Radical Shiite cleric Muqtada Al-Sadr has returned to Iraq after spending nearly four moths in hiding, presumably in Iran. Al-Sadr went into hiding at the start of the security crackdown that has worked to reduce the sectarian violence in Iraq. Al-Sadr’s first order of business upon his return was to demand that the United States withdraw from Iraq. The militant cleric’s return may be an effort to regain control of his militia. His absence combined with the US led security crackdown has weakened the militia and led to fragmentation and dissention. It is being reported that one faction has already split from Muqtada’s Mahdi Army. Muqtada’s escape to Iran may in fact have cost him political support and he has now returned in an attempt to regain both military and political power.

Unfortunately, Muqtada’s return may spell trouble for the United States in what has already been a bloody summer for our troops. His return to Iraq may indeed inspire a resurgence in violence and further endanger the lives of our service members. The 33 year old cleric has been a lightening rod for the insurgency, calling on Shiites to oppose the United States and to take up arms against our troops. During his absence, he told his followers not to engage coalition forces. Now that he has returned to the holy city of Najaf, it is reasonable to assume that this truce will come to a violent end. His followers took to the streets chanting anti-US and anti-Israel slogans. Al-Sadr himself seems to have renewed his earlier strident stance against the United States by calling for his supporters to fight what he has labeled the US occupation of Iraq. His charisma and large following and his apparent steps to take advantage of an ailing Shiite rival, make Al-Sadr a force to be taken seriously in Iraq.

Our troops will now have to face the very real possibility of heightened violence and a greater threat of terrorist attacks. Al-Sadr is the most visible example of a man attempting to step into the power vacuum of a chaotic Iraq to assume authority. He is the prime example of why we must finish the mission in Iraq and leave the Iraqi people a government that can defend them against the fanatical and frightening forces that are waiting for the first opportunity to seize power and turn Iraq into a haven for terrorists at the expense of our security and the welfare of the Iraqi people.

Monday is Memorial Day. Most of us will spend the day with friends and family. There will be bar-b-ques, volleyball, picnics. The kids will enjoy having a day off from school and parents will be happy for a day off from work. But the meaning of Memorial Day involves more than coolers, hibachis and beach chairs. It is a day meant to honor the memories of the men and women who have given their lives for this country.

I am happy to report that the internet has become an incredible means to honor our fallen heroes. For all the false reports, gossip and mudslinging that clogs the web, there are also people who are dedicating their time and resources to memorializing those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for our freedom and safety. Do a quick search for tributes to the fallen or Memorial Day and you will find a number of sites that share stories and memories of the brave men and women who have died in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I learned about Julio Cesar Cisneros Alvarez, a 23 year old Marine who loved to dance and had a wonderful smile and who gave his life in Iraq. There is Kenny Bostic who was only 21 when he was killed in Iraq. Kenny has served in Afghanistan in 2004 and then volunteered to deploy to Iraq in 2006. I read a moving tribute about Private First Class Dean R. Bright, a 33 year old soldier who was killed in Iraq. He left behind a wife and two children. Months before he was killed, Dean risked his life to rescue a fellow soldier from a burning Bradley. He was awarded the Bronze Star with a Combat V for his actions. Marine Sgt. Adam Cann was 23 years old when he and his K-9 partner Bruno were in Ramadi, Iraq in January, 2006. Adam and Bruno were doing crowd control when a suicide bomber detonated himself and killed Adam.

I share these stories, and there are only a few, because it is important this Memorial Day that we put names to the number we see every night on the news. Those who have given their lives for this country deserve to have their names repeated and remembered in the halls of history. Our freedoms, our dreams, our hopes for the futures of our children are built upon the foundation of the sacrifices made by these great men and women.

Memorial Day is meant to be a day to honor those who have made the ultimate sacrifice defending this country. But there are those who are choosing to make Memorial Day into a political event. Presidential candidate John Edwards is at the forefront of a movement to make Memorial Day a day of anti-war activism. He is urging his supporters and anyone else who will listen to take to the streets over Memorial Day weekend to protest the war in Iraq.

Some of Edwards suggestion for Memorial Day activities are to make signs demanding an end to the war and take them to Memorial Day parades. He urges people to stage protests and gatherings in public places to demonstrate against the war. He asks supporters to write letters to President Bush and Congress members to ask them to withdraw our troops from Iraq. It is no coincidence that Edwards is staging this coordinated anti-war effort on Memorial Day weekend. It s his intention to use a holiday meant to honor our troops to instead exploit our troops for his own political gain. That is not a way to honor our fallen heroes. It is little more than a political stunt and it is the height of disrespect and thoughtlessness.

