L
E T T E R S T
O T
H E E
D I T O R
MARCH
13, 2008
Who
Abandoned Whom?
LTC Steve Russell (Ret.) is the founder and chairman of Vets
for Victory. His recent commentary, “We will not
abandon you!,” began: “The lack of support
by national lawmakers to give troops the support needed to
achieve their mission has become egregious.”
“Their mission?” Isn’t the mission
of U.S. troops to protect and defend our nation? Wasn’t
the terrorist leader, who boasted of engineering 911, hiding
in Afghanistan? What danger was the coward who ruled
Iraq? So what is the real mission in Iraq, and whose
is it?
Russell wrote: “It is past time for national lawmakers
to abandon their political investment in defeat.”
“Investment in defeat?”
Apparently he has forgotten that against the advice of militarily
experienced experts, Donald Rumsfeld sent too few and too
inadequately equipped troops into Iraq, then attempted to
justify his inept action with, “You go to war with the
army you have.” So who invested in defeat?
Russell wrote: “We must reassure our fighting
men and women that they are not fighting alone.”
So who is fighting with them? Have the Bush twins joined
our military to serve at least in a stateside supportive capacity? Are
any of Dick Cheney’s relatives serving in our military?
Do the CEOs and stockholders of the military industrial complex
and their relatives serve in our military at all, much less
in harm’s way, or simply enjoy the immeasurable profits?
Russell wrote: “National media and political groups
have allowed opponents of the war a steady national say.
When the surge began to bear fruit, they began to focus their
tactics of defeat by attacking the integrity and character
of our men and women that serve in uniform or as contractors.”
“A steady national say?” Were national media
allowed to show us over 4,000 flag-draped coffins in their
news reports?
“Contractors are serving?” How dare Russell
equate the service of our troops with those feeding at the
trough of no-bid contracts, and profiting from our troops’
sacrifice?
Russell wrote: “Now we see returning veterans
caught in the blast of hit pieces portraying us as maladjusted
beings of pity, likely to kill our loved ones and then come
after you.”
“Maladjusted beings of pity?” Or victims
of an impossible attempt to fight a non-uniformed, unidentifiable
insurgency protected by the very people our troops are trying
to liberate?
“Kill our loved ones?” Yes they are.
We love our veterans dearly, and those who served in Iraq
are killing themselves in record numbers! Those still
in Iraq are committing suicide on the average of one every
two weeks!
Apparently Russell assumes that those of us who have not been
to Iraq have never talked to anyone who has. Special
interests, who have never served in our military and whose
children never will, have so cleverly replaced patriotism
with nationalism as they sacrifice our troops on the altar
of war profiteering, that even survivors of the Iraqi quagmire
are hesitant to speak publicly, lest they be labeled anti-American
and/or unpatriotic.
But ask them privately, with sincere assurance that you will
not betray their confidence, and see if they agree with the
war-mongers who never serve – just monger.
War is necessary only when those who see war as necessary
are willing to go, or if too ill or old, send their own children
into battle.
But how necessary is a war in which privileged special interests,
who do not serve, make fortunes on no-bid contracts as our
troops die in battle, or kill themselves in frustration?
Could you walk in their boots?
For example, is that a pregnant woman, or a suicide bomber?
Is that a fetus in her womb, or a bomb under her clothing?
If I shoot her, I’ll save lives if it’s a bomb;
I’ll be tried for murder if it’s a fetus.
Can you even begin to fathom the pressure?
Lawmakers, who support our troops, want to remove them from
this un-winnable quagmire.
Lawmakers, who support the mission, want it to continue as
long as they and theirs are not required to serve, especially
in harm’s way. And, as long as special interests
of the military industrial complex and big oil contribute
to their reelection campaigns.
As long as those enjoying the monetary profit avoid the human
cost, will war profiteering end? And, aren’t those
willing to sacrifice our troops for profit those who truly
abandon them?
Think about it, please!
Robert C. Currie Jr.
TOP
Is
Government’s Responsibility To Bail People Out?
I am so glad that we are in an election year. I really didn’t
know what I was going to do. I earn just a little more than
minimum wage, have a large mortgage, two new cars in the driveway
and a big screen television to watch. My problem is I have
an adjustable rate mortgage and I just don’t understand
why I can’t afford to feed my family.
Fortunately, we have a democratic controlled congress and
God willing and the creek don’t rise we will have a
democrat as president in a little less than a year. I am so
thankful that our next president is going to make my neighbor
help pay my mortgage and health insurance. It just isn’t
right for them to be so well off. Just because they actually
are responsible for their actions doesn’t mean I should
be responsible for mine. Sorry, I had to take a break from
reality for a minute.
Whatever happened to being responsible for your actions? If
I get a speeding ticket should I expect my neighbor to pay
it? If I rob a bank, should my wife or kids go to jail for
me? Isn’t this pretty much what congress is promising
now to bail out people that are too ignorant to figure out
that you need to budget your earnings to your lifestyle?
Are the taxpayers responsible for bailing someone out for
their mistakes? I don’t think so. A few years ago congress
made it harder to file for bankruptcy because everyone was
paying for others mistakes of overextending their finances.
If you are one of the people that overextended, shouldn’t
you go to the bank and try to renegotiate your loan terms
before you go into foreclosure? That would be the responsible
thing to do.
We do not live in a socialist country yet, but with all of
the promises that are being made this year we soon may be.
I hope that we are not heading that way, unfortunately there
are a whole lot of people that think the government does a
much better job of taking care of us than we can.
When President Lyndon Johnson created his Great Society and
congress passed the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, I wonder
if he expected four generations of Americans to become dependent
on our government to support them. If he did, perhaps that
is why he and President Kennedy did not see eye to eye on
so many topics. Remember it was Kennedy that said “ask
not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do
for your country.”
With the current crop of candidates, who do we have to lead
our great country?
Larry Donaldson
Darlington, SC
TOP
