THE STATE OF DISUNION

by Larry C. Johnson (bio at conclusion)

An article in the New Hampshire Union Leader by Kurt S. Wolz, an American Airlines pilot who was supposed to be on the ill-fated American Airlines 11, which crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center, caught my fancy. I share Captain Wolz’s concern that despite the President’s tough talk about “fighting terrorists there so we don’t have to fight them here”, we’re no safer today and may be at greater risk as a nation.

I sent the article to a group of friends who tend towards the conservative side of the political aisle and received the following response from one:

Dear Larry

OK, I realize that I am not supposed to go against the grain, but may I be allowed a few observations?

At the outset, I acknowledge the right of those who purchase the tickets to the NFL game that, along with the price of the ticket, the fan buys and therefore owns the right to boo the player. It goes without saying that the fan has the right to express his or her opinion. It is also probably true that most, if not all, fans never played the game, have no idea what it is like to play in the bigs, and is simply one more “observer” who thinks his or her voice means more than the time and space taken up by his volume.

Likewise, in a democracy, the voter and the tax payer own the right to boo. Likewise, the voter/taxpayer has seldom achieved or earned the position of the “player” he loves to boo. He’s never sat in the chair, made the decisions, suffered the consequences or agonies of the decision maker, or comes close to understanding the variables the elected or appointed official must weight. We are long on arm chair quarterbacks, We are long on media who are untested studio readers, we are long on middle level military, government, and academic talking heads and bloggers. They have a role to play. They might even have an idea, but seldom have the forum or the tact to enable their idea to become part of the policy dialogue. It’s easy to carp. It is more difficult to elevate the dialogue. It is far more difficult to impact policy.

Continued BELOW, folowed by MY REBUTTAL:

[Dear Larry note, continued]

In general, there is a tendency to listen to only those who agree with our bias. Unfortunately, there is also a tendency to disrespect those who disagree and assign insulting terminology or motive to the opinion of others. Seldolm do those who scream the loudest find time to mention ONE positive thing about another with whom he or she might disagree.

I wish to opt out of the screaming, the name calling, the lowered dialogue, the disrespect, the headlines, the trivia, the media. I wish to be associated with those who, in the interest of the long term benefit of our nation, will also allow others to express an opposing voice.

Signed

BB

Dear BB:

Spent the tailgate after the Washington Redskins victory with an active duty Navy Reserve Captain fresh returned from Iraq. He is 57 years old, he fought in Vietnam and was recalled to duty after 9-11. He is one of the very few guys with Vietnam experience still on active duty. He returned home two months ago after spending the last two years in Iraq. He is an accomplished Arabic speaker and was being used as a translator for Special Operations missions.

While very complimentary of the caliber of the Spec Ops guys and their professionalism in the field, he is distressed by the Administration’s policy. The strain being put on our military forces is reaching the breaking point. He said we’re failing on the ground in Iraq in part because we don’t have enough boots on the ground. Gee, there’s a novel idea. He’s not putting a political spin on this. Just trying to do his job, serve his country, and stay alive.

Based on your response, what do we do when the President ignores the advice of informed, knowledgeable officers and then in the process puts our country at greater risk? Speaking out and criticizing is an obligation of citizens, not a sign of treason or mere whining. In the case of Bush we’re looking at a guy who has not achieved his position in life through merit as much as through family connections and helping hands from wealthy, connected folks. Bush is not alone in this regard. I concede that folks on the other side of the aisle, Kennedy springs to mind, have come to political power thanks to assists that had nothing to do with intellectual accomplishment or creativity in the field of business.

What should really distress us is the gulf between the political rhetoric, i.e. “We’re fighting a war on terror”, and the reality of staffing critical positions in this “war” with guys you wouldn’t hire to take care of your daughter’s horse. Accordingly, what do we do we a leader allows cronyism and political hackery to levels not seen even in the Clinton Administration?

There are some objective facts to consider:

1. The number of international terrorist attacks are at an unprecedented level. We have 38 years of data. The spike is directly linked to the US invasion of Iraq.

2. Bin Laden has regrouped and remains free to organize follow up attacks.

3. The bungled response to the hurricane and the TV images broadcast around the world have created the image that we are weak and vulnerable. Regardless of the objective truth of our actual strength or weakness the fact that others peceive us as weak will embolden them to test us and challenge our interests around the world.

4. The political damage to Bush from Katrina will force him to devote more attention to domestic affairs at a time when the Administration’s focus is needed in Iraq.

5. The United States cannot spend 80 billion a year in Iraq and 100 billion to rebuild New Orleans during an election year without damaging the economy.

Now opinion, informed opinion, but still one man’s view:

Pressure will build to choose betwee Iraq and New Orleans. Lack of progress on the ground in Iraq and the emergence of greater sectarian strife will make it more difficult for Bush to maintain domestic support for the Iraq mission. Meanwhile, pressure to fix things here at home will escalate. Ultimately, Congressional reluctance to continue to spend money in Iraq will force Bush to choose New Orleans over Iraq. Unfortunately, that will send the world the message that the United States, when forced to suffer (by either nature or man) will retreat from its obligations. I fear that road opens up an enormous Pandora’s box that will lead to countries such as Iran, North Korea, and China to pursue their respective interests more aggressively, much to our detriment I’m afraid.

I’d welcome a more sunny scenario but just don’t see how we get there. And after a tough victory by the Skins today I’m more than optomistic (10 and 6 maybe?). Of course, I’ve been wrong about the Skins before but that’s because I let my heart rather than my head do the thinking.

Best
LJ

Larry C. Johnson
Personal Blog: No Quarter || Bio
Recommended Book List || More BoomanTribune Posts