Don"t "Support the Troops"

First, argument: If 90% of the population possessed the qualities that reveals in his writing, we would not be having this argument. You might ask, how so? So from what I can glean from my opponents writing, he is intelligence, sensible, and practical in assessing what are basic policy decision. Now, given that I just expressed a sincere belief about my opponent great personal and intellectual capabilities I also believe these great qualities are problematic when it comes the realities the public and how Washington addresses policy issues, especially those that involve life and death, war and peace. When I can I try not to get too cynical, and I do think there is an explanation behind the SUPPORT for WAR but LACK of support for VETERANS. Some of those reasons, as evinced by recent statistical analysis by Pew Research provides come from a couple of important factors like it is less and less the case that members of Congress have served, less of the public too, and general participation has declined. [I will insert the pictures at the end, even though the appropriate place is after the last sentence; sorry my understanding of how basic computer commands is abysmal and I apologize to voters to the lack for my inability to insert photos seamlessly into the text]. Argument 2: history of veterans and congress, repetitive patterns People reading will likely see the Pew stats as trivial or secondary but contrary to what at first glance seems true, they reveal an interesting insight in a long history of veterans coming to find very little support from Congress. Let me quit evading the point: if you look at American military history, the political class and returning veterans have in from the beginning a contentious, acrimonious relationship. We don’t have to look hard to find examples. However, what you do see with participation and involvement by broad sections of the country, rather than the 1% of the population that serves today, you see consensus that support for means support after but it is non-existent the more the military and the public live in two distinct bubbles that never overlap. Argument three: Examples from Revolutionary War and Civil War that illustrate SIMPLE PATRIOTISM = empty gesture or the WWE version of patriotism [read: fake] Let’s look at the two most important wars (important in establish internal conflicts) the Revolutionary War and the Civil War. In both cases, you have congress (continental in first instance) unwilling, initially, to fulfill obligations made when outcomes were uncertain. As a result, the US may have quickly descended into a military dictatorship had Washington not step in and told them of the necessity and established civilian control before the Newburgh Conspiracy turned into anything ugly. The Civil War is provides an even more disgusting (because Revolutionary War funding relied on Articles of Confederation to allocate and rise money) case of not just neglect but distain for veterans. My personal interests of military history have led me to read thousands of newspapers before and after the end of the Civil War. It is incredibly enlightening, particularly the year 1865 and the months after the war. I will quote from some PDF files from digitalized news account of the time. “The only national debt we can never pay is the debt we owe the victorious Union soldiers.” 71 The New York Herald made the praise global: “From one end of the world to the other, the people thank our soldiers for having conquered in the people’s cause.… Their remaining years may be passed in quiet usefulness at their homes.”[1] By the end of 1865 , one million Union veterans had returned to civilian society, tens of thousands of whom could find no employment, especially those who had been seriously wounded. Within a few months of the war’s end, newspapers ran ads by veterans seeking any kind of employment, and editorials reminding the unemployed and homeless veterans that their poverty was their own fault. At a reception honoring returning veterans in Chicago, Illinois governor and former major general Richard J. Oglesby warned that they could not expect charity—” You must not expect to be taken and wrapped up in a gay cloak and put upon beds of down, and soup given to you in a silver spoon”— but needed to go get work.[2] Many Chicago businessmen thought the claims of veterans grossly exaggerated, as they had spent most of the war “loafing” around their camps. Conclusion: Why the VA episode mentioned in earlier round help explain why Bumper Sticker Patriotism is a hollow shell with a facade and an empty interior Here is what I am saying: the simple patriotism mentioned in Con’s last round very little if in use value in effecting policy, and I would only reassert by contention in Round 1 about the VA Bill but let me put it in a different context. Far from being hidden or lodged on the last page of newspapers or in a 30 second segment on the nightly news, the VA Bill as well as problems that go back several decades, the issue was the central issue on every network, every print and online media, and for roughly three weeks stood out as the most significant news item in the United States. But what was interesting is that with all this attention about a specific issue like that one, it was really only tangiential concerned with veterans. The reality is that it was and end as a three with fight over whether you thought General Shinseki should be fired or not. Secondary, non-argument related remarks: I want to thank my opponent for the debate first off. And I want to apologize for taking my time limit down the last hour or so. I’m typically prompt but since Wednesday my construction company was making two new bids on a project, one of my site managers is running into problems with drywall subcontractors, and some heavy equipment at another site is late and stuck somewhere in rural Arkansas and they claim it is a third party who is responsible and liable for the cost. Anyway, felt I owed an explanation. Voters I apologize for basically going from a personal frustration argument that allowed me to vent before bed and then taking a different course entirely in the second wrong. [1] New York Herald, May 24, 1865. [2] Theodore J. Karamanski, Rally ’Round the Flag : Chicago and the Civil War (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2006), 240– 41.