IVAW- easy to hate, hard to join.

Iraq Veterans Against the War generates a lot of hatred. Why is that? For people who think the war is just dandy, it's an easy group to hate. Even for Iraq veterans who are against the war, it's a hard group to join.

I've been against the war since the summer of '02, when the media, in its best "wag the dog" form, started screaming about the need for a war with Iraq. I had also been in the Army since the other Bush administration- the one where Dick Cheney was a smart man who saw Iraq as "inherently unstable" and knew that an American occupation would "get bogged down in the quagmire." Like any good soldier, I could focus on a mission and give it everything I had. Like any good NCO, I could see my unit's performance of its mission as being more important than the actual utility of the mission. I had spent a lot of time operating in Cortinia, and even some time in Midland. Doing stupid crap in Iraq didn't take much of a mental leap. My unit was together and the stupid things we were doing were at least for real.

I didn't hear about IVAW when it was founded because I was busy in Iraq. The day after I got home for good, though, I found their website. Yes, on my down day after our "welcome home" and before our outprocessing from active duty, I spent time looking for a group of vets that was against the war; that's how important it was to me. I quickly came across ivaw.org and it was like Christmas. I'm an Iraq vet and I'm against the war. What more could you want? It turns out, a lot. First, I wasn't behind all three "points of unity." Then I spent time reading through their members' profiles and they drove me away. Second, I disagree with conscientious objectors. I don't dislike or disrespect them, I just disagree with the premise. Third, I disagree with deserters, but not as much. Fourth, I don't have sympathy for people who feel their recruiters weren't completely forthright.

I was badly disappointed. In a country of such cultural and political diversity, I was only able to find VFP and IVAW. I wasn't looking for VFP, I was looking for vets that were specifically against what we had done and were doing in Iraq. That left me with IVAW, a bunch of freaks with unreasonable demands. So I did nothing. I couldn't agree with or bring myself to associate with IVAW, so I just got on with my life. My ETS hit later that year and I voted with my feet. That was the only thing that I did to "oppose" the war.

Almost a year after I got out, I met an IVAW member. I was excited to see that there was such a group (I was so disappointed from the first time I found them that I had put it completely out of my memory), but was surprised when his first question to me was "why are you against the war?" I wasn't expecting to be challenged or anything. He told me about the problems that IVAW had had with a guy named MacBeth. They now required a 214 to join, so I couldn't join on the spot. I took a membership application and filled it out, then that night I dug out a copy of my 214 and was all set to mail it on Monday. Then I went online to learn more about them and said "oh, it's those guys." My memory of them from a year and a half earlier came back- so I put my 214 back in the files and tossed the application in with the recycling.

Another year later I ran into a group of them. I introduced myself and explained my issues with IVAW. They set me straight. These weren't the freaks I remembered seeing online, these were real soldiers and marines that I could relate to and respect. They were smart, dedicated troops who saw the problems with what we were doing and wanted to stop it. I was home. I wasn't fully in agreement with all 3 points of unity, but I was on board enough that I could become a member.

So what's this about 3 points of unity? There are so many reasons to be against what's going on in Iraq that it doesn't make sense to list them- it would be an incomplete list. Look at any antiwar rally- circuses seem to have tighter messages, and that's the problem with trying to keep IVAW on track: focus. To avoid being dragged into every debate on every topic that people don't like about the government, they came up with 3 points of unity:
* Immediate withdrawal of all occupying forces in Iraq.
* Reparations for the human and structural damages Iraq has suffered, and stopping the corporate pillaging of Iraq so that their people can control their own lives and future.
* Full benefits, adequate healthcare (including mental health), and other supports for returning servicemen and women.

Those are what IVAW is aiming for. They're not out for impeachment, they're not looking for changes in Congress, they're not trying to legalize hemp or ban genetic research. They want us out of Iraq and for us to take care of our broken veterans and help the Iraqis. Those are issues today's soldiers and veterans can get behind, no matter what their political beliefs.

Let's look at the 3 points in reverse order. Who isn't in favor of veterans' healthcare? There isn't much that's more despicable than maiming kids in combat and then refusing them the best treatment possible. I'm for it. Reparations are also great. Remember the "Pottery Barn rule?" That's a great idea. The point that I took issue with was the first- immediate, total withdrawal. No, I'm not one of those idiots who calls it surrender, I just see it as covered by the Pottery Barn rule. We destroyed Iraq, and we have a moral obligation to rebuild it. Pulling out would be to abandon our responsibility there. After a lot of thought, I ended up agreeing with that point shortly after I joined IVAW (and no, I wasn't coached, I just spent a lot of time thinking about it). In short, we're the invaders. We're the occupiers. Foreign forces are probably the best solution to Iraq's immediate security concerns, but Americans aren't- we're the ones who caused this whole mess. We still have the obligation to Iraq, but the simple fact of the American flag on our soldiers' sleeves disqualifies our soldiers from being able to fix it. If Iraq's security problem were a tactical one, we'd have solved it a long time ago. It's not a tactical problem, though- it's a social problem and American rifles and armored vehicles can't solve that.

So now I'm an IVAW member. I joined because I love my country, I love the Army and I'm dead set against the war. It's bad for the country and destroying the military- but it took two and a half years after I got home from Iraq before I was able to bring myself to join. When I was over there my chain of command knew exactly what I thought about what was going on. I wasn't shy about it and certainly wasn't quiet. So why did it take me so long to join IVAW even though it was obvious that it was where I belonged? On some levels, it felt wrong. I didn't feel like I was betraying the military, and I've never believed that protesters make the troops feel bad, but it still felt wrong. IVAW's leadership had thought things through and arrived at a conclusion that I hadn't yet gotten to myself; that we just plain have to get out of Iraq. Take that, add all the hype that we've been getting fed for almost six years now and standing with IVAW can be a little hard to stomach.

For military types who aren't against the war, IVAW's call for withdrawal is even more uncomfortable. With the kind of focus that the military requires, it's hard to have conflicting conclusions thrown at you and it's easy to simply redouble your focus and drive on even harder. It's easy to ignore civilian protesters, but when it comes from the troops themselves it can't be ignored. It makes sense to take all of your anger and frustration at what's going on and aim it at the group that's pointing out the problems and contradictions, but the problem with that is that IVAW didn't create the problems of the war. Iraq won't go smoothly if IVAW simply goes away. Iraq won't go smoothly if the U.S. simply goes away, either, but Iraq won't have a chance to start down that path until the U.S. is out of the mix. Name calling isn't going to change that. I understand, though. I started out painfully close to IVAW's position and wanted to join, but for the longest time I couldn't. If you're farther away from IVAW than I was, hatred is the response that makes sense.

I'm a casualty.

There's a lot of agitation about the number of American dead (4,005 as of this writing), with very little attention to the rest of our casualties. How many wounded are there? We don't know. The military tracks traditionally wounded soldiers, but for years denied the very existance of the Iraq occupation's signature injury: Traumatic Brain Injury. PTSD affects even more soldiers, but they aren't even considered for counting.

Another type of casualty gets overlooked entirely- troops who quit, either by deserting or failing to reenlist. My enlistment expired several months after I returned from Iraq, and I just walked away. This sometimes gets looked at as a retention problem, so the recruiters throw bonuses at it. Money's great, but military service isn't worth money and it doesn't solve the problem.

When I left, the Army lost another mid-career NCO. Just because there was no life insurance payment and there aren't any disability payments doesn't change the fact that I'm lost to them. Just because they ignore the reasons I left doesn't change the fact that it was specifically because of my experiences in Iraq that they lost me.