SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Where Is the Ticker-Tape Parade?

CROSSINGS MAY 30, 2011

Where Is the Ticker-Tape Parade?

From Iraq, I boarded an “Angel Flight”—a cargo plane that ferried the dead—back to Kuwait in 2006. As the C-130 taxied away into the night, there was the consolation that the bodies of the American soldiers would be washed, well-tended, buried with honors, and, eventually, memorialized along parade routes. The living, too, would surely be greeted with floats and hurrahs when they left behind Iraq’s rotten, sand-blown landscape.

But, in fact, the parade routes have stayed quiet. Iraq veterans, apparently, merit neither bunting nor ticker tape. This is not as it should be. When the marching bands finally began playing for Vietnam veterans in the 1980s, it was said that never again would we deny a proper homecoming to American soldiers, misbegotten war or not. Love the soldier, went the never-persuasive refrain, hate the war. So why is it that nothing has been learned and nothing remembered? It is past time to celebrate Iraq’s veterans with a welcome-home parade.

 

Taking the lessons of Vietnam to heart, Americans in 1991 feted the veterans of a 100 hour war with a full-on ticker-tape parade in lower Manhattan’s Canyon of Heroes. The ostentatious homecomings given Operation Desert Storm veterans were as much shows of self-congratulatory bravado as anything else—as if parades offered proof of a heightened sense of moral awareness—but, for the soldiers, they were well-deserved tributes.

Twenty years on, their fellow soldiers (and, in many cases, children) deserve nothing less. And, quite possibly, more: Iraq has gutted the ranks, killing nearly 5,000 men and women in uniform and wounding over 30,000 more. Walking on lower Broadway last week, however, all that I saw etched into the sidewalk were commemorations of ticker-tape parades from a distant past, feting baseball teams, astronauts, and veterans of ancient wars. The Iraq War has been memorialized, but only in makeshift shrines and plaques that, in the case of the brigade combat team (from the First Armored Division) I know best, were erected and paid for by the very soldiers dispatched to fight the war to begin with.

A proper homecoming would respond to multiple needs unrelated to glory as such. It would, first and last, do something to bridge the gap between soldier and civilian that not even the distance between Iraq and the United States could measure. The observation that American soldiers inhabited a different world from the Iraqis around them became a numbing cliché, but it was their remove from our own society that really should have unnerved us. In Iraq, the U.S. mission required sacrifice and killing. At home, the U.S. mission required easy certainties and narrative simplicity. A skewed image of the American soldier was the result, in the popular imagination either a hapless victim, or a brutal predator, or the custodian of everything virtuous about this nation (a reading with which the officer corps tends, worrisomely, to concur). Addressing the corps of cadets at West Point last week, the nation’s highest-ranking officer, Admiral Mike Mullen, said of his fellow countrymen, “I fear they do not know us. I fear they do no not comprehend the full weight of the burden we carry or the price we pay when we return from battle.”  

If what Mullen says is true, if civilians really have been assigned the role of spectators, wouldn’t a parade simply highlight this tragic distinction with a display of militarism? Quite the reverse: This would be a homecoming, a communal celebration and an expression of solidarity, not a Cromwellian procession of some New Model Army. “Nobody was able to absent himself from the festival, for no one was a mere spectator,” Jules Michelet wrote of a French Revolutionary  jamboree. “All were actors.” And so it should be when the returned march up Broadway, with maneuver battalions and high school bands each taking their turns, the crowds entertaining and being entertained, soldiers finally within reach of the civilians for whom they sacrificed so much in Iraq. All of the garbage of the past decade—the reluctance to abide any measure that might constrain personal autonomy, the subordination of the public good to private wants, the war itself—ought , if even for a moment, to give way to a modest display of civic vigor.

And what better spot? The Statue of Liberty in 1886, General John Pershing in 1919, Winston Churchill in 1946, and the returning armies, always the returning armies—all were feted in lower Broadway’s Canyon of Heroes. With more than 200 such parades over the centuries, the latest in praise of wealthy athletes, is it really necessary to point out how wicked it would be to omit the million-plus Americans who have fought in Iraq over the past decade? With the bulk of the 48,000 troops still in Iraq set to be redeployed by the end of the year, why not begin planning now?

Thus far, and aside from the laudable exertions of New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, a Democrat, and U.S. Representative Peter King, a Republican, the idea has gotten no traction at all. Exactly why this should be seems obvious. Yet never mind for a minute the wisdom of the war. Never mind, too, whether you insist it has been won or lost. The only question we should be asking is: Where do we find ticker tape in 2011?

Lawrence F. Kaplan is a contributing editor for The New Republic.

Follow @tnr on Twitter.

