Strike Force Behind The Book: strikeforce.mp3 Writers Roundtable Interview With Dale Brown ATARI ACT OF WAR: DIRECT ACTION LINKS Dale Brown Interview With: Peter Anthony Holder When a former pilot turns his hand to thrillers you can take their authenticity for granted. His writing is exceptional and the dialogue, plots and characters are first-class... far too good to be missed.' --Sunday Mirror ‘Dale Brown is a superb storyteller’ --WASHINGTON POST ‘Dale Brown is the best military adventure writer in the country’ --CLIVE CUSSLER

Non-Sense of the Congress
by Dale Brown, 2007

ARTICLE ORIGINALLY APPEARED AT TheBigFiveOh.com Blog @ Yahoo.Com, Monday January 29, 2007

I'm not a big fan of Ohio U.S. congressman and presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, but in his recent posts on http://kucinich.house.gov, I think the man is mostly correct...up to a point.

When a representative votes in favor of a funding resolution for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, he or she is giving tacit approval for the war. It's not right to criticize the President and the Pentagon and then vote to fund the war for another year. Kucinich says, and I agree, that if you are truly opposed to the war, the best and ONLY way to voice true disapproval is to not vote to continue funding it.

The response usually given is that not approving funding will leave our men and women in uniform out on the field with no support. I don't believe for a moment that's the case. If Congress was truly against the war and cut off funding, money currently appropriated for the war, along with the Pentagon's normal budget, would allow for a safe withdrawal--perhaps not an honorable or proud withdrawal, but they'd be heading home nontheless.

But it's far easier for politicians to vote for funding "to support the troops" and then get on CNN and MSNBC and denounce the President. Every representative has an obligation to cast his or her vote honestly. If you don't like the war, don't vote for it, plain and simple. To do anything else is politically, personally, and morally cowardly.

I can't defend President Bush's decision to go to war against Iraq, or the way he decided to fight it. I think I understand why he went to war, and it had nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction (although I believe Saddam had them, or could build them), saving the Iraqi people from Saddam's brutality (although Saddam was certainly brutal to his own people), or building a true democratic nation that would partner up with the West against Islamist terrorists. I believe Bush's decision to invade Iraq was to position several thousand troops into the heart of the Middle East as a warning for all the other pro-al Qaeda regimes in the region: shape up, or you're next. America is tired of nations supporting Islamic terror groups, and we're not going to take it any more.

No more cruise missile attacks, no more diplomacy, no more smiling photo ops with two-faced sheikhs and crown princes: if you threaten us or our interests, those 2,000 tanks stationed in Iraq can just as easily turn and head in YOUR direction.

I believe this is the real reason for the war in Iraq. If it is, unfortunately, the President never iterated it. In fact, he failed to give us a really compelling reason for the war. He violated the Powell Doctrine that led us to victory in Operation Desert Storm: create a clear case for going to war and build a coalition of support from citizens and allies.

Should President Bush have known or suspected that taking down Saddam's regime would create such a virulent, violent sectarian war? Maybe, maybe not. But the reality is that we're stuck in the middle of a vicious sectarian battle in Iraq, and it's slowly but surely sucking the life's blood out of the American people.

But the original mission is still there, and it's more important than ever to continue to fight it. That's why the President MUST stick to his plan and not be dissuaded or distracted by polls, critics, and opponents. The President is the commander-in-chief--he needs to STAY commander-in-chief. He can't delegate that job to Congress or anyone else.

Congress has a job too: put up or shut up. Who's the loser if you voice your opposition but keep on voting to fund the war you say you're against? Have some guts, Congress. The so-called "non-binding resolutions" are just ways for you to get up in front of the cameras during the "debates" and grab some air time.

Don't worry about how the troops feel. Unlike many of the warriors of Vietnam that war opponents are raising now, today's armed forces are better trained, better motivated, and are all volunteers. They know their duty. They may grumble, be unhappy, and their families will suffer, but they'll still do their duty...

...which is more than I can say for some members of Congress.

Welcome to AirBattleForce.Com Lake Tahoe, Nevada, USA Cyberspace home of: Dale Brown readermail@dalebrown.info