Banana Republic Generals

Dear editor:

Are our generals at it again? Is keeping a war and troops overseas a guarantee of job security and glory that doesn’t come from sitting comfortably in the Pentagon? Are they trying to change our country from civilian (elected) control to one controlled by the military? Why ask such outlandish questions? Just look at news reports that beg the possibility.

At present the United States has about 139,000 troops in Iraq. The Status of Forces Agreement signed just last year by then President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki stated that U.S. combat forces would leave in 2011 and all American forces would leave by 2012. President Obama plans to bring U.S. combat forces home from Iraq in 2010, which fits his commitments and speeches during the campaign for the presidency. Mr. Obama planned to use the money saved from the Iraq War (huge) to help pay for the country’s recession. In February of this year, Defense Secretary Robert Gates reiterated the U.S. commitment to this agreement. Evidently our high ranking men with all the stars on their shoulders have different plans.

In April, General Ray Odierno, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, stated that the decision on withdrawing American forces from Iraq’s major cities by the June 30, 2009 deadline will be made by Iraq Prime Minister, not by our duly elected American government. And now, Gen. George Casey, the Army chief of staff, speaking at an invitation-only briefing to a dozen journalists and policy analysts from Washington think-tanks, says that the Pentagon is prepared to leave fighting forces in Iraq for as long as a decade despite an agreement between the United States and Iraq.

Isn’t it wonderful? These two high ranking generals have leap-frogged over the civilian control of the Secretary of Defense and the President of the United States and offer their own international decisions for our military and the lives of our troops. When did we become a banana republic controlled by generals who think they know what is best for our country? And let’s not confuse the desire of our troops, who would rather be home, than with the glory boys who only sit safely behind the lines shining their stars and medals.

State of "Palestine" Quiz

Dear editor:

Okay, put on your thinking caps, ‘cause it’s time for “The State of Palestine Quiz.” This is one of the major problems for peace in the Middle-East. Anyone able to answer any of the below questions deserves an award for creative and imaginative writing.

1-When was the country of “Palestine” founded and by whom?
2-What were its borders?
3-What was its capital?
4-What were its major cities?
5-Name at least one “Palestinian Leader” before Arafat.
6-What was the language of the “Country of Palestine?”
7-What was the prevalent religion of the “Ancient country of Palestine?”
8-What was the name of its currency?
9-Choose any date in history and tell what was the approximate exchange rate of the “Palestinian” monetary unit against any other national currency on that date.
10-Since there is no such country of “Palestine” today, what caused its demise and when did it occur?
11-Why did “The Palestinians” never try to become independent until after the devastating defeat of invading Arab states in the 1967 Six Day War against Israel?

Interesting questions without any answers. Doesn’t solve any problems but does add some light onto the subject.

Wild West University

Dear editor:

In Sunday’s (May 17th) American Press there was a letter supporting the bill that approves of an adult who has a ‘right to carry permit’ to carry a concealed weapon on a college campus. The writer’s opinion in this letter is bolstered by a possible scenario of a deranged person entering a classroom and starts shooting. His possible story continues with someone else in the classroom also had a concealed weapon and shot the assailant before others were killed. That’s a wonderful wishful ending. But what if both were poor shots and bullets started to fly back and forth killing even more people than ever? That’s also a very real possibility. One which we surely wouldn’t want.

Consider a second possible scenario that also happens on a college campus. Saturday night after a winning football game and students are celebrating with a beer and booze bust. Two “adult” students (both with a right to carry permit) get into a friendly drunken argument that gets out of hand and before anyone knows it, guns appear and the bullets start to fly, not only at them but at others. It could happen.

Or how about the student who gets a grade lower than he (or she) thought he was going to get, rushes to complain to the professor about the mark, loses his temper, pulls out his “right to carry” concealed weapon and shoots and kills the instructor. Once again it could happen.

More weapons will not solve problems on a college campus, but rather increase the possibility of tragedy. Surely we don’t want to live in the old wild west, which could be the result of all of these guns on campus.

Of course our Congress in Washington is also trying to up the ante by considering passing a law that will allow weapons in national parks. What’s the chance of someone mistaking a hiker for an animal and firing at it. Couldn’t happen? Better not go to the park with Dick Cheney.

What it all boils down to is that our representatives locally and nationally bend to the will of the gun lobby (NRA) in this country because of the need for money in election and re-election campaigns. It is almost as if our representatives are owned by that lobby and will do nothing to endanger the money tree. This has nothing to do with second amendment rights (as our governor claims), gun sports and home protection, but rather with good old fashion money and how it is doled out.

Putting guns into the hands of young students on campus won’t protect anyone and won’t preserve the second amendment to the constitution. It will only lead to terrible tragedy.

Misplaced Priorities

Dear editor:

There are so many major problems facing our country today: the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; the possible war in nuclear armed Pakistan; the U.S. foreign debt in the trillions; Swine-flu epidemic; continually rising unemployment; the drug wars that are creeping into our Southwestern states; the cost of oil; the economic crisis facing our country and the rest of the world; the Middle East; environmental problems; the cost of financing and paying back our continuing and growing budget deficit; China; individual state, city and local financial problems and cutbacks; home foreclosures; bank failures; etc, etc, etc. It is a huge burden for our elected representatives to try and solve in the long and short term. They have to put their minds and staffs to the full time test of trying to solve these problems.

But, do they always put first things first and at least try to solve the biggest and most important problems first? Usually, but not always. Take the case of Rep. Joe L. Barton (R-TX) and three of his colleagues at a hearing before the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protections. What did they think was so important as to jump ahead of major world problems facing their committee and Congress?
According to Congressional reports, Rep. Barton has introduced legislation that would prohibit the NCAA from advertising its national champion in football as such unless it was produced via a playoff system. He levied the most pointed criticisms of his peers toward the Bowl Championship Series. “Sooner or later, you’re going to have to try a new model, and that’s why we’re here today.”

I love football, but let’s face it; shouldn’t that be way down the list of problems facing our country? Is that why Rep. Barton was elected to Congress? Should college football and its championship be handled at the highest level of government in our country? A little bit of common sense and intelligence, which congressmen and senators don’t always display, would answer that question very easily…. NO! Let’s get back to work on the important items and stop wasting time satisfying some school left out of the BCS equation, which is obviously what Rep. Barton is trying to do.