Email from Iraq

Sam sent my post, Iraq by The Numbers, to some friends. One of his friends
sent it to a friend currently serving in Iraq. That friend emailed a friend
back who emailed Sam back who then emailed me back:

Who cares? You can support any argument if you pick and choose what numbers
you use. The person who sent this has an OBVIOUS agenda, and it has nothing
to do with Iraq.

Notice the numbers not present:

People murdered in Chicago in 2003? ( 599. )

UN Resolutions requiring the government of Iraq to DETAIL the exact status
of their weapons programs AFTER it became clear that Iraq had used those weapons
on its own people and invaded another country?

Times Iraq threw weapons inspectors out?

Government sanctioned MURDERS, TORTURES, and RAPES prevented by the United
State’s toppling of a tyrant?

Years that people have been living in the “Cradle of Civilization”
without a constitutional democracy? (Over 5,000.)

Countries who helped the United States oust a murderous thug and attempt to
build a representative democracy in Iraq? ( 49 – of course France, Germany,
and Russia weren’t there, but then again neither were North Korea, Syria, or
Iran.)

Countries who came to our aid after September, 11th? ( ZERO )

Times John Kerry, Teddy Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, and their ilk DECIDED to under-fund
and over-task the people (like the CIA and the military) charged with defending
and protecting the people of this country?

US presidents who formally identified “regime change in Iraq” as
US policy?

Times BILL CLINTON was told “We have Bin Laden in our sights” and
did not act decisively? ( 3 )

USS COLE victims’ funerals BILL CLINTON attended? (I know this one – it was
ZERO. But it’s ok, he wouldn’t have been welcome.)

How about the number of Soldiers Bush RISKED HIS LIFE to serve Thanksgiving
Dinner? Or the number of Members of the Military who understand that President
Bush landed on the USS LINCOLN to THANK THEM for their service, and who still
FEEL HONORED that he would do so. (Count me in this.)

Or the number of ASSHOLES like the one who sent you this email who GIVE A SHIT
about any of the US Soldiers Killed in Iraq for any reason other than to try
to undermine the first President with the BALLS to do something to instill and
preserve NATIONAL SECURITY since Ronald Reagan? (I know this one too. I’ve seen
plenty of people like him over the last 20 years. And they’d all just as soon
spit on me as thank me for my service.)

Imagine the gull of the person who drafted the original email you forwarded
me. That person IS ACTUALLY DOING that which is claimed of President Bush –
he is USING the Iraq war further his own private and selfish agenda. And is
doing so at the expense of all of those injured or killed – and all of those
who serve their country voluntarily and ask very little in return. To that person,
I am a caricature – a little bit like Jack Nicholson in “A Few Good Men”
ranting that, “I’d rather you just said THANK YOU and went on your way.”
That person has NO CONCEPT of what the Soldiers in Iraq are doing, or why they
are doing it. To that person, words like HONOR, COURAGE, and COMMITMENT; FIDELITY
and INTEGRITY; LOYALTY, DUTY and SELFLESS-SERVICE; — words like RESPECT —
are words of contempt that can only be uttered in disbelief and with an eye-rolling,
cynical smirk: those words have little or no real meaning. The truth is that
even a “THANK YOU” from that person would ring hollow, because those
words have that same value to him.

The truth is that we who dedicate our lives to the service of our country do
so because those words DO have meaning. The truth is that the soldiers in Iraq
do what they do because it must be done. And the truth is that those soldiers
CAN HANDLE it, even if the anonymous author of your email can’t.

That person actually BELIEVES that “Bush started this war to get re-elected!”
Think about that for a second … does it make ANY sense? George Bush made the
most controversial decision of his presidency for political reasons?

George Bush NEVER said “Mission Accomplished.” Everyone in the military
knows it. The SAILORS on the USS LINCOLN said it because – at the end of their
historic, longest-ever deployment of an Aircraft Carrier during a time of War
– their mission WAS accomplished. With Pride.

And I have one other number for you: 292,861,000. That is the number of Citizens
of the United States NOT killed by terrorists – or anybody else – since the
war began.

Think about it.

This entry was posted in News on by .

About Andy

Gay Hoosier Taurus INFJ ex-playwright pianist gymbunny published author in San Francisco. Tw · Fb

8 thoughts on “Email from Iraq

  1. Brent!

    Interesting email back from Iraq. Essentially, like many political topics, both sides of the argument are “right” to the people that believe in it…

    Although, I can’t answer the question I’ve had since we stormed into Iraq: Despite toppling Saddam, and yeah, probably saving many more lives in doing so, answer me this: Who are we to push a Jeffersonian Democracy onto another sovereign nation? I mean, for that matter, why haven’t we just taken over Cuba yet? It’s communist…but so was Vietnam 40 years ago…

    Interesting…

    Brent!
    BRL, Inc.

