'Payback time' in Kosovo?
© 1999 WorldNetDaily.com
"I want to see some action. It's payback time," said
Sgt. Alexander Aguilastratt, 24, from Miami. "The
thing that makes me really mad is that Serb units
were behaving like they were returning war
heroes. They got their a-- kicked." He added,
"When we see the leader of the Tigers Brigade
saying that, if Americans bring troops to Kosovo,
it will be another Vietnam, all we got to say is
'bring it on.'"
The above excerpt came from the June 18 online
edition of the London Times, describing the
sentiments of some of the U.S. Marines from the
1st Division that have been sent to enforce the
peace in Kosovo. I can't tell you how saddened I
was when I read this and other comments being
made by U.S. Marines and other American forces
that have been sent to take part in yet another
dubious "peacekeeping" effort, compliments of the
Clinton administration. I can only hope that
whomever is anointed with the Oval Office in
2000 has the foresight and wisdom to get our
military forces out of regions like Bosnia and
Kosovo before they become, in essence, fortified
zones on the caliber of North and South Korea.
We'll need the next eight years to rebuild our
forces after the decimation they have suffered at
the hands of the corrupt Clinton regime.
As a former naval reserve corpsman combat
trained by the Marine Corps, I have no illusions
that the U.S.M.C. is very capable of stifling any
resistance they may encounter in Kosovo, be it
from Serb army regulars or KLA narco-terrorists
refusing to give up their guns. What saddens me is
that our troops seem to have gone beyond the
neutrality required to be peacekeeping forces, and
instead see their role in Yugoslavia as something
more than what it is. This is worrisome, because
despite what you may think about Serb forces,
KLA forces in many cases are no better. Anyway,
this conflict isn't now, nor was it ever, our fight to
begin with.
Consequently, looking for "payback" signifies to
me that both the U.S. government and U.S.
commanders on the ground have done a
dangerous thing in this civil conflict -- they've
taken a side. Not a smart thing to do when you're
supposed to be bringing peace to all factions in the
region. Also not a smart thing to do after taking
sides in the civil conflicts of Korea and Vietnam.
I now wonder: has the Clinton administration
successfully turned the entire U.S. military into a
force designed for retribution instead of a force
designed to protect and defend the United States?
If that's the case, it's no wonder the Founding
Fathers feared a standing army. Obviously they
were afraid some future corrupt U.S.
administration could eventually turn any standing
military force into something like what it is today
-- well-armed policemen and paid political
mercenaries to be used against anyone, foreign
and domestic.
My "hitch" in the reserves, which began during
the last days of the Bush administration, was
enjoyable, rewarding, and fulfilling. Even though I
was a "swabbie" in a Marine Corps world -- which
had its risks -- I was able to learn to appreciate the
Marine Corps and was more than willing to "put
it on the line" for the Marines in any platoon
where I was assigned. Those, however, were the
end of the "good ol' days" -- before military
training turned more towards awkward and
ambivalent "peacekeeping" and away from good
old fashioned combat training.
Perhaps our troops today don't remember, but
there have been plenty of other political reprobates
in the past with powerful militaries and axes to
grind. In many cases, their military misadventures
were launched because they convinced their
people and their armies that it was "payback time"
for somebody who didn't deserve it. Troops, eager
to please the boss, eagerly went forth and
executed their missions flawlessly, which led to
years of conflict and much unnecessary death and
destruction.
God in Heaven, I don't want to see that happen to
our military.
At the outset of our involvement in World War II,
it could easily be said that, yes, we "owed some
payback" to the Japanese for what they did to us,
but we're not talking about a surprise attack on
Sunday morning against one of our largest naval
facilities. Today, we're not talking about defending
ourselves against an aggressor. We're talking
about recrimination against Yugoslavian army
soldiers who were doing what they were ordered
to do, and who never threatened the U.S. even
once while doing it.
Thinking that we need to "payback" the Serbs is
not only morally wrong but it's a slippery slope we
don't want to negotiate. If we apply the logic the
Clinton administration used in Yugoslavia to the
rest of the world, well, there are plenty of other
regimes that need to be "paid back" as well. Are
we going to attack all of them too?
Then there are the regimes in the world who feel
the United States ought to be "paid back" for one
thing or another. We may not see it that way, but
you can bet your jackboots they do.
What our gung-ho troops don't understand is that
perception is nine-tenths of reality. Though they
may feel the Serbs are at fault in Yugoslavia, the
Serb soldiers, for the most part, are convinced they
were acting in Yugoslavia's national interests,
which is more than I can say for NATO and the
U.S. Serb soldiers were attempting to rein in a
rebellious Yugoslav province.
You can forget the mainstream media ranting
about "mass graves," "Serb reprisals," and "ethnic
cleansing," because the ethnic Albanians have
done, and continue to do, the very same things
Serbs have been accused of doing.
The point is, Serbs believe they were in the right.
The KLA believes it is in the right, and now, U.S.
Marines and other "peacekeeping" forces believe
they are in the right. There cannot be three "right"
sides in this conflict; somebody has to be "wrong."
But whom? That depends on which uniform
you're wearing.
With so much ambiguity regarding right and
wrong, it cannot be appropriate for U.S. forces to
land in Kosovo with the feeling that they
somehow "owe" one warring faction more pain
and suffering while ignoring the other. Regardless
of how "right" we think we are, before all of this is
over in Kosovo there will a number of different
factions who disagree with us. They will take their
disagreements out on our forces.
"Payback" is not an appropriate reason for
warmaking.
Jon E. Dougherty is a senior writer and columnist for
WorldNetDaily, as well as a morning co-host of
Daybreak America.
worldnetdaily.com
ps. Mr. Dougherty is an African-American, and certainly did not shoot at black children on the bus |
