On D-Day's 65th Anniversary, Americans' Reluctance to Serve Is Shameful

Honest Thoughts

There is much I could add. We are at a crossroads historiclly. The troops are the "thin red line"- they are the human version of Hadrian's Wall. September 11, 2001 briefly awoke a sleeping public, but they have resumed their slumber.

Human nature seems to guide us to delay painful or unpleasant prices. The price of freedom is not blood, but service. There are of course nexous moments in history when service requires that people bleed for their beliefs. The Jews in Krakow were not a legally constituted military force, but they knew that it was fight or die. Those men and women defeated a Nazi brigade. Those Jews in the ghetto of Krakow were placed in that situation because the Polish military was unable to stop a juggernaut. Polish soldiers died valiantly and fought nobly. In the end they were overwhelmed becuase like many European powers they chose complacency over preparation- they lulled themselves into believing that it would not happen to them.

Today we fight an asymetric enemy and the threat of nuclear proliferation and there is no "Hitler" hovering on our borders. This does not mean that the threat is less- just different. This was proven on September 11,2001.

Today we sit complacently withdrawn behind our technical and nuclear superiority, content in the knowledge that someone else will bear the burden, smug in the decision that we will serve when the enemy is at the gate.

Our young and not so young service members in the guard, reserve and active duty along with civilian law enforcement are carrying forward and are truly amazing. I have helped to bury a Marine and I pray that I do not have to do the same for my son, but why should he or I be exempt from a duty that should be borne by all? Those who do serve must not look backward and find that themselves alone- deserted by their countrymen.

Culturally the West is in an era that is very analagous to the 1920's and 30's. If we allow the analogy to continue we will find ourselves in a series of wars that could've been avoided. Perhaps we are already there.

Peace through Strength is not a philosophy it is a reality.

If my son or daughter chooses to follow me into the military I will be proud becuase they have chosen to serve others. Those of us who serve, serve so others can have a party in the backyard, go to a safe job and shop at the mall and pray in the mosque, church, synagogue or temple of their choice. We who serve want those things as well. Is it right that 99% should prosper by the sacrifice of 1%? What is the right percentage?

I only know I could not hold my head up high if I had not served my fellow man, my fellow Americans- if I was not part of that one percent.

what the?

i am a retired military member and i did not join because it is my duty, i had my own political reasons for joining. i would never agree to making people join the military, fight illegal fights and die for a piece of ground and to prove to the world that my god is better than their god beliefs. i can't understand how people salute a piece of cloth,it's a piece of cloth, it's not christ!and i never pledge allegience to a country so out of controll on fighting everybody. when i go to events and everyone rises, i stay put. when a service member dies, i salute the soldier because even though we see things differentaly, he still is my brother.

U.S.A.F. ret

Kudo's to Maj. (Ret.) Lewis

I am a 21-year veteran of the U.S. Army, serving from August 1982 through September 2003. Over those years I was deployed or in some fashion supported conflicts in Central-America, Grenada, The Persian Gulf (1986 and 1991), the Balkans, Korea (The year I spent there in 1998/99 over 120 Korean soldiers on both sides were killed in armed conflict) Afghanistan, and Iraq. In between those deployments were countless mini-deployments to the National Training Center at Fort Irwin California, Fort Chaffee Arkansas, Fort Polk Louisiana, Aerial Gunnery at Fort Knox, Field exercises at Fort Campbell and Grafenwoehr in Germany. Not to mention the little known mission to keep the U.S. Embassy open in Beirut Lebanon, that took me on numerous deployments to the region from 1985 through 1992. The day-to-day operational tempo of the armed services are relentless and the soldiers at the unit level always ask "why are there not more of us to do all that is asked of us?" and "Why don't we get paid more for all that we do?"

I completely agree with Dr. Lewis that more citizens should serve in some capacity in the Armed Services. Most people seem to forget (or choose to ignore) that the military help to fight forest fires, perform disaster relief efforts, patrol the southern U.S. border, as well as search and rescue operations world-wide on a day to day basis, all while we fight on two fronts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Many countries around the world have compulsory military/national service. The United States should institute the same thing. Our 30,000 soldiers in Korea are facing over one million North Korean soldiers today as I type this note.

I was medically retired due to Gulf War Illness, and I would still be proudly serving today if not for my premature (and unwanted) retirement. The VA is graciously sending me through college to retrain me for a civilian career, and I plan on using that degree upon graduation in May 2010 to re-enter the Department of Defense and continue to support both training and war until the day comes when I can no longer physically and/or mentally continue to serve.

My fellow Americans, please support our service-members through some type of service, whether it be by volunteering with the Red Cross, The U.S.O., the National Guard and Reserves, or on active duty. Contact your elected representatives and ask them to push for a larger military.

A large, strong, military is essential to a lot more then just fighting wars!

Sesame Street conditioning bears fruit- just ask Pavlov's dog

Somewhere in our "skunk bong'd/slim shady'd /octo'd/ designer logo flashing" land there must exist some glimmer of realisation that the Wahabists really DO hate and want to kill or convert infidels/the West .The denial of this truth served the stealth candidate from Illinos?Hawaii?Indoneisia very well indeed.His promises appealed to selfish millenials-the offspring of burnt out astronauts from Woodstock. Playing off disproportionate white guilt & wads of cash from "abroad",free media hype & Acorn bolshevists "activism".Posts by many of his disciples proclaim that when the WWII generation & senior boomers die off (the last links to American Spiritual & Cultural values )they will finally have achieved "the prize". In spite of media conditioning,there remain a wealth of brave ,decent selfless Americans among the young who want serve in the Armed Forces.Our heartfelt thanks to all.God Bless.

MAKE NO MISTAKE....