 

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 14 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

14 comments

A nice notion, Mr. Kaplan. Personally, I despise all ceremonies, but your suggestion and Speaker Quinn’s & Representative King’s proposals deserve action, especially if the welcome home parade can coincide with another Yankees World Series championship parade this November. 2 birds, 1 stone, everybody wins. Or maybe every American metropolis can each have its own parade on the same day, so it’s a local thing as well as a national celebration. There’d be greater participation and it’d be more memorable that way, I think. Most regular Army soldiers the last several years have received multiple standing ovations & mini-parades in their honor already. It happens almost daily at DFW.

- Konstantin

May 30, 2011 at 1:06am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Because if it doesn't happen in New York, does it really happen...?

- NR851651

May 30, 2011 at 4:46am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Can there be a "homecoming" parade (or a victory parade for that matter) in a war without end? A war without end against a vaguely defined enemy, terrorists, that are everywhere and ever present? And how will we know when we have "won" the war when there is no country, no enemy army, to surrender? This is not intended to take anything away from the bravery and enormous sacrafice of our soldiers, but I think it may help explain the ambivalence of the public. That a tv commercial for an airline has become the unofficial memorial for our troops both supports Kaplan's suggestion and explains why it hasn't happened.

- rayward

May 30, 2011 at 8:16am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Mr. Kaplan, We have known since very early on that the reason we sent this army to war was false - that the Iraq we invaded posed no serious threat to the United States, and that the Iraqi people did not want us there. In our hearts we have suspected that what we have accomplished there will be ephemeral, and collapse once we are gone. Hopefully we will be proven wrong on that, but even then, will it be our military having destroyed Iraq in order to try to rebuild it that binds the place into a nation, or the example of their Arab brethren in North Africa? So, what is it that we should celebrate here? Soldiers' willingness to sacrifice and risk death and injury in the cause of a myth? I think not. We can't separate the act of war from the reason for war, at any level. We all know where obedience absent justification leads. Or perhaps if we are truly honest, we ought to toss tickertape in honor of our own complicity in the injury done to our soldiers, for the ongoing bankrupting of our nation to keep them at war, and to celebrate our own unwillingness to hold the government to account for their lies and folly, or even to be aware enough to understand that it was a lie. Nearly half of Americans still think that Iraq had something to do with 9/11, after all. We ought to have been parading down Broadway and the Washington Mall ten million strong objecting to our being in Iraq, not in celebration of the return of those who voluntarily went there. In the waning days of the Vietnam War, we used to ask "what if they gave a war, and nobody came?" But that never happens. They always come. And in the corporatized, hyper-professionalized military of the US today, they come voluntarily and without compulsion. A substantial fraction of the enlisted men and women who have served in Iraq enlisted after it was clear to any reasonable observer that the war was started on false pretense, and more than half have either enlisted or re-enlisted at least once prior to their most recent service there. What exactly is it that we honor when we celebrate willingness to serve when you know, or easily could know, that your leadership will send you anywhere, for any reason real or imagined or invented, that suits their political purpose? The military is the tool of the political class in Washington, and willingly so. They cannot separate themselves from those whose orders they take, not even on the last Monday in May.

- IowaBeauty

May 30, 2011 at 8:42am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When the United States elites decided to have an "all-volunteer" army fight their wars for them, they were able to avoid the wide-spread popular discontent and loss of military morale that eventually crippled the Vietnam effort. But obviously, by professionalizing (and privatizing) the army, they also forfeited the sense of participation that motivates the kinds of enthusiastic celebrations for which Mr. Kaplan seems to feel nostalgic. These men and women were paid the agreed salary for their work, work they themselves agreed to perform. We don't have ticker-tape parades when policemen retire - they celebrate among themselves, I imagine. Do I think this is a good way to relate to the kind of national endeavor a war in theory represents? Of course not. Do I think this is fair to the men and women who honorably joined these misbegotten "force-projection" efforts for anachronistic "patriotic" reasons? No indeed. But that's the system we've constructed. You pays your money, and you takes your choice.

- rmutt

May 30, 2011 at 11:18am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Iraqi War Veterans: Please ask your "representatives" how many AIPAC members served in Iraq? "Retired general William Odom, who had once served as NSA Chief under Ronald Reagan, was openly critical of Neoconservative influence in the decision to go to war, having said, "It's pretty hard to imagine us going into Iraq without the strong lobbying efforts from AIPAC and the neocons, who think they know what's good for Israel more than Israel knows."

