Now you're in my home court

I'd like to respond to Joe Repya's letter printed on the 27th. Let me start off by saying that I am a retired Army MSG. I was in Joe's unit when he was an instructor assigned to the 5042d USAR School at Ft. Snelling. I was there when he volunteered for active duty during Desert Storm. I respect his commitment to military duty.

But I disagree with him on Midwest Heroes ad. I fully support our troops, I was one. However, that does not mean I have to blindly believe what the current regime says and does, nor does it mean that I must accept the incorrect assumptions portrayed in this ad.

Al-Qaida was responsible for 9/11. We attacked Al-Qaida in Afghanistan, where it is based, to retaliate for 9/11. However, watching the ad, one is left with the feeling that Al-Qaida was based in Iraq and that Iraq was responsible for 9/11. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Al-Qaida came into Iraq after our invasion, specifically to harass our troops.

The ad further states that we are improving road, schools, hospitals, utilities, and others. Yes we are, but are we not really just trying to get the standard of living back to where it was prior to our attack? Did the Iraqis not have functioning hospitals, schools, utilities, and roads while Saddam ruled? The Iraqi infrastructure was destroyed by our invasion and the Iraqi insurgents. Our troops are merely returning it back to pre-invasion days.

The ad also implies that we invaded Iraq because Saddam was a vicious tyrannt. I will admit that Saddam may not have been the best of leaders. However, there are may countries around the world with equally bad leaders, ones that allow torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners, and ignore or abuse human rights. Are we planning on removing all those leaders also? Are we justified attacking a sovereign nation when we do not approve of the leaders?

In short, the ad is a thinly veiled attempt to justify keeping our troops in harms way, fighting in a country we had no right to invade.

While I firmly support our troops, I do not support our regime's decision to place our troops in harm's way, nor their continued reluctance to bring them home. If you support out troops, ask the regime to define a specific mission, not some nebulous "war on terror", achieve that stated mission, and withdraw the troops.

Post #246,539 by jbrabeck 3/1/06 10:09:09 PM Reply	Now you're in my home court Minnesota. I didn't read Coleman's columns. I regret that he called them unAmerican. However, the first ad sucked. It looked and sounded like a swift boat campaign. Watch the Strib, see if I get published in the letters. If my letter doesn't get published in a couple of days, I'll come back and post it here. The second ad was moms/family who lost a son/daughter. The all want to believe their children died trying to make a difference. Again, I've addressed that in my letter. Stay tuned. (I don't have the letter here at home or I'd post it now) A good friend will come and bail you out of jail ... but, a true friend will be sitting next to you saying, "Damn...that was fun!"
Post #246,592 by jbrabeck 3/2/06 2:03:23 PM Reply	Here's how I replied I'd like to respond to Joe Repya's letter printed on the 27th. Let me start off by saying that I am a retired Army MSG. I was in Joe's unit when he was an instructor assigned to the 5042d USAR School at Ft. Snelling. I was there when he volunteered for active duty during Desert Storm. I respect his commitment to military duty. But I disagree with him on Midwest Heroes ad. I fully support our troops, I was one. However, that does not mean I have to blindly believe what the current regime says and does, nor does it mean that I must accept the incorrect assumptions portrayed in this ad. Al-Qaida was responsible for 9/11. We attacked Al-Qaida in Afghanistan, where it is based, to retaliate for 9/11. However, watching the ad, one is left with the feeling that Al-Qaida was based in Iraq and that Iraq was responsible for 9/11. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Al-Qaida came into Iraq after our invasion, specifically to harass our troops. The ad further states that we are improving road, schools, hospitals, utilities, and others. Yes we are, but are we not really just trying to get the standard of living back to where it was prior to our attack? Did the Iraqis not have functioning hospitals, schools, utilities, and roads while Saddam ruled? The Iraqi infrastructure was destroyed by our invasion and the Iraqi insurgents. Our troops are merely returning it back to pre-invasion days. The ad also implies that we invaded Iraq because Saddam was a vicious tyrannt. I will admit that Saddam may not have been the best of leaders. However, there are may countries around the world with equally bad leaders, ones that allow torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners, and ignore or abuse human rights. Are we planning on removing all those leaders also? Are we justified attacking a sovereign nation when we do not approve of the leaders? In short, the ad is a thinly veiled attempt to justify keeping our troops in harms way, fighting in a country we had no right to invade. While I firmly support our troops, I do not support our regime's decision to place our troops in harm's way, nor their continued reluctance to bring them home. If you support out troops, ask the regime to define a specific mission, not some nebulous "war on terror", achieve that stated mission, and withdraw the troops. A good friend will come and bail you out of jail ... but, a true friend will be sitting next to you saying, "Damn...that was fun!"
Post #246,595 by jb4 3/2/06 2:15:52 PM Reply	I resemble that remark! However, there are may countries around the world with equally bad leaders, ones that allow torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners, and ignore or abuse human rights. Are we planning on removing all those leaders also? Are we justified attacking a sovereign nation when we do not approve of the leaders? Hey, I live in just such a country. And I for one would relish "removal" of the so-called "leaders" that turned our country, the envy of the world up to that point, into just another banana republic. To quote that same "leader": Bring it on! jb4 "Every Repbulican who wants to defend Bush on [the expansion of Presidential powers], should be forced to say, 'I wouldn't hesitate to see President Hillary Rodham Clinton have the same authority'." &mdash an unidentified letter writer to Newsweek on the expansion of executive powers under the Bush administration
Post #246,599 by jbrabeck 3/2/06 3:14:54 PM Reply	I was hoping for the mirror effect. Thanks for confirming. A good friend will come and bail you out of jail ... but, a true friend will be sitting next to you saying, "Damn...that was fun!"
Post #246,611 by Another Scott 3/2/06 8:12:59 PM Reply	Well said.
Post #246,733 by a6l6e6x 3/3/06 9:45:01 PM Reply	Very nice, Joe! Alex When fascism comes to America, it'll be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross. -- Sinclair Lewis

Welcome to IWETHEY!