posted on Jan, 12 2007 @ 08:56 PM
Senator Barbara Boxer made the observation regarding whom makes the ultimate sacrifice, and whom is left reeling from its effects. In her statement
she included herself as being one whom does not pay such a sacrifice, nor is she one whom feels the effects. Having stated her position, she then put
it to Rice that she, too, will not pay the price, nor feel its effects on a personal level, because Rice herself has never married, has no family of
her own, no son or daughter whom is in the armed forces and serving in Iraq with the potential to lose their life whilst doing so.
Boxer's point rests on the concept that decisions that Rice makes cannot be arbitrated by any kind of experience in which she has lost a beloved
family member to a conflict that is seen wholly at odds with the conscience of the American people. On this issue, Boxer's point is both correct and
right, and it can be said to include a number of other individuals within the current administration whom bandy the the word 'sacrifice' whilst they
themselves cannot incorporate the experience of sacrificing 'anything' of their own, right up to and including Bush, or Blair.
As far as mine own opinion goes, I should say that those whom start conflicts should be there right on the front line, standing and running
side-by-side with those whom they would seek to fight such conflicts. Let them experience war and conflict first-hand, let them experience the
effects, then let us see if they are still 'gung-ho' to rush into such wars and conflicts, and that by the decisions they make if such experience
does not temper them?