|By Robert Schroader (cache-mtc-aa07.proxy.aol.com - 188.8.131.52) on Friday, September 24, 2004 - 1:35 am: Edit Post|
WHILE WE ARE EMBARKED ON A FOREIGN POLICY MOVE IN THE TROUBLED REGION FROM WHICH MOST THE WORLD'S OIL COMES, I WONDER WHY YOU RESPONSIBLE JOURNALISTS HAVE OVERLOOKED THE SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN GERMANY'S POLICIES SINCE THE FALL OF THE WALL.
WAS NOT tHE POPULAION OF THE COMMUNIST-EAST GERMANY-PEOPLE FAR GREATER THAN THAT OF WEST GERMANY? Is there any possibility (probability?) that all those young Pioneers brought their Communism/Socialism into the government of our old "allies"?
How about France; has its Communist population influenced the "side" is chooses in times when it does not perceive any threat from an expanding Russian empire?
Ally=friend. Do we really think of "friends" as being people who take bribes in the $Billion to thwart our plans at the U.N.; after all, France has a Veto. Do we really want to seek help from a Socialist Country that can care less about our loss of lives and property? Doesn't look like it, does it? Is it correct that Kofe Annin's son was on the list of the Bribed? Do you think that bribe could have been beneficially for the UN Leader? How about some time spent on these global issues instead of the glorious history of a LT. J.G. in the Navy and a 1st Lt who flew Jet fighters, either or both of them under somewhat questionable circumstances; could you put aside your personal biases as a lifelong Democrat for long enough to do a real piece on the emergence of the European Union as something less than an Ally?
We have had President after President trying and sometimes claiming to have solved the situation in Israel, but can you in your wildest dreams put any real faith in what we have done? Do we owe any allegiance to a tiny little country that has been our ALLY, our FRIEND, that includes among its citizens thousands of Americans? Is it possible our insertion of massive force in that troubled region will be ... in the long run ... far less expensive than all our previous failed eforts have been.
Could we have some reporting as to how many people die EVERY YEAR in automobile crashes? As a direct result of engaging in harmful activities like: Drinking? Drugs? Smoking? Could we put our Experience vis a vis Iraq in historical context with Hitler's Germany; JAPAN attacked us, but Roosevelt declared war on Germany and spent the next 4 years -- w/out a clue as to post-war planning -- to defeat the Germans,who did not attack us. Then and only then, did he turn our attention to our attackers; JAPAN. He had his doubters, too, but where is the reporting or historical context that might inform the public instead of contributing to more divisiveness. Or how about some Supreme Court stories illustrating how the same Court that decided the outcome in the 2000 Presidential Election also gave us Roe vs Wade (Abortion), Brown vs Board of Education (Integration) and Jones vs Clinton (Anybody, including the Nation's highest elected officer can be sued). If the Deomocrats really want, intellectually, to believe President Bush was "selected", then why aren't they supportive of the wishes of the majority who do not want Abortions or Integration.
In the 1st Amendment, our forefathers gave the 4th estate great protection, but in present times we, the people, must rethink that power. Under the assertion of the nation's right to know, Mr Rather and Co. abused that power; while most in the press and other media seem perfectly willing to water down or eliminate the rights embodied in the 2nd Amendment, why should we in the majority allow it. The framers didn't intend to limit the people to having blunderbusses; had they who wrote so beautifully, they'd have so stated. They were guaranteeing us the rights to protect against all enemies of our form of government, "...both domestic and foreign." May I presume every Peace Corp worker took the same pledge as did all other federal employees. I am retired and not rich, but I have voted in every election since I was 18 and I intend to continue to do that -- Vote -- for the rest of my life.
It irks me to see and hear the media do so little to help end the polarization of America, but make no mistake about it, those of us who demonstrate our love for our form of government are not going to move Left to accomodate the lovers of the left who favor socialism over democracy. It gives those of us who served in the "War Corps" faith in the future to see the younger generations taking on the burden of protecting our society from it enemies. President Eisenhower laid down the principal that if we were to engage in nuclear exchanges it would be better for us, Fortress America, to have it begin somewhere else. To contemplate awaiting an attack from another power via submarine, boat or passenger jet is unthinkable.
Can you imagine the devastation to the poorer people? So many live in the megacities of the east coast it is horrible the havoc a series of "dirty" bombs would wreak. Is there something in that lofty code our media proclaims but practices so little that prevents them from being both patriotic and inquisitive?
We've lost 1,000+ lives in war in Iraq; must our own media do all it can to make them be wasted? How is life in each of the Iraqi provinces? Did their Leader speak truthfully in stating the vast majority are relatively peaceful?
Is there any chance the "freedom fighters, insurgents and the like are well-financed by the Billions of $ amassed by Saddam Hussein? Is it possible our brave troops face fighters from France? Russia? Germany? How much time has our own media spent investigating the make-up of the foreign fighters? Or is our media convinced those guys are not nice enough to trust with their lives; after all, they have the example of Daniel Pearl to influence them, haven't they?
I ask these questions in the faint hope you'll turn your considerable power to more useful pursuits than reinforcing the divide. We really cannot expect the elected Congress or Presidents to behave much differently, can we?
Was Lyndon Johnson really much better than ... Bill Clinton, for example? I believe he was because he had a sense of shame; Clinton has none.
Maybe we could have some reporting about the failure of his administration to enforce our right to inspect in Iraq and thus KNOW about WMD instead of having to guess and then decide whether to err in the direction of waiting ... for another attack. We can never expect our Presidents to be more than what they are, the political leader of their respective parties. Why did LBJ retire without a fight? Could the blame for that be laid at Kerry's feet for creating the air of defeat in a war we won?