Tag

american sniper

Browsing

By Brett Daniel Shehadey
Special Contributor for In Homeland Security

Michael Moore’s incriminating sniper tweets truly deserve no real response, especially in American military circles. However, for thinking people with free speech, we must occasionally engage the folly of our time, from whomever and wherever it comes. At the heart, there are some people that feel that Iraq was about conquest, rather than a last effort of nation-building. A majority of Americans agree that it was a mistaken political-military effort from the start and for the wrong reasons. Here is Moore’s initial tweet:

Moore’s logic never ceases to use illogical parallels. Not only was Moore’s uncle an “invader” on foreign sovereign soils during WWII, but he was shot buy the sniper “insurgent”’ of his day. Moore followed up that ridiculous first tweet with this one:

So, let’s get this straight. The regular enemy soldiers were brave, and Moore’s uncle was worse than a sniper and a coward because he was part of the invading force. More importantly, the native peoples that his uncle fought against in WWII, which were not in sniper military roles and acted as defenders and insurgents of the time, were brave, according to Moore’s logic.

Now substitute the words “American invader” to their rightful places in both instances: American liberator. The only difference is the outcome. America did not stay in Iraq for 50-plus years, as it did in Japan and Europe.

Let’s take a moment to use our minds. Flash past the lack of national interest in a war with Iraq, circa 2003, and the political blunders, failures and misinformation, or the differences in Europe’s bloody tyrant and Iraq’s bloody tyrant and the delay in rise and fall and the host of other differences of the actual disparate wars.

Can we imagine, for one instant, the reverse role of foreign occupation in our lives. Imagine for a moment, if there was a brutal dictator in America and the Muslims stormed in with superior military power, wiped out our military, sacked our evil leader responsible for genocide, mass murder, torture programs, chemical weapons use, etc. Our evil leader is gone and there is initial celebration in the streets for a time, just as in Iraq. Then, quickly the invaders are seen largely as occupiers and a conservative insurgency forms to resist a superior Muslim Iraqi military. An interim president and congress and court system are imposed and installed, but ironically, they are more tolerant but seen as supportive of one political and ethnic faction. The most conservative and liberal patriots rally to remove the occupiers because they do not trust foreigner-imposed rule. After years of another leader that bestows favoritism to his political sect, insurgency increases but is restricted to security personnel only and not the civilian population. Note that this is exactly what happened in Iraq on American political terms accept many Iraqi insurgents and foreign terrorist in Iraq did target non-combatants and used suicide attacks.

A foreign superior Saddam-era Iraqi military force would also: 1) impose secular laws in America and install Sunni Muslims to hold the highest ranking positions. 2) Establish checkpoints, curfews and green zones. 3) Attempt to impose and govern state based on national Arab secularism.

Here are the key differences with a superior Iraqi military activity and its intentions as occupiers. A superior Iraqi military would: 1) not engage in positive satellite nation-building; 2) never transfer sovereignty of state back to the American people, 3) never train a new and sovereign U.S. military (even after disbanding the old one), 4) never leave if in a position of superior firepower, 4) plunder all of the resources immediately and as quickly as possible, 5) commit daily atrocities that would make American abuses in Iraq seem like children’s games,

For some people who cannot imagine the difference of conduct in American military forces, including snipers, in contrast to enemy terrorists and insurgents, not only do they lack the ability to rationally compare ethics and rules of engagement. American snipers do not target women and children for sport or as a function and purpose of mission. American snipers target the enemies that would harm such innocents. Terrorists and Iraqi insurgents of particular and intolerant sects do indeed conduct themselves in this manner.

Moore types agree with enemy propaganda in the present day evils of America but nothing of its good nature and they find only the good or praise in America’s enemies of the day. Self-criticism is necessary. It is true that the modern American soldier is often the victim, hard pressed to obey political abuses and or failures and of leaderless and personal agenda-prone presidents. Cowardice is not however in the vocabulary of hunter-killer warriors. If we disagree with their methods of killing really bad people, that is one thing, but to support players that are even worse that wish you death is beyond foolish.

Snipers are an essential part of war that every regular soldier hates, naturally. Moore’s uncle would have said what every soldier felt. Nevertheless, they are a part of restrictive warfare. Terrorism and killing non-combatants, is not.

Moore’s impulsive tweets are meant to lash out hatred for America’s military role rather than the real enemy. If we were all paranoid, we might cite Moore with collusion with the enemy a long time ago. Instead, we let any fool with a mouth speak their mind.

Even if Moore types always side with the poor enemy overseas that rightly hates America and wants to kill Americans, no one will stop the Mr. Moores. On the other hand, in Iraq, if he said anything like that, no matter the government of Saddam or future Iraqi governments to come, he would receive little protection, possibly death by the tyrants and the defenders he supports.

Note: The opinions and comments stated in the preceding article, and views expressed by any contributor to In Homeland Security, do not represent the views of American Military University, American Public University System, its management or employees.