U.S. Congressional District 2 Michigan -- Open Forum
Removing our Rose-colored spectacles
From: Terrie Hampel
Date: 21 Sep 2004
Time: 11:00:29 -0400
Remote Name: 63.183.96.71
Comments
Revised (shorter) version of letter sent to Muskegon Chronicle and
Holland Sentinel this week:
Dear Editor,
Sixteen months after the war's supposed end, Iraq's insurgency is
spreading. Each successful demand by kidnappers has spawned more
hostage-takings, the purposes of which are to end the American
occupation. The few relief groups that remain in Iraq are talking
seriously about leaving. U.S. forces have effectively ceded entire
cities to the insurgents, and much of the country elsewhere is a
battleground. The total number of U.S.war dead has passed the 1,000
mark.
Most senior US military officers now believe the war on Iraq has become
a disaster on an unprecedented scale, including retired general William
Odom, former head of the National Security Agency, who conceded Sunday
that we have better achieved Bin Laden's ends with our occupation, than
our own goals there. (NY Times, 9/16)
Despite the propaganda in the press and our airwaves, it is important
for all of us to fight our way through the political rhetoric. Denying
the truth puts us more at risk. One of the biggest risks to our security
is in assuming that our representatives in Washington have our best
interests at heart. In his capacity as sub-committee chair on tactical
and technical intelligence, Peter Hoekstra, our US Representative,
should have been aware, or was complicit in the plans that led to the
early failures of intelligence, and later abuses in Abu Ghraib and other
detention sites, which allowed mercenaries to exercise operational
control there. Violating codes of conduct regarding prisoners, --and a
"win at all costs" mentality--continues to inflame those who have been
"liberated" and shame us who support our troops. Do we really feel
safer, or our freedoms better defended by this? Does Mr. Hoekstra really
have what it takes to lead as chair of that committee?
We are all concerned about self-defense. Protecting ourselves from
terrorism is important and expensive. But between the tax cuts for the
super wealthy and "reconstructing" Iraq, we are no longer able to afford
necessary defenses at home. How, for example, is this pre-emptive war,
now costing us more than $200 billion, providing more security? -- By
leaving our first responders, like, fire, police, National Guard and
Reserve units understaffed and underfunded? By under-defending nuclear
and other power plants, attacks on which could take out thousands at a
time? By leaving hundreds of miles of our US borders vulnerable to easy
entry for hundreds of terrorists? By inspecting only 3-5% of incoming
freight in our ports, where experts say safety demands at least 20%?
To top all of that, we have now killed more than 13,000 Iraqi citizens,
angering most in the Arab world and making the terrorists’ funding and
recruiting of volunteers easier. When we should be making friends in the
world to help us find the terrorists, we are making new enemies!
Removing our rose-colored glasses reveals that the policies of the Bush
administration have put us more at risk, not less. The truth is so
disturbing we don’t want to believe it. But please. Do your own
research. You'll see it is essential to replace Bush and his
mouthpieces, like Mr. Hoekstra, if we are to truly protect ourselves
from terrorism at home.
Reasoned voices with alternate solutions can be heard on websites like
alternet.com, democracyNow.org, truthout.org and many others linked to
these. Make sure you've opened yourselves to both sides of the issues
before you vote this November.
Sincerely,
Terrie Hampel
|
