Well, well, well. Isn’t this interesting. Our diplomats, the illustrious, though spineless, few who have opted to represent our government, don’t want to go to Iraq. I wonder why. Actually, I don’t.
I’ve got a few theories as to why our quivering diplomats are wetting themselves over going to Iraq…
Because there is a war going on.
Because they’d have to plant their America-hating cans in the middle of a bunch of Iraqis that they’ve convinced should hate Americans. Kind of like walking into the cage of the bear you’ve been poking with a stick.
Because those death toll numbers they celebrate might just include them.
Because they’d have to face all the soldiers they have demoralized and vilified.
Because they are deathly afraid they might actually grow to respect the work our military is doing.
Because they might get cornered in an ally by a few disgruntled Marines and taught a little patriotism.
Because someone from Al Queda might recognize them.
Because they might break a nail.
But Condi isn’t feeling their pain. (If ever, in a million years, I wanted a woman to be president…)
In separate comments, Rice and Ambassador Ryan Crocker said foreign service officers are obligated by their oath of office to work at any diplomatic mission worldwide, regardless of the risks involved or their personal feelings about the policies of any given administration.
Little wake-up call here. My own husband, a Navy pilot, served under the philandering Commander in Chief, Bill Clinton as he systematically dismantled and demoralized (literally) the military. Talk about having personal feelings against the administration. Virtually the entire military hated Clinton, but they served. That these diplomatic morons, who have gorged themselves on the Hate America Kool-Aid and worked tirelessly to slander Bush, have the gall to try to weasel out of their duty, well, it’s breathtaking, really.
Rice noted that more than 1,500 of roughly 11,500 foreign service officers had already done Iraq duty voluntarily and, while expressing an understanding of the safety and security concerns of those who might be ordered to go, said they must uphold their commitments.
This is liberal duplicity at it’s best. Are they worried that the media will start slandering them and their work over in Iraq? A little worried that they’ll be accused of killing innocent women and children? A little worried someone will stick a tack on their chair?
On his way to the meeting in Turkey, Crocker offered an even blunter assessment, saying that diplomats have a responsibility to prioritize the nation’s interest over their personal safety and that those who don’t are “in the wrong line of business.”
Yea! What he said. But honestly, how many of these diplomats took their jobs for the cushy perks and paychecks. That they might actually have to fulfill their job description completely unnerves them.
According to the State Department:
The union that represents diplomats says the security situation is precarious and the completion of a new, heavily secured embassy compound and living quarters in Baghdad has been beset by logistical and construction problems.
Translation: The pool isn’t finished. They have a union?
Other than the blatant cowardice, these diplomats anger me for another reason. Our military is slowly losing their benefits and the respect they deserve. They are lambasted from all sides. And speaking from experience, our military doesn’t get paid nearly what these sweaty-palmed diplomats do. Yet our troops leave families behind and put themselves between the enemy and this country–all the while diplomats broker and sell America down the river to win the popular vote with the enemy. These guys are going to be hard pressed to get much sympathy from the military community.
Don’t want to go to Iraq? Tough. My kids don’t want to lose their father, but we aren’t whining.