Leaders have let us down in going to war with Iraq
Published July 15, 2003
What troubles me about Iraq is, if it wasn't weapons of mass destruction that led us to go to war, then what was it? Was it just to get rid of a tyrannical dictator? Apparently President Bush didn't think this was a strong enough reason, so he had his entire administration mislead the United States and the world about weapons that no longer existed. I find it unforgivable that American blood is still being shed for unknown reasons, not to mention the billions that could have been spent on programs and services we need.
Now the greatest soldiers in the world have been reduced to kicking in doors in the middle of the night looking for guerrilla fighters and weapons while terrorizing women and children. Our leaders have let us down and we should not forget it when election time comes around.
-- Vincent Corelli, New Port Richey
Two unpleasant possibilities
In reading about the flak over the faked report of Saddam Hussein trying to buy weapons-grade uranium from Africa, there seems to be only two possibilities. If President Bush didn't know that the "intelligence" he used was a fraud, he is an incompetent leader of a dangerously incompetent administration. If, as many of us did before his speech, he knew that the "intelligence" was in fact a poorly done fabrication, he is a dangerous liar. In either case, the deaths of thousands of innocent women, children and men, many of whom were our soldiers, are on his head, for which he and all members of Congress who support him must be held accountable at the next election.
-- Dennis J. Plews, Sarasota
Truman set the example
What a notable contrast: George Bush said, "I gave a speech . . . that was cleared by the intelligence services."
Harry Truman said, "The buck stops here."
-- Tom Ziebold, St. Petersburg
Public should show patience
To those who criticize the president for his tough talk: Get over it. I truly believe he is following his best intentions in the war on terrorism.
This president has been dealt a new hand in the art of war, a war where the enemy does not wear a uniform. We, the public, have to show patience with our leaders in this new endeavor.
I pray daily for the safety of our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as for the other members of the coalition. They are fighting for our freedoms, one of which is the right to criticize the president. God bless America!
-- Marc Scheel, Tarpon Springs
President shows a backbone
Re: Tough talk issues.
As usual people on the left seem unable to engage their brains before attacking President Bush at every opportunity. The president was neither grandstanding, acting macho, nor sounding like Don King when he made his "bring it on" statement. Anyone who believes that this president doesn't agonize over every single loss that we incur in Iraq is either brain dead, dense or sadly incapable of remembering our failures of leadership in Somalia and elsewhere.
This president, by his "tough talk," is merely expressing our nation's commitment to the ongoing process in Iraq. We will not back off because we are still taking some casualties. This will remain the case regardless of how much resistance is left in Iraq, how long this process takes, or how much hand-wringing is done publicly by the left. It's about time that a president has shown a backbone. The Democrats should observe and learn.
-- Jay Johnson, St. Petersburg
When will we learn?
Isn't it curious how our leaders have billions of dollars - $4-billion a month in Irag, $1-billion in Afghanistan - but can only afford to provide health care for themselves. The cost will continue to be staggering in terms of dollars and priceless human lives. When will we ever learn?
-- Tom S. Brown, Largo
The nation has needs at home
Re: Price tag in Irag, $4-billion a month, July 10.
This makes me absolutely furious! We have very critical issues here in the United States. Unemployment continues to climb. We have to send to Canada for my mother's prescriptions because of inflated drug costs here. And here we are subsidizing a war in a country where we are not appreciated and are losing the precious lives of our military personnel daily.
Let's get out of Iraq, let the chips fall where they may, and channel that $4-billion into jobs here! Mr. Bush, show me the WMD or get out!
-- Betty G. O'Hearn, Treasure Island
An unfunny kettle of fish
Re: Price tag in Irag, $4-billion a month.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld stated in Senate hearings that monthly costs of the Iraqi operations were running at just under $4-billion. The monthly costs for the Afghan operations are just under $1-billion. Those costs may go on as long as anyone can predict, and those are just the monetary costs.
Since the president's dramatic announcement aboard an aircraft carrier that major operations in Iraq were over, an average of one young American service person has been lost there each day. As Ollie might say to Stan, "It's a fine kettle of fish you've gotten me into this time." Only it's not funny.
-- Neil A. Hilmer, Weeki Wachee
Give democracy a chance in Iraq
Re: Not winning any hearts, minds or wars, by Louis J. Cantori, July 8.
The impressively credentialed author seems to miss several key points with his discussion as to the expectations and U.S. accomplishments (to date) in Iraq.
