adding insult to injury

Andrew Bacevich, who has strongly opposed the Iraq War from before the invasion, lost his son (also called Andrew) in Iraq this month. Like the father Bacevich, the son Bacevich was an officer in the US Army. The father served in Vietnam, and the son lost his life in Iraq. So, unlike many of the hawks supporting the war (starting with the chicken-hawks in chief, George W. "AWOL" Bush and Dick "I had other priorities" Cheney and their progeny), this opponent of the war had already served his country in war and had an immediate family member doing the same.

Bacevich criticizes Democrats for not doing more to end the war. Although I agree with Bacevich's goal, I don't agree that Congress can end the war by itself. De facto President Bush sent the troops to Iraq and I don't see realistically how he can be forced to bring them back. Even if Congress passed some law requiring it, we know how this Administration feels about obeying laws they don't agree with.

But I agree with another of Bacevich's points in his op-ed piece in the Post today. I agree that it is simply a "vile accusation" to accuse people who oppose the war of aiding the enemy. But, schooled by the Karl Rove/Rush Limbaugh method of political discourse, people even wrote to Bacevich after his son was killed to accuse him of just that:

Among the hundreds of messages that my wife and I have received, two bore directly on this question. Both held me personally culpable, insisting that my public opposition to the war had provided aid and comfort to the enemy. Each said that my son's death came as a direct result of my antiwar writings.

"Vile" is not nearly strong enough a word to describe such people.