[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 9]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 12831-12832]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         TIME MAGAZINE ARTICLE

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. STEVE ISRAEL

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, June 27, 2006

  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to share the following article 
from Time Magazine with my colleagues in the House. I believe it

[[Page 12832]]

contains some important insights into what we really need to focus on 
during the long war.

                  [From Time Magazine, June 25, 2006]

                          Forget Flag Burning

                (By Major General Robert Scales (Ret.))

       Some in Congress appear to be taking a sabbatical from the 
     long war on terrorism to introduce a constitutional amendment 
     banning the burning of the flag. The debate over such an 
     amendment may or may not be worth having, but one thing is 
     clear: at a time when the country is at war, now is not the 
     time for such tertiary considerations.
       I understand reverence for the flag. It comes naturally to 
     soldiers. We commit our lives to serving intangibles, 
     swearing oaths to a piece of parchment or saluting an expanse 
     of cloth decorated with stars and stripes. We understand 
     symbolism because symbolism is what in large measure compels 
     us to do a job that might result in our demise.
       The American flag symbolizes freedom. The Constitution we 
     soldiers are pledged to defend guarantees freedom of 
     expression even when freedom of expression includes the right 
     to deface the flag, however obnoxious that act may be. Of 
     course, I'm old enough to remember flag burning when flag 
     burning was ``cool.'' I was in Hawaii, on R. and R., halfway 
     through my tour in Vietnam. My wife and I were watching 
     television when student war protesters in California--none of 
     whom had the slightest chance of facing violent death in 
     combat--illuminated their campus by torching Old Glory. I was 
     appalled by the sight. A short time later, Walter Cronkite 
     informed the world that my unit, the 101st Airborne, was 
     beginning an offensive in the A Shau Valley. I left for 
     Vietnam the next day to confront an enemy that undoubtedly 
     would have punished those protesters had they burned the 
     North Vietnamese flag in Hanoi.
       But that was then. The image of the flag that soldiers see 
     today is different. Instead of flags aflame, we see flags 
     covering coffins of soldiers and Marines returning the hard 
     way from Iraq and Afghanistan. Pushing forward a 
     constitutional amendment is labor-intensive work. I'm 
     concerned how such a diversion during wartime might appear to 
     those who are still serving in harm's way.
       Please don't get me wrong. I have many friends in Congress, 
     patriots all. Each one of them has been to Iraq and 
     Afghanistan many times. Although he refuses to advertise the 
     fact, one was wounded there during an inspection tour last 
     year. My concern relates not to the sincerity of Congress but 
     to the perceptions among our young men and women that their 
     overseers are suddenly distracted at a time when attention to 
     their needs has never been more necessary.
       Our soldiers want to be assured that Congress is doing all 
     it can to reduce losses in what Lincoln ruefully termed the 
     ``terrible arithmetic'' of war. They want to know that 
     Congress is doing all it can to give them the weapons they 
     need to maintain the fighting advantage over the enemy. They 
     are concerned that their equipment is wearing out under 
     constant use. They and their families are worried that not 
     enough soldiers are in the pipeline to replace them.
       We know from letters and conversations that our young 
     soldiers returning from combat are concerned about the future 
     of their institutions. They want to know who is focused on 
     reshaping our Army and Marine Corps so that both services 
     will be better able to fight the long fight against radical 
     Islam. How will Congress fund the future? Where will the new 
     weapons and equipment come from? They are also worried about 
     more personal issues like housing and health care for 
     themselves and their families.
       Dan Brown was my First Sergeant in Vietnam. I was new to 
     war. He had served in two. He gave me a piece of advice then 
     that Congressmen intent on changing the subject should heed: 
     ``In combat the main thing is to keep the main thing the main 
     thing. Otherwise, you die.'' The main thing today for 
     Congress and the Nation should be the war in Iraq. Soldiers 
     are sworn to defend the right to free speech with their lives 
     even if ``speech'' is expressed in despicable ways. What they 
     want in return is the assurance that our lawmakers will hold 
     their interests dear.
       So the message from most of us soldiers is clear: Debate a 
     flag-burning amendment if you wish. But don't create the 
     perception among our young men and women in combat that there 
     are more important issues than their welfare at the moment. 
     Wait a while. At least for their sake, wait until the last 
     flag-draped coffin comes home.

                          ____________________