The Daily Background
| Top House Republicans: Iraq war debate “should not even be about the Iraq war”
Filed at 7:57 pm, Tuesday February 13th 2007
by Arlen Parsa
by Arlen Parsa
Printed below is the actual text of an actual letter sent out to Repubican House Representatives by Rep John Shadegg and Rep Pete Hoekstra, both powerful Republicans. The memo urges their fellow Republicans to expand the debate over whether or not to pass a nonbinding resolution disagreeing with the President’s escalation plan to instead debating not even the Iraq war, but “radical Islam.” I’ve highlighted the most relevant portions below. You can download a copy of the full letter, complete with attatchments in PDF format here (364KB).
The letter has its truth. But I think there should be a debate of how the war is being handled.
it should be about controlling the situation at hand
Instead of concentrating and arguing on the past mistakes of the world, which has already occured, we must use the lessons of destruction and hate from violent actions to determine the best way to deal with what is happening now with the “War on Terrorism”.
Personally, I believe that the Bush administration made a grave error in actually entering Iraq itself even though the radical Islamist groups were in power in the country itself. The US should have gathered more evidence in regards of the threats towards American Citizens before attempting to infiltrate a country with strict codes of conduct and regulations.
By the American government taking all of the responsibility of attempting to erradicate this group of radicals, they are not only risking the lives of Americans and other foriegn citizens, but are offending the codes of conduct which were already set into Iraq’s society years ago. In Iraq culture, as in any other culture in the world, if your country is attacked by outsiders, attacking those people back is one of the usual responses. This kind of view has been seen throughout history, for example Pearl Harbor, and it will continue as long as violence itself continues. In the meantime, as the US government decided to enter the homeland of people who are proud of their culture, who are offended and feel disgraced as an outside power suddenly pours their military staff, weapons and all, into the place they call home, there would be an unfavorable response by, not only the “radicals” of Iraq, but the citizens themselves.
Though the radical Islamists are dangerous and undecisive of which civilization they will target next, I believe the real question in this debate is why did the US feel that they were the only force who had the authority to battle with this dangerous foe? Not only that, but why did US, as its relationships with other countries are next to brothership, not ask other countries for assistance in defeating the threat of terrorism? Why did the US, instead of attempting to track down the masterminds of the entire scheme of violence, go after Saddam Hussain and are still in Iraq after he has perished, even though we have not traced the whereabouts of Osama Bin Ladin?
In conclusion to my view on the debate over when the war on terrorism would have begun and when the US would have beaten the radical Islamist regimes is that the US should have not gone alone and so soon into a country of which they had little knowledge of where the actual sect was held.
(my website information is now attached. Thank you.)
This country is going to be like the movie V for Vendeta!!!! i swear to you we are going to ruin our selves
We’re not in charge of the entire world. Yes, we should make an effort to help the countries that need a little assistance to keep their citizens safe. However, we shouldn’t be putting the lives of thousands of young men and women at risk to save the world. We’re not Superman and we shouldn’t try to be.
We’re not in charge of the entire world. Yes, we should make an effort to help the countries that need a little assistance to keep their citizens safe. However, we shouldn’t be putting the lives of thousands of young men and women at risk to save the world. We’re not Superman and we shouldn’t try to be.
Radical islam wants to kill whoever will not convert. It needs to be stopped even in it’s homeland, before it can come to our shores.
IRAQ
first and foremost, please forgive for any future misspellings.
ok, the one thing I LOVE to hear is the threat of “radical Islam”. yes, violent extremist that wish to do harm to others for the sake of their beliefs are wrong (if not scary), yes the very thought of another 9/11 or WWII scares me also (not to mention extreme right wing conservatives), however, just to put it out there, we forget that christianity had and HAS its radical side too, complete with devasting effects.
anyone remember the branch davidians, a religion based on christianity stating that david caresh was jesus reincarnated? or the salem witch trials, where a bunch of KIDS started the mess and sent an already religiously strict settlement into a hysterical uproar. or the crusades, where christian armies from various parts of europe swarmed on jeruselem soley on the promise that they would go to heaven (sound familiar?) on the muslim side, they just wanted to expand their empire—-the notion of a HOLY WAR originated with caucasian europeans in Catholocism, not Islam radicals.
