Apparently, she got tired of attacking our Commander-in-Chief.
Cindy Sheehan, the California mother who became an anti-war leader after her son was killed in Iraq, declared Monday she was walking away from the peace movement.
She said her son died “for nothing.”
Sheehan achieved national attention when she camped outside President Bush’s home in Crawford, Texas, throughout August 2005 to demand a meeting with the president over her son’s death.
While Bush ignored her, the vigil made her one of the most prominent figures among opponents of the war.
But in a Web diary posted to the liberal online community Daily Kos on Monday, Sheehan said she was exhausted by the personal, financial and emotional toll of the past two years.
She wrote that she is disillusioned by the failure of Democratic politicians to bring the unpopular war to an end and tired of a peace movement she said “often puts personal egos above peace and human life.”
I don’t agree with her opinions, but I respect her son’s sacrifice. I know that she’s grief-stricken, which is why she can’t see the importance of this war. Her son didn’t die for nothing. He died for freedom. A freedom that our President, George W. Bush, is trying to win for us and for the people of Iraq. A freedom that she denied President Bush himself by constantly pestering him at his Texan domicile.
Have they[anti-war demonstrators] seriously asked themselves how humane the consequences of that would be? The news of a pullout would put a wolfish grin on the faces of the “al-Qaida in Mesopotamia” brigade, as Mr. Zarqawi’s force has named itself in order to resolve all doubt. Every effort would be made to detonate every available car-bomb and mine, so as to claim the withdrawal of coalition forces as a military victory for jihad. I can quite understand Ms. Sheehan’s misery at the thought of her son being killed on some desolate road. But will she be on hand to console the parents whose sons are shot in the back while being ordered to surrender and withdraw?
I hope I don’t insult the intelligent readers of this magazine if I point out what the consequences of such a capitulation would be for the people of Iraq. Paint your own mental picture of a country that was already almost beyond rescue in 2003, as it is handed back to an alliance of homicidal Baathists and Bin-Ladenists. Comfort yourself, if that’s the way you think, with the idea that such people are only nasty because Bush made them so. Intone the Sheehan mantra—repeated this very week—that terrorism is no problem because after all Bush is the leading terrorist in the world. See if that cheers you up. Try it on your friends. Live with it, if you are ready to live with the consequences of what you desire.
This is an argument, about a real war, that deserves moral seriousness on all sides. Flippancy and light-mindedness have no place. Cindy Sheehan’s cheerleader Michael Moore has compared the “insurgents” in Iraq to the American minutemen and Founding Fathers. Do I taunt him for not volunteering to fight himself in such a noble cause? Of course I do not. That would be a low and sly blow. Do I say that he is spouting fascistic nonsense? Of course I do. Is Cindy Sheehan exempt from any verdict on her wacko opinions because of her bereavement? I would say that she is not.
I just hope someday she realizes the error of her views. America understands why she felt the way she did, so we can be patient.