To be fair to poor Kamala, much as I hate to, the nation itself has done its best to marginalize Memorial Day, which for those of us who have war veterans in our lineage (both my father and grandfather are buried in Arlington National Cemetery) has gravitas and importance.
Memorial Day was established as special day of reflection and remembrance of those who died while serving in the U.S. military, according to the Congressional Research Service. But its significance has been gradually stripped away along with cultural and historical literacy in general, so now many Americans just think of it as an excuse for a long weekend, celebrating the beginning of summer, and getting drunk. When it had its own day, May 30, the holiday held more reverence in the public. It began as Decoration Day, after an organization of Union veterans called for decorating war graves with blooming flowers on May 30, 1868. It remained a solemn holiday through the 19th century: President Grover Cleveland spent the holiday going fishing, and he was widely criticized for being disrespectful. (It didn’t help that Grover dodged the draft in the Civil War and paid a substitute to fight in his place.). Then Armistice Day, which marked the end of World War I, confused everyone when Nov. 11 became a national holiday in 1938 and was renamed Veterans Day in 1954.
Both military holidays were marginalized (along with Washington’s birthday) in 1971 and became generic holidays when Congress decided that having long weekends was more important than having holidays actually commemorate important historical events and people. A year later, TIME Magazine (what?) wrote that the Memorial Day had become “a three-day nationwide hootenanny that seems to have lost much of its original purpose.” Now, instead of remembering our fallen soldiers, many Americans consider the day an opportunity to get big discounts at Memorial Day sales. Stores used to be closed on May 30 out of respect.
Oh that!
But who knows? Maybe when the next Democratic Congress votes to change the holiday to “George Floyd Day” the Left will be respectful again…
Ethics Alarms 
Being a Democrat means never having to say you’re sorry.
Most Democrats these days offer, at best, lip service to veterans. They really don’t like them much because they tend Republican, and are therefore evil MAGA orange man supporters that they would very much like to see sanctioned via social credit systems, arrested, or killed.
It’s telling that the Twitter (X) kids at the DNC have not even the slightest respect for service members lost in combat. To them, if you are in a group not sufficiently supportive of Democrats, you deserve to be used in an attack ad.
Most holidays have gradually been stripped of their significance, except maybe black history month, which still gets a ton of remembrance by every TV channel under the sun. It just goes to show you how deeply the woke mind virus has infected the American psyche, and how it’s eating away our traditions and culture. I keep reading, “Woke is dead”, but trust me — it’s very much alive. Bad ideas never seem to die (See also: Socialism, communism).
I’m sorry, but you have to be kidding me.
Military deaths are not only fair game, but they have been for a very long time, and the RNC knows it. After Autopen’s withdrawal from Afghanistan, the RNC ran ads nonstop with the families of the men who died. They invited everyone to the convention. What? We care about Gold Star families until it becomes inconvenient? We’re only honoring the dead if we’re attacking Democrats? What’s the principle here? Or is it just vibes?
Yet there is a critical distinction between serviceman deaths in the course of a military operation, and needless military deaths as a result of a sudden, ill-prepared. ill-conceived withdrawal, no?
Are you sure?
Because the people who died in Afghanistan were also serviceman deaths, and I think there are great arguments for America’s involvement in Iran, particularly the involvement that led to those deaths, was just as ill-prepared and ill-conceived as Afghanistan was.
Trump has been doing some really stupid things in his second term, and I think at some point he’s worn out the benefit of the doubt. People are dying for reason directly attributable to his decisions.
There are no “great arguments” for kicking the deadly Iran can down the road for a single second, and it was irresponsible for the US not to take that country out after the Marine barracks were bombed. There have been 13 US military deaths, tragic all, but amazing, given the scope of the operation. If that doesn’t show excellent prep, I don’t know what would. The weenies and the pacifists think all wars are wrong, and they would have maintained this right up to Iran turning Israel into a parking lot. Trump having the guts and fortitude to brave the polls and do the right thing by neutralizing Iran is one of his very best initiatives.
Ha. I was so triggered I left out the primary reason your comment is ill-advised! No Republicans used Memorial day to criticize Biden’s Botch by evoking those deaths. That’s the issue at hand.
