Saturday, November 19, 2005
Government should be held accountable for its actions
Richard Stanford, in his response to my letter, "Government should be held accountable for its actions", accuses me of "regurgitating the Democratic party line". He then proceeds to "regurgitate" the Republican party line. He also says that anyone buying the rhetoric of certain Democrats is "stuck on stupid". By the way, I believe it is the policy of this paper that such words as 'stupid' are not to be tolerated when responding to another writers comments, so I will not respond in kind. I will let the readers of this column draw their own conclusions. Mr. Stanford also objects to the word 'quagmire' when describing our position in Iraq. He goes on to explain the definition of quagmire as being
"a difficult or inextricable position" and that "it does'nt fit by any stretch of the imagination".Well, I'll just let that slide and let the readers, once again, draw their own conclusions. Finally, I would like to go on record as NOT advocating that we cut and run in Iraq. It's too late for that. I contend that we jumped the gun by invading that country in the first place. I further contend that having done that, we owed it to our troops to provide them with the tools to properly do the job. We did not. We became an occupational army without a plan.
That failure to provide enough troops to protect the civilian population falls right into the laps of the war hawks who could'nt wait to get us into this "quagmire".
There, I've said it again, Mr. Stanford . And I remain adamant that the word DOES fit our position in Irag.
George Morin
Auburn
"a difficult or inextricable position" and that "it does'nt fit by any stretch of the imagination".Well, I'll just let that slide and let the readers, once again, draw their own conclusions. Finally, I would like to go on record as NOT advocating that we cut and run in Iraq. It's too late for that. I contend that we jumped the gun by invading that country in the first place. I further contend that having done that, we owed it to our troops to provide them with the tools to properly do the job. We did not. We became an occupational army without a plan.
That failure to provide enough troops to protect the civilian population falls right into the laps of the war hawks who could'nt wait to get us into this "quagmire".
There, I've said it again, Mr. Stanford . And I remain adamant that the word DOES fit our position in Irag.
George Morin
Auburn
