Commit to winning war
The debate between John Terlazzo and me, both on the Sunday News op-ed page and Yorkblog.com, is important, yet few others become involved. More than Rush Limbaugh and Al Franken must get tackle this issue, and I can’t leave the last word to an America basher.
Mr. Terlazzo, you say I missed the point demonstrating the improbability of the 655,000 Iraqi death toll, that 6 or 655,000, it’s all the same. But that is not what you said when you first raised the issue as a way to label our troops as child killers. The death toll became a mere statistical contrivance to you only after I laid out the facts and weakened its propaganda value.
To comment on this letter, click on “Comments” below
You spout your anti-Americanisms and cry foul when I apply light to your heat. Motive behind opinion is always an issue. Your high school classmates and teachers agree you fomented political discord then, and you have not changed. It is not about flowing to “where the pop culture machinery of any decade purports to lead” but viewing contemporary issues through a 40-year-old lens. I have not attempted “to discredit [your] deeply held spiritual views” but to discredit your insults to our nation. You have called our troops murderers, child killers, and mindless puppets, and claimed violence as our creed while admitting America means to you “no more nor less than the whole of humanity.” You worship in your preferred manner in this nation that means nothing special to you because that right was purchased with the blood of men and women whose ideals you condemn.
Most of America did not consider Iraq an immoral war until they realized our troops were dying pointlessly because once again we will not commit to winning. It’s Korea and Vietnam all over again. But if we leave Iraq to radical Islam, if we cave in to the Cindy Sheehans and John Terlazzos, it will be only a matter of when and how often the terrorists come. How many times must this insidious enemy declare its eagerness to destroy us before you believe them? How many bodies must pile up before you resign from the Rosie O’Donnell brigade and join the country that grants you freedoms you seem hardly to appreciate?
Fight wars rarely, but once engaged, fight as we did in World War II. We are not doing that in Iraq. That is immoral.
Dennis W. Brandt
Windsor Township
Two points:
1. "If we leave Iraq to radical islam". Allow me to point out that Iraq was a secular state until we toppled that regime and made the country vulnerable to domination by fundamentalists.
2. "We will not committ to winning". For six years President Bush planned and fought the war he wanted to fight. The left denied him nothing. He got the money and the force level he wanted. Bush and Rumsfeld angrily countered suggestions by their own generals that a larger force should be committed.
History will be the ultimate judge of this war. Personally I do not think that bringing democracy to Iraq is an achievable goal at this time. But do not attempt to create a myth that the democrats or the press lost this war. This is president Bush's war and he failed us. He did not commit enough troops, he did not adequately plan for the occupation, he alenated our allies, he failed to gain an understanding of the region or its people. In summary, the president took an awful situation - the Hussein dictatorship - and somehow managed to make things worse. Many a fine soldier has suffered for his incompetence.
"You fomented political discord then".
It's called dissent, and it is more beneficial to the republic than is your mindless flag-waving.I wish more americans were a little more cautious about sending our sons and daughters to war. Iraq is a disaster. It has made us less safe, and ruined the lives of thousands of americans. It would be great if the saber-rattlers would learn something about the limits of military power. Alas, they will just invent some story to blame it all on the libs.
Why are you so threatened by this guy?
John is a typical feel good, do nothing lib, no sense in arguing with him or any of the other anti-Americans out there. They would not understand the truth nor believe it if it smacked them along side the head. No wmd huh? How did Sadam kill thousands of his own people with nerve gas then? His weapons are long gone because the worthless UN gave him time to do so. No use arguing with folks that are ignorant of the facts and truly hate America, no matter what they say they do.
He had no WMD because the "worthless" UN and its inspectors, and the airstrikes of the Clinton era did their job and he got rid of them. No point in arguing. Anyone who thinks that the Bush administration is wrong "hates America". What a crock. Just ignore the FUBAR that Iraq is. That is about as far as your thought processes go. By the way, Where did you serve?
I love america, dash, and do not appreciate the insult. A cheap attempt at smearing those who disagree with you does not make you fit to debate anywhere but fox news. But I am sure that will fall on deaf ears.
The cardinal rules of how to debate like a conservative.
#1 Bush is good. (or is it "god").
#2 Anyone who disagees with you about anything hates america and wants the terrorists to eat our children.
#3 The bill of rights are more "suggestions" than amendments.
#4 Liberals lost Vietnam.
#5 Liberals lost Iraq (working on just how they did it. Will get back to you on that.)
#6 Liberals are godless gay-loving humanists who want to take your Hummer and rape puppies on their day off. They are responsible for the UN, ACLU, traffic congestion, astroturf and the Brady bunch reunion.
There. That should get you well on your way to replacing Bill o'reilly.
Insults, sound and fury, signifying nothing. That is political "discussion" in America.
Well, dryfly has revealed to me I have no clue as how to debate like a conservative! lol - It's probably because I'm absolutely not a mainstream one.
Anyway, if I remember correctly, Mr. Brandt is a Lincolnite. Lincoln helped us believe that war = peace. Of course, no one is going to say they like war, but obviously profit is being made by the bankers as the involved countries bury themselves in death and debt. Not to mention the state naturally usurps more power during these times (look - now the president may declare war, without first having Congressuional approval).
If we could only understand that "spreading enlightened democracies throughout the world" is a globalist ideal and not an American one, we could see this through a clearer light.
Glad you got a laugh out of it, Katie.
have a good weekend!