Iraq veteran returns home to cries of "baby killer"

[Riesstiu IV]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/jamieson/181422_robert09.html

Veteran gets rude welcome on Bainbridge

By ROBERT L. JAMIESON Jr.
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER COLUMNIST

Think about the Seattle area -- Bainbridge Island to be exact -- and you think scenic views and liberal-minded tolerance.

At least the killer views are still there.

The bucolic island's deep reputation for civility got a gut check this week during the annual Grand Old Fourth of July celebration.

That's when Jason Gilson, a 23-year-old military veteran who served in Iraq, marched in the local event. He wore his medals with pride and carried a sign that said "Veterans for Bush."

Walking the parade route with his mom, younger siblings and politically conservative friends, Jason heard words from the crowd that felt like a thousand daggers to the heart.

"Baby killer!"

"Murderer!"

"Boooo!"

To understand why the reaction of strangers hurt so much, you must read what the young man had written in a letter from Iraq before he was disabled in an ambush:

"I really miss being in the states. Some of the American public have no idea how much freedom costs and who the people are that pay that awful price. I think sometimes people just see us as nameless and faceless and not really as humans. ... A good portion of us are actually scared that when we come home, for those of us who make it back, that there will be protesters waiting for us and that is scary."

On the Fourth, Jason faced his worst fear.

It was such a public humiliation -- home front insult after battlefield injury.

It really shouldn't have happened for two principal reasons.

Reason No. 1? History.

The past informs us that the men and women who fight our wars are not just following orders.

They are risking life and limb.

When they return from the battlefield they should be embraced regardless of the public popularity about the conflict, regardless of the politics.

Have we so quickly forgotten the painful lessons of Vietnam?

Frederick Scheffler, whose daughter and son-in-law marched with Jason on Sunday, hasn't.

Scheffler -- an Army veteran of two tours in Southeast Asia -- was shot in the leg during that long-ago conflict.

He came home with a cane, only to discover the American public was either indifferent to his sacrifice or downright hostile.

"I didn't think in this day and age combat veterans would be treated in this manner," Scheffler, 60, tells me, reflecting on Jason. "I saw it happen to veterans in Vietnam. I'm not going to let it happen today, not to these kids."

Reason No. 2? The rules.

The Bainbridge Island Chamber of Commerce, which put on the community celebration, permits freedom of expression at the event but asks that parade announcers not act in a manner that is partisan or prejudicial.

Jason's mother, Tamar, says a female parade announcer locked eyes on her son who was walking behind a pro-Republican group called Women in Red, White and Blue. The group supports President Bush and the troops in the fight against terrorism.

According to Tamar, the female announcer sarcastically asked Jason: "And what exactly are you a veteran of?"

The perceived mocking, the mother adds, set off some people in the crowd, loosing a flood of negative comments, "like a wave... a mob-style degrading."

Kevin Dwyer, executive director of the Chamber of Commerce, spoke with the announcer after the allegations reached him this week.

He says the woman denies using sarcasm; she just wanted to know which war Jason was a veteran of so that she could "honor him" in public.

"It wasn't her intention to incite anything -- that's what she told me," Dwyer said. "But if she acted out of school, that's not what we're about."

Dwyer added: "I believe (Jason's) mom when she said her son was called 'a murderer.' But I'm sure it wasn't so much directed at the kid as it was the president. A soldier with a sign represents that."

The female announcer told Dwyer that some in the Bush-Cheney contingent in the parade seemed "militant."

And so, battle lines are drawn.

From the outside looking in, the fuel for this conflict seems obvious.

The left-leaning island hosted a group of people who support Bush's controversial war. (On the same parade route, people bearing pro-Kerry signs were cheered and applauded for, among other things, tooling around in an environmentally responsible car.)

Against such a roiling backdrop, an unfortunate tone of voice or the wording on a sign can spark, well, something -- something unconscionable it appears.

But less obvious factors are undoubtedly at work here, too.

The female announcer at the parade had a father who fought for America in a previous U.S. conflict. He never made it back home.

Jason's mother -- unbeknownst to many observers along the parade route -- is a tireless activist behind the pro-troops movement in the Puget Sound region.

Such a combo on a day of red, white and blue can only lead to fireworks -- snap, crackle and popping off during what locals call the "best small-town parade in America."

I wasn't exactly pro-war but this kind of treatment is despicable and only hurts the anti-war movement. Don't hate the soldier, hate the war.

 

[Uncle Sam]

I wasn't exactly pro-war but this kind of treatment is despicable and only hurts the anti-war movement. Don't hate the soldier, hate the war.

Better yet, don't hate either. But i completely agree that this is despicable, these young men and women are risking their lives both for the Iraqi citizens overseas and the American public back at home, whether they like it or not.

Anyone out there booing returning soldiers should have the hell beaten out of them as far as i'm concerned.

 

[Riesstiu IV]

Beating the "hell" out of them makes you just as bad if not worse than the anti-war protesters who verbally assaulted the veteran.

 

[Uncle Sam]

Beating the "hell" out of them makes you just as bad if not worse than the anti-war protesters who verbally assaulted the veteran.

