Today's Letters: Soldiers' smiles may mask anxious questions

By LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Published September 8, 2007

They say a picture "speaks a thousand words," and as I look into the faces of the young soldiers surrounding President Bush in the photo on Tuesday's front page, I am immediately reminded of the words that they would like to say regarding their feelings about this conflict. They, however, do not get a chance to say more than a few. The photo-op was quick, and the smiles were temporary, both for the soldiers and I would hope for Bush.

The serious side of this war has no place within this picture. It speaks solely of well-adjusted young men and women, but it omits their daily worries about losing life and limb, about fractured families back home, about feelings of natural uncertainty regarding this whole endeavor.

The omitted words could be: "I miss my kids." "I long for a good home-cooked meal." "I hope our sacrifice is worth the pain." "Will I have time to adjust before my next tour?" "Will my wife and kids (or husband, boyfriend, girlfriend, parents, friends) recognize me when I return and if I return?" "Will I be the same person I was before this war began?" "Can our buddies' ultimate sacrifice be remembered always despite the fact that we have nightmares when their faces flash before us?" These are not unlike the questions asked during wars since the beginning of time.

The answers will never truly be known unless we speak to one of the smiling faces personally. We can only imagine the answers, but I in some small way have tried to place a meaning behind those glowing smiles. They are the strong, the dauntless, the brave, who despite their words of uncertainty, continue to do the job they have been sent to do.

God bless you all. We are proud of you. Your questions are legitimate, worthwhile and richly deserving of an answer from those whom you have been sent to defend.

Norma McCulliss, Palm Harbor  

Operation Iraqi Freedom

Withdrawal equals defeat

Late last year in a letter to the editor, I lamented the fact that our military was not being aggressive enough in Iraq. Now that that mistake has been corrected, there are many who continue to insist that we must withdraw. It is at these times that one must insist that all Americans have a firm grasp on their history lessons!

Our president may not be the most intellectual man on the planet, but he does know this: Withdrawal equals defeat. The British are now learning this hard lesson. Yes, they are withdrawing voluntarily; they are not being forced to retreat. However, the opposition sees it differently, and the most eloquent of them can make a very strong case for their position. This would be our fate if we left now.

There is no such thing as a popular war for those who have lost sons, through history, and now daughters, in the modern age. Yet, there are those things whose value is worth the blood we spend. They include the right of self-determination and the right to be secure in one's dwelling and possessions. These things have been the root of conflict for millennia. This fact does not make it right. It merely makes it a fact. Only one's viewpoint makes the fact pertinent or not. When we consider what we are doing in Iraq and the stakes involved, let us manage by fact, not by emotion.

This is not a beauty contest, something to be won or lost by popular vote, but an issue to be decided by those we elect to represent us, who - if they have a backbone - will make their decisions based on the merits of the facts presented to them, not by that which is most popular.

This is why it's lonely at the top.

Rick Hubbard, Tampa

Poisoning minds Aug. 31, letters

A freedom we fight for

The writer of this letter has incensed this former drill sergeant and Army retiree of 15 years. His words are not my opinion of the situation. The letter writer has no problem voicing his opinion on this subject in a public forum, yet he condones the suppression of that same freedom for the Veterans for Peace.

All soldiers defend every American's right to free speech and opinion under the flag of our great country. That includes the opinions of those we greatly disagree with. The letter writer referred to the Veterans for Peace as "peaceniks and malcontents" and in essence called us cowards.

There is no cowardice in speaking out to bring an end to an unjust war or to presenting alternatives to military service to a young person. That's freedom of speech - and a strong desire to stop the killing and maiming of our overtaxed and overstressed troops.

Until the burden of serving our country becomes mandatory and is shared by all classes of Americans, there is an alternative to volunteering to take up arms on foreign soil so American oil company's can reap outrageous profits. The vets for peace have every right as concerned, taxpaying American citizens to express their point of view. Anyone saying or implying they don't, especially a fellow vet who should know better, is not embracing "the American way."

Ron Kaiser, U.S. Army (retired), Gulfport

Letters Sept. 1

Sacrifices are required

Where in the world do you people get these clueless whiners constantly complaining about the cost of war? Where were they on 9/11/01? They seem to want freedom without sacrifice.

Thank God we can still field a strong army of patriotic young men and women to protect us, unlike countries such as Russia, Canada, Great Britian, France, Spain, etc. Peaceniks need to realize their attitudes originally conveyed the mistaken concept to our enemies that we were weak and would collapse as soon as we started having casualties. This encouraged the terrorist attacks to begin with.

Only a fool would believe in negotiating with an animal who would cut off someone's head in front of a camera or blow up a school full of innocent children.

Many of us are thankful that we can go to a shopping center or a ballgame without being blown up by some brainwashed fanatic, and we are realistic enough to know that sacrifices are required of us. If 100 percent of us believed this and lived it instead of sticking our heads in the sand and hoping stronger people will do what's necessary, our enemy would have long since folded his proverbial (or literal) tent and given up. Many lives and dollars would have been saved.

