Any member of the Democratic Party, of which I have proudly claimed to be since the late 1950s, who reads the Oct. 4 letter of Mr. Hoffman [“The tragedy and irony of Islamic terrorism”] should be outraged at its not-so-subtle accusation of Democrats “becoming strange bedfellows with the terrorists.”

Any American who has had the privilege of serving this nation as a member of the armed forces (which I am sure that Mr. Hoffman has), especially during wartime, realizes that men and women of all political persuasions, ethnic backgrounds and religious beliefs go into combat not as Democrats or Republicans, Jews, Christians, Muslims, agnostics, or atheists, etc., but as Americans.

Shame on you, Mr. Hoffman, for besmirching the sacrifices of young Democrats, or any non-Republicans, who are defending you today in Iraq and Afghanistan just as previous generations of young Democrats, along with their Republican comrades and others in arms, have sacrificed in every other war in which this nation has been involved.

The tombstones at our countless national cemeteries do not list the political party of which the deceased was a member. They are simply honored as Americans who served their country honorably.

To insinuate that a Republican, by definition, is intrinsically more patriotic, politically attuned or less gullible than a Democrat, especially during a time of war, is not only despicable, but divisive and must be causing true Republican leaders such as Eisenhower, Goldwater and Reagan to writhe in their graves.

We fight and die as individual military members of the armed forces of a great country, not as members of a 26th Republican Regiment or 99th Democratic Division.

Another trait which you seem to have adopted directly from the playbook of Karl Rove is to define anyone who disagrees with President Bush on any issue as hating him. By this definition, if you ”hate,” you are not simply disagreeing, but being irrational and, on occasion, uncontrolled.

It follows from this that you simply disregard such individuals who disagree with the policies of President Bush because they are really not worthy of having their views considered.

I must give Mr. Rove credit as such egregious practices have proved useful throughout the presidency of George Bush. Another, not-so-subtle term but, I must again admit, which is effective, is to not necessarily describe someone who disagrees with President Bush as a Bush hater, but as a Bush basher. Clever or cutesy, with the same result.

Let me turn to another issue, the truth, similar to that of patriotism noted above, which is an additional marquee item on which this administration claims to have cornered the market.

While they constantly harp on leveling with the American people when it comes to how we, both the American people and the two houses of Congress, were fully informed as to the facts surrounding President Bush’s decision to invade Iraq, the full truth comes nowhere close to supporting the administration’s claims.

Mr. Hoffman, it should be pointed out, loudly and clearly, that this administration has “cut and run,” one of their favorite mantras, from the actual truth when it pertains to the administration’s “marketing” of the Iraq invasion.

With this track record we are constantly bombarded with the chant of “trust this President, he is doing all that he can to save American lives.” Meanwhile, world opinion of the U.S. has sunk to all-time lows and we are lectured “to stay the course” in Iraq, whatever that means.

The preconceived decision to invade a sovereign nation, which had no desire or capability to attack the United States, by the ideologically-based neoconservatives, spearheaded by Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary of Defense Wolfowitz, was predicated on the argument, “Do not give us 100 valid reasons as to why we should not invade Iraq; find one or two that we can ‘sell’ to the American public out of fear.”

Whammo: weapons of mass destruction and strong ties to al Qaeda appear. Over 2,700 dead, brave young Americans and approaching $500 billion in expenditures later was one [heavy] cost in experimenting with placing “democracy” in the Middle East.

In closing, it should be pointed out that there are five words which are to found nowhere in the letter of Mr. Hoffman - al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden.

I do believe that even a cursory check of the facts by Mr. Hoffman will reveal they, and not Saddam Hussein, initiated the attacks of 9/11. Osama bin Laden is still unlocated and the ranks of al Qaeda have grown from roughly 1,000 to 2,000 in Afghanistan in September 2001 to an estimated 20,000 to 40,000 worldwide today.

And Afghanistan, which was supposed to have been “liberated,” is slowly but surely devolving into a morass similar to that of Iraq while now producing 95 percent of the world’s poppy seeds. This not only fuels the world’s supply of illegal opium, but significant funding for a growing and increasingly threatening Taliban.

Now that is progress, Mr. Hoffman.

Wade J. Williams
Peachtree City, Ga.

The writer describes himself as a “retired Army colonel whose 30 years of service includes 18 months in Vietnam and Thailand among 15 years spent overseas.”

login to post comments