Turning the Military’s Dead into Political Ploys at Arlington National Cemetery ─ Can We Get any More Morally Revolting?

© 2010 Peter Free

 

12 October 2010

 

Military operation names have replaced war names and geographic locations on Arlington headstones

 

Today, the Washington Post reported that Arlington National Cemetery has been putting propaganda-like military operation names on headstones, rather the name of the war or the place the military member died.

 

The renaming of “Operation Iraqi Freedom” to “Operation New Dawn” reveals the ethical harm in this practice.

 

Christian Davenport (staff writer) and Magda Jean-Louis (researcher) discovered that:

 

Along the meticulously spaced rows of graves at Arlington National Cemetery, the names of the nation's wars are clearly etched into the headstones: World War I, World War II, Vietnam, Korea, the Persian Gulf.

 

Unlike in past conflicts, the overwhelming majority of headstones for veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan at the nation's most hallowed military burial ground use the military's official names for those conflicts: Operation Enduring Freedom for Afghanistan, Operation Iraqi Freedom for Iraq.

 

As of Sept. 1, Operation Iraqi Freedom has been rebranded Operation New Dawn.

 

Using operation names on headstones is a recent phenomenon that departs from the usual practice at Arlington. Most headstones there from the Persian Gulf War say "Persian Gulf," not "Operation Desert Shield" or "Operation Desert Storm," Horst said.

 

 

© 2010 Christian Davenport, Families, veterans call operation name on Arlington headstones propaganda move, Washington Post (11 October 2010)

Davenport states that this change from historical Arlington practice is the Army’s doing.  It runs the Cemetery.  Davenport goes on to say that many military family members, probably distraught at the time of the funeral preparations, did not recall being given a choice in how the headstones were to be worded.

In contrast, the Department of Veterans Affairs ─ perhaps because it is about veterans, rather than propaganda ─ has not replicated the Army-instigated change in Arlington tradition at its 131 military cemeteries.  Veterans Affairs engraves “Iraq” or “Afghanistan” on headstones.  If the military family desires, the operation name is added to the location/war name.

Why should we care?

The Army’s doings (and those of the politicians who undoubtedly encouraged them) are not innocuous.

There are serious ethical issues with the Army’s deceptive practice:

(1) Who, in the future, is going to have any idea about what a military operation name actually designated?

 

(2) Non-geographic military operation names mask the reality of dying in named, far-away, hostile places.

 

(3) Non-geographic operation names do not connote the cultural ambiances and the history of the regions where service members died, thereby defusing criticism that America should not have been there in the first place.

 

(4) Operation names are deliberately worded to sound noble, heroic, and bloodless ─ thereby concealing the realities of war and death that come with them.

 

In sum, operation names distort History, minimize just foreign policy criticisms, and duplicitously minimize the reality of the service member’s perceived sacrifice.

Political manipulation is illustrated in the following example

Davenport notes that:

The name "Operation New Dawn" was an attempt by the Obama administration to signal the drawdown of forces in Iraq. Since that became the official name of the conflict more than a month ago, seven U.S. service members have died there.

 

© 2010 Christian Davenport, Families, veterans call operation name on Arlington headstones propaganda move, Washington Post (11 October 2010)

Renaming the Iraq War to “Operation New Dawn” is the Obama Administration’s attempt to politically credit the President with leaving Iraq.

When Obama’s propaganda ploy is coupled with the Administration’s absurd statements that Iraq is no longer a combat zone, we see a parallel with the Bush Administration’s too-early propaganda attempts to minimize perceptions of the life-and-death difficulties that it had created in Iraq.

Who wants to have their tombstone read, “Operation New Dawn,” when virtually no one knows where or what that was?

And worse, when informed what Operation New Dawn meant, to recognize that one’s tombstone is actually a propaganda statement that diminishes the meaning of your sacrifice?

Does anyone want to die in a firefight or bomb explosion that the Administration says, for election purposes, was not really combat?

Conclusion

The parasitic self-advancement that our leaders do on the backs of our deceased military service members and their grieving families has reached revolting levels.