I wouldn’t argue against that, but the comment I was responding to didn’t make that point. The point was that using military deaths in attack ads, particularly deaths seen as preventable or wasteful, is kind of time-honored.
Are you talking about the Beirut bombings of ’83? Well, I’m sorry that America didn’t take the opportunity to attack Iran 43 years ago, but at some point, the statute of limitations kicks in… Maybe sometime around the point the entire regime was replaced by the next generation?
The excuse to war can’t be as weak as “I don’t like them and our allies were going in anyway”.
Look, America is in a rough place right now. Part of the reason why Trump won the first time around is because after 20 years of consistent military action, the results were in, they weren’t good, and there wasn’t a lot of appetite for intervention in wars that don’t effect you.
This needs to be stated: Your military budget grew from 300 billion to 700 billion after the war on Terror was engaged, and has ballooned to more than a trillion. Could you imagine what America would look like if instead of bringing democracy to Afghanistan (and look how that went), you diverted even half the increases, for 26 years? What would America look like if you hadn’t spent 12 trillion dollars?
I’ll bite, current Canada, current Europe, current Africa, oh wait they look like that since they have sheltered under the USA’s umbrella for the last 70 years. Remove damn near every medical advance since 1945. Restore the USSR, delete South Korea. Likely add a few more uses of Atomic Bombs to settle disputes.
‘you seriously think the world would be a better place today if the USA hadn’t meddled in world affairs since 9/11/2001? You are sitting in judgement of 25 years of history with the hubris of all the knowledge you have, today.
I mean… That’s stupid for a couple of reasons…. I don’t even have to chew on the meat of it, I could just say I don’t see why not spending trillions on forever wars in the middle east post 2001 would wipe out medical advances from 1945.
If you wanna try again, maybe actually engage with what I said and not some jingoistic wet dream of a scarecrow that you want to spout American exceptionalism to, I’ll respond.
This isn’t a “forever war” HT. You discredit yourself by stooping to partisan talking points.
You’re failing to recognize the change in American military policy post 9-11. It doesn’t matter if the specific conflict has an end, the reality is that America has not been at peace for 26 years. That is a complete deviation from history. An entire generation of young people, including, I think, your son, has never known a single day of their life where America isn’t sinking blood and treasure into someone else’s backyard.
Part of the reason why Trump’s position of “no new wars” was effective in his first (and to an extent his second) campaign and why the populists on both the left and the right are developing isolationist wings, is because rational people can look at what the extreme bloat of the American military budget has done to you and want a return to normalcy, Again… I don’t know what the exact number America has sunk into fighting useless overseas battles, but it’s in the tens of trillions of dollars at this point, and you don’t need to continue to do it.
“forever war” is kind of an amusing slur since there’s never been a time in the history of mankind that one tribe hasn’t been in conflict with another tribe.
There hasn’t been a time in the history of mankind where the biggest tribe isn’t being attacked, threatened or undermined for the majority of its time as the biggest tribe by a diverse set of smaller tribes.
Clausewitz said war is a continuation of policy by other means – that is – all states are forever in competition with each other. Someone eventually got around to modifying this to “politics is just war by other means”. With the key takeaway here is that international competition isn’t just the “norm”, it’s the reality. Nations, even friendly nations, even trading nation, compete with each other. This competition ultimately takes a “whole of government” character and part of a government’s tool chest for power assertion is it’s military. Sometimes the military is part of the power projection and pressure applied to a competitor, sometimes it isn’t.
I think it’s somewhat utopian to think that the biggest game in town can avoid the fact that being the biggest game in town tends to mean even the smallest disturbance somewhere affects its equilibrium – sometimes to degrees that warrant corrective or preventative action.
And since there are small (and large) disturbances everywhere always, by definition, the biggest game in town is going to be affected.
There is no statute of limitations on acts of war. It is correct to say that Iran has been waging war against the US since 1979. Hundreds of American service members and civilians died in the interim in attacks orchestrated by Iran or its proxies. The best estimates are about 1000. There were the 1983 Beirut bombings, the 1996 Khobar Towers attack, and over 600 U.S. troop fatalities attributed to Iranian-backed militias in Iraq between 2003 and 2011. In the meantime, Iran has been open about its hostility to the US, and has been broadcasting “Death to the Great Satan!” (us) since 1979. I’d have to go to Steve-O to find another example of a major power that tolerated such acts by a foreign power for so long without finally retaliating. I believe the lesson taught by Trump finally doing what should have been long before is the right one. Attack the US or its citizens, and sooner or later, you’ll pay for it. My guess is that Reagan promised not to bomb Iran to get the hostages back. Bush, Clinton, Bush 2 and Obama have no such excuses, nor did Joe, except being senile and gutless.
