As the war in Iraq drags on and more of our troops are killed and wounded or faced with the challenges of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, the politics of the war are becoming an ever present part of our daily lives. Ant-war activists are becoming louder and it is becoming almost impossible to engage in thoughtful debate on the war. Instead of being able calmly discuss the decision behind the war, the current strategy, the possibility for victory, the only debate we hear on the war had been reduced to slogans and sound bites created to grab our attention and focus the camera on their side of the public relations fight.

But what activists and pundits on both sides of the war debate are starting to forget is that their words are being heard by our troops and their families. In this age of satellite, internet and worldwide journalism, our troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan are not immune to the acrimonious war of words going on back here at home. Their families, the wives, husbands, children and parents of our service members are spending every day waiting and praying and worrying and listening to the thoughtless and outrageous slogans being tossed back and forth so easily by those who see only the big picture of the war, and do not think about the individual men and women fighting the war.

It has become too easy for us to become wrapped up in debating the merits of the war and to forget that every war must always come down to the men and women carrying the weapons. In an effort to sway the public to their side of the war, both sides of the debate are growing more and more forceful and, at times, inconsiderate in their choice of words. Almost nightly we hear an anti-war activist saying that we must pull out of Iraq before anymore American lives are “wasted.” Now that phrase may succeed in garnering attention for the activist’s point of view, it may draw attention to the over 3,000 lives lost so far, but it does nothing to support our troops. The activist may not think twice about using the word “wasted” but that word will reverberate in the hearts and minds of the troops still serving in Iraq, the men and women who have seen their friends dies to defend this nation. And that word “wasted” will strike at the heart of a widow who has just buried her husband or a father who is mourning his daughter.

Debate on the war is a good and necessary thing. We should debate why we are in Iraq, whether we can win and how best to secure the country and equip its people to defend themselves against the forces of evil that are waiting to overtake them. But debate should not be a war of sound bites and video clips and it should never come at the expense of those who are still fighting for this country.

Jesse Adam Macbeth is a former soldier who tried to make himself a leader in the anti-war movement by claiming to have served in Iraq. He also claimed to have committed war crimes including killing civilians in a Fallujah mosque in 2005 and he also claimed to have received the Purple Heart. In reality, Macbeth was discharged from the Army in 2003 after only six weeks for, according to his discharge forms “his entry level performance and conduct.” Macbeth received a fair amount of notoriety and acclaim on anti-war blogs and media when he came forward with his fictional story of war crimes and post-traumatic stress disorder.

But Macbeth did not stop with his anti-war work. He took his falsified paperwork and made up stories of service and dishonor to the Veterans Administration and collected a reported $10,400 in benefits. Benefits he was clearly not entitled to receive. Macbeth reportedly has a criminal history including charges of fraud, domestic violence, and trespassing. The anti-war organizations that once took Macbeth under their wings and gladly used his story to push their anti-war agenda, have since tried to distance themselves from his lies. Macbeth is currently facing charges of using or possessing a forged or altered military document and one charge of making false statement to the Veterans Administration.

What truly upsets me about this story is not that the anti-war movement was so anxious to get a former soldier on board that they failed to properly vet this man, or even the fact that Macbeth is so selfish as to steal benefits from injured veterans who truly need ongoing care and support. What is most upsetting to me is the fact that this self-centered, myopic individual was willing to bring dishonor to this country and to those who are putting their lives in danger every day serving this nation. His deception shamed this country in the eyes of our allies and in the eyes of our citizens. He brought the honor and morality of our military into question. He tarnished the true heroes who have received the Purple Heart by attempting to become one of them and by claiming to have committed atrocious war crimes. His true crimes go far beyond doctoring a piece of paper and lying to the Veterans Administration. But there is no law on the books for sacrificing the dignity of your country and the valor of the men and women who serve it.

As the media coverage of the war in Iraq turns ever more ugly and negative, the slogans of the anti-war movement are becoming a part of our daily lives. “Support the troops, bring them home,” “support the troops, end the war.” These are phrases we are bombarded with every time we turn on the nightly news or pick up a mainstream media newspaper. Both aides of the war debate claim to support our troops and an appreciation for our service members and the service they give always precedes political statements form both sides of the war debate. But can you really support the troops while opposing their mission?

Personally, I believe there is a way to engage in thoughtful debate on the war while still supporting our service members. But in order to reach that point, anti-war activists must first acknowledge that they have at times crossed the line with their outrageous sound bytes and demonstrations. It is one thing to speak out against the politics of the war, it is another to disrespect and insult our troops and their families in a shameless bid for attention.

I know there are those who will read that above paragraph and claim that no such inappropriate acts have taken place. But I will point such critics to Rosie O’Donnell’s rude and truly disgusting recent remarks where she essentially called our troops terrorists. Then there is Presidential hopeful John Edwards and his plans to turn Memorial Day, a day meant to honor our fallen service members, into a day of anti-war activism. And also on Memorial Day, graves of fallen troops in Washington were defaced when they flags place don’t he graves were burned and replaced with swastikas. Then there is the now infamous banner held aloft by anti-war activists at a parade in San Francisco that read “We support our troops when they shoot their officers.”

