Old Soldiers Never Die They Just Volunteer Away

by Jim Moore

05/19/2003

Jacob G. Hornberger must have been reading my mind. Or I was reading his. It makes no difference. We both had the same idea at the same time, so I take it to mean the idea must not be all bad.

Hornberger, founder and president of the Future of Freedom Foundation, informs us that during the war in Iraq there were thousands of men, age 40 and older, who were eager to support the administration's decision to send young American soldiers into combat. 
In that battle, as you may know, more than 100 young U.S.servicemen were killed in action so that the Iraqis would be "free."

It's not necessary to list their names, as Hornberger did, but I will tell you this: most of these soldiers were in their early 20's.

Hornberger goes on to tell us what he thinks should be done when Washington gets us into the next foreign war to "liberate" the people from tyranny. His idea, under the heading of "Old Patriot's Suicide Brigade" (OPSB), would be to have all the men 40 or older, who were so anxious to send younger men into combat in Iraq, contribute to the war effort next time--by volunteering themselves.

No, not to grab a rifle and fight. These "old-timers" would volunteer to be suicide bombers, and would blow themselves up on enemy targets, thus saving the lives of young American servicemen.

Explains Hornberger, "It would enable the older men to support the young soldiers in a more meaningful way than just sitting on the couch at home, sipping a cool one, watching television, and cheering the troops on. It would also give the oldsters a bonus---the opportunity to sacrifice their lives for 'freedom, democracy, and country'."

What greater way to show patriotism than to give your life for a soldier. And if the lad happens to get killed anyway? Well, that's war for you. But you did your part, old-timer; you died first.

And as Hornberger rationally adds, "After all, haven't older American men had their chance to enjoy a long life? Haven't many of them outlived their usefulness anyway? If we're going to sacrifice Americans so that foreigners can be "free" wouldn't it be better to sacrifice the old and weak to save the young and strong?"
Sorry. You'll have to decide that one for yourself. 

As for me, the idea I have, which in essence parallels what Hornberger suggested, is a bit similar but a lot simpler. 

The day we invade another nation to "liberate" its citizens from tyranny (or for any other reason), all men 60 years and older will put on whatever they have left, if anything, of their old service uniforms, walk into a recruiting office in town, and volunteer to sign up for active duty. 

But with this caveat. The recruiting officer must agree to release the next young man and take you instead. An even switch, you for him. Get it? The young guy goes home to his family. The old bird signs the enlistment papers and reports for active duty. 

Now, as you suspect, the recruiting officer will not be able to keep a straight face as you, with medals jingling and white hair flowing, make him the proposition And the young man whose place you would be taking is smiling, overjoyed at your selfless, would-be sacrifice on his behalf. 

I say "would be", because the substitution, however magnanimous on your part, will be rebuffed. When the smoke clears, and the tittering subsides, the young fellow will sign the enlistment papers, and you, in the remnants of your uniform will walk proudly, but painfully away. For you have suddenly been made aware that, although old soldiers don't necessarily die, neither can they do 50 pushups during basic training like they used to.

No matter. You have done your duty. If people living under a dictator in a foreign country don't get liberated, that's too bad. But it won't be your fault. You tried.



Jim Moore
Jmoore1819@aol.com