One of the most interesting viewpoints I’ve garnered from reading history is the idea that there are always, or at least almost always, both creative and destructive trends in evidence. Often one or the other predominates, but that’s partly a point-of-view issue. Is the destruction of the Roman empire a good thing or a bad thing? What about the American empire?
So while we acknowledge and bewail the manifold sins and wickedness of a Congress bent on eliminating our civil liberties at the behest of corporations, we also notice that there remain instances of true heroism. Even in Congress.
Murtha rejects the president’s argument that the war on terror is being fought in Iraq. “The insurgents are Iraqis — 93 percent of the insurgents are Iraqis. A very small percentage are foreign fighters…. Once we’re out of there, [Iraqis] will eliminate [foreign fighters],” says Murtha.“[President Bush] is trying to fight this war with rhetoric. Iraq is not where the center of terrorism is,” he says. “We’re inciting terrorism there…. We’re destabilizing the area by being over there because we’re the targets,” Murtha says.
When [60 Minutes correspondent Mike] Wallace challenges him by saying, “General Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, says your comments are damaging recruiting and hurting the troops,” Murtha responds by saying it’s the military’s own fault. “[Troops] are rotated [into Iraq] four and five times. They have no clear mission,” says Murtha. “One of the problems they have with recruitment is [that] they continually say how well things are going and the troops on the ground know better.”
Telling the truth is an American value.
We do need heroes. However, I am surprised at you naming John Murtha as a hero. If anyone has been part of what Eisenhower called the "military industrial complex", Murtha fits the bill.
He might be convenient at this moment, but let's not hold him out as a "hero". I prefer to save that designation for persons who have demonstrated it over a long period of time.