Captain Frank

posted this article about the children left behind when our soldiers are killed in action. The story is, of course, sad and tragic. These poor kids are left without a parent, and there's really nothing that can replace the parent they lost.

It did get me thinking a bit. I don't think much of Newsweek, and my automatic assumption is going to be that they're making political points about the war in Iraq. It's probably not fair of me to assume this, and the story is no less real. Suffice it to say that the Media brought this suspicion on itself.

I do not think for a moment that the death of our soldiers is a good thing. I do not think the suffering of these families is a good thing. But I do need to raise the point - is this a necessary thing? I believe the war itself is necessary, and unfortunately that brings death with it. I thought of the thousands of kids left orphaned after September 11th, and concern that our enemies had for their loss - which is to say, none at all.

Look, I'm a civilian with no one in harm's way. It's easy for me to sit back and say "this is something the country needs, and it's unfortunate that this is the result." It's a lot harder to say that when the person killed is your loved one. Yet what are the alternatives? Allowing the terrorists to run rampant here? Leaving Saddam in power when even the NY Times has figured out he had WMD capability? (See here as well for some opinion on the subject.)

I wish there was something we could do to bring back the parents of these kids, and all the other sons, daughters, husbands, wives, and friends. If there is any comfort to be taken from these deaths of these wonderful people it's that they died to protect all of us. Think about that for a minute. Not only did they die to protect their own families (which I think most of us would probably do), but they died to protect millions of complete strangers. What kind of incredible people volunteer for such a job, knowing the risks involved? Only the best this nation has to offer.