Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Critique of war strategy really an attack on the president

Re: Optimism is not enough, Dec. 1.

Your editorial accusing President Bush of offering too little in the way of specificity regarding the conduct of the war in Iraq and the path to its conclusion is difficult for me to understand. To the best of my knowledge, there has never been a war in the history of the world where the war plan has been a) inflexible regardless of evolving circumstances, and b) deliberately telegraphed in detail to the enemy.

I would very much like to know what position the Times editorial staff would have taken with respect to our involvement in the other wars in which our country has been engaged. Indeed, it seems to me that if those wars had been fought under the terms the Times and other liberals suggest, we would have lost them.

Confess it: There is nothing that the president could say or do with respect to the war in Iraq that would meet with your approval. For the Times, it is not about the war, it is about attempting to destroy this administration in the court of public opinion.

Don't let Bush's rhetoric slip by

Re: Optimism is not enough, Dec. 1.

Your editorial observes that President Bush's expansive, unfocused goal in Iraq is at odds with reality and would require an open-ended commitment this country is not prepared to make. But Bush's rhetoric plainly demanding such a commitment remains largely unchallenged.

Bush contends that if we do not defeat the terrorists in Iraq, we will have to fight them here at home. This gross exaggeration, if accepted, would require the open-ended commitment of lives, limb, and treasure your editorial rejects.

In invading Iraq, rather than advancing our cause as he contends, Bush exacerbated the war on terrorism. He created the magnet that is Iraq, drawing terrorists across its porous borders where they enjoy a lush target of opportunity in our soldiers and Marines. But attacking the United States proper is a far different proposition, and contending that if we do not defeat these same terrorists in Iraq we will face them at home is an implausible stretch.

We will have the war on terrorism to fight regardless of the outcome in Iraq, and our conduct of the war in Iraq will have its effect. But the consequence of letting Bush's rhetoric slip by and buying into his contention that the war in Iraq is a proxy war against the homeland would be to give him the unfettered rein he has held to date and sanction an open-ended commitment. Instead, we need a sober analysis, in the context of the war on terrorism, of the level, as your editorial suggests, to which the threat in Iraq can be reasonably reduced and left in the hands of an Iraqi government capable of running the country.

A strategy centered on politics

Two years and seven months after ending major combat operations in Iraq, President Bush releases a "victory strategy" to win in Iraq. Why is this strategy so late?

Could it be that the powers that be didn't care about winning a war but more about keeping the military industrial complex, Halliburton, Big Oil and other profiteer companies happy?

Now this administration realizes it may lose House and Senate seats in 2006, possibly enough to start an impeachment process. The real "victory strategy" is to resell how well the Iraq war is going so Republicans may achieve victory in 2006.

Iraqis letting us do the work

After just six weeks of traning, I was given a gun and a badge and sent out to protect and serve in a New Jersey city with an area of four square miles and a denser population than Manhattan. I did so for 27 years. Why can't the Iraqis put together a police department after two years?

About 50 years ago we sent our boys to places unfamiliar to them, Europe and the Pacific, to fight two standing armies and defeat them with only 14 weeks of basic training. Why, after two years, can't the Iraqis put together an army to fight a rag-tag insurgency in a country they are familiar with?

I'll tell you why. They have us to do it.

Reopen the 9/11 investigation

I think it is perfectly clear to most thinking people that the Bush administration has been anything but truthful to the American public. According to Bush, 9/11 changed everything, and that tragic event has been used as a rationale for a number of major changes in this country.

In light of this fact, I think it is vitally important that the whole story behind the events of 9/11 finally comes to light. This will only happen when an independent investigation is conducted. There are still many unanswered questions that were brushed aside for obvious political reasons. Please urge your representatives in Washington to reopen the 9/11 investigation.

More positive stories needed

Re: Payoffs to Iraqi media spark concern, Dec. 2.

The first question to Sen. John Warner's concern should be "are the stories true?" If they are, I don't have a problem with this action.

It is very apparent to most Americans that even our own press is very negative about our troops' successes in Iraq, as we hear or read few favorable stories concerning the war and our rebuilding efforts. Maybe we need to start paying our media to provide some fair and unbiased reporting. A free and independent press is critical to the functioning of our democracy as well as theirs.

Celebrating diversity

Re: Christmas controversy.

Merry Christmas! Happy Hanukkah! Happy Eid-al-Adha! Happy Kwanzaa! And Happy Holidays to anyone else I may have inadvertently excluded from my holiday wishes.

As a Christian, I joyfully celebrate each year the birth of my Savior, Jesus Christ. However, as a business owner and a citizen who cherishes our multicultural diversity, I respect the fact that others may not share in my religious faith. When it comes to the holiday season, I say "Merry Christmas" to my known Christian friends and clientele. I say "Happy Hanukkah" to my known Jewish friends and clientele. If I'm not certain of their faith, I simply say, "Happy Holidays!" I've never had anyone complain.

So what's the real issue? It's that there are extreme fundamentalist "Christians" who are loudly raising their voices, as well as a lot of money, simply because "Merry Christmas" is not written or spoken in every retail store or public venue. Businesses and individuals who serve the general public, including our government leaders, must recognize and respect the diversity of the community in which they serve if they desire long-term success.

So be proud of who you are and whatever religion, if any, you represent. But take some time this holiday season to observe and appreciate the diverse culture we live in. Happy Holidays!

[Last modified December 7, 2005, 00:33:18]