Let’s see: 11 US soldiers being killed was the impetus for the Mexican War. 268 deaths on the Maine sent us to war with Spain. The deaths of 128 Americans on the Lusitinia put us on the path to war in WWI. I’d say Iran, by all previous precedents, was way overdrawn on the US restraint bank…
I’m going to ignore the ridiculousness of asserting that there is no statute of limitations to war acts. While there’s no objective standard for this, obviously the further away we get from something the less legitimate it is to say that that something is the justification for a current military act, and I’m not sure exactly what that timeframe is, but it’s obviously less than 50 years.
And you better hope that’s true, because America has been killing people the world over, sometimes with literally no justification past a goal of destabilizing an area, for longer than you’ve been alive.
I even think that bringing up Lebanon in the 80’s is bad for your argument, although to be fair, you could have done worse. Why was America there? Why does Iran call you the Great Satan?
“Look, America is in a rough place right now.”
It really isn’t. But enough of America’s loudest voices have convinced themselves they are.
I don’t know…. There’s a few things that I’m looking at which scare the piss out of me in Canada, and the rates are all strictly worse in America: The average household credit card debt, the mortgage foreclosure rate, and the new housing start rate.
Economies are complex systems, so there usually aren’t single sources to problems, but I think the trillions of excess dollars that America diverted into foreign sandboxes with very low ROIs is one of the larger contributors to the current market problems. Those are trillions you could have spent on damn near anything else.
“Are you talking about the Beirut bombings of ’83? Well, I’m sorry that America didn’t take the opportunity to attack Iran 43 years ago, but at some point, the statute of limitations kicks in… Maybe sometime around the point the entire regime was replaced by the next generation?”
I don’t have a problem with the idea that a nation can shrug off an attack by another nation and eventually, if normalcy returned between the two nations in the mean time, there’s a sort of “too late” aspect of this.
But war isn’t just about “you hit me, so I get to hit you”. There has never been a time when US-IRGC relations have been normalized. They have always been belligerent. There will not be a time when they do not hold an “our way or doomsday” mindset over the area of the globe they share with many other states, and despite any hopeful attitudes otherwise, that means that US interests (and frankly Europe’s, and China’s and the Middle East’s, and … Canada’s whether they will admit it or not) are tied to the IRGC being in or being out of power.
The IRGC question should have been answered years ago – decades ago.
If we think dealing with an IRGC that can close the Strait of Hormuz is difficult, wait until we have to deal with an IRGC that can close the Strait of Hormuz AND has nuclear weapons.
That the rest of the Western World would rather throw an anti-Trump temper tantrum to feel good about themselves looking down their noses at more “American adventurism” is Prima Facie proof that none of the other countries can be taken seriously on international security topics.
When they say that America is becoming an “unreliable” partner they couldn’t be further from the truth – it is they that are unreliable.
HT, would you like to react to Tammy Duckworth’s post?
Tammy Duckworth is a Senator from Michigan who lost both legs in the war in Iraq, as is not in favor of the ongoing war efforts in Iran.
I think the discussion at the post about the war in Iran is besides the ethical point of the post. That point is that Memorial Day is a National Holiday to remember and honor the sacrifice of our fallen soldiers. All of them. Irrespective of whether you agree with the wars in which they died. Using the thirteen fallen soldiers in Iran as a prop in an attack ad against Trump exploits Memorial Day for political purposes. Politics is what other days are for.
No, Tammy nailed it. There’s a place and a time.
But let’s not pretend that’s what I’m taking issue with. If everyone here was saying some variation of “You know, merits aside, they just really should have said it on any other day of the year” I’d agree with you, that’s not what’s happening, so I’m not agreeing.
Based on this comment I think you agree that the original ad by the Democrats criticized in the post was unethical as unbefitting Memorial Day. The Democrats wisely (but too late) withdrew this ad. Then the question becomes why the Democrat party felt that they need to publish that ad in the first place. And when you delve into that you find that for many people politics trumps everything.
