The Audacity of a Politician

'World Peace'

It is the consummate answer that is given by numerous beauty pageant contestants, when asked the question on what they want most for the world. It is the phrase that politicians use when asked what they wish to accomplish in their foreign policies. I hate to say it, but 'world peace' does not, and will not ever exist.

The current demands of peacekeeping and humanitarian aid missions have become more common with the growth of global organizations such as NATO and the UN. Our politicians love to promise the help of US forces to render aid and lend a hand into hot-spots the world over, Bosnia, Somalia, East Timor and Kosovo, to name a few. With a hand shake during an photo-op to a government official from a country most Americans have never heard of, they keep the promises coming. As we speak the United States makes up more than 25% of the NATO peacekeeping and humanitarian ais efforts throughout the world.

As nice as 'world peace' sounds, it's a farce. Humanitarian aid missions, athough the intentions are great, are a politician's way of making themselves look good in front of the camera. I understand the intent and purpose of these missions, as I am a veteran of two of them. What most politicians forget to realize is this one really important facet, bullets don't care about humanitarian aid and good intentions. They don't care if you are there to held build shelters, hospitals, roads and schools. They don't care if your heart is in the right place. Just because a soldier is part of a peacekeeping force or humanitarian aid effort, does not make him or her impervious to bullets, bombs, IED's and chemical warfare. How many service members died in Bosnia? Somalia? The answer ... 12 and 45 repectively. Where were the Senators and Congressmen then? Not one outcry. Not one 'let's bring our boys home'.

Senator Obama can decry the war in Iraq. He can say that he never voted for the war, (he didn't by the way ... because he didn't have a vote in the House or the Senate ... he was still a state senator from Illinois). He can shout at the top of his lungs to end the US occupation of Iraq. Why? So we can focus on humanitarian aid efforts in Darfur, where the odds are still greatly stacked against our forces and its missions there. The fact of the matter remains, no matter what the mission, war in Iraq or peacekeeping in Somalia, the loss of American service members is inevitable. It is an unfortunate truth that the loss of any service member, no matter how tragic, is part of the life that they have enlisted for. Is the death justified because it was a peacekeeping mission instead of a war?

I have lost friends in Iraq. Marines that I have served with are placed in cemeteries across America, forever entombed beneath a white marble stone, with just their name and rank. To them, it did not matter that they died in Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia or Kosovo. Bot they and I believed that this country is the greatest country on God's green earth. They were willing to serve her, and gave their lives. Premature withdrawel from Iraq will only embolden our enemies and strengthen their resolve against us. We will soon find the battlefields on our own shore and in our own neighborhoods.

Senator Obama, due to a severe lack of experience, does not see the justification to a victory in Iraq. He does not have the foresight to see the means to this end. He would rather accept the withdrawel as a foregone conclusion, cut our ties in the region and move on to the more politically correct obligations, like humanitarian aid efforts. What he does not see is that a withdrawel now would mean our return to that region several years from now on one of his peacekeeping and humanitarian aid missions, and as the past has taught us, back to square one.

Americans must think long and hard about the upcoming election. Do they want a leader, or just a politician. Senator Obama is a politician.