Freedom Isn't Free
On Saturday, a couple parked their pickup truck in front of my house. It had a prominent "Freedom Isn't Free" decal with an American flag on the back window. This is an interesting slogan, and it got me thinking. It exploits the dual meaning of "free" in English: free, as in liberty; and free, as in price. (This dual meaning has given the Free Software Foundation no end of trouble.) In this era of bumper-sticker politics, this one happens to have quite a bit of truth to it. As Thomas Jefferson said, "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
However, the more immediate meaning of this bumper sticker is support for the war in Iraq. And that is where I part company with the people who display it. Now that we are bogged down there, I wish every day for a quick and graceful exit. "Peace with honor" is imbued with negative connotations of Vietnam, but that's what I hope for.
There is now little question that Iraq posed no threat to the United States. We had Saddam contained; he had no ties to Al Qaeda; and he had no weapons of mass destruction. Thousands of people who would today be alive have died because the Bush administration couldn't leave well enough alone; and that being so, still failed to plan adequately for the aftermath. We are suffering the consequences to this day, and we will continue to suffer them for many years to come.
If Saddam was no threat, there was no need to pay for our freedom from him. People are paying, though. But for whose freedom?
Maybe, I thought, this sticker would be more appropriate.
posted by Luke Francl @ 12:38 AM |
| 
9 Comments:
"For those who have fought for it; Freedom has a taste the protected will never know."
Its sad that the most you can get out of simple lesson is a reason to whine.
-Censored
At my father-in-law's request, I printed up a bunch of bumper stickers that read "Freedom isn't free... so quit whining about paying taxes." From what I understand, there's about twenty of them on his lefty friends' bumpers up in central Minnesota.
"People are paying, though. But for whose freedom?"
Americans, Iraqis, and our allies are paying for Iraqi freedom. Do you object to sacrificing the lives of white people for the freedom or dark skinned people? That is the not-so-subtle racist subtext of your entire "they're not worth it" train of thought. I guess we know which side you would have fought on in the Civil War.
Wait, we have an all-white military? When did that happen?
Congratulations on being the first one to call me a racist, Dave.
If we're fighting for the freedom of the Iraqis, then you shouldn't mind my new design of the Freedom Isn't Free graphic.
I highly doubt the American people would have supported the Iraq war if they'd been told the only reason that we were going was to liberate the Iraqis from Saddam -- which was the whole point of my graphic (The ongoing tragedy in Darfur simply underscores this). For the most part, I bet that the people displaying Freedom Isn't Free stickers on their cars still believe that Saddam was a threat, that he had WMD, and that he had ties to Al Qaeda. A good example of this is the Power Line guys.
Hello Sadam was a threat! he killed thousands of people. anyone who spoke out against him was not only tortured and killed but so were their families. get a clue. the problem with freedom is that people only care about freedom when their own is being threatened. that's why sadam was allowed to be in power in the first place. god frowns on oppression and the free world has a responsibilty to stand up to it. who cares if sadam really had wmd. he was one.
Hey Luke, I "highly doubt" most americans would of supported the invasion of Normandy if the headlines in the paper read "50 thousand troops excepted to Die tommarrow." But our parents and grandparents did and that is the TRUE meaning of "Freedom isnt Free." Some of us like to not forget where we come from and how we got here, to remember those who paid the ultimate sacrafice so that dumb asses like yourself can sit in your cozy little home, wake up every morning, drink your coffee and gander at the headlines in your local paper, and not think twice about the fact that you might get killed on your way to the market due to an IED or suicide bomber. So get some insight. That's Freedom and no it is not Free.
Weapons of Mass Destruction? Pres. Billy Clinton first stated the threat of WMD held by Iraq. Many of Saddam's highest officials also thought they had WMD. Saddam did have WMD because the U.S. gave them to Him in the early 90's. He has used them on Iraqi citizens.
Saddam did have WMD. He did have programs to develope WMD. He gave no indication or any proof he did not have them. He did everthing he could to maintain the appearance of having WMD.
John Kerry, Edward Kennedy and other said Iraq had WMD before Bush became president.
All that does not matter. Bush knew what no one else did. Bush lied about WMD but Clinton did not?
-Roger W Hancock, PoetPatriot
www.PoetPatriot.com
I agree with the Bush supporters that freedom isn't free...but it could be a hell of a lot cheaper. America has spent hundreds of billions of dollars, lost thousands of its citizens' lives, and gradually given up its citizens' freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism, and it's clearly not working.
What our government really needs to do is stop plundering the globe for our own economic gain and making enemies out of ourselves. Then we could spend our money on more constructive things, like helping the poor and destitute of our own country, whose freedom Bush essentially eradicates with his policies.
Post a Comment
<< Home