"No two wars are ever the same. Some are just, some are unjust, but the basic commonality shared between them all is that young men and women heeded a call to service, overcame their fear, and fought for their side"
About this Quote
Riley’s line does a politician’s favorite bit of moral gymnastics: it nods to complexity while steering you toward reverence. “No two wars are ever the same” sounds like nuance, but it’s also a preemptive shield against arguing particulars. If every conflict is unique, then the messy question of whether a given war was wise, legal, or sold honestly becomes harder to pin down. The sentence invites debate in the abstract, then quickly moves the audience to safer ground.
The pivot is “some are just, some are unjust,” a concession that performs humility without naming a single unjust war, a single policy failure, or a single decision-maker. Accountability evaporates into grammar. What remains is the “basic commonality”: service, fear, courage. That’s the emotional payload. Riley is building a bipartisan, cross-ideological sanctuary where critique of war cannot easily contaminate admiration for the warrior.
The phrasing “fought for their side” is telling. It avoids “our country” and replaces it with a cooler, almost sports-like “side,” which subtly normalizes war as competition rather than moral catastrophe. It also universalizes the soldier’s experience, positioning valor as morally independent from the cause. That separation is the subtext: even an unjust war can still produce admirable sacrifice, so public gratitude should be unconditional.
Contextually, it reads like civic liturgy - the kind of language that plays well at memorials, Veterans Day podiums, or moments when leaders need unity without reopening the argument about why the war happened. The intent isn’t to settle history; it’s to manage memory.
The pivot is “some are just, some are unjust,” a concession that performs humility without naming a single unjust war, a single policy failure, or a single decision-maker. Accountability evaporates into grammar. What remains is the “basic commonality”: service, fear, courage. That’s the emotional payload. Riley is building a bipartisan, cross-ideological sanctuary where critique of war cannot easily contaminate admiration for the warrior.
The phrasing “fought for their side” is telling. It avoids “our country” and replaces it with a cooler, almost sports-like “side,” which subtly normalizes war as competition rather than moral catastrophe. It also universalizes the soldier’s experience, positioning valor as morally independent from the cause. That separation is the subtext: even an unjust war can still produce admirable sacrifice, so public gratitude should be unconditional.
Contextually, it reads like civic liturgy - the kind of language that plays well at memorials, Veterans Day podiums, or moments when leaders need unity without reopening the argument about why the war happened. The intent isn’t to settle history; it’s to manage memory.
Quote Details
| Topic | Military & Soldier |
|---|
More Quotes by Bob
Add to List
