I think it's easier to lose a son in a war you believe in. So yes, for this father it is more tragic than for another father who supports the war.

That doesn't mean it's not terrible for both. Losing a child is not something I would wish on anyone.

The older I get the more I hate the waste and stupidity of war. It is a sign that our species, at bottom, is hopelessly irrational.

Well said, David. It is not a tragedy, in the Greek sense, for a hero to die for a worthy cause. It is far closer to a tragedy for a hero to die for a foolish cause brought on by a national tragic flaw.

The death of a US soldier is terrible. Period. When the man/woman chooses the honor of wearing the uniform he/she chooses to obey the civil leaders. The soldier does not pick and choose what battles the soldier fights.

It saddens me when any parent loses a child. But remember this soldier, as a man, chose the life he wanted to lead.

CY: Jules Crittenden, who knew Professor Bacevich

Might you be confused over the fact that father and son have the same name, Andrew Bacevich? The father, a professor at Boston U., is still alive. The son was not a professor.

Lex, Crittenden mentioned in his article that he knew him.

There seems to be a point that seems to escape some, most soldiers and military in general aren't warmongers. They are average, every day people that believe that our country, right or wrong, is worth defending. They don't want to go out in a blaze of glory, that's Hollywood. Most just want the world to be a safer place to raise their families. When I see backhanded comments about what some think our guys ideas are, I wonder if they ever talked to any.

Is it irrational to try to provide security and establish peace in a country where individual rights didn't exhist before present? (Never mind why we WENT to war, we are there now and should not leave it in turmoil).

Is it really a foolish cause to try to give people a chance at freedom? To let them live their lives without fear? To instill in them a desire for a better life?

He did not "Choose" to die in battle, he chose to protect the ideas of this country and protect freedom and democracy around the world. The individual battle, ANY individual battle is not worth dying for, it is the belief and ideas that he held that make his death not in vain.

Lex, I'm sorry that you're too lazy to actually click the link provided (it clearly answers that question).

I feel bad for any soldier who dies in war. Even worse for the ones who think they are fighting in Iraq for our freedoms (how could anyone fall for that canard?).

On the other hand, I'll believe he's dead when I see his flag-draped casket on TV.
(Fat chance.)

CY: Lex, I'm sorry that you're too lazy to actually click the link provided (it clearly answers that question).

I was genuinely trying to be helpful. You said 'knew', which is past tense, so I thought perhaps you were confused.

I was confused also because I can't figure out why you are outraged about Steve Clemons's remark. Obviously it's easier for a father to accept the death of his son when believes the son died for a noble cause. That's common sense.