WAR IN IRAQ IS MUCH DIFFERENT THAN WORLD WAR II

A recent letter to the Herald ("Civilian deaths sad, but can't alter will") illustrates just how bland naivety has killed rational thought.

The writer sought to paint Iraq as being another war against the "Axis" powers, when in fact, we are fighting an enemy that can't be so easily defined as being German, Italian, or Japanese.

This enemy wears many faces, and the war on terror cannot be defeated simply by killing every terrorists we find. I ran across an article yesterday which spelled out why we are losing this war in Iraq and the war on terror. The columnist pointed out that even if we killed every terrorist today, terrorism would still be there tomorrow.

And the next day. And the day after that.

According to one controversial report, we have killed as many as 655,000 Iraqis and another UN report says that 1.4 million of them have been displaced because of the war. But the enemy is still there, and we are now grasping onto the idea that we can never defeat the insurgency militarily.

But the writer seems to believe that if we lost the war to terrorists, we will lose our freedoms and only be bowing down to Mecca 5 times a day as a result.

It's funny, but under Bush, we already have lost our freedoms. We lost Vietnam too, but that didn't mean we succumbed to Communism. I have serious doubts that by losing this war, we will all be converted to Islam in a second flat.

America will still be America no matter what happens. But we shouldn't allow our fears to rule our lives--if we can't face reality for what it is these days.

Schuyler Thorpe

xxxth Street xx #X001

Everett, WA 98204

(XXX)-XXX-XXXX

GOP WAR CRIPPLES US POSITION IN THE MIDDLE EAST

For the last 3 years now, Democrats and liberals have been offering up legislation, ideas, and plans to the GOP in hopes that some inkling of strategy and planning--in an already poorly laid out war--would sink in; thus minimizing the damage and chaos resulting from such insolent judgment on both the Bush administration's handling of the war, and the GOP's pigheaded stance that what they have will carry them through.

But Democrats and liberals had been shut out of the GOP's "circle of trust", and labeled as the party of "cut and run" and "aiding the enemy"--when we should all be just one big happy family--going on in pretense that nothing is wrong, and the war would somehow (by wishful thinking) sort itself out into some grandiose form of Western-style democracy.

Well, it didn't turn out as such, now had it warmongers?

You know, we tried to tell you this ages ago. But you wouldn't listen. You were absolutely convinced that your way was the right way, and our way was nothing more than 'defeatist' talk.

Guess what? You've reaped what you've sown. And now you're desperate to get out of Iraq, you don't know what to do! You can't leave, you can't withdraw, you can't defeat the insurgency militarily, but you won't call off this disaster which is now (sadly), Iraq either!

Because of your stubborn arrogance, your selfish pride, and your outlandish ignorance, you have doomed our nation and our foreign policy objectives in the Middle East for years to come--if not decades.

Congratulations on a glorious accomplishment! Semper Fi! (And sa-lute!)

Schuyler Thorpe

xxxth Street xx #X001

Everett, WA 98204

(XXX)-XXX-XXXX

PLANE ACCIDENT COULD'VE WELL BEEN A TERRORIST ATTACK

Not to sound off the fear alarm here, but the tragic accident involving Lidle's airplane revealed 2 critical flaws in the Bush adminstration's continued hypocrisy that they are continuing to make Americans safe from terrorists.

One, is the fact that the plane's course literally made a complete 180 and slammed into the high-rise apartment complex. If this was an actual terror attack, ground radar wouldn't have picked this up until it was way too late.

Second, the federal response to this accident was slow as usual. Jets were scrambled late--ten minutes after it had happened!

So much for the infamous Bush "precognative pre-emptiveness".

Schuyler Thorpe

xxxth Street xx #X001

Everett, WA 98204

(XXX)-XXX-XXXX

NO LONGER 'STAYING THE COURSE'?

In the six years since Bush has been President, one of the most stringent things about this buffoon is that no matter what befalls our troops in Iraq, you will always hear him say, "We must stay the course".