    COMMENT:
    “Countries who came to our aid after September, 11th? ( ZERO )”

    We all grieved with you. Citizens of many countries died that day. Gander, Nfld is now famous for taking in all the stranded passengers. Here in Vancouver, alot of the same.

    4 Caniadian solders were killed in Afghanistan. By US pilot zipped on speed. Noone was to blame apparently.

    We helped until Iraq and the fact that he’s shit deep in a US mess doesn’t excuse his bit that he has no friends. His government did that, not us.

    (my cousin lost 2 friends on 9/11. He was in the building the first time.)

  2. Christian

    I’m impressed that you posted this response, Andy, despite how much I’m sure you disagree with it.

    I agree with it, but too many people (myself included at times) aren’t willing to let the other side get in its say.

    Nice job.

  3. flounder

    “Although, I can’t answer the question I’ve had since we stormed into Iraq: Despite toppling Saddam, and yeah, probably saving many more lives in doing so, answer me this: Who are we to push a Jeffersonian Democracy onto another sovereign nation? I mean, for that matter, why haven’t we just taken over Cuba yet? It’s communist…but so was Vietnam 40 years ago…

    Interesting…

    Brent!”

    If Castro started harboring terrorists with the capability to produce WMD in order to kill Americans, then yeah Cuba would be next…unlike the half-assed Bay of Pigs failure (resulting in the suffering of Cubans for the past 40 years), this Prez is going all out to defeat terrorism and bring freedom to the people of the Middle East. Its sickening to see liberals like Ted Kennedy trying to undermine these efforts with bogus and divisive accusations…

  4. Tim Z.

    In typical comments which betray an ignorance of history and an aversion to the truth, the anonymous “flounder” (good name!) fails to recall that the US almost went to war with the Soviet Union in October of 1962 over the very issue of nuclear weapons in Cuba.
    This quaint incident is known a the “Cuban Missile Crisis”. It sends Republicans running for the Kaopectate because the very mention of it reminds voters that the GOP propaganda about the Democrats being “weak on national security” is false.
    John F. Kennedy, a decorated World War Two veteran was the Democratic president in 1962. John F. Kerry, a decorated Vietnam War veteran, is also a Democrat.
    George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Carl Rove are all chickenhawks who don’t know the difference between an M-16 and an F-16. They are eager to send young people into the sort of conflicts that they themselves went out of their way to avoid.
    They were unable to defend the nation against box cutters on 11 September 2001. I feel much less secure that this fundamentalist clique is currently in charge of our security.

    If I had a few hours, I’d respond in full to that post from Iraq. While it’s mostly neocon Democrat bashing, he does score debating points in about two of the two dozen areas he rants about.

  5. Gary Barnes

    Is it outside the realm of possibility that political parties throughout history are just trying to get elected. And that a president from either party who had intelligence like the cuban missle crisis or the present terrorist/UBL might just get with his advisors and do what is best for this county? We have to believe that Clinton didn’t pass on UBL while having hard information that he was planning to kill Americans. We have to believe that Clinton didn’t know that 800,000 people were being butchered in Rwanda. We have to believe that Bush had and has information that is leading us towards the elimination of radical islamists. We don’t know if the Middle East is capable of a kind of democracy. But, if it is, the world will be a safer place. As a side note, me presidential match came up 58% Bush and 58% Kerry.

  6. flounder

    What’s up with the ad-hominem attacks? Don’t forget I’m not only ignorant, but a bigoted fascist as well…

    Its interesting that liberals applauded Clinton for avoiding service back in ’92, yet now they trash Bush for “only” serving in the Guard while lauding Kerry as a war hero. Which is it lefties?

  7. Jarred

    Clinton didn’t go around saying he was a “war president”.
    He didn’t put on a flyboy suit and land on a carrier and proclaim “mission accomplished” when it wasn’t.Bush avoided service in Vietnam by jumping ahead of 500 poor and middle class Texans to get into their national guard.
    He partied during the war while Kerry, Gore, and Clark suffered in Vietnam.
    At least Clinton was honest about dodging the draft. That’s why he was applauded. He would kick Bush’s ass back to Texas if the two could run against eash other.

  8. flounder

    “At least Clinton was honest about dodging the draft. That’s why he was applauded.”

    Looks take a closer look at this statement because I think it goes to the heart of liberal ideology. So its “okay” when someone does something wrong if they admit to it?

    Dear liberals, admitting to wrong behaviour may be good for the soul and the right thing to do, but it doesn’t make it acceptable behaviour that should be applauded. Makes you wonder where “lying under oath” by a President falls in what liberals believe should be applauded…

Comments are closed.