Google search of my sites and the web


Thursday, September 02, 2004

Republicans Revising The Concept of "Purple Heart"

According to this report by Stewart Nusbaumer,
...on the floor of the Republican National Convention, Republican delegates proudly sported band-aids with little purple hearts in an attempt to diminish the significance of John Kerry’s military record and his three Purple Hearts--which stand in stark, embarrassing contrast to George Bush’s avoidance of the Vietnam War and his “yellow heart.”
Well, this is curious, to say the least. So, apparently some gurus at the convention seem to think they know better than both military officers and medical doctors in charge of awarding soldiers injured in battle their Purple Heart decorations. And, of course, as Mr Nusbaumer correctly observes,
According to retired Gen. Merrill McPeak, former Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force, 3,700 Purple Hearts have been awarded in Iraq. Are Republicans mocking all 3,700 of our servicemen and women wounded in Iraq? Or only those they determine were not sufficiently wounded?

According to this former Marine grunt, how dare they laugh at my Purple Heart?

George Washington was correct: a wound is a wound, and that entitles one to the award. This decoration is not about the depth of the wound, not about the wound’s length, not about the quantity of blood that came from the wound. The Purple Heart recognizes the personal sacrifice of our troops without regard to the severity or the nature of the wound. This has been the official position of the U.S. military since the days of George Washington, and this is the correct position today.
This is not the first time combat veterans find themselves being smeared for political gains in the US in recent times. But, as they say, this just takes the cake. At least for now. But I wouldn't bet on the Republican smear machine not coming up with even dirtier tricks in the near future.

No comments:

Digg This!!!