Soldier's Death Strengthens Senators' Antiwar Resolve
Kerry, Dodd Demand Stronger Challenge to Bush
By Jonathan Weisman and Ann Scott Tyson
The above headline caught my eye. Why did this one particular soldier's death 'strengthen senators' resolve'? I asked myself. So I read the article. Here's an exerpt. And here is the rest.
Just before Christmas, an Army captain named Brian Freeman cornered Sens. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) and John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) at a Baghdad helicopter landing zone. The war was going badly, he told them. Troops were stretched so thin they were doing tasks they never dreamed of, let alone trained for.
Freeman . . . returned to his base in Karbala, Iraq, and less than two weeks ago died . . . .
The death of the West Point graduate . . . has radicalized Dodd, energized Kerry and girded the ever-more confrontational stance of Democrats in the Senate. Freeman's death has reverberated on the Senate floor, in committee deliberations and on television talk shows.
Now, while I'm glad something has gotten Congress off the dime, I'm sorry this man or any of the 3,081 who preceeded him had to die to make it happen.
EVERY SINGLE ONE of those service men and women who has died, been maimed for life, been wounded or will come home with PTSD--facing a lifetime of challenge just to make it through another day--is a face, a name, a loved one of someone. Why couldn't those senators have figured that out before now?
Why did it take the death of someone they met face-to-face to get them [especially those who have actually been to war] to put a human face on the catastrophe?