Letter to Rep Poe re: Afghanistan

I'm responding to your e-mail to me of 8 March 2011. Your e-mail, of course, did not respond to my original message, but that is not so disturbing as the evident lack of perspective and perception of the actual text of you response.

In that response, you state, “I believe the President needs to act swiftly in providing these additional troops.  Hesitation and inaction will only provide comfort to our enemies, frustrate our allies, and cause the people of Afghanistan to question our resolve.”

What enemies? The Taliban is aggressive only because the US military is there. It was not the Taliban who attacked New York and Washington – it was al Quaeda, and their leadership is not in Afghanistan. There is something deeply shameful about continuing to use 9/11 as a justification for remaining in Afghanistan.

What allies? Other countries have left Afghanistan or are leaving. President Karzai has made it known several times that he doesn't want the US military there either. His presidency is corrupt and only eats US financial aid. This is hardly an ally for the short or long term.

What people of Afghanistan? Again, they have made it evident that they do not want US military in their country, especially once civilian after civilian is erroneously and carelessly killed by US “mistakes.”

As for resolve, that is never a reason to maintain unwise military presence anywhere. This is the same lousy argument made for years and years during the Vietnam conflict. Resolve means nothing when tens, hundreds of billions of dollars and hundreds of lives are wasted in Afghanistan. Today more than ever, Americans feel that military presence there is “not worth it.” It is only worth spending money we do not have to corporations who who influence Congress more than common sense does.

Again, your response doesn't hold water. It's based on false assumptions, hyperbole, and a very short-term (and expired) understanding of the old conflict.

Withdraw. That is the only sane decision.



Popular posts from this blog

Comments from Tiffany Flesher 4 May 2015

From Tiffany Flesher Doc Martin, Really really sad this class is over. I enjoyed having you as a professor this past year and a half, but I want you to know I consider you a friend .  Thank you for being my listening in ear in times that I needed it the most. One of the best parts about you (not only your teaching style) is your ability to make people feel like they are important and not just another face in the crowd. I also appreciate your lack of judgement.   Your strength this semester with all that happened in your own life was inspiring. More than anything, thank you for making me feel like I could still do this at 30 years old. I will TRULY miss giving you hell in class.                                               Basically, y...
Read more

Letter to Rep Riddle: Judicial Influence

Dear Ms. Riddle, Recently New York’s top court officials decided to bar the state’s hundreds of elected judges from hearing cases involving lawyers and others who make significant contributions to their campaigns, a move that will change the political culture of courts and transform judicial elections by removing an important incentive lawyers have for contributing. This move bluntly tackles an important issue in our state — money in judicial politics — that deserves more legislative attention. Similar measures have been adopted recently in Washington, Oklahoma, Michigan and other states, and would take the question of disqualification entirely out of judges’ hands. Texas, too, should flatly state that “no case shall be assigned” by court administrators to a judge when the lawyers or any of the participants involved donated money in the preceding two years. The reasons should be obvious. Daniel Schuman has written about the growing problem of money in judicial elections across...
Read more

Letter to Rep Poe regarding Debt Reduction

The rich must be taxed for a healthy economy. It is completely illogical to think that a percentage-based equality is good for the middle class. To use percentages to equate tax obligations makes no sense as disposable income is used in greater amounts for the lower and middle class than for the upper class. We know, after 30 years of Reagan's trickle-down economics, that it doesn't work. The American middle class has shrunk by 30% since Reagan's tax code. The discussions this week MUST include revenue increases. That is the only thing that can possibly reinvigorate the economy. Yes, I agree that "entitlements" must be addressed, but the budget discussions must include increased taxes on the super rich if there is any hope of long-term recovery, because the corporations and the banks obviously are not interested in investing in the middle class any more.
Read more