I have reacted to the lionization of the VT victims much as I did to those who died in the 9/11 attacks. These are victims, not heroes. To celebrate their heroism cheapens heroism. I am not saying their deaths are not tragic, but they did not come about, with rare exceptions, as a result of any exceptional display of courage. They were in the wrong place at the wrong time.
It would be tempting to think of this as a distinction between these victims and our casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq. Given that we have an all-volunteer military, the latter chose to put themselves in harm’s way for a greater cause and may in fact deserve more, not less, esteem when they fall, this line of reasoning goes. And I am not sure it is not correct.
But on the other hand, much as I believe Kerry intended in his much-ballyhooed bungled comments last year, many of those serving in the US occupation forces in Afghanistan and Iraq can be considered no less victims, virtually compelled — no less than they would be with conscription — to join the service by the lack of other opportunities in the inequitable American society. The old men who send our forces to war still exploit the least fortunate in our society, not the sons and daughters of privilege. I remind myself of that whenever I am tempted to get on my moral high horse and suggest that the troops should have the ethical sophistication to refuse to participate in an unjust war.
[While we are on the topic of courage, I am of course unambivalent about the courageous stance represented by war resistance. Ironically, this is often seen as its diametrical opposite, cowardice.]
Follow Me Here... 