The American Spectator

Reader Mail

(Page 3 of 9)

If we choose to believe the mainstream media in this country, the war on terror and the battle for Iraq is all but lost. In my opinion the American people have become a nation of "instant gratificationists." Video games, the Internet, cell phones, credit cards, etc. have given us almost instant access to nearly anything material. Not all Americans fit the categories I just described but a large percentage do. The anti-war leftists along with readily available "Rent-a-Mob" misfits and the all too willing media have fueled the opposition to the battle for Iraq's freedom. World War II raged on all over the world it claimed millions of our very best and it took five long sorrow filled years to win, then after winning the war it took another 10 years of occupying Germany before it was finally declared safe from terrorism. During the five years of WWII the American people were rationed of food, goods and products they did so willingly believing these sacrifices were toward a just cause. Are we being asked to make these sacrifices today? In today's world would the American people be willing to make those sacrifices, somehow I doubt it. No, we would have the ACLU, trial lawyers, the NAACP, would be Cindy Sheehans, wannabe Michael Moore or Al Frankens this type would be whining, crying and gnashing their collective teeth in protest that their civil right had been violated, "Give me a break Jake!" What these people don't realize is that the murdering thugs we're killing would most likely kill them first as they are activists and so called leaders and a totalitarian government will not tolerate activism of any sort. A good example of the repression is China, North Korea, Iran or Cuba, read actual eyewitness accounts of how the people of these countries are denied their freedoms and even food; it is almost beyond our comprehension.

p>"GW" warned the American people long ago this would be a long bitter struggle and it's a struggle we must win, a loss would mean a rapid decline of an entire way of life for the American people. I do agree President Bush could possibly do more explaining the war to the people but an overload of information could also work against the President and aid our many enemies. We elected our leaders to protect us and I do not think the American people could comprehend or need to know everything concerning our nation's security. We as a whole are ignorant of history and just to prove my point I offer a challenge to anyone, go up to anyone under 40 on the street and ask them who our first President was, where the Civil War was fought or who was U.S. Grant and Robert E. Lee, I dare you. As a whole the American people must quickly realize that if we don't kill these murderous terrorists on their streets they will soon be on our streets trying to kill us and that's a fact and sadly I cite the tragic 9-11 events as an example. br> -- Carlton E. Leslie br> Hagerstown, Maryland /p> p> I'm afraid Jed Babbin's article is quite disturbing to me and a lot of others, but the man speaks the truth. He has put into words something that has been in the back of my mind for some time now about Bush's leadership on this. We lost Vietnam at home through the PR campaign, now we just might do the same with Iraq. I believe, though, that Iraq is the center of the GWOT. It is the killing ground. The enemy is feeding terrorists into this country and we are killing them. Should we expand the war and take on other nests of terrorists? Should we have gone into Cambodia, Laos, even China in the Vietnam conflict? Or should we just be content to stay in Iraq and kill the enemy as they cross the border? Of course, there's Afghanistan but that is another can of worms (in more ways than one). We should bear in mind one thing though. If we cut and run in Iraq ("peace with honor"), the killing won't stop for us as it did in Vietnam. No we will still be bombed and killed but here instead of in Iraq. I also doubt if these left-wing "peace" loving cowards who are clamoring for our defeat will crawl out of their holes long enough to help defend us. That is the reality Jed, no matter what our concerns might be and yes, you are right, Bush had better start showing his leadership on this. While that comes about, this ol' boy will hold the fort up here in la la land until they pry the pen (and computer keyboard) from my cold dead hands. br> -- Pete Chagnon /p>

Mr. Babbin's call for the President to lead is stirring, and one fervently hopes that Mr. Bush gets the message.

But, sir, "palimpsest"? What the devil is a palimpsest? I have a high school diploma, thank you, but I haven't the slightest idea what a "palimpsest" is.

Nor will I look it up in a dictionary.

As Mr. Babbin so aptly pointed out, wartime presidents have to tell our people what is going on, and why.

p>It seems to me that a similar obligation must be born by wartime analysts: they have to tell our people what in heck a "palimpsest" is.

topics:
Mainstream Media, Social Security, Islam, Constitution, Law, Military, Iraq, Iran, NATO, North Korea, Energy, Oil