5.23.2005
Grief, Pain, and Sorrow
I remember where I was when I heard that Pat Tillman had been killed in Afghanistan. After finding out in an internet cafe in Playa del Coco, Costa Rica (a truly awful beach), the news hit me like a pile of rocks. I am not one that feels emotionally involved in the deaths of high profile individuals. I rarely feel sorrow when a famous person dies: they are still strangers to me, and should not merit any more of my grief than a person selected randomly on the Obits page.
But Pat Tillman inspired me, because he of the way that he lived his life on and off the football field. He played football the way I hoped I played the game: with heart, rage, and tenacity. He bucked stardom and turned down lucrative contract offers because of loyalty to the lowly Cardinals. He ran marathons and did triathalons for "fun" in the offseason. And he left in all in a heartbeat because of a higher calling to serve his country.
Tillman was held up as a national hero when he died, and the story would not have been nearly as romantic had the American public known the truth behind his death. Today, the embittered Tillman family is angry with the army, and it's saddening to read this article in today's Washington Post. The country that Tillman gave his life for has let him down:
But Pat Tillman inspired me, because he of the way that he lived his life on and off the football field. He played football the way I hoped I played the game: with heart, rage, and tenacity. He bucked stardom and turned down lucrative contract offers because of loyalty to the lowly Cardinals. He ran marathons and did triathalons for "fun" in the offseason. And he left in all in a heartbeat because of a higher calling to serve his country.
Tillman was held up as a national hero when he died, and the story would not have been nearly as romantic had the American public known the truth behind his death. Today, the embittered Tillman family is angry with the army, and it's saddening to read this article in today's Washington Post. The country that Tillman gave his life for has let him down:
Shortly after arriving in the mountains to fight, Tillman was killed in a barrage of gunfire from his own men, mistaken for the enemy as he got into position to defend them.As my father always told me, "once you get caught in a lie, you can never be trusted again." Thus it is understandable that Tillman's parents would feel the way they do now:
Immediately, the Army kept the soldiers on the ground quiet and told Tillman's family and the public that he was killed by enemy fire while storming a hill, barking orders to his fellow Rangers. After a public memorial service, at which Tillman received the Silver Star, the Army told Tillman's family what had really happened, that he had been killed by his own men.
The latest investigation, written about by The Washington Post earlier this month, showed that soldiers in Afghanistan knew almost immediately that they had killed Tillman by mistake in what they believed was a firefight with enemies on a tight canyon road. The investigation also revealed that soldiers later burned Tillman's uniform and body armor.
"After it happened, all the people in positions of authority went out of their way to script this," Patrick Tillman said. "They purposely interfered with the investigation, they covered it up. I think they thought they could control it, and they realized that their recruiting efforts were going to go to hell in a handbasket if the truth about his death got out. They blew up their poster boy."The fact that the Army and the Bush Administration would use Tillman's death for political and PR purposes is very sad indeed. The Army needed Tillman's story badly, and now they need to punish those who manipulated that story for their own ends.
"It makes you feel like you're losing your mind in a way," [Mary Tillman] said. "You imagine things. When you don't know the truth, certain details can be blown out of proportion. The truth may be painful, but it's the truth. You start to contrive all these scenarios that could have taken place because they just kept lying. If you feel you're being lied to, you can never put it to rest."
# posted by Juanson : 11:18 AM
Comments:
<< Home
Juanson - would you prefer that the administration do what's best for the one family or what's best for the country? Our military recruitment numbers and morale would have been absolutely devastated beyond repair if the Army had revealed what had happened and it would have occurred at precisely one of the most pivotal points in the war over in the Middle East, which is part of a much bigger war on terror. Things like what happened to Pat Tillman happen all the time and it's sad and awful and I hate it just as you do. However, don't act like this is out of the ordinary or that this is some kind of a revelation, b/c it isn't. I just want to make this clear - you wanted our military to tell the world what happened to Tillman right away. Correct? That the Army made a horrible mistake and accidently shot one of their own? Well, if we do that, then we would be constantly putting feelings, desires, and emotions of one single family or one small group in front of what's best for all of our troops and what's best for this country and the rest of the world. But, if that's how you feel, then you are certainly free to express your opinion and feel that way. Tillman was a hero and what he did was the right thing. What happened was a tragedy and what we need to remember is the life he chose to lead and his legacy, not some mistake that was made and he was unfortunately a part of it. That's what our soliders need, not some anti-military anti-U.S. utter leftist banter from those who know nothing about what it's like to serve this country in that way. I think the National Review said it best on the cover of the June 6, 2005 issue with the words "insert mainstream media credibility here" here being the toilet.
# posted by 
: 5:58 PM
: 5:58 PM
Anonymous,
First of all, in a democracy the government is not supposed to lie to the people, even if telling the truth gives bad publicity.
Second of all, our soldiers do not need the Army lying about the way soliders die. They should not have been sent to Iraq in the first place. Now that they are there, the administration could at least supply them well (most Humvees are unarmored) and give them proper medical care (Bush is planning to slash the budget of all VA hospitals).
