In times of disaster, Americans are known for their generosity, even to nations hostile to us, such as Iran.
Are we allowing politics to change that admirable trait?
At Slate, Christopher Hitchens asked:
Question: Why have several large American cities not already announced that they are going to become sister cities with Baghdad and help raise money and awareness to aid Dr. Tamimi? When I put this question to a number of serious anti-war friends, their answer was to the effect that it’s the job of the administration to allocate the money, so that there’s little room or need for civic action. I find this difficult to credit: For day after day last month I could not escape the news of the gigantic “Live 8” enterprise, which urged governments to do more along existing lines by way of debt relief and aid for Africa. Isn’t there a single drop of solidarity and compassion left over for the people of Iraq, after three decades of tyranny, war, and sanctions and now an assault from the vilest movement on the face of the planet? Unless someone gives me a persuasive reason to think otherwise, my provisional conclusion is that the human rights and charitable “communities” have taken a pass on Iraq for political reasons that are not very creditable. And so we watch with detached curiosity, from dry land, to see whether the Iraqis will sink or swim. For shame.
This has stirred questions from others, for example at Bloggledygook:
Indeed, where is the liberal counterpart to Spirit of America? And on the right, why is Spirit of America alone in its work? We are, generally, watching this war from afar, either ignoring all the good news coming out of Iraq or damning anyone who has questions about the conduct and wisdom of war.
It is assumed that because I support the Iraq war that I must believe only the good news. In fact, it is because I support the war that I want to know when things are going south. I am not so naive to believe everything that comes from the administration but I am also not so cynical to discount each step forward as a White House orchestrated charade.
Even if I had been against the war, I don’t imagine that I would now be wishing for our defeat in it and certainly wouldn’t be couching my opposition in “support the troops” semantics.
These are legitimate questions, that deserve thoughtful answers.
Perhaps we should start closer to home, and help those of our own. On my brief visits to the US, the only visible signs I see of support for the troops are literal signs, magnets on minivans.
Is that the best we can do?
There is now an opportunity to put your money where your mouth is when you say, “I support the troops.”