SmallGovTimes.com

By: Felicia Benamon | Published on 07/13/07    

In the past, I've advocated that we support the President in his request for funding for military operations in Iraq. I supported the President's view of having no attachments to the Iraq Funding bill...as it should have been. I was under the impression that after getting the war funding needed, that we would go on the offense with a vengeance. I haven't seen it. Thus, my view of the Iraq war has taken a new direction.

For the sake of bipartisanship and for the sake of the precious lives of our troops in battle, I would hope that President Bush would at least sit down and meet with concerned Republican lawmakers in Washington who represent a growing consensus among their constituents who want to see an end to the Iraq war. President Bush has been plunging ahead full force with a troop surge, but that has left many unnerved. Why commit more troops to Iraq without showing the full brunt of our military's might?

The reason President Bush has advisors is so they can tell him the best course to take in fighting terrorism and the war in Iraq. It would be best if the President lent an ear to all who have concerns. He can't go about making decisions on Iraq on his own, or from a select few.

President Bush is losing Republican support left and right and it doesn't seem to faze him. He is going about things his own way.

A lot of times, when I hear President Bush speak to the American people as he tells us to expect heavier fighting (as if casualties on our side expect to rise)...I wonder, why are we thinking in that mentality? When we go on an offensive operation, shouldn't we have the mentality that it is our enemy that will suffer the consequences of heavy losses? The American people need not worry, right?

We have the capability of causing heavy losses on our enemies and we won't do it. Never in the history of the world have we seen a desire by our enemies to control, dominate, or wipe us out and our way of life. But it seems we are not taking that scenario serious enough.

We got rid of one tyrant, Saddam Hussein. The US has sophisticated means of collecting intelligence, no doubt aided by satellites. We can pinpoint a wanted terrorist in no time. Once we have established that we have in sight the enemy, why not take him out? I am still waiting to see Osama Bin Laden caught or wiped out. We certainly are able to find who we need to find. This question needs to be asked...why are we limiting ourselves in this global fight on terror?

Something else that has bothered me...the fact that we are charging our troops with supposed "war crimes" against civilians. No war will be painless...we've been more brutal in the past and civilians caught in the heat of battle have suffered far greater. Today, our military is fighting with the utmost care they possibly could to avoid any civilian casualties; it's changing even how we fight wars.

A soldier is trained to kill. He is to identify the enemy and go after them to kill. This war has seen terrorists use, time and again, women and children as human shields. If the enemy wishes to use that tactic, then they are putting their own citizens at peril. It is not the fault of American troops and our allies to hold back because civilians get caught up in the war strategy of the enemy. Why is there no outcry from humanitarian groups to terrorists to cease using women and children? No, the fault always lies with our troops. It's a disgrace!

War is necessary to remove the threat of evil, to confront and defeat evil. We must not play around with evil. We should never treat terrorism as if it were some law enforcement issue. Defeat it and move on.

Considering the position I am now taking, I am not protesting war for the sake of it; I truly feel we need our troops home to protect against any future attacks against this country and to fortify, increase, and strengthen our troops. Some of them have done a number of tours in Iraq and Afghanistan and are no doubt weary.

I do not advocate that we make our troops abandon their presence in Iraq right now; I really believe we need to employ a different strategy so we CAN exit sometime in the future. I really hope that we step up offensively and with a vengeance; the way we are going now seems to drag on.

I just wrote an article only hours ago and mentioned an amendment backed by Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee that would seek the help of our allies more and would see us eventually leaving Iraq. But if we do not go on the offensive, then the strategy that the amendment offers seems the wiser choice.

Iraq needs to step up and govern their country, same for Afghanistan. We came to help in those countries (and in other countries throughout the globe) and that's all. Now we need help back at home. The border situation seems to be out of control (our border to the South); the US Border Patrol is needing help. No one terrorist should even come CLOSE in succeeding in another attack on America! I say this because it was reported today that US intelligence suggests Al-Qaeda is looking to execute more attacks on American soil by infiltration or by agents already on American soil.

The President needs to think of Americans here at home. And no, I don't think regular law enforcement can handle a terrorist intent on inflicting mass causalities. Our troops can help here.

Most Americans want an end to our role in Iraq; we need to be fortified at home. Defending our beloved homeland takes more importance over any other matters right now. We may not know what to expect in the future. Iran is said to be focused in getting nuclear material; Iranian President Mahmood Ahmadinejad wants an end to the West and our way of life, China is rapidly increasing their military for a reason. America must not be vulnerable militarily.

Let's think of our troops and their families, and move to see an end to US presence in Iraq and Afghanistan. We can use our full might of the military if only our military were allowed to. President Bush used to talk tough (as he should) on "taking it to the enemy" so if he is going to talk that way, he should deliver. The US doesn't bluff.

Original URL:
http://www.smallgovtimes.com/story/07jul13.conducting.war/index.html