August 14, 2005

The Genocidal Pacifism of Cindy Sheehan

A very nice woman named Nancy wrote me earlier today.

She had read the Dallas Morning News which had published some select bits from my earlier post Go to Hell, Cindy Sheehan as the lead article in a blogosphere roundup.

She could not understand my anger at, "a poor woman who has lost her son and is expressing her frustration and grief."

People like Nancy can sympathize with Cindy Sheehan the victim mother who lost her son in war. What they don't seem to grasp is exactly what steps Cindy Sheehan is asking our government to take, and what would result from those steps. Cindy Sheehan wants a unilateral and immediate withdrawal of all United States military forces from Iraq, asking, "How many more of our loved ones need to die in this senseless war?"

Cindy Sheehan's cries are cynical words coated in jagged, razor-sharp malice, folks; she will not create peace, but would plunge a new nation on the brink of freedom into civil war and possibily genocide.

The transition of power from one form or government to another is stressful in the best of times, and Iraq right now is not the best of times. A fledgling democracy that had its first elections just this past January, Iraq is facing not just a new kind of government, but the prospect of building up a new security infrastructure, including military and police units, from the ground up. While these units are larger and much better trained than they were just a few months ago, they are not yet ready to take over Iraq's security and fight a vicious insurgency that seeks to plunge the nation into a bloody sectarian civil war, pitting Shiite versus Sunni versus Kurd.

A gradual transition of power to Iraqi police and military units can prevent this, and is possible even probable within the coming year, but the transition must be gradual to insure domestic stability.

But Cindy Sheehan does not want the logical phased withdrawal from Iraqi that the Secretary of Defense and others said could start occurring with the coming months, she wants a headlong retreat, now. Because of her blinding hatred for George w. Bush, Cindy Sheehan either does not see or does not care that the complete and abrupt retreat she advocates would create conditions favorable for genocide.

Remember Rwanda?

800,000 died there because the world's pacifists did not want soldiers to intervene. Do you want even some small measure of that on your conscience if we follow Cindy Sheehan's desires? Not I.

The false pacifism practiced by Cindy Sheehan is rooted in politics, is used as a weapon, and does not care for human life. If Cindy Sheehan really cared about the lives of people in Iraq, she would call for Congress to give us additional equipment and funding so that we could complete the transition process. Instead she calls for retreat. She calls for dangerously destabilizing a country.

Cold as ice, she has no qualms about playing politics with 25 million Iraqi lives in her mad desire to somehow, in some small way, hurt President Bush. She says herself, "My personal agenda is to make sure someone is held accountable for Casey's death," Sheehan said. "I'm the mother, he was my son, and Bush sent him into a war based on lies."

She wants blood for blood, and as she can't get Presidential blood, Iraqi blood will do.

I've seen enough dead children in Iraq. We don't need the Cindy Sheehan's of the world creating any more of them through the real apathy of false pacifism.

The immediate retreat called for by Cindy Sheehan is nothing more than a call to create a power vacuum that would create conditions favorable for civil war in a nation that has already seen enough bloodshed. I'm sure Cindy's son Casey Sheehan was a wonderful human being, but no man is so special that his death should spark the genocide of thousand or tens of thousands.

I don't need to know him to know that unecessary deaths are not the legacy that Casey Sheehan would have wanted, even if it is the legacy his mother is inadvertently advocating.

Update: Must be a theme night.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at August 14, 2005 02:35 AM | TrackBack

Cindy Sheehan is a disgrace to both the memory of her son and all other sons and daughters who have died in not only this conflict, but all conficts through out this nations history. Members of my family in every generation have proudly worn the uniform and we have always supported the military. Ms. Sheehan's son was a soldier. His job was to defend this country from all enemies, foreign or domestic. He wore his uniform with pride, answered the call and paid the ultimate price for freedom. That is how he deserves to be remembered. Not because he was born to a woman who has no idea what the words; dignity, pride, honor, service, and sacrifice truly mean.

Posted by: Robert Mauldin at August 20, 2005 06:02 AM

Cindy Sheehan is dishonoring her son Casey in several ways. One way she dishonors him is by omitting what his own views on the Iraq war was and synthesizing her own personal views with his. I find it strange that she says her son was against the war in Iraq, but yet Casey Sheehen reenlisted in the army of his own volition, that just doesn’t comport with Cindy Sheehan’s statements. This is a 100 % volunteer military, there is no conscription and that begs the question as to why Casey Sheehan reenlisted in a war he opposed, if that is even true. If perhaps Casey Sheehan disagreed with certain aspects of the war in Iraq e.g..he felt maybe we needed more troops in Iraq, or more armor on humvee’s or better food for the troops etc., then that should be explained by Cindy Sheehan without the partisan hyperbole. A person can complain about particular conditions in Iraq without opposing the entire war in Iraq you know. During another interview on national television Cindy Sheehan stated that her son was killed by friendly fire, when she was pressed about that statement she then said ” well I have speculative evidence that he was killed by friendly fire.” It’s amazing that anyone could use the words speculative and evidence in the same sentence side by side and keep a straight face. Evidence substantiates an allegation, speculation is just the opposite it requires no evidence at all,to use “speculative evidence” together is a perfect example of an oxymoron. The real truth of Casey Sheehan’s death is he was killed by hostile fire in Sadr City, this was the consistent report of his death since day one, medical reports and the reports from fellow soldiers who were present at his death confirm the same fact. Casey Sheehan was a real hero of the first order, when a convoy of soldiers from his unit was attacked in Sadr City he volunteered to join a rescue force to get them out, even after his commanding Sergeant told him he didn’t have to go because he was a mechanic and not an infantryman. Casey was reported telling his officer ” I go where my chief goes.” Thats not a man who didn’t believe in his cause or his duty, thats a hero. Casey Sheehan’s family has released this statement and I quote ” We do not agree with the political motivations and publicity tactics of Cindy Sheehan. She now appears to be promoting her own personal agenda and notoriety at the the expense of her son’s good name and reputation.”

Posted by: William Leatherwood at August 22, 2005 10:08 PM

What most people don’t understand is why Sheehan is being eaten up inside. The fact is she had a terrible argument with her son, Casey, and didn’t speak to him again before he died. The poor woman is grief stricken to the point of being mentally ill, and the left wing is taking advantage of it. I also heard that she wasn’t even Casey’s real mother, just the egg donor and that most of Casey’s life he had a step Mom. Guess that’s way she’s so inconsistent in her speeches, kinda just rambling, another sure sign of mental illness.

Posted by: jt at August 26, 2005 05:19 PM