- MSA70

May 30, 2011 at 12:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Perhaps we haven't had one because they almost never do the Ticker Tape Parade anymore? Check out Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ticker-tape_parades_in_New_York_City The only time they do it now are for sports titles, like the Yankees or New York Giants. There hasn't been a title ticker tape parade since 1998, when John Glenn got one for going up in the Space Shuttle, and Sammy Sosa one for coming in second on the home run chase. Before that, the last two were 1991, for the Gulf War like you mentioned, as well a the Korean War veterans. There were only 3 total in the 1980s: The Iran Hostages, 1984 Summer Olympians, and Vietnam Vets. In the 1970s there was only one: Pope John Paul II in 1979. The last time those parades were frequent was in the 60s, when they were given to returning astronauts or visiting heads of state. There's no Broadway parade for the Iraq war vets because there aren't any Broadway parades anymore, period.

- Crock1701

May 30, 2011 at 1:38pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Iowa says: What exactly is it that we honor when we celebrate willingness to serve when you know, or easily could know, that your leadership will send you anywhere, for any reason real or imagined or invented, that suits their political purpose? So what was the purpose of the Iraq action in your humble estimation? Why did the neos go to all of that trouble?

- jacko

May 30, 2011 at 5:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

one big parade in NYC is a pretty empty show, how many vets could actually attend? Far better would be that each town that be a soldier stationed in a foreign war be feted in their own hometown however that town sees fit, in a big city it could be in whatever ward or district they live in. Personal is far better.

- blackton

May 30, 2011 at 5:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Jacko: I doubt that there was a single reason amongst all of the neos, or the rest of the people who supported invading Iraq. Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld were settling an old score from 1991 Yes, I know people dismiss this as beneath these leaders, but I think that's mostly wishful thinking - people really don't want to conclude that the people we put in charge gamed the system for what amounts to personal pique. For my part, I've seen enough talented, informed people in executive positions - even very high executive positions - completely unable to see their own biases in their decisions to think this is the best explanation we've got for this bunch. Powell was being a loyal soldier. Wolfowitz and the others appear to have honestly believed that you could easily create democracy and stability by invading and deposing Saddam Hussein. More than half the country thought we were avenging 9/11. A minority, although a potentially influential one in some quarters, clearly had Israel's interest in mind in encouraging us to go to war.

- IowaBeauty

May 30, 2011 at 6:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I came of age during the Vietnam War. I passed my physical. My daughter was born about that time and I received a dependent deferment. Many young men of my generation went to war. Many were killed and wounded. I don't feel "guilty" about this, but I don't feel real good about it either. I remember the protests against the war. They struck me (a person who did not serve or put myself at risk) as less "against war" and less against the Vietnam War in particular as saying, "Don't put me at risk." I live in a community with a strong strain of pacifism. Many people say how much they are against war and violence. Most are of my generation in age. I presume many or most are people who said "Give peace a chance," and so on at the time of Vietnam. The puzzle is: if there are people who for various reasons are willing to attack and kill us, as there are, how do we respond to them without being as bad as they are? Now that we have a "volunteer army" without a draft, we have slid the problem under the rug to an even greater degree than we did at the time of Vietnam. Now that we are developing ever greater skill at killing at a distance with "drones" we are ever more able to kill without experiencing what that means at first hand. Our enemies (radical Islamic Muslims, who are not all Muslims) have their own "drone" weapons, children and young believers so drugged on fanaticism and indoctrination that they can kill at a distance (e.g., flying airplanes into buildings or blowing themselves up in markets). The outlook for civilization is grim indeed.