Gerald Doty, St. Petersburg

What dogs can teach us about humanityAug. 31, Sue Carlton column

Soldier deserved more

I agree with Sue Carlton's article about dogs and humanity. I have always been the ultimate animal lover and also find myself guilty of having more compassion for animals than humans.

I do find it rather interesting that on the same page as her article, there was a large picture of Winter, the bottlenose dolphin, and her new tail (Finally, a tail). While I applaud what they are doing and all the coverage in the St. Petersburg Times, I find it very sad that next to that whole story is a very small picture of Cory Clark (Plant City man dies in bombing). He was a young man who gave his life for his country, leaving behind a wife and four children.

I think Cory deserved a lot more coverage than he got because if it wasn't for men like him, we would not have the freedoms that we have.

Good luck, Winter, and thank you, Cory Clark - you gave the ultimate sacrifice.

Elaine McClory, Palm Harbor

Bush squads stifle free speech Aug. 31, editorial

A tyrant's tactics

The headline came as no surprise, but the extent to which this administration will go to suppress free speech comes as quite a shock. It is hard to conceive that this great country would sink to such low levels in the 21st century.

Maybe George W. Bush and Dick Cheney should pull out their dictionaries and look up the word tyrant. Their rules seem to fit the description quite well. It would be interesting to know where this booklet of rules originated. It would not be surprising if the trail led to the vice president, but that is just conjecture on my part. What a sad state of affairs we are experiencing.

Don Mott, Largo

Democratic snub won't be forgottenSept. 5, editorial

Real culprits are lawmakers

Your editorial implies that the Democratic National Committee has disenfranchised the paltry few who actually vote in the primary. Truth is, the Republican-led, dysfunctional Legislature and Gov. Charlie Crist are the culprits in this fiasco. They knew full well what the DNC would do if Florida moved its primary beyond Feb. 5, 2008. But for no plausible reason, like obstinate little children, they went ahead anyway. As you suggest, campaign contributions should be withheld - not from the candidates but rather from our elected leaders who foolishly caused this predicament. It is they, not the DNC, who have penalized Florida's primary voters.

I'm from a small New England town and participated in primary elections up-close and personally. Campaigns were face-to-face affairs with the candidates being forced to answer probing questions and sometimes endure stinging criticism regarding their views. These gatherings were attended by an electorate less influenced by a candidate's war chest than by what he said. Not so in Florida, where campaigns are about expensive television sound bites contrived by slick consultants and media experts, often conveying half-truths or outright lies that escape scrutiny by a media far too interested in calling a horse race than in doing the heavy lifting required to explore the substantive policy positions of the candidates. The truth stands a better chance in the small states.

The DNC and the candidates were correct in trying to bring about some party cohesion and give all the candidates, regardless of the size of their campaign coffers, a chance to go face-to-face with those voters concerned enough to participate. Because money does not count as much there, the small states are better at whittling down a large field of candidates. Afterward, let the money talk. Though not perfect, there was no compelling reason to change this system that has served us reasonably well.

Paul R. Corbett, Palm Harbor

Democrats boycott Florida race Sept. 2, story

Party stupidity

All of the major Democratic candidates for president agreed last Saturday to boycott Florida's primary because it is scheduled on Jan. 29, too early according to the rules of the Democratic (my) Party. Florida Democrats are being pressed by the Democratic National Committee not to count the votes from Jan. 29 and instead award the state's delegates based upon some not-yet-determined method, possibly party caucuses.

My national party wants Florida to not count votes. This is the ridiculous situation the Florida Legislature and the DNC have placed Florida Democrats in, sort of between a rock and stupid place. I would love to blame the Republican-controlled Legislature, but state Sen. Jeremy Ring, a Broward County Democrat, voted for this mess and now he states, "What scares me the most is the Republicans are still going to campaign here and they're going to have a six-month head start on us." He then promptly yanked his endorsement of Barack Obama, saying Florida issues would not be front and center for Democrats.

Does this strike anyone besides me that this is the dumbest situation ever? Now, I was angry but I got a whole lot angier when I went to mailbox and found letters from Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama wanting me to support financially their spouses' bids for the presidency. I would like to - really - but they will need to come to Florida to get the check!

Ronda Baer, Seffner

Few see benefits of hyped program Sept. 2, story

Multiple benefits

In Sunday's article, your writer seemed to take pride in tearing into a program that is not perfect, but it is helping many and could help many more.

I have been involved with the program since the pilot phase in 2006. Unlike your writer's example, I am a field inspector (and homeowner) who lives in Pinellas County, not in Orlando. The people I have done inspections for have welcomed me and thanked me for doing my job.

Yes, the program has evolved. Yes, some areas were cut back while others increased. That is why there was a pilot program. No, the program is not intended to be a big government giveaway.

There are three levels of value in the program:

1. Getting a free inspection to determine vulnerable areas of a house and methods to strengthen it against storms. This is a great value just by itself!

