Roger L. Simon: Calling Franklin Foer

In a characteristically eloquent piece, Yon has also written Foer (who is over-matched in this regard) up a tree as well.

Beauchamp is young; under pressure he made a dumb mistake. In fact, he has not always been an ideal soldier. But to his credit, the young soldier decided to stay, and he is serving tonight in a dangerous part of Baghdad. He might well be seriously injured or killed here, and he knows it. He could have quit, but he did not. He faced his peers. I can only imagine the cold shoulders, and worse, he must have gotten. He could have left the unit, but LTC Glaze told me that Beauchamp wanted to stay and make it right. Whatever price he has to pay, he is paying it.

So The New Republic hasn't had a quarter of the cojones that Beauchamp has. What cowards.

Comments

Comments require registration through TypeKey. Abusive remarks may be deleted. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Roger Simon.

That is more than I can say for some publishers, editors, reporters and legislators.

Now I'm confused. Now Beauchamp is a hero for all but recanting his story? I must not have gotten the email coordinating the new conservative response. I would really appreciate it if in the future when the conservative blogosphere is going to make a 180-degree turn like this that, you make sure we are all up to date on the new position just as a common courtesy.

Hi, Jon Swift. In case you hadn't noticed, I don't do ideology... so don't look for a "conservative" response here.... or a "liberal" one either. I don't even know what they mean anymore. I just thought Yon had a point. Someone willing to stay on Iraq under those conditions and whose officers are vouching for him deserves a second chance.

Jon Swift: I must not have gotten the email coordinating the new conservative response.

this is such a great event: a lost soul finding his center. That this Beauchamp man is actually staying in Baghdad, living with other soldiers who must shun him, and finding it possible to be a Man... what more can anyone ask for??

With all the bruhahaas after his published diaries, those buddies still cover his sorry ass as a unit.

"Now I'm confused. Now Beauchamp is a hero for all but recanting his story? I must not have gotten the email coordinating the new conservative response. I would really appreciate it if in the future when the conservative blogosphere is going to make a 180-degree turn like this that, you make sure we are all up to date on the new position just as a common courtesy.

Beauchamp is not a hero here, and no one's claiming he is. Rather, Beauchamp is repentent, and implicit in that is the idea that he's recanted his terrible portrayal of his comrades. Maybe not publicly, but as one of the posters at Yon's site said:

"It seems to me that the clearest refutation of Beauchamp's story is that he himself was willing to go back into the field with these people. Had they been anything like he described, I imagine that he would have cut his own hand off rather than go back to them."

So, there's implicit admission that the stories are false, and a process (likely yet uncompleted but still underway) of forgiveness from the people most directly affected: His own unit. And Roger's response here was that folks should be lenient in their dispositions to him, not because of any mitigating factor within the original statements themselves, but because of his actions he's taking as a consequence of them.

None of this says he's heroic. Rather, it's the same sort of leniency that occurs when a criminal is repentent. He admits his mistake, he accepts the consequences, the people most affected accept him back into their ranks, why should we who are so far away be any harsher?

And as far as the "cojones": Roger's right. He is more ballsey than TNR. He's accepting the consequences of his act, something that publication has yet to do. That's less about heroism than a criticism of TNR.

I can't believe this actually has to be laid out for you, but that's what happens when you comment before you think.

Beauchamp was seduced by the Sirens' song, which has at some point in our lives happened to most of us; surely to me. He is now doing the Right Thing, painfully and hazardously. He will come through this a permanently much better man.
TNR will continue to sing with the Sirens.

I don't think from out here any of us are in a position to figure out what precisely happened with Beauchamp. Maybe he's sorry about the whole thing. Maybe he's doing what he's doing to avoid charges from above. We honestly don't know. And we're not really in a position to judge him one way or another without knowing the details.

I really liked Yon's article about General Petreus and second chances. And I think it applies here. Beauchamp has to answer to his unit, his wife, his editors and his conscience. They probably won't let him off the hook, so it's no miscarriage of justice for us to not kick him when he's down.

On the other hand, we have a pretty good idea of exactly what The New Republic did wrong. And so far they have NOT been taken to task for it. Where was the fact-checking? What about the whistle-blower who was fired and publicly attacked? What about the conflicts of interest in the fact-checking department? Where was the open investigation, and what were the results? Where's the accountability?

All the focus on Beauchamp distracts us from the big picture here. This is part of a continuing pattern that we see with New Republic writers. Plagarism, fabrications and inaccuracies are supposed to be caught by the editorial staff. The New Republic has had its second chance, and its third chance. The fact that this is happening again and again discredits the entire publication.

No, you moron, he's a hero for decided to remain in Iraq, in harms way, when he had a way out.

The reason you aren't getting the emails is because there's a minimum membership requirement. You fail, in the "clues" category.

I don't do ideology... so don't look for a "conservative" response here.... or a "liberal" one either. I don't even know what they mean anymore.

Some of us suspect you never did, you just thought one was cooler than the other.

No, you moron, he's a hero for decided to remain in Iraq, in harms way, when he had a way out.

You're right. It takes great courage to stick around after you've told tales out of school on your unit. I'm glad you're not buying Yon's pack of lies.

Yon's pack of lies? What on earth are you accusing him of lying about? What evidence do you have for your potentially libelous charge, and who are you, anyway?

October 25, 2007: Calling Franklin Foer

Comments

Post a comment

Email This Post