speaking of which, the entire conflict with the Muslim peoples mainly originated around the time of the crusades, that and the constant struggle for oil have brought us to this war here.
but getting back to the original argument posed by the letter, since no WMDs were found in Iraq, their allies have no substantial powers to threaten the world (unlike korea and the us), without oil, no one would even care that a place like Iraq existed.
we need to stop pretending that this entire situation was brought on soley by 9/11 and look at the big picture: the us has had a dirty finger in places like iraq, iran and etc, for years only for the oil and the millions upon millions of dollars that result from it.
if the us truly wanted to break iraq’s supposed power over the west, it needs to seriously develop different, environmentally conscous alternative fuels/vehicles for mass transit. this won’t be easy, bringing change never is, but the truth is the real problem in oil are the people that are greedy for it and stand to make the most money from it.
hopefully this does not just sound like a rant from an naive, over-idealistic optimist, but eventually that’s where things need to move anyway, because lets face it, oil is an unreplinishable resource, once you use it, you can never get it back, and one of these days we’re gonna run out of it eventually.
IRAQ
(sorry for posting twice, comp trouble)
first and foremost, please forgive for any future misspellings.
ok, the one thing I LOVE to hear is the threat of â€radical Islamâ€. yes, violent extremist that wish to do harm to others for the sake of their beliefs are wrong (if not scary), yes the very thought of another 9/11 or WWII scares me also (not to mention extreme right wing conservatives), however, just to put it out there, we forget that christianity had and HAS its radical side too, complete with devasting effects.
anyone remember the branch davidians, a religion based on christianity stating that david caresh was jesus reincarnated? or the salem witch trials, where a bunch of KIDS started the mess and sent an already religiously strict settlement into a hysterical uproar. or the crusades, where christian armies from various parts of europe swarmed on jeruselem soley on the promise that they would go to heaven (sound familiar?) on the muslim side, they just wanted to expand their empire—-the notion of a HOLY WAR originated with caucasian europeans in Catholocism, not Islam radicals.
speaking of which, the entire conflict with the Muslim peoples mainly originated around the time of the crusades, that and the constant struggle for oil have brought us to this war here.
but getting back to the original argument posed by the letter, since no WMDs were found in Iraq, their allies have no substantial powers to threaten the world (unlike korea and the us), without oil, no one would even care that a place like Iraq existed.
we need to stop pretending that this entire situation was brought on soley by 9/11 and look at the big picture: the us has had a dirty finger in places like iraq, iran and etc, for years only for the oil and the millions upon millions of dollars that result from it.
if the us truly wanted to break iraq’s supposed power over the west, it needs to seriously develop different, environmentally conscous alternative fuels/vehicles for mass transit. this won’t be easy, bringing change never is, but the truth is the real problem in oil are the people that are greedy for it and stand to make the most money from it.
hopefully this does not just sound like a rant from an naive, over-idealistic optimist, but eventually that’s where things need to move anyway, because lets face it, oil is an unreplinishable resource, once you use it, you can never get it back, and one of these days we’re gonna run out of it eventually
I believe that this is very dangerous territory. On one hand we are on the verge of Americans starting their own “Jihad” against radical muslims. Many americans do not care to distinguish between radical and conservative muslims, and actually assume that anyone of middle eastern decent is a threat to america in general. I also believe that there is validity to being cautious about radicals of any type, and if they are not fought they will have their way with any group that they please. I think we got into this mess and we can’t leave Iraq in the state they are in, so we owe it to them to wait for order until we pull out. I think what this world needs is a war of ideas and thought to really get them straightened out, but I am not holding my breathe.
lots of love required, killing and converting aint going to work. brotherhood, is required. these people dont even care about their own.
lots of love required, killing and converting aint going to work. brotherhood, is required. these people dont even care about their own.
While many people believe the war in Iraq is about establishing a new government for a broken country, it really isn’t, as this letter establishes. Americans need to look beyond what the media is saying, and not make judgements before they have all possible knowledge on the topic.
