|
July
25, 2007
Craig:
Thank
you for your questions. It is good to talk to you again. Following are some of my positions:
I am a
combat veteran. A group who's numbers in congress are small and growing smaller. It is getting tougher
to communicate to members of the legislative and executive branches the true capabilities of combat units in combat, and
sound off if an administration is visibly projecting an unlikely outcome of any situation. The Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs said it would take "several hundred thousand troops" to do the occupation of Iraq. There were
too few vets in congress to adequately support and amplify this point of view.
I would not only be a
vet in congress, but the father of a vet. My mother had two of her four grandsons in Afghanistan just 30 days ago, and
both are likely to be there again. All six of FDR's kids were in uniform in WWII and extra efforts were made to
keep one of them off the beach on D day. Less than about 2% of congress has kids in the military. It goes
with the territory. Most members are at least financially well off and there is no economic necessity for their kids
to serve in an all volunteer military. Wars are fought and military commitments are met with "someone else's
children."
As I worked with the 179th, 180th, and 279th in my 95th MTC reserve career, we often encountered
and considered a "die in place" mission in various simulated combat situations there. To me, generally
speaking, a die in place mission is the only alternative to the famous "cut and run", loudly expounded by those
who blindly support the current administration. Public support for the war in Iraq is now around 30%, depending how
the question is asked. It drops into the low single digits if "support" includes hauling the first born off
the couch and down to the recruiters' office. As a parent and 28 year Reserve Officer, I humbly ask those who don't
favor the first option to give us a little more help with the second one. Also, we are running out of troops
who can fight. With each deployment about 33% suffer mental and physical injuries which should prevent them from returning.
When I flew in Vietnam in late '71 there was significant anti-war activity back here. I, or any of my fellow
pilots and crews, was not bothered by it. When we took the time to think about it, most felt that was part of why we
were there fighting.
I have no problem with the Second Amendment or the NRA. It should be a state issue and our
state is a western state with strong frontier traditions and gun ownership should be relatively unrestricted. However,
I do feel that when Junior High students feel the need to settle a score, as has recently happened over around Harrah and
Choctaw, they shouldn't have unrestricted access to a working RPG (rocket propelled grenade) mounted on their father's
wall.
|