Finally, you seem to be arguing that the Army and the government should lie if lying is "what is best for the country." In other words, a lie is good if it has good intentions.
Do you think it would be ethical if the Army promised new volunteers that it would not send them to combat and then ship them to Iraq? Why don't we just ban all speech that criticizes George W. Bush and the military? Surely that would be "what's best for the country."
You sound like the Chinese government, who censors blogs and independent thought because it is not "best for the country."
See: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/
24/opinion/24kristoff.html?hp
First of all, in a democracy the government is not supposed to lie to the people, even if telling the truth gives bad publicity.
Second of all, our soldiers do not need the Army lying about the way soliders die. They should not have been sent to Iraq in the first place. Now that they are there, the administration could at least supply them well (most Humvees are unarmored) and give them proper medical care (Bush is planning to slash the budget of all VA hospitals).
Finally, you seem to be arguing that the Army and the government should lie if lying is "what is best for the country." In other words, a lie is good if it has good intentions.
Do you think it would be ethical if the Army promised new volunteers that it would not send them to combat and then ship them to Iraq? Why don't we just ban all speech that criticizes George W. Bush and the military? Surely that would be "what's best for the country."
You sound like the Chinese government, who censors blogs and independent thought because it is not "best for the country."
See: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/
24/opinion/24kristoff.html?hp
# posted by : 2:33 AM
: 2:33 AM
Anonymous,
You argue that the feelings of a small group shouldn't be put in front of what's best for our troops and our country. What if that was your family? Would you want the death of your son or daughter exploited for political gain? But wait a minute, no one in Congress has anyone on the front lines. So I guess they wouldn't know how it feels.
You then alude to the Newsweek debate. Let's look at it this way: you say that the Army made a mistake, but we shouldn't hold them accountable... ok, so Newsweek made a mistake, and by extention the credibility of the entire mainstream media is lost?
Do you suggest that we eliminate the mainstream media then, and only let the nation read unbiased publications like the National Review? That would be great for the nation, right, because all we would hear is praise for the Bush administration. That would prevent the small group from interfering in what's best for this country and the world.
You argue that the feelings of a small group shouldn't be put in front of what's best for our troops and our country. What if that was your family? Would you want the death of your son or daughter exploited for political gain? But wait a minute, no one in Congress has anyone on the front lines. So I guess they wouldn't know how it feels.
You then alude to the Newsweek debate. Let's look at it this way: you say that the Army made a mistake, but we shouldn't hold them accountable... ok, so Newsweek made a mistake, and by extention the credibility of the entire mainstream media is lost?
Do you suggest that we eliminate the mainstream media then, and only let the nation read unbiased publications like the National Review? That would be great for the nation, right, because all we would hear is praise for the Bush administration. That would prevent the small group from interfering in what's best for this country and the world.
Christian, upon reading what is written above, it doesn't appear that anonymous is arguing that people read the National Review over anything else. It seems that what is being said is that it’s not just that Newsweek made an incredibly horrendous mistake - this has been a pattern for years. There has been an attack on the right and this administration for as long as one can remember. Furthermore, there has also been a pattern in the military of covering up how people die. That's just the way things are. You are lying to yourself if you didn't know that. And yes, it should be used for political gain. No, the military isn’t going to say “you aren’t going to Iraq” and then ship the person off to Iraq. That is absolutely absurd. Furthermore, the military will always be held accountable for these things, it’s just unfortunate because sometimes (not all the time) it’s not what’s best for the rest of the country and staying the course. Explain how you would handle the situation of Pat Tillman’s death differently if you were in charge? Also, explain your reasons that you would give to Pat Tillman about why he was an idiot for being over there and why he never should have been there in the first place. Perhaps that all should be written on his grave stone. Perhaps he should have just played pro football because that’s something we can all truly admire and have worry free enjoyment over. And finally, if the mainstream media continues to keep on track with the bias it currently has, then yes we should eliminate it.
# posted by : 11:28 AM
: 11:28 AM
wow. first of all, for someone who is so confident of his/her opinions, I am puzzled as to why "anonymous" feels the need to remain "anonymous". But I digress...
Clearly Anonymous is sympathetic to this conservative administration. I wonder then why he is basically espousing a viewpoint that says "Government knows what is best for individuals." That sounds like classic "leftist banter" to me.
The problem with right wingnuts who make arguments like those of Anonymous is that consistency doesn't matter. There is no intellectual rigor to their perspective. It's this blind allegiance, the tendency to avoid detail, that represents a true threat to our democracy.
Case in point -- supporting the soldiers and supporting the way the war is being fought are not synonmous. In fact, my position is that the war is being fought in the wrong way PRECISELY because it doesn't put the welfare of the soldiers first. I am disgusted by the way our government ratchets up the political rhetoric to rally behind the banner of our soldiers, and then gives them the cold shoulder when it comes to providing them with resources to fight or when, heaven forbid, they come home as casualties. Why don't I hear conservative outrage over our government allowing reservists' homes to be repossesed while they are away?