To truly support our troops, we must remove that support from the political arena. It is not support if it is tied to an anti-war agenda. Our troops need unwavering and unconditional support from each of us. They did not choose the war they are fighting. They did not sign the legislation authorizing the war. They did not decide when to deploy or where to go. They are simply doing their job. The job they volunteered to do because someone has to defend all that we hold dear. Whatever you believe about the war, the men and women who are fighting for our freedoms deserve unqualified support.

In fairness, Edwards and his anti-war organization also made a few positive suggestions for Memorial Day. He advocates sending letters and care packages to our troops overseas. He also mentions visiting a wounded veteran and offering support or volunteering in a VA hospital. But truly, those activities are things we should be doing anyway and all year round. Truly supporting our troops should not come once a year, but it should be incumbent on each of us all year long. Memorial Day is a day to lift our glasses and bow our heads as we honor those who have given their lives so we can live in peace and security. Don’t make it political, make it holy.

On May 12th in Al Taqa, Iraq, a United States troop patrol was attacked by Iraqi insurgents. During the attack, five United States soldiers went missing. Al Qaeda has claimed responsibility for kidnapping these soldiers and has told the United States to stop looking for them. The soldiers are from the 4th Battalion, 31st Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 10th Mountain Division, Fort Drum, N.Y. The soldiers who have been abducted are: Sgt. Anthony J. Schober, 23, of Reno, Nevada, Spc. Alex R. Jimenez, 25, of Lawrence, Massachusetts, Pfc. Joseph J. Anzack Jr., 20, of Torrance, California, and Pvt. Byron W. Fouty, 19, of Waterford, Michigan. The have been classified as Duty Status Whereabouts Unknown. DUSTWUN.

It should come as no surprise that the United States has not stopped search and recovery efforts for these men. The US military is offering rewards up to $200,000 for information related to the location of our soldiers. Over 50,000 leaflets have been dropped on the area where the troops were taken telling local Iraqis of the reward and asking for information. But we are still waiting for news. Five families are praying and hoping for the best but fearing the worst.

Much has been made of the treatment of Iraqi prisoners in recent months. Whether it is a scandal at a US military prison in Iraq or the on going saga of Gitmo, our news is peppered with stories of the treatment of Iraqi prisoners. The Red Cross is notified if prisoners are not given hot meals, or if they run out of shampoo. Our treatment of captured Iraqi insurgents is examined under the microscope of public scrutiny. And there is no hesitation on the part of our media or certain segments of the American public to cry out against the smallest perception of abuse. So, I ask, where is our outrage that five our young men have been taken captive? Say what you will about Gitmo, we don’t publicly behead our prisoners.

There are five families here in the United States waiting for news. They only know that their loved ones are in the hands of the enemy. An enemy that will most likely torture and kill these men and send the world a video tape of their cruelties. Five young men who volunteered to serve this country are in the hands of terrorists. Instead of talking about funding the war or setting benchmarks for our withdrawal, our politicians, reporters and public should be focused only on getting these men back. Our troops went to Iraq to fight for us and they asked for nothing, but they deserve nothing less than knowing that this country will fight for them.

It is no secret that Rosie O’Donnell is against the war. She takes every opportunity she can to speak out against the war in Iraq and to criticize the President and his policies. She has a casualty counter on her blog, pictures of war protesters and she doesn’t hesitate to toss our outrageous sound bites that will be sure to keep her in the public spotlight. Rosie O’Donnell isn’t the only public figure using her platform to push her own views on the war, no matter how ill informed or inconsiderate to our troops, but she is one of the most flagrant.

Ordinarily, I would not want to give Rosie or those like her any more publicity than they are already receiving. I don’t mind a well thought debate on the war. I don’t mind someone who has a sincere opinion speaking out against the war. But I do take serious issue with people, especially celebrities who speak without thinking. Perhaps it isn’t fair of me to single out the famous people. After all, they are still entitled to their own opinion. But when you have a microphone and a platform, I think you need to take a few extra minutes to contemplate your words. Rosie O’Donnell started this new irritation of mine on May 17th when she opened her mouth on The View and issued one of the worst insults to our troops I have heard in many months. Here is her quote “I just want to say something. 655,000 Iraqi civilians are dead. Who are the terrorists?”

Rosie O’Donnell has called our troops terrorists. There is no other reading of that quote. She has labeled the men and women who are fighting for this country as terrorists. She went on a morning talk show and told the American public, including the families who have loved ones in combat, that our soldiers, Marines, sailors and airmen are terrorists. I cannot think of a more disgusting insult to our troops and their families. This is the mentality that led to our Vietnam vets being spat upon and called “baby killers” when they returned home. And it must stop. If you want to speak out against the war go ahead, but show some respect to the men and women who are serving this country. They didn’t volunteer to fight for Iraq, they volunteered to fight for the United States. It is their sacrifices and their heroism that give Rosie the freedom to run her mouth without her thinking. Instead of calling our troops terrorists, Rosie should be sending each and every one of them a thank you note for giving her the freedom to call them names and denigrate their service.

