate.
Islam is different . Islam as a religion, includes a complete set of social, economic, political and legal prescriptions. It calls on its adherents to create theocratic states governed by Sharia, Islamic law. While Imam Rauf can soft pedal Sharia as divinely inspired law, akin to the appeal to the creator in our Declaration of Independence, the fact is that Sharia law as it is practices throughout the world is deeply at odds with Western Humanism, whether secular or Judeo-Christian.
Sharia is the law of the land in Saudi Arabia. Sharia allows slavery. Sharia oppresses women, making wives property of their husbands. Sharia calls for the execution of homosexuals. Sharia calls for the stoning of apostates. Etc etc.
Americans simply don’t want to live under Sharia. Liberals, in the media, and in academia have so elevated tolerance as a value that we develop a lack of clarity about what Islam as a belief system promotes. It promotes a non-democratic non-western government and society.
“We could deal with those Islamists except for one thing: A large segment of our fashionable opinion-makers… think that Islamists aren’t as bad as all that; and if they are, then we are still worse, and what we stand for isn’t really worth defending. So the public doesn’t know what to think, and a few self-appointed custodians push them into all manner of doubt and guilt by accusing anyone who criticizes, or — horrors! — laughs at Islamists of Islamophobia, racism, fascism, etc. etc.”
David Pryce Jones
If Islam, were not a religion, if it was an otherwise all encompassing belief system, we could talk more freely about its challenges to democracy. Communism was (and still is)a belief system that prescribes an entire set of beliefs about how people should interact, how they should be governed, and even what they should believe about God (he is an imaginary figure). Most Americans, even if they happen to be Marxist in their outlook, do not begrudge an honest discussion about Communism and the advantages and disadvantages of the system, surely even American liberals are not saying that communism is beyond criticism, by virtue of our freedoms of speech, conscience and association. Liberals are rabid attack dogs when challenging any perceived fascism, a much abused word that still includes a definition of Totalitarianism. Atheists and Agnostics are often quite critical of Christianity and Judaism, often because that’s where they started out. But Islam is sacrosanct. As Pryce Jones noted in today’s society criticism of Islam as a thought system=Islamophobia=Racism=Fascism=Evil.
I think that far leftist thought is often rooted in guilt and self loathing. When we no longer care enough about our own culture and traditions to defend them, we have nothing left to fight for. Tolerance is as beautiful a thing as prejudice is ugly, but blind tolerance is blind to threats. Will the last liberal standing please give the Jihadists the keys
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)