And now he's quoted as saying that he's open to the idea of changing that ideal?

After three years of an endless quaqmire? Of no planning or strategy by either this administration, the GOP, or the Pentagon?

Bush wants to finally listen to dissenting opinion and change his way of thinking?

Under normal circumstances, I would be applauding this decision, but we live in a set situation where anything Bush says and then does is anything but normal.

Schuyler Thorpe

xxxth Street xx #X001

Everett, WA 98204

(XXX)-XXX-XXXX

WORLD NOW MUST LEARN TO LIVE WITH A NUCLEAR IRAN & KOREA

Instead of being fearful of living in the shadow of a possible nuclear war with Korea and another possible pre-emptive "strike" by the US with Iran next year, has anyone thought of just saying, "the heck with it?" and moved on?

We all know that whatever sanctions against Iran will ultimately fail because of how far along Iran is with its nuclear enrichment program--and Bush's stubborn attitude towards that country in particular.

In regards to North Korea, the said could be said of the same. Diplomacy in the past had forestalled Kim Jong Il's nuclear ambitions, but--again--Bush's arrogance towards that nation has accelerated what could've possibly have been a lesser shock to the world in the future over this matter--had he not labeled that country as being a part of that "Axis of Evil".

We could've dealt with both countries on more amicable terms and avoided this whole mess had we just done things normally. But Bush didn't want it that way. He wanted a 'push comes to shove' line of foreign diplomacy. He wanted both countries to tow America's hardliner stance of "my way or the highway".

Well, America, we now have two countries which weren't nuclear before, but are now--all thanks to Bush.

And though we can always blame Clinton for this mess, the Democrats, and anyone else who doesn't agree with this backwards administration, the world will just have to learn to live with both nations and adapt to each situation as time goes on.

Because military force won't get rid of either. No matter how much the war hawks beat their drums these days.

Schuyler Thorpe

xxxth Street xx #X001

Everett, WA 98204

(XXX)-XXX-XXXX

RESPONSE SHOULD BE MEASURED CAREFULLY.

So North Korea successfully lit off a nuclear bomb in an underground test.

What's the world's response? Condemnation. No surprise there.

Bush's?

"Oh...let's get a blockade going and touch off another Korean War." (As if having one more doesn't make much of a difference with this dipstick.)

That's his response.

So should I really be afraid of North Korea?

Considering that I grew up in the Cold War era and lived to see its end, why should I spend the next 50 years being afraid of a regime which has already lived in isolation for the last 40 years? Why should I spend every waking moment worrying about phantom bombs raining down on my head? How productive is that?

Let's face it folks: We should be more afraid of what our country's response would be to this matter, than some two-bit dictator with a severe attention-deficit disorder--even though Kim Jong carried out what he set out to do in the first place.

However, our nation has gone to war once already based on fear and false intelligence. And look where that landed us.

So why are we so eager to jump the gun again, just because we are afraid?

The world has changed much since the last days of the Cold War. But some people never did. It's just sad that they now have full control of our own government.

Schuyler Thorpe

xxxth Street xx #X001

Everett, WA 98204

(XXX)-XXX-XXXX

MONICA LEWINSKY MEET MARK FOLEY

Given how much the Foley scandal has permeated even the most deepest, darkest, recesses of the GOP leadership structure, it's rather amusing to see how the majority in power is resorting to bringing up old issues (some dating back to 1973) with Democratic scandals--in regards to minors or those of legal age.

Incidents which have long been since dealt with.

Granted, the Democrats have no leg to stand on when it comes to sex scandals. They've had their share in the last few years beginning with one former New Jersey governor.

But curiously enough, the GOP is going out of their way to try and paint this episode as something the Democrats would do in a heartbeat; acting as if this latest scandal had the earmarks of a Democrat conspiracy--even though this episode percolated deep within the Republican ranks for the last 11 years. (According to the latest rumors.)

So what do they do? They don't take full responsibility for this mess. Hastert's "attempt" to do so was the lamest excuse if I ever saw one. The man artfully dodged the bullet by saying he was "sorry", but he wasn't going to resign.

