At the risk of being called a right wing extremist by Tim, yet again, I would like to explore the ideas in the original posting, idea by idea. Let’s take the opening paragraphs, first. Mike, feel free to chime in here, anywhere, your opinions are valued, even where I might disagree. You, too, Tim, but please keep the personal attacks to a minimum. 
Ken, Kevin, and everybody else, join in the fun… Here we go. :lol:
Steve Featherkile quoting Ralph Peters said:
[b]UNAWARE[/b] of the cost of freedom and served by leaders without military expertise, Americans have started to believe whatever's comfortable. We've never had better men and women in uniform. But our leaders, and many of our fellow Americans, no longer grasp what war means or what it takes to win. Thanks to those who have served in uniform, we've lived in such safety and comfort for so long that for many Americans sacrifice means little more than skipping a second trip to the buffet table.
Two trends over the past four decades contributed to our national ignorance of the cost of, and necessity for, victory.
[b]First,[/b] Ivy League universities once produced heroes. Now they resist Reserve Officer Training Corps representation on their campuses. Yet, our leading universities still produce a disproportionate number of US political leaders. The men and women destined to lead us in wartime dismiss military service as a waste of their time and talents. Delighted to pose for campaign photos with our troops, elected officials disdain the military in private. Only one serious presidential aspirant in either party is a veteran while another presidential hopeful pays as much for a single haircut as I took home in a month as an Army private.
[b]Second,[/b] we've stripped in-depth US history classes out of our schools. Since the 1960's one history course after another has been cut while the content of those remaining focuses on social issues. Dumbed-down textbooks minimize the wars that kept us free. As a result ignorance of the terrible price our troops had to pay for freedom in the past creates absurd expectations about our present conflicts. When the media offers flawed or biased analysis, the public lacks the knowledge to make informed judgments.
National leadership with no military expertise and a population that hasn’t been taught the cost of freedom leaves us with a government that does whatever seems expedient and a citizenry that believes whatever’s comfortable. Thus, myths about war thrive.
My undergraduate major in college was in history, with emphasis in European history from the The French Revolution to the Cold War. Yes, that covers a lot of material, but I couldn’t help myself, it was fascinating. My major professor was a WW II vet, saw combat as an infantryman from the first wave at Omaha Beach to the Rhine River, where he finally got his “Million Dollar Wound.” He was also an unabashed “liberal.” My favorite professor enlisted in the Army at Ft Lewis in 1935 because he needed a job, found himself in Air Corps Intelligence on December 7, 1941 at March Field, Ca, and retired from the Air Force in 1963 as a Lt. Col in Air Force Intelligence. He spent a lot of time in the Middle East, knew King Saud and King Hussein personally. He was an unabashed conservative. Naturally, that produced a very interesting dichotomy in my education. Those two were best of buddies, primarily based on their mutual respect for shared experiences during 1942-1945. However, they would often get into some verbal donnybrooks the like of which you have never seen. Never did they resort to name calling, however. Perhaps we can do the same.
Now, to the debate. Today’s leaders here in the US, largely do not know what war is. There are exceptions, but they are rare. Warriors hate war. We have seen what war does, and do not wish that on our worst enemy. However, sometimes war is necessary. Sometimes, talk is not enough. We must be prepared to fight at all times. The policies of appeasement do not work. The 1930’s proved that. So did the 1990’s. The best way to avoid war is to be prepared to fight it at all times, and sometimes you have to fight. Wars usually take longer than 30 minutes.
What has happened to our education system, where any talk of what happens in war is expunged from history classes? I took my then college senior (now first grade teacher) daughter to see the movie “Pearl Harbor.” Horrible movie. It was historically accurate in that the Japanese did attack Pearl Harbor and 16 B-25’s did bomb cities in Japan a few months later. What was surprising was that my daughter had no knowledge of Jimmie Doolittle’s Raid. How can this be? So, we sat down and had a long talk about history. She knew nothing of Belleau Wood, had heard of Omaha Beach, but did not know its significance. She had not heard of Utah Beach. She did not know what Guadalcanal was, nor Saipan, nor Iwo Jima (this was before “Letters from…”). To her credit, she had heard of the Charge up San Juan Hill, but did not know where it occurred, nor who we were fighting at the time. The list goes on. The only battle of the War of Northern Aggression she could name was Gettysburg.
This is an almost college graduate. How can someone get through our education system without knowing this stuff? It is no wonder that our politicians fail miserably to lead. They just do not know enough of history.
I understand about academic freedom. I fully support the concept. But, what about the academic freedom of college students to take ROTC if they so desire? Is it only those who march in lockstep with the academic left who deserve academic freedom?