Can you support the troops and still speak out against the war? Yes. It is our right and our responsibility as Americans to express our beliefs and our opinions. It is our Constitutional right to assemble, to protest and to speak our minds. But let us never forget that our troops and their families are watching and listening. Hopefully we have learned from our mistakes in the way our Vietnam vets were treated when they returned from war. Our troops did not choose the war, they only chose to serve.

Military spouses face numerous challenges when their loved one deploys. For months, maybe even a year or longer, they must assume responsibility for everything back home. They must pay the bills, raise the children, write letters, send care packages, take out the trash, fix the car and countless other thankless jobs that they must shoulder on their own. When their loved one is sent to a war zone, those daily sacrifices are compounded by an ever present fear that their spouse may never come home again. The knowledge that their loved one is in harm’s way settles like a heavy cloak on their shoulders and brings a stress and anxiety that they may have never experienced before. We ask much of our troops, and we ask much of our military families as well.

But there are those who are attempting to take advantage of military spouses. A telephone scam is specifically targeting military spouses and preying on their fear for their loved ones. The American Red Cross is reporting that military spouses have been contacted by a person who identifies themselves as a representative of the Red Cross and tells the spouse that her husband has been injured in Iraq and med-evacuated to a hospital in Germany. The caller goes on to say that treatment cannot be started until paperwork is completed and that in order to finish the paperwork and start treatment of her husband’s injuries, the spouse must give the caller her husband’s social security number and date of birth.

If an unsuspecting military spouse, caught in the grip of fear for her husband’s life, gives the requested information, she will find her family a victim of identity theft. The American Red Cross and the military are urging military families not to give out any personal information to unknown individuals over the phone. The Red Cross adds that it does not contact family members about injuries to service members. That information should come from the military and the Department of Defense.

But when a military spouse spends every minute of every day worrying that her husband may be injured or killed, it may be difficult for her to see through the scam when the phone rings. The idea that there are people devious enough to take advantage of military families should immediately sicken all of us. Our military families sacrifice so much to enable our troops to serve and defend this country. We should demand that someone defend those families as well.

Perhaps in your travels around your hometown you have noticed a banner hanging in a few windows. Perhaps you have seen a white banner with a red border and a blue star sitting prominently in the middle hanging in the front window of a house or apartment. Have you seen the banner and wondered what it means? It surely has something to do with the military, but what? That is a service banner. It is a symbol that there is someone form that family serving in the armed forces. It is an honor reserved for families who have an immediate family member serving are allowed to display the banner. There is in fact a federal law that states the service banner may be displayed in windows of families who have an immediate family member serving in the armed forces during any period of war or hostilities. Organizations like churches and business may display the banner to honor the service of someone closely affiliated with that organization. For example, a business may honor the service of a reservists or guardsman called up to serve.

These service flags, also called “Blue Star Banners” were created during World War I and have been in use ever since. They are a symbol of pride and hope for the families of those who serve. They are also a means for those of us not currently serving to recognize those who are making sacrifices for our freedoms.

But what of the banners with gold stars? Those Gold Star Banners are the mark of a family who have lost a loved one in war. The gold star was designed to completely cover the blue star on a service banner and to honor the sacrifice that service member has made defending this country. Gold Star Families have earned a special place in the hearts of this nation. They are the mothers, fathers, wives and children of our fallen heroes. When you hear someone say they are a “Gold Star Mother” you immediately know that they have lost their child. They are those select few who have stood by a flag draped casket, listened to the mournful bugle and the twenty one guns. Those who have accepted a tri-folded flag and the thanks of a grateful nation and yet never had a chance to say goodbye to their loved one. When you see a gold star hanging in a window, stop for a minute and say a prayer for those who have served and mourned in silence.

A number of families of fallen service members are upset with the use of the names and images of their deceased loved ones by anti-war groups. And some states are listening. Oklahoma and Louisiana have passed laws making it illegal to use the name or image of a fallen service member without the permission of their family. Texas, Florida and Arizona are all considering similar legislation. The constitutionality of these laws is already in question and there is no telling if these laws will stand up to judicial scrutiny, but it is a step in what many believe is the right direction.

The issue of the use of the names and pictures of deceased service members is frequently brought up when protests are staged by anti-war organizations. They use the names of fallen troops to illustrate the magnitude of the loss we have suffered in the war. They write the names of the dead troops on crosses or on placards or list them in newspaper ads. Some have argued that it is a way to honor the troops while also speaking out against the war. Others say it is nothing more than an exploitation of those who have died and it dishonors their memory.

Then there are others who are using the names of our fallen troops to make a profit as much as they are making a political statement. One such individual, and the object of much of the criticism by offended military families, is Dan Frazier. Frazier makes T- that list the names of 3,155 U.S. military personnel killed in Iraq. He uses the names to create slogans such as “Bush Lied — They Died” and “Support Our Remaining Troops — Bring the Rest Home Alive.” Frazier sells these shirts online and says he is doing it primarily to speak out against the war. But he doesn’t give them away for free and he does make a profit by selling the shirts. There are others who use the images and names of fallen service members on calling cards, body armor and other items.

Family members are understandably upset to see their loved ones used as commercial products. They are even more upset to see their loved ones used as a means to protest the very war that they gave their lives fighting. I personally have lost friends in Iraq and I know first hand that they would not have wanted their names to be used to protest a war their buddies are still fighting.