There is altogether too much dissention throughout the nation
about going to war and some criteria should be applied to determine
who has the proper answers.
There is altogether too much dissention throughout the nation about going to war and some criteria should be applied to determine who has the proper answers.
Since war would affect us and our progeny forever, the standards should be high and undeviating. Only those who meet them should be allowed to express an opinion and those collective opinions must be the guide for the rest of us.
Because it is an American issue, we should disqualify anyone residing here who is not a citizen from having a say in the matter. Agreed? Opinions of those who were astute enough to be born here, of course, outweigh those of people who came here from other countries for greater freedom, more opportunity or whatever because naturalized citizens might retain some residue of their native lands. (Sorry, Dad)
Many people on either side of the current question cite their combat military service as evidence they are in the right. (There goes President Bush along with almost every American woman and me).
Some others who are ardent on the issue point out that they are better qualified to decide important matters than those who do not have their academic background. That sounds right. No matter that at least a few of the college graduates we all know cannot even pronounce “nuclear” correctly (President Bush again), they do have the diploma.
George Washington and Abraham Lincoln no doubt meant well, but one must concede that Richard M. Nixon had at least four times the formal education of the two of them combined.
Let’s take a break here for a moment to assess where we are and where we are going. It’s a vital issue and we must be sure of our groundwork so future generations of Americans cannot chide us for having built on a weak foundation.
Age is very important in making decisions. My reasoning has often been disqualified because the person with whom I was arguing brushed my points aside and said, “I’ve been around a few years longer than you have.” I’ve used it myself when some young squirt has confronted me with facts.
Criticism of the United States should disqualify the critics from ever having an opinion on anything. They may maintain that they want the nation to be even better than it is, but we remember the agony that the Abolitionists and the bleeding hearts that clamored for child labor laws put America through. “Love it or leave it. Period,” say we.
If age and citizenship are important, then length of time one’s family has lived here is vital. As a new reporter I covered a meeting at which the speaker pushed her cause with frequent reference to her descent from two Mayflower passengers. At one point she said, “Many of you people have strayed quite far from our goals.” She became distinctly chilly during an interview after her presentation when I cited Jamestown and St. Augustine as earlier settlements than the Plymouth colony. She finally stilled me by saying, “My family has probably lived here longer than your family so I know what I’m talking about.”
There was no convincing reply to that so I retreated into an uneasy but patriotic silence. One may think what one wants – and perhaps somebody should look into that – but arguing with a real by-God American cannot be tolerated.
It seems, then, that the best mentors to determine the issue of war would be elderly male descendants of the settlers of St. Augustine, with at least one college degree and who have served in combat.
There are only three, all centenarians, and they reside at the same old folks’ home. One is on medication that invalidates his opinion, and the other two vehemently differ on every issue that arises. What do we do now?
