Hi Wulfe,
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Either side using someone who has fallen as a symbol for their cause is disguisting to say the least.
-SW
Not if that person intended for their sacrifice to advance a specific cause. Regardless of what you or others feel about the struggle in Iraq, Jeff Starr clearly saw dying there as something noble and was willing to do so in order to advance the light of freedom:
"It may seem confusing why we are in Iraq, it's not to me. I'm here helping these people, so that they can live the way we live. Not have to worry about tyrants or vicious dictators. To do what they want with their lives. To me that is why I died. Others have died for my freedom, now this is my mark."In essence, Starr said "I am willing to die so that others might live in freedom" and proved that by laying down his life. American patriots like Nathan Hale whose last words were
"I regret that I have but one life to give to my country" were equally willing to die, that their death might inspire others to continue their struggle. This has long been the aim of men dying for what they believed to be a noble cause.
For instance, Hugh Latimer, who was sent to the stake by Bloody Queen Mary for his protestant beliefs said to his fellow Martyr Nicholas Ridley as they lit the bundles of wood beneath their feet:
"Be of good cheer, Ridley; and play the man. We shall this day, by God's grace, light up such a candle in England, as I trust, will never be put out."You see, when the NYT attempts to spin the words of Jeff Starr to make them fit its anti-war agenda that is dishonest and yes perhaps even "disgusting" because they clearly understood that Starr supported American involvement in Iraq and selectively edited to obscure that fact. When others, however, proclaim what Starr himself believed and
clearly and unambiguously said he was dying for, that is in accordance with his own desires.
The problem is that there are many people here in the USA who are against what Starr supported, but they sense that saying "I don't care what Jeff Starr believed, he may have been a good soldier, but he was wrong" will have a negative resonance to say the least, so they attack the use of his own words as illegitimate. I do wish that more people would simply be willing to say, "Americans - be they citizens or troops - who support the intervention in Iraq are just as wrong as the politicians who support it!", and draw the line where it actually is.
- SEAGOON