To: The Dallas Morning News
Date:  July 28, 2004
Subject: Why we had to go to Iraq 
Result:  censored

Dear Editor,

I cannot disagree with George W. Bush that Saddam was a maniac and a threat that had to be removed.

But I can never help but think what a wonderful world it would be if the first George Bush had removed Saddam back when he had the chance to do it. Then the whole world expected and supported it, or at least would have accepted it. It was all right there, ready to happen, just one more little anti-climactic step. But then President Bush decided to be Mr. Nice Guy - or something that who can figure it out? - and he let Saddam off the hook.

I think of all the lives that have been lost and ruined since then, starting in Iraq during Saddam's murderous reign after we left, and continuing through today with all the innocent Iraqis being killed and maimed by the post-Saddam terrorists. Certainly not least in the toll is our own men and women who are fighting and dying, in addition to the many wounded whose stories never get told and who we hardly bother to even count.

I think of all the money that has been spent and is left to spend trying to stabilize the very difficult situation we have there. And the truth is, we obviously need a lot more soldiers and related equipment and logistical support - i.e., money - to do the job there.

And then there's Afghanistan, the past and present hotbed for terrorism, which fostered much of what is in Iraq today. Ideally we would have brought that under control, including the warlords, before we quadrupled the playing field by invading Iraq. We still need to take care of that.

Of course, the way Afghanistan became a problem in the first place was after we put the Taliban in power there, under President Reagan, giving them all kinds of money and training and weapons to use against the Soviet Union. And why did we do that? It was purely a moral expedition, motivated by our hatred of "Godless Communism". It had nothing to do with our actual welfare and defense, or the Afghanistan people's (*).

So much destruction and misery and suffering and expense that could have been averted if President Bush the First had just taken that one last step.

I have to wonder, does the Republican Party itself have no culpability for President Bush's colossal error? Plus it was the Republicans who virtually gave the Taliban to the world - and their good friend, Osama bin Laden.

My last couple of thoughts about Iraq are, first, where is Kuwait when it comes to helping us out in Iraq, including with the expense?

Also, on all these police stations that keep getting blown up, killing many people each time, apparently this happens when somebody drives up in a car or truck right to the police station and then blows it up with a bomb. Maybe they need to not let unauthorized cars drive up to police stations. If you have business there, you park or get dropped off down the street and walk to the station.

Thank you, John Vehon

----------------------------------------------------------------

Footnote (*): I wrote a Letter to the Editor dated 12-13-87, which is on my web site, where I suggested that our support of the rebels in Afghanistan was unwise. Unfortunately The Dallas Morning News was not able to allow that idea to be considered by its readers "due to limited space."