Our profiting from Iraq is only fair
TO THE EDITOR:
It is payback time. We Americans need to profit financially from the rebuilding of Iraq to help the United States get back the $100,000,000,000 ($100 billion) or more that it will cost you and me to remove Saddam Hussein, change regimes, and rebuild Iraq.
On our edge of the world, we do not want the French, Germans, Russians, Chinese, Turks, Mexicans, Chileans, or any of their ilk to sign any or complete any contract to rebuild that which is already in progress in Iraq after the war. We are especially adamant about France. She has gone out of her way to try to wound us as a nation. She has shown by her actions that she would be happy to see us dead as a nation.
Here is an answer to the bit about the recent burning of the Statue of Liberty in effigy in France. The quotation at the base by Emma Lazarus was taken by the French to be an insult to all Americans. It intimates that we are a country of rejects that no other country wants and will not accept. However, their saying that, or intimating that, does not make it so.
War being about oil is illogical
TO THE EDITOR:
If this war were about oil, we would have taken the oil fields long ago and pumped the oil out. If oil were all that mattered, President Bush Sr. could have seized the oil fields in 1991. This war is about liberation, not occupation. It is about freedom, not profits. President Bush Jr. is not avenging his father or profiting from oil fields; he is refusing to stand by while evil goes unchecked.
After the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein was ordered to rid his country of all chemical, biological and other weapons of mass destruction. For the past 12 years - yes, 12 years - he has refused to do so. Only because the Clinton administration refused to do anything about it, are we forced to do it now.
Those nations that are behind us are so for many reasons, but the main one is that they, too, want this tyrant stopped. It might interest the antiwar protesters that those countries that are against us have many billions of dollars invested in the oil fields of Iraq, much more than the United States does.
I stand behind our troops and our president, and I am proud to be an American. This president is worthy of respect. He is making tough decisions and following his conscience. He is a man of principle and character; that description would not apply to his predecessor. As far as how Bush got the office, he won by the law of the land, and it was the Democrats who attempted to gerrymander the outcome.
As far as the Dixie Chicks, Martin Sheen, etc., are concerned, they are irrelevant. I am sure Natalie Maines is one "chasing the dollar" by issuing her tepid apology. Maines should have stuck to her guns; I would have more respect for her then.
Reasons reader can't support Bush
TO THE EDITOR:
If President Bush had been elected straight across and without all the confusion, I would have supported him.
If President Bush and his administration would have cooperated with our Congress (the Government Accounting Office) and handed over the energy policy files of this government instead of claiming "executive privy," I would support this president and his administration. I still do not understand why a government would want to keep its energy policy secret from its general public unless there is condemning evidence. The American people have the right to know what this administration has lined up for our nation's energy policy. It is our money. And why is Halliburton, our vice president's oil company, spearheading the rebuilding of Iraq?
If President Bush can tell me the real reason for war with Iraq - apart from Saddam Hussein trying to kill his dad or Iraq having weapons of mass destruction, which hasn't been proven by the U.N. weapons inspectors - I would support this president.
If President Bush can tell me why he wants a massive tax cut and why he is taking away so much money from veterans' benefits, I would support this president.
If President Bush can tell the American people why we as a nation could not wait until the U.N. weapons inspectors were done inspecting before going to war, I would support this president.
If President Bush can tell the American people why his administration took away the enforcing of laws behind the U.S. Department of Agriculture, I would be able to support this president. But as it is, the U.S.D.A. can only inspect but not enforce any laws. What is the point in inspecting our meat-packing companies but not enforcing if companies are in breach of laws that protect the American people from contaminated meat products?
These are the reasons why I cannot support this president.
To comment on a City Paper story or local issue, send us a typed letter 100 words or less (with zip code and a daytime phone number for verification) to: email@example.com , or Editor, The City Paper, P.O. Box 158434, Nashville, TN 37215. Letters may be edited to fit. There is no guarantee letters received will be printed.