Congress is continuing to use the anti-war platform as their springboard to the White House in 2008. Although their first war defunding bill was vetoed by President Bush, Congress is still trying to use the budget to force the President to change tactics in Iraq. In response, a petition is being circulated on blogs and pro-military sites across the internet to send a different message to the anti-war members of Congress. This petition is meant to show Congress that there are Americans who want victory in Iraq. There are Americans who see an immediate withdrawal for what it is, a surrender.

Here is one example of the petition being sent through cyber-space. Feel free to email it to Speaker Pelosi and anti-war front man Senator Reid.

To: Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House
Harry Reid, U.S. Senate Democrat Leader

Congress has passed and President Bush has vetoed H.R. 1591, the Iraq Surrender Act of 2007.

This legislation, which you worked to pass, sets a timetable for surrender. It pulls the rug out from under our troops. That is shameful and wrong.

Your actions have already emboldened the enemy. Violent jihadists now know that the elected leadership of Congress would undermine the troops by holding their funding hostage to demands for surrender.

This Congress would bring us back to the dark days of the 1970s, when the world doubted our staying power. Except only much worse. Withdraw in April 2008, and on May 1, Iraq becomes an unchecked den of terrorism at the heart of the Middle East — a new base for the same people that struck our homeland on September 11th.

I stand with our troops. I stand for victory. I support the President’s veto and will urge my representatives to vote to sustain it.

There can be one and only one outcome in Iraq: We win, they lose.

The actions of Congress have indeed given the enemy the greatest of all weapons. Hope. The men and women of Congress who have postured and publicly protested the war have shown the enemy that they only need to outlast our attention span and they will have free reign in Iraq. This blackmail legislation has done no less than show Al-Qaeda that there are parts of the American government that are willing to sacrifice the people of Iraq for political gain. Congress can bicker all they want, but they must be united behind our war effort if we are to have any chance at victory in Iraq and at keeping the terrorists from our shores.

Concerns are justifiably high over the state of our military. The high operational tempo has sent our service members overseas at an alarming rate. Many active duty troops are working on their third, perhaps even a fourth combat deployment. For some of these service members they are returning home from a combat tour only to redeploy to Iraq or Afghanistan in less than a year. Our reservists and National Guardsmen are no longer serving two weeks a year and one weekend a month. These “part-time” soldiers are spending up to a year and a half in combat. As our troops endure repeated deployments they are more susceptible to mental distress related to combat. The Army’s Mental Health Advisory Team has stated that nearly 25% of soldiers and Marines going through their second combat deployment show signs of mental illness. The team has also released a study that shows a link between the time spent in combat and alcoholism, marriage problems and suicide.

Given the stress the current operational actions are having on the members of our military and their families, how can we accommodate our current military efforts, and be prepared to respond to a future attack of global crisis, and still keep our troops healthy? One answer is to increase the size of our military. Our active-duty Army has decreased 40% from its level in the 1990’s. Though we are engage din a global war on terror, we are fighting with a smaller military. And though the military is spending huge amounts on re-enlistment bonuses, the biggest problem in boosting our military is money. Military spending is less than half of what it was during Vietnam. Much of the money the military doe shave is being dedicated to replacing and repairing equipment and on the medical treatment for our injured troops. Increasing the military budget is always a matter of public debate and any President or Congress that one day asked for a significant increase in military spending to recruit new troops, would face a huge challenge.

The Army’s Mental Health Advisory Team has shown that the best way to keep our troops healthy is to give them more time at home. But the only way to give them the time they need between deployments and at the same time ease the burden on our reservists and National Guardsmen is to increase the size of our active-duty military. It is time for our government to invest in rebuilding our military.

In my constant reading and researching on the war, I came across an interesting observation about the priorities of the primarily Democrat anti-war politicians. I will preface this article by saying that I realize there are war supporters and war protestors on both sides of the Congressional aisle. It is not fair to pigeon-hole any party and make broad assumptions about where all politicians stand. However, it is fair to point out that the majority of politicians speaking out against the war and putting forth legislation to defund the war or demanding an immediate withdrawal of our troops (however ill conceived that might be) are Democrats.