The learned professor quotes the 1832 Carl von Clausewitz classic On War, that victory occurs when the enemy's army is destroyed, formally surrenders and its will is broken and bent to your own. He further points out that this is accomplished by conquest, not by the "hearts and minds" war of "liberation" our leaders are trying to accomplish in the current conflict.
So a book on war written in the early part of the 19th century, according to the columnist, directly applies to the type of conflicts in the beginning of the 21st century. I find this rather amusing.
The columnist goes on to explain the geopolitical, ethnic eccentricities of Iraq and concludes that neither the experts on Iraq within the U.S. government (the State Department, National Defense University and CIA), nor the small group of highly expert American academics have been consulted by the Department of Defense, Congress or the media.
After finishing the op-ed page, I saw two other articles: Iraqis take key steps toward self rule and Iraqi finances taking shape: bank, budget, no Hussein. Then I looked at the date, July 8, and remembered back to May 1 when the president announced that the major conflicts had ended, but that there was still a long way to go before a free and democratic Iraqi government would be in place. I said to myself, "Jeeze, it has been less than 16 weeks since this whole mess began. This is not a quagmire. Can't we just give it a bit of a chance?"
Now I like to be a Monday morning quarterback as much as the next fellow, but I think this is a time to just relax, and allow a reasonable time to "give democracy a chance."
-- Andrew R. Inebnit, Clearwater
Alarming comparisons to Vietnam
Re: Not winning any hearts, minds or wars, July 8.
This column by an eminently qualified observer who cannot be dismissed as a "cowardly democrat" or "knee-jerk liberal," brought to mind our experience in Vietnam. Consider his particularly compelling comment: "Americans are dying. American policy is faltering, if not failing. Military victory eludes the coalition forces."
The comparisons to the Vietnam War are alarming. Then, it was the "Domino Theory" that was invoked to halt the spread of Communism across Southeast Asia. Now we are being told that the enemy is even more ambiguous: Islamic fundamentalists, governments that harbor weapons of mass destruction and/or sponsor terrorists.
The Vietnam decision, at first, was also strongly endorsed by a large majority of Americans while critics were accused of aiding the enemy (read: being traitors) and cowardly liberals. Sound familiar? Now, too, raising questions about our policy in Iraq arouses the wrath of the war hawks. It seems as though we have learned nothing about our experiences in Vietnam. In the meantime, American casualties increase daily.
In Vietnam, it was only after the count of body bags numbered into the thousands that a growing public anger and mistrust of our policy forced us to recognize the futility of the war. Again, today, despite the administration's attempt to sanitize the results of our efforts in Iraq, the casualties grow day by day. We can only hope that commentaries by experts like Cantori will begin to have their impact on public opinion and, ultimately on the decisionmakers, before the body count goes any higher.
-- Jack Sandler, Tampa
Terrorist link is elusive
Re: President is battling terrorism, letter, July 9.
This letter accuses the press of being two-faced and the Democrats of being cowards, in response to a cartoon (Don Addis, July 5) that questions the real motives for this country's war with Iraq. The letter writer's reasoning appears to be that the invasion was a part of the president's war on terrorism but he failed to explain what the invasion of Iraq had to do with fighting terrorism.
Before the war, the Bush administration only offered one or two half-hearted claims of any connection between Iraq and al-Qaida. And now after we've been in Iraq for a few months, evidence of any connection between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden has been as elusive as the weapons of mass destruction that supposedly were at the enemy's fingertips and ready to be used against our troops.
Instead of attacking those who question what is going on, perhaps people like the letter writer who blindly support the president should really look to see if the emperor has clothes on.
-- Eric Greenbaum, Tampa
Troops deserve better
Prior to and during the recent war in Iraq, I heard much talk about supporting out troops. However, now that as President Bush has said, "the major fighting is over," I do not hear any discussion of how President Bush's lack of postwar planning has put our troops in jeopardy.
I believe our troops deserve more support by this administration than our current commander in chief's challenge to our enemies to "bring 'em on."
-- Richard Feigel, Clearwater
Share your opinions
Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731. They also can be sent by fax to 893-8675. They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length. For e-mail users: Letters can be sent by e-mail to letters@sptimes.com E-mail messages must be text only and cannot include attachments. If you're using a word processing program to write the message, you must use its "Save as" function to save it as a text file, then import it into your e-mail program. Please include your return e-mail address, as well as your name, mailing address and phone number, in the text of the message.
