When a Soldier is More Than a Soldier

There has been a lot blowback from the above ad that moveon.org put out. Many republicans, most notably presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani, have blasted both moveon.org and the democrats for not immediately distancing themselves from the ad.

Dick Cheney said today "It's bad enough when politicians turn their backs on a war they voted for and supported when it was popular. But no one in politics, regardless of party, should hesitate to object when an American soldier at war is mocked and insulted.''

Now, first let me say this is just political posturing. The republicans are exploiting this as an opportunity to embarrass the democrats for being disrespectful toward a soldier and to distract the public from a failed war policy. But regardless of the disingenuousness on the part of the republicans, the question still stands: Is it wrong to criticize, or blatantly insult soldiers?

Usually it is wrong, but not under these circumstances. General Petraues is a soldier, but the minute he testifies before a congressional committee and defends a politician's policy (in this case the President's), he becomes more than a soldier. You can't blame soldiers for simply following orders, or just carrying out policy, regardless of how bad that policy he is. But as soon as they start serving in a political capacity, then they make themselves vulnerable to political attacks like all other politicians.

This is an important point because it means politicians can't just hide behind well-respected official to try to advance their agenda. Don't like how this soldier is being treated? Then don't try to showboat his respectability by having him vouch for your policy goals. Part of the reason why soldiers are respectable to begin with is because they stay out of the political fray.