Come to think of it, those who are most notably guilty, are usually the ones who protest the loudest. So maybe Hastert has something to hide after all?

Yes, the Democrats had Monica. But the Republicans have one big folly named Mark Foley.

And since this came from within the GOP power base on Capitol Hill, I'm most interested in seeing how this cover up within that party plays out.

After all, what goes around, comes around. Right?

Schuyler Thorpe

xxxth Street xx #X001

Everett, WA 98204

(XXX)-XXX-XXXX

SO MUCH FOR A 'CLEAN' CAMPAIGN!

For the past month now, I've been seeing some relatively 'family friendly' campaign commercials from Cantwell to the newcomer, Darcy Burner.

Even McGavick! (Which I found a bit strange--him being a Republican and all.)

So I was really thinking in the last week (prior to the Foley scandal), "Are we going to actually see traditional campaign commercials were everyone running would be cordial and respectful to one another--up till November?

Nope.

Two days after the sex scandal with Foley broke, I started seeing the RNC attacking Darcy Burner on every issue imaginable--ending with the phrase: "If she tells the truth, she'll lose."

And Mike McGavick? It didn't take him long to start throwing mud at Maria Cantwell.

As for Maria or Darcy? Not a peep. Not one commercial designed to throw 'mud' at their opponent.

And for this, I applaud them for restraining themselves admirably. I for one am tired of the GOP 'attack' ads which have nothing to do with the actual issues at hand, but more to the point of smearing their Democratic rivals with hatred, fear, and ignorance.

Given their lack of 'successes' as a Congressional body, I can't really blame the Republican Party for doing this. I mean, if you had as much of a failed record as they have these last 12 years as a majority, wouldn't you resort to the same unstatesman-like conduct?

I know I would.

But Maria and Darcy have shown that they don't have to campaign negatively in order to make their points known. They've shown what it is like to be a real representative of Washington state.

And that's why they have my vote.

Schuyler Thorpe

xxxth Street xx #X001

Everett, WA 98204

(XXX)-XXX-XXXX

GOP DOESN'T REPRESENT AMERICA

If the Abramoff scandel hasn't highlighted to the average American just how corrupt the Republicans are these days, then this page scandal with Foley should be a wake up call to every voter in this nation that this charade has gone on far enough!

Why must a party corrupted and rotten from the inside out continue to represent this nation and its people, if it's content to wallow in its own filth?

Schuyler Thorpe

xxxth Street xx #X001

Everett, WA 98204

(XXX)-XXX-XXXX

REPUBLICANS NOW A LIABILITY THAN A REAL ASSET.

Instead of blaming everyone for the faults and failures of its own party and representatives, the GOP should try--for once!--to own up to the fact that no amount of finger-pointing and heated accusations will erase their own depravity and endless shame.

From Abramoff, to DeLay, to Duke Cunningham...and now Mark Foley, the GOP has each and every time sought to place the blame on some obscure incident or loss of self-control--even go as far as blaming minorities, liberals, even Democrats for their mistakes.

Whatever happened to holding themselves accountable and recouping the high ground as a result? Is there something so wrong with that ideal? Or is admitting to mistakes a crime in the circle of politics these days?

Well, whatever the excuse is now, the GOP has proven to the American people and the world, that it cannot lead or make those tough decisions which have greatly affected everyone around them.

Instead, they foot drag their way through, while bungling up one opportunity after another. And when the stuff really hits the fan, they seek to smear those underneath them as being the primary troublemakers and attack their patriotism.

If a group as corrupt, incompetent, and morally bankrupt as the GOP is allowed to foster its poisoned ideals and blind ignorance to those around it, it doesn't give much credence and strength to the country as a whole.

It becomes a weakness. It becomes a liability in the end. And we know what we do to things that become liabilities, don't we?

It gets cut.

Schuyler Thorpe

xxxth Street xx #X001

Everett, WA 98204

(XXX)-XXX-XXXX