Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Policy Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (6187)	12/9/2003 12:39:30 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15987

Hawk, the military families are going through emotional challenges in the face of Bush continuing to keep their near and dear ones in Iraq and Afghanistan without any info on why they are there etc. I don't necessarily disagree with you.. But even if it were political, it will be cloaked in military and governmental secrecy.. A secrecy that is probably quite sound, depending on a person's perspective (protecting sources, not compromising investigations or operations.. etc). Look at how Feith's letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee, denoting Iraqi involvement with Al-Qaeda, was leaked (now pending an investigation itself).. And unless you have ever served in the military, or know any military families, you probably wouldn't understand their mentality.. Most military families understand the sacrifices they are forced to make. Especially in the post 9/11 environment... They understand that we're at war and don't need much "convincing" as to why after the WTC and Pentagon attacks. What is emotionally challenging to them is why certain political leaders have sided with the anti-war factions and attempted to directly, or indirectly undermine their mission by casting doubt and dissent about decisions that now lie in the past. These military families are worried about the present and the future. They have no need to hear Howard Dean speculate about whether Bush had advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks, or about whether there were WMDs in Iraq or not. They had only to see the state of the Iraqi people and economy; to visit the mass graves, to fight the Fedeyeen, to deal with the mass terrorism against humanitarian agencies (UN, Red Cross).. To understand that while certain demagogues grouse about whether we should have attacked Iraq or not, they are tasked with winning the peace and destroying all violent opposition to stabilizing and rebuilding that nation. So I would worry less about how it will sound, when and/or if, the Bush administration fully discloses the results of the intelligence they have obtained, than how it sounds to have people questioning we should have overthrown a brutal dictator who was sworn to exact revenge upon the US for his defeat in 1991.. That's what alienates military families Chinu.. As someone who served over 10 years in the Army, and who still associates with a number of military people, I think I can express that opinion with some confidence, at least with respect to the majority (there will always be a minority of dissenters). Hawk