Sunday, April 02, 2006
Please vote on Tuesday, and oppose the cut-and-run WITHDRAW resolution.
There is a permanent portion of the population that will never support a war under any circumstances. I just received the pro and con flyers from the organizations fighting it out on the "cut and run" resolution. The proponents of the resolution certainly have a lot to say, and have used a lot of words to say it. They virtually ooze with self-righteousness, with an additional dose of Frankenian naivete.
I don't support the President on everything, and I have always had some doubt that Iraq was the region most worthy of our national focus. But the danger was real in the minds of Bush, Gore, Kerry, and Clinton and we moved forward to stop the threat and build a better world. Naive? Perhaps. But ambitious and idealistic at the same time. Similar to G.W. Bush's commitment to fighting AIDS in Africa, the War on Terror and the War in Iraq and Afghanistan were started as an effort to transform and improve the world. Nothing whatsoever selfish or evil about what we've been trying to do.
So the same extremists with the "War Is Not The Answer" yard signs have now organized the upcoming vote to condemn what George Bush and our troops are trying to accomplish. Unlike some, I don't think it's unpatriotic to oppose a specific military action, but I do believe that opposing every war is simplistic and shallow. There are causes worth the loss of American life, and the anti-war activists deserve our contempt for failing to recognize that fact. Is hating George Bush and Republicans a good enough reason to tell our soldiers that we do not support their mission?
I, for one, am grateful to have a President willing to think big and take risks in a post-9/11 world, and a military with the ability to fight the good fight and meet every challenge. Telling both the President and our troops that their decisions and sacrifice have been a mistake, seems somehow blasphemous in my mind. I'd like to think that I would support Bill Clinton if he had made this decision as our Commander in Chief. The Naderites would never do that, of course. But the good people of America ought to get behind our efforts to build a better world.
For better or for worse, we made the decision as a nation to liberate Iraq from Hussein and help them build an independent nation, free of dictatorship and ethnic or sectarian cleansing. It was and is a worthy goal. I would encourage all of you to dismiss the anti-war zealots and reject this "cut and run" referendum. The people and ideas behind this effort do not represent the best of what America has to offer the world. Turning our back on the great challenges of the day is no way to make the world a better place.
Please vote on Tuesday, and oppose the cut-and-run WITHDRAW resolution.
Comments:
<< Home
For better or for worse, we made the decision as a nation to liberate Iraq from Hussein and help them build an independent nation, free of dictatorship and ethnic or sectarian cleansing.
The problem is that we made the decision as a nation based on incomplete information, only seeing part of the picture. As a result, much of the nation now feels hoodwinked, or bamboozled. "To liberate Iraq," as you put it, was not the driving force behind the war's original support. It was the supposed immediate threat Iraq presented toward the United States.
In the aftermath, many people feel they have not had a decent forum or fair opportunity to have any sort of accountability or reconciliation over the fact that most of the "reasons" for going to war have fallen flat.
So, people are left wanting their voice to be "heard" and this referendum has sort of sprouted up as one of the few places to do just that. Is it ideal, or the best way to do it? No, not really.
But, people on the left think (and are right) that Bush not only doesn't heed their concerns, but doesn't even hear them to begin with.
Until Bush gives a complete mea culpa about how the administration hoodwinked America (whether it was his personal intention or with his own knowledge or not), you are going to continue to see these obscure methods of a disaffected and growing segment of the populace that feel their voice has not been heard by the people in power.
I know you and everyone reading this blog on the right might be sick and tired of this movement, but it is not you and your readers that these people are truly trying to reach.
Post a Comment
The problem is that we made the decision as a nation based on incomplete information, only seeing part of the picture. As a result, much of the nation now feels hoodwinked, or bamboozled. "To liberate Iraq," as you put it, was not the driving force behind the war's original support. It was the supposed immediate threat Iraq presented toward the United States.
In the aftermath, many people feel they have not had a decent forum or fair opportunity to have any sort of accountability or reconciliation over the fact that most of the "reasons" for going to war have fallen flat.
So, people are left wanting their voice to be "heard" and this referendum has sort of sprouted up as one of the few places to do just that. Is it ideal, or the best way to do it? No, not really.
But, people on the left think (and are right) that Bush not only doesn't heed their concerns, but doesn't even hear them to begin with.
Until Bush gives a complete mea culpa about how the administration hoodwinked America (whether it was his personal intention or with his own knowledge or not), you are going to continue to see these obscure methods of a disaffected and growing segment of the populace that feel their voice has not been heard by the people in power.
I know you and everyone reading this blog on the right might be sick and tired of this movement, but it is not you and your readers that these people are truly trying to reach.
<< Home