Obviousely i'm exaggerating. I was just trying to put across my point of how disgusted i am with people like that.

 

[Hundegesicht]

Honestly, why do liberals in the U.S. attack soldiers so viciously? Most of these people didn't even want to go to Iraq and just are following orders; they don't deserve this kind of treatment.

 

[North King]

Some people are idiots on the leftist side, but some are idiots on the right wing, too. There are some pretty much everywhere. The idiots on the leftist side equate hating the war with hating the troops, and so they do both. Most, I hope, do not. I myself have always belived that one can support the troops while protesting the war.

 

[Uncle Sam]

I myself have always belived that one can support the troops while protesting the war.

Yeah, this was something i was talking to someone about not long ago, that even amongst the anti-war crowd there is still a "support our troops" mentality, this news is a little disturbing. Let's hope it's just an isolated incident.

 

[Sanaz]

I wasn't exactly pro-war but this kind of treatment is despicable and only hurts the anti-war movement. Don't hate the soldier, hate the war.

Dwyer added: "I believe (Jason's) mom when she said her son was called 'a murderer.' But I'm sure it wasn't so much directed at the kid as it was the president. A soldier with a sign represents that."

The female announcer told Dwyer that some in the Bush-Cheney contingent in the parade seemed "militant."

And so, battle lines are drawn.

I'm definitely 100% against the Iraq war, in the way it was carried out. But I am also 110% the soldiers there, some of them my friends who are (maybe ironically) also anti-war. But they are there for a reason, and risk there life every day.

I'd like to think the people in the crowd were truly reacting to the Bush sign, but I don't. Too many people, no matter which side they fall on, simply turn off their brains and forget that these are real people, for the most part just trying to do the right thing as best they can. The president and his boys have put them in a horrible position, but then the anti-war crowd does nothing to help at all. I don't know which is more unforgivable.

And you're right. The pro-war crowd can now group anyone who is anti-war into the same group as these people, and that just doesn't help. And "baby-killer"? I wonder where that came from; obviously not someone too bright. I guess with free speech, we take the good with the weird and the bad.

 

[Tripwire]

Despicable.

These are the men putting their lives on the line for our freedoms. If these protesters have some kind of bug up their *ahem* rear, they should take it to the leaders who brought this war upon us. I really don't see the sensibility of bashing soldiers.

 

[SesnOfWthr]

This makes me absolutely sick.

These men and women are simply doing a job, one that many of them may find distasteful or completely disagree with.

It is not for them to decide what their orders will be. They enlisted to help to protect our rights and freedoms. They did not necessarily want to go to Iraq, but they are fulfilling the commitment they made to me, you, and everyone else in this country.

The part I hate about these stories is that the soldiers were over there doing what they do, so that people like the idiots on the street are free to yell things like "baby killer".

Do they have any idea what kind of treatment they would receive if they spoke against their leaders in some of these middle eastern countries?

 

[NateDawgNY]

None of the guys I served with wanted to go fight in Iraq. They would have been more than happy if they had just stayed right there on post. This kind of treatment from protestestors is despicable and completely uncalled for.

 

[cgannon64]

Great, we're taking the worst part of the Vietnam war protests...

 

[Plotinus]

These men and women are simply doing a job, one that many of them may find distasteful or completely disagree with.

It is not for them to decide what their orders will be. They enlisted to help to protect our rights and freedoms. They did not necessarily want to go to Iraq, but they are fulfilling the commitment they made to me, you, and everyone else in this country.

If those soldiers don't like going abroad and killing people, why on earth did they join the army?

I don't understand this attitude that practically canonises all military personnel as saints who heroically do a wonderful job whatever their orders. Surely if you make the decision to be a soldier you are also making the decision to follow what may be dodgy orders in the future. Maybe there are many soldiers who disagreed with the war, but by becoming soldiers they at least implicitly agreed to fight any dodgy war that they were ordered to partake in. And if they disagreed with the war but fought in it anyway, they were essentially saying that they thought that following orders was more important than doing what's right. They always had the option of being conscientious objectors, as some brave soldiers did. Nope, sorry, the "just following orders" defence doesn't hold an enormous amount of water.

The part I hate about these stories is that the soldiers were over there doing what they do, so that people like the idiots on the street are free to yell things like "baby killer".

Now that's surely questionable... Whatever one's opinion of the rights or wrongs of the war in Iraq, I don't think there's much doubt that it had very little to do with the ability of Americans to shout at each other. Americans were quite free to shout at each other for all the 30-odd years that Saddam Hussein was in power, and I don't think any of us doubts that this freedom would probably have remained available even if he were still there.

Not that I generally approve of shouting abuse at people in the street, whatever the provocation, of course. Only people who break traffic regulations deserve that!

 

[cgannon64]

Plotinus, I'm sure every soldier returning home is thinking those very same things, which is why we don't need hatred pointed there way just to add on top of it.

 

[JohnRM]

There are worse things, happening, in the world.

 

[Sanaz]

If those soldiers don't like going abroad and killing people, why on earth did they join the army?

