View From West Point: We Are Not The Enemy
by Ben Salvito
Ben Salvito is a cadet at West Point and is majoring in International Law. He will graduate in May 2010 as an aviator. In this op/ed he responds to the blowhard Chris Matthews, who in the wake of President Obama’s address re Afghanistan, said that the President had given his speech in “an enemy camp”–namely the U.S. Military Academy.
On Tuesday night, President Obama addressed the world and announced his decision regarding the conflict in Afghanistan. The New York Times, preempting his remarks, declared that his speech here “may be one of the most defining decisions of his presidency.” Soon soldiers will be deployed overseas in pursuance of his new strategy, and the debate has begun throughout the media and political arenas as to whether this decision was the right one.
The President chose the United States Military Academy at West Point as his backdrop carefully and deliberately. As one of America’s great bastions of military power and a crucible for teaching leadership, the cadets and those who work to teach them are among the most affected by his words. Unfortunately, the President’s decision to place his podium at West Point and the reaction of the Corps of Cadets to his speech has been criticized by the media almost as much as the new strategy itself.
Many members of the media condemned the audience for its lack of enthusiasm or emotion in response to what was said, though it is unclear what alternative reaction was expected. To applaud or to boo at the announcements made last night would have both been equally inappropriate for the Corps of Cadets. In fact, the stoic reaction by all ought to leave the world confident in the Corps’ and the military’s ability to be apolitical and execute the policies of the President and Congress with fervor and duty. In an interview posted on Politico, Arron Conley, the President of the Class of 2010, said, “My role is not to advocate policy but to execute it.” No words more accurately describe the mission of the officers in the US Army and those whom they lead.
In the most polemical of criticisms, TV pundit Chris Matthews stated that in coming to West Point, the President made an “interesting” decision speaking at the “the enemy camp.” He said that the crowd exhibited “if not resentment, skepticism” and that it lacked “warmth.” Later acknowledging the potential ramifications of such a controversial statement, he attempted to assuage critics by stating that “maybe earlier tonight I used the wrong phrase, ‘enemy camp,’ but the fact of the matter is that he went up there to a place that’s obviously ‘military.’”
This is perhaps the most vapid response one could muster, especially in an attempt to retract such a scathing statement. The President came to West Point because he desired to address those whom his decision would affect the most….
3 Comments
I concur with the author’s sentiments. Any other response from the Corps, whether a dissenting chorus of “boos” or throaty roars of approval, would have been wildly inappropriate and cause for concern among the American populace. My only criticism was the number of cadets caught sleeping on camera, but, as Elizabeth Samet wrote in her wonderfully insightful response to the speech (that is definitely worth reading), the cadets had been in Ike Hall for far too long (several hours) waiting for the speech. This being the case, I can understand the somnolent state of some, especially given that they stay exceptionally busy for approximately 18 hours a day. Nevertheless, I am not sure that many of the other viewers know about the background or are willing to give the cadets the benefit of the doubt. Training to lead in a time of war is very hard work, but I wish, for the Corps’ sake, that the cameras would not have been so adept at catching those cadets on tape who were exhibiting the impact of their exertions.
I had no idea that the cadets had been cooped up in Eisenhower Hall for four hours. But having once or twice been with the cadets at their first class of the day and having given several presentations at West Point in the evening, I knew at once that the cadets were just dead tired. I would have thought the television producers had arrived sufficiently in advance to have recognized that as well. Surely it takes considerable time to set up the requisite cameras, controls, etc.
It’s normal to get shots of the audience’s response to a speech, especially one by a President. A sleeping cadet or two might inadvertently or unavoidably been inside the frame of some of the shots. But a number were zeroed in on a given cadet. Those shots reflected deliberate choices by the producers concerning what to air. I’d like to think the producers simply didn’t realize how tired the cadets were — a bunch of refreshed cadets who slept, or were pretending to sleep, might have been newsworthy, sort of. If not, the producers were just as much ass wipes as was Matthews.
Having lectured at the AF Academy many times, cadets have an amazing ability to sleep through anything. No matter what the topic, I will venture an estimate that there is a 100% chance some cadet will be asleep in any gathering of 20 or more for more than one hour. Shame on the sleeping cadet’s classmates for not jabbing him awake, given the # of cameras looking at the audience.
That said, Presidential security is incredibly oppressive…audiences of O-5/O-6s have been locked in a sanitized auditorium for about two hours to hear their commander in Chief at NDU.