- skahn

May 30, 2011 at 7:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I am a Vietnam veteran and served as a medical corpsman at the 12th USAF Hospital in Cam Ranh Bay from 31 May 1967 to 31 May 1968. I admired the eloquence of Lawrence Kaplan's words. They were deeply felt by him and equally deeply felt by me as I followed each sentence effortlessly flowing into the next one. Well done, Mr. Kaplan. There were moments when I became unsure of all the emotions I was feeling or how to deal with them as I read your heart-felt tribute. We live in a country that even in my life has fought on so many distant shores. I was never for the invasion of Iraq. I was actually dumbfounded with the support for the way. I got a knot in my stomach. I thought Americans had learned a painful lesson in my war. And of course I was wrong. I support the young men and women in their service for our country. Why I even have to mention this as a Vietnam veteran should tell you how ambiguous are my feelings about war. Or perhaps how mixed all our emotions are about the Vietnam war, whether we went away or stayed behind during the turbulent sixties and early seventies. But in my war, and there are many different versions of the Vietnam war as there are Vietnam veterans, I saw the human face of war on the wounded American soldiers, the wounded ROK marines, the wounded Vietnamese civilians, especially those who survived The Battle At Hue in the Tet Offensive of 1968 and even the few wounded VC guerillas we treated at the hospital. All I saw that year were victims of this tragedy we call war. And I have also seen my fellow Vietnam vets come home and fall as if it hit by a round from exposure to Agent Orange. So my war goes on and on in my life, and I was awarded a 30% disability last September of 2010 for my exposure to Agent Orange. But I am really blessed because I only have a mild case of Iscemic heart disease, a slightly enlarged heart. Civilans sometimes think i am a bit touched to have been finally awarded compensation after four decades. But the recognition meant a great deal to me. I honored my country with my service, and finally my country has honored me. I am coming to terms with my war as well as can be hoped for, since I have been in recovery fro my alcoholism for three and a half years. And I blame no one, not LBJ, not the protesters against my war, and not even the Veterans Administration. I ran but I couldn't hide from my denial. I ride my bicycle as much as I want in the summer. I probably will audit a college course this summer semester at Kent State University. And I remember hearing the news that summer day on May 4th as I got off night shift at the steel mill. Life is good to me, as Zac Brown sings in one of his country western songs. It would be a testament to the sacrifice of the fallen soldiers if we had a parade in New York City for those who came home from Iraq. Honoring them would be ennobling for them and for the civilians lined along the streets as they marched by. But I fear that America is long gone. We have an Army of volunteers. The pain of war cuts deep but narrow wounds into the family members back home when they learn of their wounded and departed loved ones. But it remains to them more a private loss rather than a loss to the entire community or the nation. War is a consecration of life. President Eisenhower made that observation. It takes money from the citizens back home who need government help. It takes money for the research we need to create new jobs with real wages to have a vibrant economy. And most of all it takes hope from the hearts of all of us who have served and still must heal their physical and mental wounds to carry on a productive life. On this Memorial Day, instead, I propose a sincere salute the American people. They are resilient when facing tragedy: they are resourceful when confronting adversity; and they are forgiving when offering their hands in peace and goodwill to former enemies. They're simply quite amazing after all they have been through since John Kennedy was our President. So, as a Vietnam veteran, I today honor the American people. Somehow through all the confusion and chaos of these past decades, all the big lies from our political leaders, all the fleeting disillusionment we have felt together over the years, we are still one nation despite our obvious political passions, opinions and even our fears about the dark clouds looming on the horizon. Somehow, someway, we all actually made it to this day, thus annual remembrance of sacrifice and service to our country . Rather amazing when you think about it.

- rewiredhogdog

May 30, 2011 at 8:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

As a historian of the United States military, Lawrence Kaplan probably appreciates that there were no homecoming parades down Broadway for veterans of the Indian Wars, the Philippine Insurrection, the Boxer Rebellion or the US interventions in Mexico, the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua or Haiti during the first half of the 20th century. The Iraq War (at least the Iraq War post-immediate invasion) is much more like those interminable, distant and low-intensity conflicts than World War II, Korea, Vietnam or Desert Storm. Which is why the American people would likely be mostly puzzled by a ticker-tape parade in 2011 for Iraq War vets, since many of them think that the war has been over for some time.

- wildboy

May 31, 2011 at 10:26am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

We entered the Iraq war without good reason and with little reflection, sent thousands of men and women into combat and counter-insurgency operations and then promptly forgot about them. Why is anyone surprised that their return is receiving as little attention as their deployment? We couldn't be bothered to care enough when the war started and at least some of us thought was a good and necessary thing; now that we know the truth about the war you think maybe we will find it worth our attention? Those of us who opposed the war were shouted down as unpatriotic. Our elected representatives bowed to the power of the big lie (WMD, in case you have forgotten), and the bigger lie about 9/11 connections to Hussein. Kaplan and TNR were all a part of the Iraq cheerleader squad, as I recall. It seems obscene for them to lecture us on our duty to the troops -- as if we were the ones who sent them to war on such a flimsy, dishonest, and negligent basis. Where was the sense of duty then, in 2003, when it might have spared lives? It is a fine thing to send men and women to war in error, and then pretend that a parade will make it all better. Just brilliant. Typical neocon stuff. Meanwhile, there is no end in sight for our troops in Afghanistan, and last I heard we plan to have troops in Iraq for quite a while. And we are now at war with Libya, or at least taking sides in their civil war. Maybe that is why people didn't realize it was time for a celebration? Maybe it is reasonable that people missed the end of one of the wars? But, I agree we need a parade, or better yet, three parades. Let's get them all home from Iraq and have that parade next week. Let's bring the troops back from Afghanistan and have that parade the week after. And let's stop the illegal war in Libya and have another parade. Maybe then people would realize it was time for a party. Neil

- purcellneil

May 31, 2011 at 2:08pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close