I don't understand this attitude that practically canonises all military personnel as saints who heroically do a wonderful job whatever their orders. Surely if you make the decision to be a soldier you are also making the decision to follow what may be dodgy orders in the future. Maybe there are many soldiers who disagreed with the war, but by becoming soldiers they at least implicitly agreed to fight any dodgy war that they were ordered to partake in. And if they disagreed with the war but fought in it anyway, they were essentially saying that they thought that following orders was more important than doing what's right. They always had the option of being conscientious objectors, as some brave soldiers did. Nope, sorry, the "just following orders" defence doesn't hold an enormous amount of water.

You are discounting some very basic issues here. US military personnel join to serve their country, to protect freedom, etc. They are very good at what they do. If one of them drops out, they are walking out on the people they report to, and the people who report to them. Is that more honorable than becoming a conscientious objector? Also remember, built in to the military is a trust that your leaders will do what is right, and will use the military in good faith. That has obviously not happened lately, but how exactly is everyone in the military to prepare for that? And what happens if everyone becomes a conscientious objector? Reinstate the draft? I have also heard, but not confirmed, that the word is out in the military that to be a conscientious objector with the current administration results in court martial. This would not surprise me at all, but maybe someone else can validate/invalidate this.

The point is, it is easy to sit on the sidelines and claim that the soldiers can just back out, but this just doesn't work so easily in real life. It's not like they give classes during training on how to become a conscientious objector. At least I assume they wouldn't, I don't actually know.

 

[Plotinus]

It's not like they give classes during training on how to become a conscientious objector. At least I assume they wouldn't, I don't actually know.

I'm sure they don't!

But I still disagree. You say that people become soldiers to serve their country and protect freedom. But obviously soldiers don't spend all their time doing this. Anyone who becomes a soldier must surely be aware that there is a chance they will find themselves having to kill people, having to do things that seem morally dubious, having to take orders that they don't agree with, and so on and so forth. Practically any gripping military drama film (possibly starring Gene Hackman, or maybe Jack Nicholson) can tell you that. If anyone really decides to become a soldier in the belief that they will spend their entire time obeying whiter-than-white orders and doing the military equivalent of rescuing babies from burning buildings, then they clearly haven't thought very much about it. And obviously they aren't all like that anyway. My flatmate met an Australian who had managed to join the British army, because he thought the Australian army would have had fewer opportunities to kill people. That's honestly what he thought. I don't have much sympathy for that mindset, although I hope it's limited to a minority in even the most belligerent or brainwashed armies.

Again, you say that someone who becomes a conscientious objector is walking out on his colleagues. Well, maybe so. But the day loyalty or obedience are prized as higher virtues than doing what you know to be the right thing - I think that is a day when America has lost all claim to be any kind of moral guardian or protector of freedom.

I accept that it's easy to sit on the sidelines and say that soldiers shouldn't do what they know to be wrong, and clearly there are enormous pressures on them to shut up and obey. But they chose that situation. Whether there's a war on or not, whether they are in fact doing good or doing harm, they chose to be in a potentially morally compromising situation, and they certainly made that decision under no pressure and without the threat of court-martial. And that I can't understand or sympathise with.

 

[Sanaz]

Again, you say that someone who becomes a conscientious objector is walking out on his colleagues. Well, maybe so. But the day loyalty or obedience are prized as higher virtues than doing what you know to be the right thing - I think that is a day when America has lost all claim to be any kind of moral guardian or protector of freedom.

I think the current administration has already destroyed any "claim to be any kind of moral guardian or protector of freedom", but that's a different topic which has been covered extensively elsewhere...

What is the right thing, really? Walking out on people you train with and serve with for many years? The same qualities that make a good philosopher do not necessarily make a good soldier. Are they do be punished because they don't see the world as you do? Maybe they don't have luxury to think about things in the same way. There are just too many problems with condemning the soldiers who are out there fighting.

Also, is the Iraq occupation really the worst thing ever? It's not like the world was better off with Hussein in power in Iraq. I am very much against this war, and by that I mean that on a scale of 0 (completely anti-war) to 100 (completely pro-war), I'm somewhere between 15 and 35. Would that be enough to leave a 15 year career in the military? What would be enough to make that decision, maybe 0, or maybe 49? And how would you know you made the right decision, and wouldn't regret it every day of your life if a friend were killed and you weren't there to maybe save them? When do you lose complete faith in the system that you have sworn to defend? This is where it becomes very difficult to judge someone else's decision without being that person.

 

[zulu9812]

"I really miss being in the states. Some of the American public have no idea how much freedom costs and who the people are that pay that awful price. I think sometimes people just see us as nameless and faceless and not really as humans. ... A good portion of us are actually scared that when we come home, for those of us who make it back, that there will be protesters waiting for us and that is scary."

I really feel that I must take issue with this statement. American soldiers are not the ones who pay the price for American freedom. Other countries' civilians pay the price for American freedom.

 

[amadeus]

Great, we're taking the worst part of the Vietnam war protests...

I wouldn't go that far. We haven't seen any tye-dyed hippies in granny glasses carrying flags of the Viet Cong and reading Maoist poems to each other...yet.