2. Using the report to gain insurance discounts you may already be entitled to. This would save the homeowner about $150 to have a private inspection for the same purpose.

3. Qualified owners can apply for a matching $5,000 grant to help protect their homes. It is there to help homeowners who potentially would be the most affected by a storm.

Hey, St. Pete Times, why don't you get involved and see how you can help spread the word about this program? With your help, more home owners would know about this program and be able to take advantage of it.

No, not everyone gets all three of the benefits, but even one feature at the price (free) would be worth it.

Michael Oberacker, Safety Harbor

Luciano Pavarotti 1935-2007

He was magnificent

I was first exposed to opera in my grandfather's Brooklyn barber shop where, if you came for a haircut, you listened to Caruso, Del Monaco and Tagliavini. Over my 72 years, I have heard them all. Pavarotti was the best, and his voice will live long after he is gone.

I was fortunate to be at the Tampa Sun Dome concert that John Fleming refers to in his Sept. 6 article. Unlike Fleming, I did not feel "cheated," not for one glorious moment. Even if he "phoned it in" as Fleming puts it, Pavarotti was magnificent.

I also kept a copy of Fleming's review of Feb. 18, 1994, in which he closed with these words: "He sang five songs as encores for the stomping, whistling, shouting crowd ..." Obviously the 9,000 in attendance didn't feel "cheated" either.

Michael P. Catalano, Palm Harbor

A measure of humanity

Luciano Pavarotti's singing of Puccini's aria Nessun Dorma (from Turandot) was my acid test for compassion and humanity. Anyone who could listen to that without a tear in their eye was someone whom I would gladly avoid.

David Manson, St. Petersburg

An inspiring photo

Wow! An inspirational picture on your front page. I might actually keep my subscription!

In all seriousness, I go out and pick up your paper and nine times out of 10 will toss it because I am so tired of seeing you report on the base level of everything. In the worst of times there are still stories of inspiration.

Thanks for the great picture.

Mary Hickok, Belleair

Little reason to smile

Yet another staged photo by George Bush, again slavishly published on Page 1 by the St. Petersburg Times.

I wonder if maybe - just maybe - somebody of rank shouted, "Okay, now, everybody smile" just before the camera clicked. I would bet the house on it! Bear in mind also that this photo was taken on a safe base, otherwise Bush would not have been there, so no doubt the props had more to smile about anyway.

But before Bush supporters get carried away by this latest stunt, they should not forget the unstaged figures: more than 3,750 American dead and more than 27,700 wounded so far, in a war that was based on lies and deception, and should never have been started. When you add to that the hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqi civilians and the 2-million who are living in dire circumstances in Jordan and Syria thanks to Bush, I really don't see why he has anything to smile about - other than the fact that he managed to settle a score for his father with Saddam Hussein, of course.

R. G. Wheeler, Lealman

Images in contrast

What a cute picture in Tuesday's paper: the president and three smiling blond female soldiers. Makes one think that service in Iraq is quite a blast. (Pardon the pun).

This picture is in sharp contrast with Sunday's wedding picture of the disfigured Marine and his sad bride. What a shame.

Seymour Weinberg, Wesley Chapel

Two faces of the war

Once again, a picture is worth a thousand words, and two pictures tell the story of this administration and the war in Iraq. In Sunday's Perspective section, you featured the dramatic and poignant wedding portrait of a young Illinois Marine, wounded beyond recognition in Iraq, and his bride.

Tuesday's front page featured our president mugging for the cameras with a bevy of blond soldiers at an Iraq air base. Maybe President Bush should have gone to the wedding instead of to Anbar province. Then he could have seen the real face of this war.

Barbara G. Classen, New Port Richey

Sorrow for the soldiers

Those pictures and narratives of wounded soldiers and Marines in Sunday's Perspective shook me. Their faces, their lifeless "legs," and the accompanying stories should to be told. We need reminders of what is happening a world away. Sometimes we go about our lives, worrying about taxes, insurance and the price of gasoline. These men have no such mundane problems.

Do we all know that the average soldier in Iraq carries more than 40 pounds of body armor, in addition to an automatic weapon, ammunition, water and a first-aid kit? He's expected to run, jump and fight often in 120-degree heat in the cities of Iraq. All this, while engaging insurgents who will be carrying little more than a 10-pound AK-47.

He is a target for improvised explosive devices. The term IED is thrown around often in the media, and we should know what that means: that our soldiers can be killed or maimed indiscriminately. While these atrocities are happening, Iraqis are suffering and being killed at an even higher rate than the soldiers.

Perhaps I'm not as political as I should be. Perhaps I should march in Washington as some have done. Perhaps we should be asked to sacrifice as we did in World War II.

Being sad and depressed over the plight of our military - is that enough? How can any of us who have not "been there" imagine what it's like? What will our leaders do to end this slaughter? I don't have any answers. I'm waiting for our president's report from Gen. David Petraeus - what will that mean? I have lots of questions and no answers.

Lilyan "Vee" Dayton, New Port Richey

[Last modified September 7, 2007, 20:49:11]