Did I Miss Something In The News?
Dear editor:
Somewhere along the way I must have missed or misunderstood a lot of the news about the war in Iraq. Every time I hear an update from a member of the administration or the military leaders of our country it is in complete contradiction to what has been said previously, which leads one to question the honesty and competence of these people. And the sad part is that they think you believe, without question, everything they tell us.
Take for instance the latest testimony of General Petraeus, a much decorated and respected officer and leader, before the Senate committee hearings recently held in Washington. The general, if anyone, should (and I mean should) have a clear understanding of what is going on in Iraq. General Petraeus explained that pulling more troops out of Iraq at this time would be a major mistake because we have made too much progress to withdraw additional troops. Sounds reasonable. But the only problem with that is that he previously told Congress that we hadn’t made enough progress to withdraw additional troops. Talk about complete reversals. Do we make up reasons as we go along?
President Bush told us over a year ago that the “surge in troops” will make Iraq safe enough for that country’s legislative and executive bodies to make great political headway in order to secure that country and give the United States a successful campaign and war. Well, we’ve had over six months of reduced violence and death but the expected goals set forth by our president haven’t happened. (However, we have seen an uptick in violence and American deaths.) As a result, our definition of success has once again changed, which it has done many times since his selling the country on the necessity of a pre-emptive war to safeguard our country.
On May 1st, almost five years ago, President Bush stood on that aircraft carrier and proclaimed for all to hear and see that our troops were victorious and it was “Mission Accomplished.” Of the over 4,000 Americans troops killed in this war, almost 3,900 have died since that famous misplaced scene and speech. This is to say nothing of the almost 30,000 wounded.
We were told that the major purpose of attacking Iraq was to free the country of the despot ruling it, namely Saddam Hussein. Since Saddam was captured on December 13, 2003, almost 3,600 of the over 4,000 Americans were killed. So now we backpedal to come up with a new definition of success.
How are we the American public supposed to understand and believe the information and protestations of our leaders when the stories keep changing to fit their incompetence? When can we have a firm, unadulterated reason for our continuing loss of life and raping of our treasury? Just saying that they will recognize “success” when it happens isn’t good enough. And by the way, what does the word “success” mean when applied to the debacle in Iraq?
Somewhere along the way I must have missed or misunderstood a lot of the news about the war in Iraq. Every time I hear an update from a member of the administration or the military leaders of our country it is in complete contradiction to what has been said previously, which leads one to question the honesty and competence of these people. And the sad part is that they think you believe, without question, everything they tell us.
Take for instance the latest testimony of General Petraeus, a much decorated and respected officer and leader, before the Senate committee hearings recently held in Washington. The general, if anyone, should (and I mean should) have a clear understanding of what is going on in Iraq. General Petraeus explained that pulling more troops out of Iraq at this time would be a major mistake because we have made too much progress to withdraw additional troops. Sounds reasonable. But the only problem with that is that he previously told Congress that we hadn’t made enough progress to withdraw additional troops. Talk about complete reversals. Do we make up reasons as we go along?
President Bush told us over a year ago that the “surge in troops” will make Iraq safe enough for that country’s legislative and executive bodies to make great political headway in order to secure that country and give the United States a successful campaign and war. Well, we’ve had over six months of reduced violence and death but the expected goals set forth by our president haven’t happened. (However, we have seen an uptick in violence and American deaths.) As a result, our definition of success has once again changed, which it has done many times since his selling the country on the necessity of a pre-emptive war to safeguard our country.
On May 1st, almost five years ago, President Bush stood on that aircraft carrier and proclaimed for all to hear and see that our troops were victorious and it was “Mission Accomplished.” Of the over 4,000 Americans troops killed in this war, almost 3,900 have died since that famous misplaced scene and speech. This is to say nothing of the almost 30,000 wounded.
We were told that the major purpose of attacking Iraq was to free the country of the despot ruling it, namely Saddam Hussein. Since Saddam was captured on December 13, 2003, almost 3,600 of the over 4,000 Americans were killed. So now we backpedal to come up with a new definition of success.
How are we the American public supposed to understand and believe the information and protestations of our leaders when the stories keep changing to fit their incompetence? When can we have a firm, unadulterated reason for our continuing loss of life and raping of our treasury? Just saying that they will recognize “success” when it happens isn’t good enough. And by the way, what does the word “success” mean when applied to the debacle in Iraq?
posted by Sam Schoolsky | 2:45 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home