Response to Chris Mills’ column “Moral Nightmare,” dated May 18:
I agree on one point only with your comments regarding your view on the war in Iraq. You state, “Contemplating those vying to replace (current leadership) brings us no consolation.” I agree the current pick of 2008 candidates is extremely disheartening. However, there are many accusations made by you that are distorted or untrue:
1. President George W. Bush is a “God-sent” leader, not a leader who instituted a “monomaniacal troop surge.” By unanimous vote, a Democratic Senate elected the new Army Gen. Petraeus to go to Iraq. President Bush is acting on Petraeus’ recommendation to increase troop strength.
2. War is (and was) approved by Congress, not by President Bush alone.
3. It does not seem all supporters of the war have “either repented or lost interest.” Your own statement “the troop surge is well underway” is proof that the Democratic majority did not have enough votes to override President Bush’s veto of a timetable to withdraw troops (tacked onto war budget bill). Therefore, a large minority agree with President Bush’s policies.
4. You make an assumption when you imply that our nation is not grateful for the death of a soldier in the line of duty; that only his family cares. I am a member of this nation and I am very grateful! This is a volunteer army, unlike Vietnam and very different in other ways as well. The enemy is hidden (sometimes with suicide bombs attached to women or hidden behind children). Our hospitals were not prepared for this type of maiming on this scale. Do you actually believe that the lack of proper veteran hospital care is as a result of only President Bush’s administration? When it was brought to his attention, he immediately addressed the problem.
5. You state a true accounting of the war’s costs “has been distorted and hidden from us.” In your own words, you say there is “almost no hard evidence upon which to base (your) objections.” It works both ways you make an assumption that could be incorrect when, in fact, the war’s costs could be correct.
6. You speak of this as an immoral war. From “Why Does God Allow War?” by Good News Publishers, 2003: “The question that needs to be asked is Why does God not allow the world to destroy itself entirely in its iniquity why does He set a limit to evil? On the brink of the Nazi Holocaust, a British preacher named Martyn Lloyd-Jones concluded ‘the ultimate cause of war is lust and desire the same tendency we see in ourselves to be jealous, or to lie, or to hold a grudge God allows war as a reminder of the horror of sin and a wake-up call in our own hearts, and in the entire human race, which leads to such results.'” By the way, what are you doing reading Hustler magazine anyway?
President Bush is striking at terrorists on their own ground. Never forget the previous Iraqi government, through the use of chemical weapons, killed over a million Iranian people before 1990 and probably over a million of their own Kurdish people (the mass graves are still being unearthed). One of Saddam’s own former generals, Georges (Sada) wrote a book published in 2006 called “Saddam’s Secrets: How an Iraqi General Defied and Survived Saddam Hussein.”
” Saddam’s plan in 1990 (was) to attack Israel with three types of chemical weapons: the nerve gas Tabun plus Sarin 1 and Sarin 2.” Even though Afghanistan and Iraq now have representative governments, Iraq’s issues go deeper because the insurgents from the two vying religious sects want power through oil and their greed will drive them to do whatever it takes to undermine their new government including killing their own people. President Bush is a good man, and a Godly man, divinely-inspired in turning around evil for good. You can choose to ignore the facts that belie the truth like the vast majority of the media. There will be an accounting at the end of the day and ultimately ” There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known.” Matthew 10:26.
I share some of your frustration about the war because I have three close relatives over there, but to direct the majority of your condemnation toward one man, President Bush (as seen in other articles you have written) is like walking around with blinders on.
CARRIE KNEELAND Groton