Islam seeks to convert or bury the world. Mohamed conquered by fire and the sword - this is the legacy of Islam. Swallow hard, but except that obvious reality.

This being the case, it might be wise to compare Akamadinijad to Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot or Mao - Not Ghandi or Christ.

Communist dictators will use the Muslims as attack dogs to sap away at our strength. Ultimately they will have at each other, but only after we are finished or rendered inconsequential.

All that said - it should be obvious that America has out-sourced her strength and tied herself in regulatory knots - contributing to economic collapse. Pragmatism dictates that we abandon the realm - retreat back, and attempt to hold North America and the Western Pacific. A small, but well trained, and highly technological, professional military might be able to accomplish this... for a while.

However, the end game will not change unless we rediscover our moral character and stop the decay engendered by our "progressive" culture.

Were you There

Fellow American,

Was it you, who died there.

Died so others shall be free.

Died to free a country under attack,

Question.

Shameful Comparison!!!

Maybe if the US would actually DECLARE war through an act of Congress, as our Founding Fathers had wished. During WWII, it is true that every man and woman in America stepped up to the plate. ( At least the ones that were allowed to step up to the plate, since America was mired in such extreme bigotry that it would not allow African Americans to fight) American conflicts would carry more pertinence if conflicts were a real matter of the survival of the American State. WWII was the last conflict in which the very survival of the world was at stake and hence, Congress declared war. Every conflict, with the exception of the Afghan war has been a politically motivated war, and when you have a politcally motivated war, well it becomes bi-partisan. The opinion blames the Vietnam era as a source of American disconnect with our fighting forces. While it is shameful to see how our forces were treated upon return home,

however the war was so drastically politcized by that time that little else could have been expected.

That is not to take away from the courage of the men and women who now do the fighting, however, exactly what have we been fighting for since WWII?

Korean War- if we had not fought that war would the Koreans have swept through the south pacific as the Imperial Japanese? Of course not, regional war, thousands of lives lost for what has become a 55+ year stalemate.

Vietnam War- complicated, yes! A matter of nation-state survival, absolutely not! It is the Dominoe Theory of Communism, that if Vietnam fell, the South Pacific was going to fall in succession. Essentially another civil war in Asia that America found herself mired in for totally political machinations.

Gulf War I - Matter of American nation-state survival? Again the answer is no. The American and world dependence of oil dictated the reasons behind the conflict, cleverly dressed by Bush 41 as a stand against aggression. If Saddam Hussein was a dictator in sub-saharan Africa, far removed from the world's supply of oil, dare I say we would have never heard of Saddam Hussein!

Gulf War II - Enough said about this conflict. Possibly the most cynical, unneccessary, and politcally motivated war in US history. Time will only tell about the outcome, however History, I believe, will be incredibly harsh on Bush 43 for the prosecution of this war.

And should I mention the intense boost in recruitment directly after 9/11? Or has that been forgotten? When America seemed like we were under extreme duress, Americans again stepped up and united, but again, that seems not to get mentioned. Only after, when more and more information came out out the idelogical reasons and possible criminal manipulation of the facts did we stop and re-think and say to ourselves..."Whoa, Why exactly are we fighting???"

When America can properly use our forces. Not for short-sighted and vague politcal goals, dictated by neccessity and not by ideology (Bush 43), then you will see Americans step up again.

irresponsibly skewed article

Dr. Lewis, the author of this article fails miserably to consider the tremendous difference in moral arguments to defend the allied actions of the 1940's and those in current engagements in Irak and Afghanistan.

Dr. Lewis, if you really expect the american people to respond in the same way today as they did in 1944, please make a case for what the Iraki or Afghan people did that was tantamount to the attack on Pearl Harbor by the Japanese, the invasion of most of Europe and Northern Africa by the Nazi German regime or the shameful racist actions of the fascist regimes of Mussolini and the Third Reich.

What a shameful shortcoming in an article written by a professor of military history.

Thank you, commenters below

who served on our behalf. In order to solve some of the problems we're seeing, I would like to submit these thoughts on things we might do differently:

1) Double the size of our active duty and reserve and guard forces so that we cannot rely as heavily on an "abused few" for multiple tours. We have a recession here.

The military is a "jobs program" for sure.

2) We know that Social Security and Medicare are separate "payroll taxes" for separate purposes. I would like to see us divide our income taxes as well into two parts. One, a levy specifically for national defense, with rates that can go up or down as needed to always fund all defense and wars in real time. The other, a levy (like at present) for everything else. This would assure that everyone "participates" (financially, at least) in things like Iraq and Afghanistan, and would keep a constant focus on why we're in these places.

3) I believe we have erred badly in hiring too many civilian contractors to perform services for the military. Even if less efficient, I believe that the expanded military should resume doing more things for itself. There is something very wrong with contracted people making more than soldiers in war zones. Thinking PEOPLE never voted for that questionable policy.

Just as good...

I served a total of eleven years and believe I did my part. It would be nice if more young Americans would do theirs. Unfortunately, many of them have been raised in an environment that does not foster a love of country or a sense of duty.

The teacher's unions and the major media are made up of people that find American power repugnant and despise the American military. The same crowd that hated President Reagan for actually trying to win the Cold War (and succeeding) hated President Bush for eliminating threats from Afghanistan and Iraq after 9/11.

Bush and the military succeeded despite the best efforts of the Democrats and their toadies in the state-run major media to undermine the war effort. Much was made of supposed torture and atrocities by our side with little focus on the real atrocities, such as beheadings, on the other. Such biased and dishonest information poisons the perspectives of young Americans.

It strikes me as hypocritical for the liberal media to complain that not enough young Americans serve in the military when it is the media themselves that are a main cause of their reluctance.