Civilian Activists

First, let me say, I appreciate the work of anyone who stands for peace. We have too many war mongering people in our society, and anyone who isn't like that is definitely part of the solution. With that said, there are a few things I have noticed when dealing with civilian peace activists, and I'll just address those things now.

1) Please, please, please, fact check yourself before publishing to websites. I don't care about misinformation that gets as far as your living room or the street corner in town, but when you publish something, you really need to make sure your information is accurate.  Being both a veteran and a peace activist, I can tell you that the military does not care for peace activism, and that they do read what we put out there. If it's full of misinformation, the message is lost.

You don't need to go to great lengths to make the military look like crap.  For the love of all that is sacred and holy, friends, my husband DID NOT go to Iraq without body armor.  He always had a kevlar and a vest, just like what you see on the news.  He didn't have an up-armored VEHICLE for the invasion.  Again, this is no great news, as up-armored vehicles did not exist back then, least of all in a construction engineer battalion.  Why? Because they weren't needed in previous conflicts when IED's weren't the issue they are today.  Nobody blames the Army or their command for the lack of up-armor at the beginning.  As for mine, please ask before dropping his name or his story somewhere. We don't mind if you do, but PLEASE get it right.  He hasn't retired yet, and we really don't need our names connected with anything blatantly false, even if it was done with good intentions. No other soldier needs that either. Fact check your stories. Fact check your stories. Fact check your stories.

2) Try not to make it about you, unless it actually is (In other words, wounded warrior wives or moms, it's TOTALLY about you. Everybody else, it probably isn't.)  Hey, I know how much it sucks that your son is deploying. My husband has done three tours, so I definitely get it.  Even so, I read an op-ed piece today that made me absolutely cringe.  It was from a mother whose son was preparing to deploy with 10th Mountain Division. Not only was the tone of the article very whiny (We're accused of being whiners already. We need to not feed that.), but this woman literally said, "They say they're pulling the troops out of Afghanistan, but they're sending more over. They can start by not sending more. They already have plenty there." 

Maybe you'd like to talk to my friend who just had her second baby last week, 7 months into her husband's 3rd tour in Afghanistan, about what it would be like for her husband to just stay gone until 2014 so that no new troops have to rotate over and take his place so he can come home. Go ahead and ask her how she'd like to introduce him to his brand new 2-year-old, and her 4-year-old sister who doesn't even remember what a daddy is, when he finally gets home.  Hell, why don't you talk to her husband about this?  He's an Infantry squad leader in some totally awful location. See how well he thinks he'd be doing after 3 straight years in the shit. Sure, your son wouldn't have to go, but a whole lot of soldiers would die from complacency, and a whole lot of families would be hurt, if you had it your way. 

The take away message to me from that op-ed, was that this woman wasn't really a peace activist, but someone who just didn't want her kid to go to Afghanistan.  Again, I get that. I'm a mom, too.  Constant worry is in the job description, and it is only more so when there's real danger involved. There's no shame in just not wanting your kid to go there. I don't want my husband to go there next year either. Why would I? What wife wants to spend 9 months apart from her husband, especially when he's already done 3 tours?  You don't see me putting that stuff in the paper, though.  There are things you put in the paper, and things you don't.  The things you do put in the paper are factual, calmly yet firmly worded, and relevant to the times.  While I don't diminish the gravity of your son's deployment, the fact that an 18-year-old Private is leaving for his 1st tour is, in the grand scheme of things, is not news. How about those with multiple tours who are sent back to back to back? How about those with PTSD who are deployed time and time again on psychological medications?  How about the fact that we have amputees serving in combat zones? How about the conditions of care for our veterans upon discharge from the military, or the state of services for our severely wounded veterans, and their families, or the rising number of veteran suicides?  Keep it in perspective.  I ONLY pull the "wife of a 3 tour Iraq vet with PTSD" card when I know it is relevant to the situation. I urge all activists to also make sure to know the situation before pulling whatever card you've got. I don't deny that the "son in Afghanistan" card is relevant to some situations. It just wasn't relevant to that one, and it did our cause of peace no service.

3) There is a fine line between anti-war and anti-military.  This is one reason I didn't like when Veterans for Peace functions were opened to civilians.  I've seen a change in peace activists in recent years.  It used to be that the overall tone was "love the troops, hate the war". Well, that's how most of us who have worn the uniform and oppose the wars feel, too. We love our brothers and sisters in arms. We support them 100%, and the reason we oppose the wars is because we don't want to see any more of them die for some bullshit reason that some politician who probably can't even find Afghanistan on a map, cooked up in some office in Washington.  In recent years, however, the civilians who frequent peace activities, seem to expect us to be ashamed of our military service. I hear all the time about how soldiers are nothing but pawns in the system, paid killers, mercenaries... (It's amazing what people will say right to your face when you don't look like a vet, in other words, because I'm female.) Why would anyone bring that mentality to a group of veterans? I can't stand that. 

This is a real change from the beginning of the wars.  In the beginning, the civilian activists were on the same page with us. They wanted this to end. They totally heard our message that we love our country, and we hate unjust wars, and that we can do so much better than this if only the citizens will demand it of the people we elected. Now, they seem to have turned against us at least somewhat, and that's odd.  Many still want to use our stories and our organizations' names, but they don't actually stand with us anymore. I don't like that.

I understand that in the beginning, everyone was a peacetime enlistee. None of us had enlisted knowing there would be a war, or what it would be. None of us chose it.  Now, 11 years in, almost everyone enlisted in wartime.  Most of the peacetime enlistees have either gotten out or retired. I do not understand what would motivate anyone to enlist during wartime, because I was a peacetime enlistee, but what I do know is that there are still at least a few peacetime enlistees serving because throwing away their entire future (ie, their retirement) because a bunch of civilians think it's a noble cause to walk away from their career after 12, 14, 16 years, would be stupid.  While these soldiers make up a small minority of the military, they're still significant. I also can't hate on the wartime enlistees.  I'm not in their shoes.  Maybe they always wanted to be in the military, but they were too young to join before we got bogged down in Iraq and all.  I was 19 on 9/11/01. I'll turn 31 in a few days. Most soldiers are younger than me, and I was only a peacetime enlistee by 8 weeks. You can't really hate on someone for when they were born.

The point is, though, it would benefit us a lot if we could just keep the focus on the issues, and the fact that the politicians are who need to be held responsible for this. Our job is to keep writing those letters, keep campaigning for candidates who aren't Republicans, keep trying to open people's eyes to the importance of ending the wars ASAP, and not starting any new ones. Now is not the time to villainize soldiers. I don't know if there ever is a time for that, but if it does exist, it isn't now.


I'd like to end by saying that I hope nobody thinks I don't appreciate all efforts for peace.  Everything anybody does for this cause is coming from the right place, and every last person who is involved in any way shape or form, is part of the solution. I raise these points not to diminish people's efforts, but to help hone those efforts to become all the more effective. We need to greatest effectiveness from this important work. I don't think anyone can argue with that.