Finally, you are kidding yourself, Anonymous, if you think "the military will always be held accountable." Last I checked, no senior official has been fired for Abu Ghraib, nor has any Halliburton official gone to jail for fraud and/or theft of taxpayer dollars. Instead, responsibility is always pushed down to the lowest levels, attributed to "a few bad apples." How about that fact that there were NO WMD? Should someone be held accountable for that? Because last I checked, Bush gave George "It's A Slam Dunk" Tenet the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his savvy intelligence work on that one.
I can't even go on... Respond to these points if you can, Anonymous.
Clearly Anonymous is sympathetic to this conservative administration. I wonder then why he is basically espousing a viewpoint that says "Government knows what is best for individuals." That sounds like classic "leftist banter" to me.
The problem with right wingnuts who make arguments like those of Anonymous is that consistency doesn't matter. There is no intellectual rigor to their perspective. It's this blind allegiance, the tendency to avoid detail, that represents a true threat to our democracy.
Case in point -- supporting the soldiers and supporting the way the war is being fought are not synonmous. In fact, my position is that the war is being fought in the wrong way PRECISELY because it doesn't put the welfare of the soldiers first. I am disgusted by the way our government ratchets up the political rhetoric to rally behind the banner of our soldiers, and then gives them the cold shoulder when it comes to providing them with resources to fight or when, heaven forbid, they come home as casualties. Why don't I hear conservative outrage over our government allowing reservists' homes to be repossesed while they are away?
Finally, you are kidding yourself, Anonymous, if you think "the military will always be held accountable." Last I checked, no senior official has been fired for Abu Ghraib, nor has any Halliburton official gone to jail for fraud and/or theft of taxpayer dollars. Instead, responsibility is always pushed down to the lowest levels, attributed to "a few bad apples." How about that fact that there were NO WMD? Should someone be held accountable for that? Because last I checked, Bush gave George "It's A Slam Dunk" Tenet the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his savvy intelligence work on that one.
I can't even go on... Respond to these points if you can, Anonymous.
# posted by : 1:01 PM
: 1:01 PM
I think anonymous was being facetious about eliminating the mainstream press, as that would be a violation of everything this country stands for. Furthermore, I am sure anonymous was being facetious about holding the military accountable as that rarely happens. Halliburton? Why don't you look back to prior administrations and involvement with Halliburton and get back to me. Reed, I agree lying to Pat Tillman's family is sick. However, why do the American people need to be involved in making those decisions regarding those issues in the military? FOIA? I think it goes to show..."you can't handle the truth"
# posted by : 3:39 PM
: 3:39 PM
Reedski,
I respect your opinion, but I gotta tell you that I only wish my argument was a left-wing talking point. Unfortunately, what I'm talking about is all too real for soldiers and their families that most directly bear the human and financial costs of this war.
Ultimately there are two questions that really matter when it comes to putting troops in harm's way:
1) Are the troops stopping an imminent threat to U.S. national security?
2) Within the context of overall mission objectives, is every possible measure being taken to minimize risks to the soldiers?
I don't believe the war in Iraq was absolutely necessary, but we are there now. So I don't believe that we can't afford to do more to support the troops abroad and their families here at home. It's especially insulting to read about families collecting money to buy armor on the Internet to send to their soldiers abroad, and then hear about how the Pentagon can't account for how millions of dollars are being spent over there, or why they haven't spent some of the over $200 billion that Congress has already allocated. Such mismanagement and lack of accountability demonstrates fundamental disrespect for the sacrifices those soldiers are making. And the fact that Bush, et.al. haven't cracked some skulls in order to improve the situation just goes to show that they aren't making it a high enough priority.
I respect your opinion, but I gotta tell you that I only wish my argument was a left-wing talking point. Unfortunately, what I'm talking about is all too real for soldiers and their families that most directly bear the human and financial costs of this war.
Ultimately there are two questions that really matter when it comes to putting troops in harm's way:
1) Are the troops stopping an imminent threat to U.S. national security?
2) Within the context of overall mission objectives, is every possible measure being taken to minimize risks to the soldiers?
I don't believe the war in Iraq was absolutely necessary, but we are there now. So I don't believe that we can't afford to do more to support the troops abroad and their families here at home. It's especially insulting to read about families collecting money to buy armor on the Internet to send to their soldiers abroad, and then hear about how the Pentagon can't account for how millions of dollars are being spent over there, or why they haven't spent some of the over $200 billion that Congress has already allocated. Such mismanagement and lack of accountability demonstrates fundamental disrespect for the sacrifices those soldiers are making. And the fact that Bush, et.al. haven't cracked some skulls in order to improve the situation just goes to show that they aren't making it a high enough priority.
# posted by : 3:51 PM
: 3:51 PM
i now realize anonymous is not taking this seriously at all and therefore will not engage him any further.
Post a Comment
# posted by : 3:54 PM
: 3:54 PM<< Home
