TIMELY AND DEPRESSING
Re: Jeff Emanuel's A Surge in
Ignorance and Defeatism:
Mr. Emanuel's piece on our ignorance is timely and quite
depressing. One thing that caught my eye was his assertion that al
Qaeda could make the war regional. There's no maybe, there is a
certainty. Bin Laden wants Mecca. And if anybody thinks that the
Saudi military would have an easier time against al Qaeda than
we're having, well, talk about ignorance.
-- Andrew J. Macfadyen, M.D.
Omaha, Nebraska
Mr. Emanuel hits the nail on the head. The Iraq war can be won if
we commit to victory and leave partisan politics aside. Conversely,
we are guaranteed to lose if we remain divided and focus on
departure as our number one objective. This has been the problem
all along and will remain so until we leave with al Qaeda at our
backs or President Bush starts showing some leadership by getting
out and speaking to us about what is needed instead of telling us
that is a tough haul, will take time, and he and the troops are
"working hard." No, he needs to come out and tell us what is at
stake, appeal to our patriotism, explain that we will LOSE if we
are not united and that we are fighting Al Qaeda despite what
Congress keeps telling the press. He needs to explain that victory
can only be accomplished if we pull together and then he needs to
ask for support. Explain that Congress voted to pursue this war and
that means victory, so that Congress should get behind their
Commander-in-Chief and help him win the war. The sooner we win, the
sooner we get out. I do not believe that I have heard him ask for
support since early in this whole mess. Being united requires a
leader. Bush cannot unite us unless he demands it. Over and over
again.
-- Patrick Minnis
Yorktown, Virginia
Contrary to Jeff Emanuel's multiple claims about "war on terror," "victory in Iraq," "strategy" and "winning." The truth is much more clear and obvious. Bush and his cronies invaded Iraq to secure the oil resources of that country. Whether you believe the Neocon plan to increase the flow of oil from Iraq to crush OPEC, or the Oil Corp. plan to restrict the flow of oil from Iraq to maintain the artificially high price of oil, it doesn't matter. The bottom line is that they invaded to control the oil resource and the whole "War on Terror"/Al Qaeda/911/WMD's" bull manure is the smoke screen being used to sell it to the American public. Access to the oil is why we haven't left yet and that's why the "oil law" is the most important part of "reconciliation," because in that law are the profit-sharing agreements that allow unfettered, unalterable access to Iraqi oil by Anglo-American oil companies for the next 30 years. So how much more American and Iraqi blood do you want to spill for Oil Corp/Saudi profits?
If you continue to have the author write for you, why don't you
ask him to lay off the kool aid and treat your readers like
adults.
-- Dr. Erik Thompson
A man brings in his German shepherd to the vet. The dog is listless and fatigued. The doctor runs the standard battery of tests and reports back that the dog is seriously malnourished. The man says that impossible; I put out the most expensive and nutritious dog chow every morning. The doctor inquires does the dog eat it? The man thinks a bit, and answers indirectly that he sometimes feeds the dog food scraps. The doctor asks about the other family members. Yes, they feed the dog too. The doctor patiently explains that the dog does not have the intelligence to choose wisely when presented with a myriad of choices, especially if the food that is damaging is the tastiest choice. The man must be responsible for the dog and feed it only what it needs or grave damage will be done to the dog
While the last thing America needs is censorship, one of the
first things she needs is citizens who think before and after they
digest the news; in fact, our entire electorate system was created
upon the idea of an informed citizenry. We have, thankfully, a
plethora of news ranging from the Looney Left to the Up Tight Right
and everything in between. Too often people pick news sources, if
they have one at all, that are most convenient or entertaining. Few
people think about, let alone investigate, the philosophy,
ideology, or dogma of their news sources. When it comes to news,
Americans are overstuffed and undernourished. It is imperative that
we take responsibility for our being informed before grave damage
is done.
-- Ira M. Kessel
Honesty compels me to admit being one of the ignorant and defeatist whom Jeff Emanuel scolds. Allow me to explain how I got there, even if it doesn't stop the scolding.
My defeatism ought to be easy to understand. I believed we entered Iraq to eliminate the threat posed by a bloodthirsty dictator who vigorously supported terrorism. We had every reason to believe he would supply WMDs to terrorists. Diplomacy, isolation and sanctions had not worked, so we used force. Our redoubtable armed forces won the conventional war in a New York minute, vanquishing Saddam's armies and sending him into hiding. No problem there. But it all went sour starting the day Bush announced "Mission accomplished." The President was either premature or just plain wrong. As there were still areas not subdued, he should have held his tongue until resistance was eradicated. Instead, he left pockets of viable opposition who even today have yet to be taken out. He allowed them sanctuary in this or that mosque. He let collateral damage considerations outweigh victory. Fresh recruits flow across the same Iranian and Syrian borders that the elusive WMDs crossed, although border control has never been one of Bush's strengths (a topic for another letter).
Commanders hamstring our troops with ridiculous rules of engagement which give the enemy an advantage. Example: a terrorist bounds into view and starts spraying submachine gun fire into a squad of Marines, tagging three. He then throws down his weapon and puts his hands up. What instructions did the Pentagon give our boys? If you guessed "Don't return fire, just walk up and accept his surrender hoping there aren't any other snipers hidden nearby," you are very close to what my Marine son was told. According Geneva Convention treatment to terrorists isn't just unnecessary, it's idiotic. Reminiscent of "The Far Side" cartoon about the Wimpodites who fought with pillows being easy prey for other Vikings.
Mr. Emanuel may consider my arguments merely anecdotal, and evidence of an overall ignorance of the true strategy in Iraq. Okay, then, let's address my ignorance. Remind me, in plain English, what we are trying to accomplish. Lay out our strategic objectives, in either a logical or sequential order, using milestones, responsibilities, and estimated timing. Don't use vague phrases like "rallying tribes," "secure the population," or "win back their neighborhoods." If it isn't measurable, it isn't a legitimate milestone. Please don't ask me what the milestones should be; you're the embed, you tell me. Then tell me how much longer it will take, how many more dead we should expect, how much more it will cost. If it will take another 50 years and 10,000 funerals, be up front about it, or else we'll reach our own conclusions.
I suspect that it's the lack of a businesslike approach that has
cost this war its public support. Businesses never undertake
projects without a clear idea of what the objectives are, and what
costs and benefits will accrue. What Mr. Emanuel calls a
"fast-food, instant gratification culture" I call a
results-oriented culture. Americans will be as patient as we need
to be, but we don't enjoy throwing good money after bad, and even
more, we don't sacrifice our sons and daughters lightly. We don't
know what victory in Iraq even means any more because nobody will
tell us what the criteria are. The only data we get are casualty
counts and ridiculous stories about Abu Ghraib. We are in the fifth
year of this safari, and the only hide we have to show for it is
Saddam's. Is it any wonder that we are disenchanted?
-- Jim Bono
Midlothian, Virginia
An excellent piece. Mr. Emanuel's assertion that the American public is ignorant of the factual conditions with respect to Iraq and this state of ignorance leads to widespread defeatism is, I think, correct.
The question is why is the American public ignorant of the factual conditions even in an age of unparalleled access to information? The president has repeatedly enumerated the reasons for the war in Iraq and against Islamic extremism.
The reason for ignorance in the American public has to do with traditional American media. American MSM has consistently reported negative information about Iraq and excluded the good. This finding has been confirmed by several studies completed by media watchdog entities. I think a good follow up piece would be an analysis of why American MSM war reporting has been so biased against the war.