For years, those on the far left have repeatedly maintained that
they support the U.S. military while, in reality, they oppose
nearly every incidence of its deployment. Now it seems their
animosity is not just reserved for our most recent forays.
Apparently the Iraq War has soured them retrospectively on earlier
battles for freedom as well.
There is no greater proof of this shift than the recent debacle
involving the Board of Governors of liberal bastion San Francisco
and its rejection of the retired WWII battleship, USS
Iowa. Though some seek to frame this as a military
gay-rights issue, the primary objections are
clear.
After California’s congressional delegation — led by Barbara
Boxer, Dianne Feinstein and Nancy Pelosi — succeeded in 1999 in
securing a $3 million grant from Congress to transport her from
Rhode Island to the Golden State’s Suisan Bay, it seemed the
Iowa was well on its way to a permanent berth in the city
by the bay.
Led by the Historic Ship Memorial at Pacific Square group, the
city since 1993 had lobbied to gain the ship, known as the “Big
Stick,” whose history spans fifty years of valiant service. After
winning nine battle stars during the Second World War and two
during the Korean War, a controversial accident on one of her gun
turrets killed 47 crewmen in 1989 and she was decommissioned a year
later.
For the record, the Iowa was commissioned in
February, 1943 and participated in many WWII battles including
Guam, Okinawa, Leyte Gulf and Wake Island. She also returned
President Roosevelt from the 1943 Teheran Conference and was
Admiral Halsey’s flagship for the surrender ceremony of Japan in
September 1945.
But the sacrifices of the thousands who served aboard the
Iowa and the millions who defended this country before and
after her final voyage have been damned by association with a U.S.
military that, in the minds of the far left, stands for cruel
repression and conquest.
Without waiting for the bones of the “greatest generation” to
grow cold, some liberals are already showing their gratitude. As
one leftist writes in a letter in reference to Frisco’s attempts to gain
the Iowa, “The days of military glorification and
addiction are over. We need hopeful symbols, not more war toys. We
didn’t want the Mighty Mo (USS Missouri) home-ported here
way back when, and we don’t want it now, even as a relic.”
San Francisco Supervisor Chris Daly, who voted against the
resolution to acquire the Iowa, also spoke out: “I am sad
to say I am not proud of the history of the United States of
America since the 1940s.” This is strange to hear from the lips of
a liberal, considering that their stranglehold on the culture of
America began its ascendancy around that time, spreading inward
from the east and west coasts.
But we know what Mr. Daly really means. He means he’s not proud
of the U.S. military’s history during and after the Cold
War when, thanks to the indomitable spirit of her fighting men and
women and the determination of a few Commanders in Chief, millions
of human beings were delivered from the bondage of communism and
totalitarianism.
Eight of Mr. Daly’s eleven colleagues concurred with his
opinion. Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi said quizzically, “If I was
going to commit any kind of money in recognition of war, then it
should be toward peace, given what our war is in Iraq right
now.”
Sadly, Mr. Mirkarimi, like most leftists, fails to realize that
with tyrants and terrorists, peace only comes after a victorious
war. This lesson should have been obvious to students of WWII in
particular, and ships like the USS Iowa should be
venerated as illustrations of that fact.
Only six years ago, the city seemed ready to accept the Iowa
as a tribute to its long national service and as a floating tourist
attraction. Even anti-war congresswoman Lynn Woolsey was ready to
welcome the “Big Stick:” “Unless there is some unforeseen
circumstance… San Francisco will soon have a new museum dedicated
to those who served in our Navy.”
So what caused the shift in opinion? Could it be that the
“unforeseen circumstance” is that the military has actually been
called to the purpose for which it exists?
It is absurd to say that you can support our soldiers but not
the military they make up; that you can support the troops even if
you don’t support the mission. Soldiers fight wars and battles,
voluntarily. And they do it for all of us, without regard to
political affiliation.
In a city celebrated for its tolerance, you’d think that a
portion of compassion might be summoned up for those who love and
respect the heritage of this country and most importantly, for
those who defend it.
Lisa
Fabrizio is a columnist who hails from Connecticut. You may
write her here.
