An Open Letter to President Obama - # 3
Hello again Mr. President. You are probably tired of hearing from me. Frankly I wish, by now, I had run out of issues to raise about your administration. You never answered my first two letters so I have provided a link (for Letter #1 and Letter #2 ) in case, you want to correct any errors in my observations.
Shame on you Sir, for telling us you would stop the war in Iraq and bring the troops home within 16 months. If I am not mistaken you have now modified that position some. The war is winding down quite nicely in Iraq (thanks, I believe, to the surge which you opposed) but you are now ramping up the war in Afghanistan. Is that different than a surge? I do not disagree with increasing our efforts in Afghanistan. I just wish you were a little more forthright about it. Mr. President, you are not bringing the troops home from Iraq, you are shifting them to Afghanistan. You also said the deficit you inherited was in large part due to spending on the Iraq war. Well, if you are shifting our military spending to Afghanistan, where are we saving any money? I don't get it.
I would also like to understand why you feel Iraq is a "bad" war but Afghanistan is a "good" war. Both are being waged to get rid of tyrannical leaders whos actions or perceived actions threatened the United States. Both wars are being fought to liberate oppressed people from these leaders. In neither case is the US occupying the countries for our own gain (we are there for our safety yes, gain no). When our work is done, we rebuild any physical damage and restore the infrastructure to as good or better than when we arrived. No superpower in history has ever been so selfless.
Wars are not pretty but some times they are necessary. Wars should be fought to win (quickly if possible) or not fought at all. We can never restore life to those who lose it in this type endeavor. For the innocent civilians it is senseless and incomprehensible. For our own brave men and woman it is tragic. They volunteered and gave their lives so that others would have a better life. They are truly our finest. Please be sure you do not render their sacrifice meaningless.
Shame on you Sir, for ordering the closing (within one year) of the Guantanamo Prison Camp. I know this was a campaign promise you made. It would have been better to just admit you might have been a bit hasty in your judgement on "Gitmo". I am sure you remember ordering an in-depth study of the prison camps to determine whether the detainees at "Gitmo" are properly treated and that US troops are abiding by the Geneva Conventions. I am certain you got to see the report (since you ordered it). Just as a refresher, here is partially what your in-depth study said:
"Guantanamo complies with the humanitarian requirements of the Geneva conventions and the prisoners are treated with dignity." It further said, "The Bush administration created a humane detention camp that has been unfairly characterized by critics". A Pentagon official said "the report underscored that if the men are moved, they may “go from a humane environment to a less humane environment.”
A visitor to Guantanamo (from that study group) saw first hand the living conditions of these prisoners, who have committed acts of terrorism or battled against America and her allies in the war on terror.
"I saw the exercise yards with elliptical equipment; learned about the six meal plans from which these detainees choose their weekly meals; saw the interrogation rooms for the hardest terrorists (these rooms have cushy, overstuffed couches); viewed the high-quality flat screen televisions the terrorists watch on their nightly movie nights; and observed the play yards where groups of detainees played soccer together.
Throughout the prisons, arrows are painted on the floor so when the prisoners are called to prayer five times a day (all prisoners are Muslim), they know where Mecca is.
The prison is climate-controlled. Each prisoner has a doctor, an orderly, a nurse, and receives better healthcare than our troops and the American taxpayers who foot the bill for these terrorists."
There is no logic to closing Guantanamo. It is safe and humane for the detainees and safer for us at home.
I do not believe you have decided what to do with the detainees when "Gitmo" is closed. I think it would have been a good idea to think that through first, but anyway, I have a suggestion. You have an unoccupied house in Chicago. With some security modifications maybe it could be used to temporarily house some of the Guantanamo detainees. Would that be OK with you? "No"... I didn't think so. Bringing them to US soil may not be such a great idea after all.
Still on the subject of detainees. Currently, detainees being held at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan cannot use the US courts to challenge their detention. The justice department ruled that some 600 so-called enemy combatants at Bagram have no constitutional rights. Most of them were arrested in Afghanistan on suspicion of waging a terrorist war against the US. The BBC's Kevin Connolly says, "the move has angered human rights lawyers, with one saying the new White House was endorsing the view of the old one, that prisons could be created and run outside the law”. Do you remember how the Left considered President Bush a war criminal for taking this exact position? Where does that leave you?
Shame on you Sir, for signing a nearly one trillion dollar Stimulus Bill and not specifying the funds needed to finish the full 2000 mile border fence. In 2006, Congress authorized nearly $3 billion for 670 miles of fencing stretching from California to Texas. It was agreed to and approved by congress in 2006 with your support when you were a Senator. It has not been completed yet, three years later. Using those numbers it looks like a mere ten billion dollars would cover the whole project. That is chump change in today’s trillion dollar world and it would create jobs NOW. If you were looking for bipartisan issue this would have been a good place to start.
Shame on you Sir, for showboating by convening 130 members of congress to brainstorm the budget deficit. As if 130 members of congress could do anything in three months or three years, you allocated only three hours to tackle this enormous problem. When it was over, participants said the meeting yielded promising insights on the nation's budget troubles, and you Mr. President said, "All the suggestions would be boiled down into a final report within 30 days". Please. That's like a giving final exam in college. Describe the "universe"... give three examples. You have one hour to complete this assignment.
Shame on you sir, for insulting the American people, lecturing us that you were going to reinstitute the "pay-as-you-go” policy which you said was abandoned in the last administration. You also suggested that it was a major cause of our current situation.
Excuse me Mr. President, but would it not have been wiser to do this a week before (rather than after) you signed a nearly one trillion dollar spending bill. Well it is not too late to now tell us how you plan to pay for it. What specifically are you going to cut that comes even close to one trillion dollars? Oh, excuse me, you are going to raise taxes to pay for it. Sir, you told the American people you were not going to raise tax on 95% of us. Mr. President, you could confiscate all the wealth of the top 5% of taxpayers and I guess that would be a few trillion dollars more or less. But then sir, what would you tax in future years?
I will close for now with a quote that was brought to my attention recently. I hope it makes as big an impression on you as it did on me.
"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it."
Dr. Adrian Rogers
Respectfully,
Steve Mishket
02/25/09
No comments:
Post a Comment