There are certain dates on the national calendar that have a solemn nature. Not only in the USA. In many countries they have Armistice Day at November 11th. The Netherlands has its Memorial Day at May 4th, the day before Liberation Day at May 5th, when the Nazi’s in the Netherlands capitulated in Wageningen. At those days certain words and actions are required, others are inappropriate and off limits. The last years there are groups and individuals who hijacked the day by vandalizing memorials, disrupting ceremonies all because their cause is Palestine, and remembering the Jewish deaths in WWII does not fit the narrative.
I think a nation needs to treat national holidays as precious. These holidays tell a story about the nation as a nation, and what being a citizen of that nation means. So citizens should try to be united in their celebrations.
Here is where the problem is; are the United States of America still united as a nation? Or are Americans in the first place Republicans and Democrats?
Fair game for political ads, sure, but not as a Memorial Day remembrance.
Sorry if you can’t see the difference, but in my humble opinion, there is one. Ethically, it is a no-brainer.
If you want to say that running the ad on that day was tasteless? Sure. But you made your entire point without ever once mentioning Memorial Day.
So I did.
THe original article certainly did, but he is correct that you didn’t, shame on you for not restating the context, again.
Heh. I know, right? How careless of me. 😉
Thanks, Jack for an excellent reminder of Memorial Day. My Dad, several uncles and an aunt served in WWII, and Danny is a Marine, served in Vietnam, returned in 1969. I remember learning to respect these holidays in elementary school, where we also learned to sing a variety of patriotic songs (even the songs that mention God), including the Marine Corps anthem (which mentions Heaven).
Somehow the left has convinced everyone that patriotism is evil. I do hope that we can overcome that obstacle. Perfection doesn’t exist on Earth, but at least we are still striving, still aspirational, still a great place to live. And we owe our existence to those who served, and owe honor to those who perished in our defense.
Thanks again for the shout-out to the military.
I read an article a couple of years ago (I wish I could include the link, but I didn’t save it anywhere) entitled “Is it time to rethink the holidays?” I was skeptical when I opened it, but the main idea the author had was designed to restore the gravitas of Memorial Day. His suggestion was to move Memorial Day to July 3rd. His aim was to make July 3rd a day to remember all those who had given the ultimate sacrifice and July 4th a day to celebrate what those sacrifices had given to us.
I find that people tend to confuse it with Veterans Day. At least there, it’s more towards its intended purpose, even if it is misguided.
Though, it is weird getting a lot of Thanks for your service texts from friends and family at this time.
I have mixed feelings about the military, yours and mine.
I have family who served, I have family who are serving. But it’s been a very long time since we’ve been in a war that was truly just. A lot of what we’re seeing right now is this quasi-mercenary work where we go around the world putting out fires that very likely would never concern us. More than that, service has changed. We aren’t charging Vimy Ridge anymore, we’re sitting behind a screen watching the drone targets get obliterated.
Between the lack of righteous action, and the almost complete mitigation of risk…. Frankly, I don’t think that the job is the same as it used to be. I don’t think there’s as much of a difference between someone who serves in the armed forces, and people that do their 9-5. I don’t blame kids for not having the same level of respect as previous generations did. It’s still necessary work, it’s definitely insurance against worse things from happening, and it’s still one of the more dangerous careers out there, but I’d love for someone to articulate why they should.
“I don’t think there’s as much of a difference between someone who serves in the armed forces, and people that do their 9-5.”
So long as the United States remains the sole hyper-power, under which a large number of other allied militaries can nominally shelter, then yes, this is a …. sort of …. accurate statement.
When and where we can, our navy can park safely out of harms way and our air force can practically deploy from *the United States* and strike enemies who can essentially shoot back at about a 1 in 10,000 success rate.
But there will come a day when the United States will again have to fight, *on the ground*, an enemy with infantry on both sides pulling the trigger. Something as “low” level as Iraq/Afghanistan where the technological differences are understatedly stark, yet the enemy still engaged in close quarters combat or eventually something as more brutal than even what the Ukrainians and the Russians are slugging it out in.
No matter the technological advances one side ever has, history has shown the “other side” eventually catches up, an equilibrium is met, and battlefield decisions inevitably boil down to guys in trenches trying to stay alive longer than the guy in the other trench.