So having said all that, here is the idea that caught my attention. The Democratic party is traditionally in favor of granting broad social benefits to illegal immigrants. Broad social benefits that involve broad government spending. However, this same political party that is willing to extend welfare benefits to illegal immigrants is willing to take money away from our military. The anti-war Democrats may be willing to spend our tax dollars on health insurance for illegal immigrants, but they don’t want to spend that money on troops who are fighting a war on terror. There is no talk on Capital Hill of defunding social programs that exist primarily to address the needs of illegal immigrants, but the Congressional anti-war Democrats are spending every minutes they can to campaign to defund a war that is still being fought. I cannot think of a clearer example of political priorities being severely out of touch with reality.

How can we seriously consider funding illegal immigrants, but refuse to fund our troops who are in harm’s way? The men and women who are putting their lives in danger in Iraq and Afghanistan deserve more than that. They deserve to be more than a political pawn, they deserve to be more than a budgetary weapon to use against the President. There should not be any talk about defunding a war when we still have troops fighting it. How is that blatant illogic of that statement not immediately obvious? Defunding a war when out military is still actively engaged in fighting the enemy is tantamount to abandoning our service members. Whether members of Congress support the war or not they must give our troops the equipment and resources they need to defend themselves and this country until Congress pulls them out. To do any less is irresponsible and reprehensible.

With all the talk about whether we can win in Iraq or whether we are fighting a war we have already lost, perhaps we should take some time to try to envision what victory in Iraq what look like. Most Americans will say that they want us to win in Iraq, but it may be more difficult for them to explain what victory entails. Perhaps victory is like obscenity, we’ll know it when we see it. But, if we are truly committed to winning this war, we should have a clear goal in mind. That is a lesson that our politicians would do well to remember.

Victory in Iraq must involve the establishment of a country that is free form the clutches of Islamic fanatics who use intend to use Iraq as a staging ground and a training ground for attacks against the United States and other free and democratic societies. Iraq must be a country that is free from terrorism. Any foothold available to terrorists in the country is an invitation for further violence against us and our allies. To leave Iraq a stable and free country, victory must also necessarily include the elimination of the insurgents who are actively working against the establishment of a democratic society. Does that mean that Iraq must become a mirror of Western society? No. Iraq can be free to chart its own course, but it must remain a country free from fanaticism and free from terrorism.

Victory in Iraq also means that our troops can leave. When the Iraqi people and the Iraqi government can successfully defend the country, then our troops can withdraw with the knowledge that all the good they have done will not be undone as soon as they board the planes home. We cannot simply withdraw today and call it a victory. We will leave the Iraqi people at the mercy of a well armed and well funded insurgency which has no true concern for the good f the Iraqi people. Therefore, victory must also necessarily involve our continued presence in Iraq until the Iraqis can take up the fight with the training and confidence they need to defeat our common enemy.

There is an end in sight to this long war, but whether it is a victory or a defeat is still to be determined. The most important element to that determination right now is whether those in charge of the big decisions can formulate a clear goal for victory in Iraq. When we know where we are going, when we can visualize the goal, it makes the getting there so much easier.

As the war continues, the military stories coming out of Iraq and Afghanistan are continually overshadowed by politics and election preparations and protests, it is more important now than ever before that we remember the actions of our troops who are serving overseas. For all of the talk about funding the war, keeping troops in Iraq or pulling them out we cannot lose sight of the individual men and women who are in the midst of combat. The service members who are fighting everyday, who are sweating in the oppressive heat, who are far from home and who are willing to put their lives in danger for this nation. Those men and women should never be far from our minds. If we are safe today, it is because they are willing to defend us.

Many of the soldiers, Marines, sailors and airmen who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan have friends and family members who are sending them letters and cards of encouragement. They send care packages full of goodies from home to help the troops pass the time. But there are also troops who are in combat zones who don’t ever receive a letter, who never get to open a care package and find something special. For those service members, loneliness can be just as damaging to their morale as the heat and the sandstorms.

One organization is trying to make sure that no service member gets forgotten. Any Solider, Inc. was founded in 2003 to help get mail and care packages into the hands of troops who weren’t receiving mail. The organization was started by the parents of a deployed soldier who told his mom and dad about men he was serving with who weren’t receiving tangible support from home; the cards and letters that bring a smile to a soldier’s face in the midst of so much tragedy. By 2005, the organization had incorporated and received approval as a non-profit group and had expanded to include all the branches of the armed forces.

Any Solider and its sister sites allow people who want to show their support for our troops and to put that support into concrete action to send letters or care packages to our troops. Volunteer service members receive the packages and distribute them to the troops who need them most. Everything goes directly to the volunteer troops who make sure everything goes to our troops. If you are interested in participating you can visit their website at anysoldier.com. Complete instructions for sending letters and care packages (including things that cannot be sent to our troops) can be found there.