This basic principle is sometimes overlooked by those who urge us to blindly "support the troops" without thniking what is involved. There was no threat from Iraq, as the Administration has long since openly admitted, but a major one is clearly developing there now, because of the invasion, contining occupation and military action.

President Bush, in his speech at Fort Bragg last month, justifiably praised the troops who have placed their lives at risk. In so doing, he appears to have forgotten that they are in Iraq precisely and only because he, as Commander in Chief, is the one who decided to place them in harm's way.

One of the great strengths of our military is that they will go where they are told, and do what they are told, to the best of their ability. Those who have already paid the ultimate price, or who have been maimed or wounded, and those for whom the horrors are yet to come, deserve the profound thanks we unreservedly offer for their sacrifice. We are all proud of them, and honor their sacrifice.

For exactly the same reasons, Mrs. Sheehan, others left to grieve for or with their loved ones, and the rest of the nation deserves a full, open accounting of the rationale behind a deeply flawed, poorly executed, and totally unnecessary conflict. They have paid a terrible price, and to suggest that they, along with the rest of us, have not earned the right to an explanation from those who decided on a path to death and suffering, is to pretend that Support the Troops has value and meaning only for the living.

Ed Peck, former U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Deputy Director of the Cabinet Task Force on Terrorism in the Reagan White House, and Fellow, Institute for Higher Defense Studies, National War College, is a member of the Coalition for a Realistic Foreign Policy. He served two tours on active duty with the paratroops.

An earlier draft of this essay originally appeared at The Huffington Post, and is reprinted here by permission of the author.