It appears that Eric Olander missed the warning, Norm, in your letter. He again addressed you in his usual acerbic style, forgetting you wouldn’t read any more words to you, by him. He’s more zealous in spouting his own verbiage than listening to others. So I will take your wise advice, and ignore him henceforth, also.
Regarding the missive by Brian Wright, here’s my reply. I, too, agonize over the Iraq War and its carnage; I groan in spirit over American and Iraqi fatalities (as I believe President Bush does ” not judging his heart as others do, including you).
You have every right to protest the war, even as I have to support its mission, in spite of the pain and terrible loss. But think briefly what the alternative might be.
America ended one of the most brutal, murderous regimes in history, and helped bring its architect to justice. Estimates of Saddam’s reign of terror range from 400,000 to 1,000,000 killed, including the war he launched on Iran. If we hadn’t stopped him, he could have wiped out three or four million by now. If he had, especially with the chemical weapons he definitely possessed and used to slaughter thousands of innocent Iraqis, you and others would condemn Bush for doing nothing to stop it, even more than you disparage him now. You know it’s true; he can do nothing right in your eyes.
All wars are abhorrent, but sometimes the lesser evil becomes the preferable choice. We were brutally targeted by Islamo-fascists long before we were in Iraq or Afghanistan. I believe Bush was right, in spite of the polls and the American Left, who’d rather appease or ignore evil, than confront and defeat it. (That’s why Obama would make a pathetic choice for president, in the cowardly steps of Jimmy Carter.)
Also, Brian, have yours or your friends’ phone calls or medical records been monitored via the dreaded Patriot Act? If not, let’s hear it for far-Left paranoid rants, folks!
Norm, it is good time we ponder what would it be like if we’d taken our own puppet dictator Saddam out prematurely. Putting aside for the moment that sanctions are, and have always been a form of warfare; making the present conflict simply the third phrase in the first Gulf War. We actually went to war because sanctions were due to end under full compliance, before we sent in known CIA operatives as inspectors, and thus began the process of legitimizing the WMD dodge; would we not be there propping up a weak Saudi Government and keeping Iraq oil off the world markets?
Considering we were daily bombing Iraq infrastructure and civilians for the whole 11 years of sanctions would the Iraqi’s suffered less, while the permanent members of the UN Security Council was stealing $8 billion dollars from the Oil for Food program? Good questions to ponder, Norm, because we’d probably still be there same as today. The reason being our actual strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan is to keep happily destabilized so Iran can be our perpetual enemy in the economy of warfare. That, I might add, is as American as apple pie.
If they print this, Norm, I may not disappear without a trace, but I know for a fact that of those who do, one out of every 100 Americans, there are many who are there simply for telling the truth. Some may even be here in Colorado, in Super Max. Our own specially-built Gulag, for silencing dissent. With a 24/7 solitary confinement policy, where the only one to hear from you again is the voices in your head. This is the price of the illusion of freedom, Norm.
Support Local Journalism
Support Local Journalism
Each donation will be used exclusively for the development and creation of increased news coverage.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
User Legend: Moderator Trusted User