So, whether or not our superiority in tech has allowed the current generation to have fairly unserious attitudes about various Memorial Days, doesn’t mean that they are right in losing respect.
And when that day comes, I’ll re-examine my thoughts. But follow the thread up to my original point: Reality asserts. We can’t just look down the bridge of our nose at the youngs who don’t believe that service is as dangerous now as it was in WW2, particularly when they’re right.
Go read the poem “Tommy” by Kipling. You even say this is necessary in your own words. Are soldier’s saints? Not by a long shot, but they have all signed an IOU for an amount up to and including their life. That is the difference to a 9 to 5 job. Does every soldier understand that? No, they are generally young, with the invincible optimism of youth. Reality doesn’t care if they understand, that is what they have done.
Some gave all is Memorial Day
All gave some is Veteran’s Day
Without soldiers people like you would do just fine, until someone who doesn’t care what you think comes along and decides things for you.
You don’t have to understand soldiers, they often don’t understand themselves, but you should be thankful such people exist and do what you cannot or will not.
you can bet that Tommy see’s….
No, I’m sorry, but you’re wrong on this.
I said this before: We aren’t storming Vimy Ridge every other week. Serving isn’t even in the top 10 for most dangerous jobs anymore.
There are about 400 deaths per year in the military, about 250 accidents, about 70 suicides, and about 80 natural cause deaths. There are entire years where someone doesn’t see a combat fatality. This makes the average fatality rate about 20 deaths per 100,000 personnel.
The fatality rate of roofers is more than twice that. The fatality rate of Garbage collectors is 50% higher. There are all kinds of people assuming higher rates of risk the country over, and no one sings songs about them.
The decisive difference is the boss of a roofer cannot tell his worker that he *will* repair the roof in the face of imminent death – well he could try and the roofer will walk away from the job freely.
The company commander most certainly can tell the private soldier that he *will* stay at that street corner despite the approach of enemy soldiers intent on killing him and the soldier cannot get out of that obligation freely.
That’s why we don’t sing songs about roofers.
Why does that matter?
If the average roofer is in more danger of death and injury than the average soldier, why does the voluntary trek up the ladder not mean just as much as the order to stand on the corner?
Just google’d your 400 number….I see 1000. Oh wait you meant Canadian…
The other jobs you use aren’t exactly equivalent not many roofs or garbage trucks are actively trying to kill them.
Comparing the number of combat deaths is pretty tough since each conflict is a unique set of circumstances.
You also don’t seem to understand the difference between a civilain job and being under orders. A soldier explicitly gives those appointed over them the ability to send them in harms way, which includes someone else actively trying to kill them.
https://dcas.dmdc.osd.mil/dcas/app/summaryData/deaths/byYearManner
I have a mea culpa to make: You’re right. I googled for American numbers specifically, I think the search engine gave me results based on my location, which were in fact Canadian numbers.
The American numbers are worse. Of your 2 million or so members, about 800-900 die a year, which brings your rate to about 45 per 100,000, which makes them about as safe as roofers, and slightly less safe than garbage truck drivers. And puts them on the top 10 of most unsafe professions.
I think there’s wiggle room towards my point though, because about half of those are accidents or natural causes, and those only get counted because people serving serve 24/7. If a roofer has a heart attack in bed, or was in a car accident, the deaths wouldn’t get counted, if a serviceman did, they would. I gave that to the other side when I thought the numbers were lopsided because I could easily make my point despite that, but it is what it is.
On this though, I’d have a hard time putting into words how little I care. The likelihood of something happening matters, and probably matters more, than just identifying that the possibility of something happening. There were less than 100 combat deaths over the last decade. In a population of 2 million. You are literally more likely to die on the highway while driving.
That’s what the teenagers serving in Japan thought in June, 1950. No one told them that being in the Army might entail being in a war. They thought all that was over and done with.
And yet, when called upon, they stood and fought. And some of them died.
(an ethics movie, close enough to the actual history also, inspite of the tropes and liberties)
Between Zulu (1964) and Glory (1989), I’m not sure which is the greatest war movie. (and yeah, I realize I’m opening a can of worms with Saving Private Ryan fans here by not making it number 1)