Collegiate Times

Unfortunately I do not see it happening. Ask people who support the war in Iraq and most respond it is better to fight them there than here. Some will say it is also to protect our national security interests. Others will declare a bit of both with the impression that our superior ideology and military might allows us the right to impose our will because we are a good and noble people. Between the irrational fear of Islamic 'radicals' who hijacked a 'peacefull' religion that has attacked us since the 70's and the 'legitimate' right to take the property (Iraqi oil) of another by force...though we pay through the nose ($100 bbl) for it the Republicans have said they prefer the status quo. The world has turned upside down. We think our CIA meddling in other nations politics is justified. The pro-lifers are pro-war. We borrow money to lend to Moslem dictators in Pakistan, Egypt, and Arabia to name a few. We refuse to ask if a person who doesn't speak english for a valid ID while voting, but we force all Americans to take off their belt and shoes to board a plane. Like the WOD the WOT will drag on in an endless and hurtfull way unjustly for many and not address the root of the problem. I am the opposite of Mrs. Obama. I was very proud of America up until we started wars and promoted fear to do what we have done in the last few years.

Let me first say that my views in no way are the official policies and viewpoints of the United States Army, Department of Defense or any US Government entity. I find your opinion of the Iraq War to be the tired old bullet points that have been expressed since the conclusion of the Gulf War in the early 1990's. When I read your opinion piece I thought that I have heard the "War is bad, America is mean, America should not try to shape the world in a way that would be advantageous to itself" argument before. We have a responsibility to provide a stable, economically viable country to the people of Iraq before we draw down forces in the country. Furthermore, we have the right to demand a return on our investment into this whole operation both monetarily and from the security standpoint. From my experience, the Islamic radicals in this world have two venues on this planet, that are not the United States, where they can get their rocks off by shooting or blowing up an American. To say that the Global War on Terror has made us more disliked is like saying we put another gallon of water into the ocean. Radical Islamic Terrorism has been attacking the US since a Palestinian nationalist shot RFK 40 years ago. By trying to alleviate the problem of Islamic Radicalism through sustained economic growth and education we will improve our reputation in the Middle East. First, we have to set the security conditions that will foster growth. The military surge of 2007 - 2008 has begun in earnest the change of strategy that is required for us to do just that. The diminished violence of the past 9 months has given the government of Iraq the opportunity to make the necessary legislative and security improvements needed for the US military to go into an over-watch posture in nearly every province. From here we will continue to train, equip and help the Iraqi government because it is the right thing to do. My life experiences, especially since graduation, have taught me the right thing is not always the easiest or the most popular but that doesn't make it less right. I know that one paragraph won't change your state of mind but if you feel up to taking a walk to the Pylons and telling Jeff Kaylor and Tim Price that you don't think their sacrifice is worth finishing the job, I'll be home in 8 months and I will say that it certainly is. CPT Michael Filanowski 2-504th PIR, 82nd Airborne Division

Well, sure, let's pull out the soldiers and only leave humanitarian aid workers there, because that has worked ssoooooo well in Africa. Oh wait a minute… no it hasn't, just ask the people in Rwanda. Without a stable government in place, the different warlords will just begin to take things back to the way they were before. Yes we have been in Iraq for 5+ years, and no, there isn't a starbucks, or a Wal-Mart on every corner, but does anyone remember how long it took to rebuild Europe after WWII? As I recall, we still have soldiers and bases in Europe, that while not necessarily involved in policing the populace, they were definitely busy for several decades after the end of WWII, and I bet that more then a few people died in their duty to rebuild Europe, but it worked, and most people would argue that it was worth it to have a stable Europe, instead of the wasteland it was at the end of the war. We seem to be developing the mentality of young children who say that we want something, and we want it now! Patience is no longer a virtue in our society, and it is all about getting things now, and the idea of delayed gratification has gone out the window. We have also forgotten the idea that things don't come for free but instead require sacrifice. Kind of like how a certain candidate is getting massive support by talking about what the government is going to "do for" or "give" to the common man if this person is elected. I would rather be able to take pride in what I have been able to do on my own, rather then to subside on handouts from the government. But that is for another article. Yes there have been thousands of soldiers who have served and died in Iraq. My own little brother has done a tour over there, and is slated to go back this year. But soldiers have a dangerous job, with the chance of injury or worse, and they know that when they sign up. The majority of soldiers and vets aren't picketing and protesting because they understand that that is what they signed up to do, they weren't forced into it. I am not belittling the sacrifice that they have made, I respect them, and appreciate their service daily, but unlike the old saying, all is not fair in love and war. Life isn't always fair, but that's the way it is.

