I've criticized the CASTLE bloggers (aka. oasis + launchpad) a lot lately so I figure it's only fair that I also say I approve of their campaign to use candles and signs to show support for the troops, as reported in the Staunton News Leader: Candles support troops; signs call for victory. There's not a thing wrong with it, and I applaud their conviction.

BUT:

I sure hope CASTLE isn't planning to start demonizing people who don't put candles in their windows or signs in their yard. As I've touched on briefly before, it would be wrong to portray candle-less people as being against the war or not supporting the troops, just as it was wrong after 9/11 to imply that people without flag decals stuck on their cars were un-American.

While I have no problem with showing support for the troops, I do have a couple of semantic quibbles to mention. First, the last line of the News Leader article reads: "It's a reminder to the troops that we're behind them," Short said. "It's a reminder that people are willing to risk their lives for our freedom."

Wrong. It was all good up to that last sentence. Men and women in Iraq aren't risking their lives for our freedom. At best, they're risking their lives for the Iraqi peoples' freedom, and at worst, they're risking their lives for American political and economic interests in the Middle East. (Not that there's anything wrong with those things.) It's nonsensical to suggest Americans are going to lose their freedoms if we don't win in Iraq (whatever "winning" means anymore). The last American soldiers that fought for our freedom carried muskets (in the War of 1812, where the British and Canadians tried to invade America).

Second, on the verbiage of the "Win the War" signs, I still don't think anyone should be calling the situation in Iraq a "war." (This applies to the "End the War" signs too, actually.) It's "law enforcement." Walking the beat. Cleaning up the streets. Taking out the trash. That kind of stuff. (Probably both literally and figuratively.) A war is where two armies duke it out on a battlefield. Obviously, since the insurgents and terrorists are too cowardly to fight in the open without civilian shields, that isn't happening over there. Calling it a "war" is just a cheap way to whip up patriotic fervor, boost ratings, or get elected.

Of course if Iran gets involved, that's another story.

Thomas Krehbiel writes The Krehbiel Strikes Back, a generally centrist commentary on news, media, politics, and culture.