Remembering D Day

"....They will need Thy blessings. Their load will long and hard. For the enemy is strong. He may hurl back our forces. Success may not come with rushing speed, but we shall return again and again; and we know that by Thy grace, and by the righteousness of our cause, our sons will triumph. They will be sore tried, by night and by day, without rest – until the victory is won. The darkness will be rent by noise and flame. Men’s souls will be shaken with the violences of war. For these men are lately drawn from the ways of peace. They fight not for the lust of conquest. They fight to liberate. They fight to let justice arise, and tolerance and goodwill among all Thy people. They yearn but for the end of battle, for their return to the haven of home...."

With these words, on the evening of June 6, 1944, President Franklin D. Roosevelt consecrated the sacrifices being made by Allied soldiers on the beaches of Normandy on June 6, 1944. In his Fireside Chat the President expressed an understanding of the sacrifices being made by the soldiers and their families on those beaches, an understanding that is lacking in our current "leadership". All of us who read this.... if this is all we knew of that day, when a break in the weather acted as a "wink from the fates" enabling the largest land / sea invasion in Human History, we would be able to glean that the future of the free world was at stake.

Two reasons would explain the overwhelming support most Americans gave to this invasion,... to the war. Those who listened that night could take heart in the fact that the cause for which their loved ones were sacrificing their lives and limbs was just and REAL. In addition, our men were well trained, well supplied and the exit strategy was called "unconditional surrender".

Our current conflict has turned out to be less glorious. In Iraq our soldiers have performed the responsibilities that HAVE been clearly outlined for them. The problem is that they have no idea how they will know what the "....end of battle,..." is or when "...their return to the haven of home...." will be.... if ever. Americans have had none of the material and emotional preparation for war that Americans experienced in the 1940's. We were told to go shopping. Perhaps if we had been asked to make those sorts of sacrifices the right questions would have been asked and the wrong answers not accepted. The modern public was lied to again and again. We were told to believe that there were weapons of mass destruction. There were not. We were told the Saddam was in league with Al Qaeda. He was not.

Responsibility for this huge military blunder floats like a helium balloon around Washington DC settling nowhere. There are even hints that the Iraqis are to blame for the failure. Such an idea never would have dawned on those commanding the D Day invasion. In his Fireside Chat FDR spoke with confidence that we would succeed, but on the night before, one man had his doubts. A degree of doubt in the mind of an honest, thinking person in the face of something so monstrous is a commendable thing. From the letter that General Eisenhower sent the troops before the invasion, praising and encouraging them, one would never have guessed that he was fearful for the success of the mission. Not only was he fearful for its success, he was ready to accept responsibility for its failure. Out of fatigue and / or nervousness he actually dated a handwritten note for July 1944 instead of June. It reads:

“Our landings in the Cherbourg-Harve area have failed to gain a satisfactory foothold and I have withdrawn the troops. My decision to attack at this time and place was based upon the best information available. The troops, the air and the Navy did all that bravery and devotion to duty could do. If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt it is mine alone.”

It was a letter he never had to submit. Thank you to all of the Operation Overlord Soldiers and Sailors of all nationalities and their families.

BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR……

In March of 1917 the nation of Russia was embroiled in a hugely unpopular war. To fight World War One the Russian people were paying dearly in terms of lives and life's necessities. Due to an extremely harsh winter, a deepening famine added insult to injury. In spite of these conditions, the world seemed appalled when a revolution tore Russia apart.

Russia's 300 year old ruling dynasty, The Romanovs, had more than enough time to become insulated against the needs of the common people. As a result Nicholas was forced to abdicate to a Socialist, Menshevik Government in the hands of Alexander Kerensky. Yet Kerensky failed to end Russian involvement in World War One, so the difficulties did not end. The fatal result was a Bolshevik Communist revolution in the autumn of that same year…. And (to make a very long, very complicated story short) the USSR disappeared behind the Iron Curtain.

The seeds of what happened in Russia in 1917 are present in the United States today. A hugely expensive, immoral war is sapping the lives and resources of this nation and natural circumstances (hurricanes, wild fires and floods) have caused a wave of need throughout the land.

The Bush's, like the Romanov's and then the Mensheviks, have violated the social contract that they have with their people. Most Bush supporters claim that national security and moral issues are the basis for Bush's "mandate." They actually believe that this President's agenda will rescue them from some sort of "pre-moral," natural state. This will mean their deliverance to a prosperous and moral future where self-reliance is paramount. They need to re-read John Locke.

Our natural state was anything but pre-moral. According to Locke, families and small communities live in a natural state. Everyone is equal and indispensable. There is a mutual respect for each other's natural rights. When the members of "this" community join with the members of "that" community to form a political state they surrender some of their liberties in exchange for the protection of their Natural Rights. In the natural state the community's elders or adults hold the powers of protection and punishment. In a political state the government must act in that capacity. The Bush Administration's perceived morality was not the only reason for its re-election. Many Americans believed in its supposed ability to protect our Natural Rights and us.

It is ironic that it is in this duty of protection that the Bush Regime, like the Romanovs, has failed so miserably. Katrina, for example, has shown us that this administration seems willing to sacrifice the health and lives of the citizenry for their agenda. Their "odd" interpretation of and disregard for the Fourth Amendment serves as evidence that the Bush Administration is anything but intent on protecting our liberties. Morality and responsibility were claimed as the hallmarks of the GOP vision, yet again and again there have been deep cuts in programs that would have improved infrastructure and made the poor more self reliant. In further violation of the Social Contract, the President as repeatedly sought to shift blame for the many failures from his desk to the nearest liberal. How moral or responsible is that?

Thomas Jefferson, in his commentary on the Social Contract known as The Declaration of Independence, acknowledged that the power of government comes from the people. In the event that that power is abused it must return to the people so that they can form a new government.

In 1994 the GOP came out with a platform that won them political control of the country, "The Contract With America." In their version of the Social Contract they revealed an agenda to push the country to the "Right." The Conservative Revolution they outlined and worked so ardently for has caused wreck and ruin in this land in the years since. I saw evidence of this in the faces of the people at the Superdome and in the New Orleans Convention Center. I saw more, larger, far left wing groups getting the attention of average folks at the September 24, 2005 Anti-war March in Washington DC. This was something I had not seen at any march before. I was overjoyed by the winds of change in the air, and they were NOT coming from the right. That became even more clear this past November.

Does this mean that I am advocating Socialist Revolution in the United States? No. I think that ultimately the health care and non-renewable resource industries as well as education may have to be nationalized to protect the American people from the likes of Dick Chaney and who ever we must not know that he met with. But I also still agree with Jefferson's assertion that going too far off the beaten path can cause more problems than it solves. Just ask the Iraqis. We are more fortunate in many ways than the Russians were in 1917. For one thing, we have mechanisms for political change that they did not. But I would say this to Conservatives who have pushed their agenda a little too hard in hopes of bringing on a "Socio-political" revolution: Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it, only in the opposite direction. Oh, and hurricane season has just begun again….. do you know where your National Guard is?

The SG Patriot