I'm on my third tour in Iraq and have seen the drastic change the surge has brought first hand. Were we to pull out now the entire country would implode. The Iraqis need and want the security we are providing. Mr. Vick ignores this. The fact is that most of the polling among Iraqis shows that they want the US out eventually, but at the moment are more afraid of our leaving because of the security situation. Humanitarian missions sound great on paper, but they are doomed to fail unless the security environment allows it. Otherwise the strong take all of the humanitarian assistance for themselves and the poor and the weak never see it. The fact is that all of us over here want to go home, but until the job's finished. CPT Filanowski, keep your feet and knees together.

Sorry, meant to say ..."all of us over here want to go home, but NOT until the job's finished."

Everyone keeps saying we will be in Iraq until "the job is finished." Please tell me what that means because all I hear from Bush & Co. is lofty rhetoric that constantly keeps asking for another 10 billion with no questions asked.

'Lofty rhetoric' seems to be enough for Obama!

Vick, I love all you liberals talking about bringing "our" boys home. They aren't "YOUR" boys. They know what they're doing. They know why they're there. They signed up for this. They believe in what they're doing. Sure, CNN can find the one malcontent who will whine about how he didn't want to go. And they'll ignore the other 1,000 soldiers around him who repeat what Chip and CPT Filanowski posted. Unless you have a relative in the military, I suggest you desist in your claims to be speaking of their supposed desire to abandon Iraq. And as for why Obama and Hillary have stopped their cut-and-run talk: they're smart enough to realize the fallacy of that argument. Welcome to the real world, kid. It's not all bunny rabbits and rainbows.

In response to Alum, I think Obama has much more substance in his campaign than any other candidate running. He even has it listed in his 60 page blueprint on his website for everyone to look at. Or if you don't want to read that, how about one of his two best-selling books. Now what was it you said about lofty rhetoric?

I know what Obama wants and I don't want any parts of it. I was referring to the fact that so many people who have voted for him so far have done so based largely on his oratory, which is extraordinarily vague. If you asked most of the millions who have voted for him what his position is on any issue, they'd simply say change. What does he want for the economy? Change! What does he want for social security? Change! What does he want for Iraq? Change! What does he want for ... well you get the idea.

To Mike and so many others over the years, thanks for the support. And for the record, I like bunny rabbits and rainbows.

Well, I strongly believe you will begin to hear much more substance from Obama. Much of the oratory you have heard so far in this campaign has been used by Obama to grab attention of the electorate and build support for him. Obama knows and has shown over the past couple weeks that he must move to the point where he meeds to start talking policy. John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan ran similar presidential campaigns just like Obama. They both ran their campaigns on hope and change and then gradually began to talk more policy as the election drew near. It is exactly what Barack is doing right now and so far has proven to be successful. Only time will tell!

1. Negotiate a peace settlement?!? I'm sorry Mr. Vick, but in case you weren't aware, neither Al Qada nor the Taliban are signatories of the UN Charter. We're dealing with a global jihadist insurgency that resepects neither national sovereignty nor international conventions. This struggle is not going to end with some sort of brokered peace talk in Geneva or Paris. 2. To echo CPT Filanoski, veterans and serving members are quite tired of the patronizing attitude the anti-war left takes toward the military. We're not naieve, powerless victims who somehow were swept up into events beyond our control. It's a volunteer military - folks join up because we believe in the mission, and we're fully aware of what we're getting into. If you're against the war fine -- but don't coopt our service as part of your rhetoric.

"We have a responsibility to provide a stable, economically viable country to the people of Iraq before we draw down forces in the country." - No we don't, THEY do. We shouldn't be trying to change a country. Who are we to say that our type of democracy is what the Iraqi people want? "Furthermore, we have the right to demand a return on our investment into this whole operation both monetarily and from the security standpoint." - If they had asked you to show up, sure. They'd owe you something. But what you're saying is more like ADT coming to my house and installing a security system and charging me when I never wanted it to begin with. Plus, the security system sucks.

Hey tough guy, don't use my name when you talk about issues you have no knowlege of. You cherry pick information to support your point of view, which you are entitled to have but I would appreciate it if you didn't put my name sans 2 letters on it.