While many people believe the war in Iraq is about establishing a new government for a broken country, it really isn’t, as this letter establishes. Americans need to look beyond what the media is saying, and not make judgements before they have all possible knowledge on the topic.
the war in Iraq is basically for the interest of America ,some good came out of it ,like ending the dictatorship in Iraq because now a lot of people will have a chance to have rights, they could have never gotten,but it still sad because bush didn’t go to war to help the iraqis,it was so he could benefit the u.s.
IRAQ
This is true. We can’t just leave Iraq. It will create an even bigger mess and the world will support us less. Our soldiers are doing a good job and if it weren’t for them, we would have more attacks on american soil.
IRAQ
This is true. We can’t just leave Iraq. It will create an even bigger mess and the world will support us less. Our soldiers are doing a good job and if it weren’t for them, we would have more attacks on american soil.
i agree with MAtt. i think that thw reasons why the war is going on should be disscussed. Also what are we going to do now?
We are in a no win situation with regards to Iraq and even the Middlle East. If we stay, we will be are currently are accused of being invaders interested in oil. If we leave, the situation in Iraq will only worsen and foreigners will say that America was only in the Iraq War for is own interests and left once they couldn’t acheive their goals.
The war in Iraq is on a list of the biggest mistakes America has made in its strive to be the greatest proponent of democracy and world peace. In getting rid of Saddam Hussein who posed no threat especially a threat of a biological/nuclear warfare was the beginning of the deadly mistake that this war has become. While we all can acknowledge the fact that he was a ruthless dictator, he maintained peace in Iraq by subjecting militants, proponents of democracy and terrorists alike to an irrational amount of fear. His removal led to the complicated situation that we now have in Iraq; a situation in which whether or not we stay or leave will simply continue to escalate until it becomes a “civil war”. For if we stay in Iraq we simply waste resources both human and capital and if we leave we leave the country to be led by militants and terrorist that will rule the country as dicatators in the likeness of their overthrowned leader Sadaam. As a result, of the lose-lose situation we know face, our representatives and leaders simply try to turn this situation into as much of a benficial one as possible that reflect the selfishness and incompetence that exists in our seats of power. As can be seen through this letter, our representatives are not concerned about the war or necessarily its effects on the population but their reputation which will fail to hold once it can be proved concisely that the war in Iraq is the biggest waste of money in the history of any civilization and one of the greatest mistakes of all time; a truth which shall be revealed in due time. by the way Bush getting re-elected was the second mistake that led to the devastating situation we now see ourselves in.
When you read this article you wonder. Do those in political standings really have a clue as to why we entered the war in the first place or why we are even still in it at this time. Why not debate why we are in the war and how things are going on? I know there are still a lot of unanswered questions about the war and many uncertainties among the people, and if those in political power don’t even have a clear view on what is going on how in the world are we as the people supposed to support it.
IRAQ
I think that if they’re basing the opinions of hundreds of people on whether they’re a Democrat or Republican based on this kind of arguement, they’d find that many people would be out of order so to speak. Debating about the radical Islamist in Iraq doesn’t seem to be solving any problems. It seems unfair that these two men are pretty much stating that every Islamic person in Iraq is radical, when that is very untrue. Like in the United States, people in Iraq have many different views and its cruel to punish an entire country for the mistakes that a group of people within the country did. Thats like saying that everyone should be punished because one group of people hunts deer. I understand that the war is a much larger scale but its a similar idea. If debating about the radical Islamists is really what these two republicans want maybe they should have their own arguement because by dragging in the entire Republican party it reflects badly upon them. Also to say that the Democrats are not thinking ahead about what will happen after our troops are removed form the middle east is false. The topic is on everybodies mine. I understand that the war isn’t going to instantly stop the moment the last of our troops are sent home, but it is possible that it would help and it would save the lives of many people. Not just American lives would be saved but also the lives of Iraqi citizens. The majority of lives lost in this war happened after the United States troops settled in to help “rebuild Iraq.” Its unreasonable to ignore the facts and the big picture because of a narrow mind set. Opening up and seeing both sides and not debating about one specific thing could help this situation greatly. If both the Democratic and Republican parties could understand the other party’s point of view maybe we could come up with a solution and bring our troops home without putting the rest of the world, ourselves included, at risk.
Overview of US restaurants. Chili%27s Grill & Bar
possible, walking or running 7 occasions between Attach Safa and Mount Marwah, as well as symbolically stoning the Demon within Mina.