The following is a letter to the editor from Paul Cully. Letters to the Editor do not necessarily reflect the views of WestfordCAT or its Board of Directors. To submit your own Letter to the Editor, e-mail asylvia@westfordcat.org
This is in response to the “A Nation Still Unprotected” letter published in the 09/23/2015 edition of the WestfordCAT News Online.
With United States military troops garrisoned in more than 150+ countries on this planet (and perhaps even more as some installations are kept secret), and with an additional eleven carrier groups (virtual floating mobile military bases) circling around the globe, I wonder how much more Dennis Galvin believes we should do to become “secure”.
Could it be that the omnipresence of U. S. troops, and the behavior of those troops, around the globe, angers and motivates residents of other countries to join militant anti-American groups? Could it be that the Muslims in other countries with whom we share this planet are fed up with U. S. intervention around the globe? How can we reconcile the fact that outside of the United States the people in other countries view the United States as the most serious terrorist threat?
While I respect Dennis Galvin and generally agree with his views, I feel his opinion on the role of the United States military on our planet is ill-informed. I believe that the failed policies are the ones
· that sanction the invasion of other nations solely for economic reasons;
· that support, with war material and troops on the ground, regimes that would not otherwise be friendly to, nor compatible with, our government;
· that first-strike waging of war against nations chosen for attack because some small cadre from that nation tried to assassinate the president’s father (and failed);
and that these policies are not in keeping with the best interests of the people of the United States.
Dennis Galvin warns that we risk another 9/11 attack, but does not acknowledge:
· that the first 9/11 attack was made possible by the administration failing to listen to its national security advisors;
· that by the time U. S. troops went into Afghanistan after 9/11, the terrorist leaders had already fled that country;
· that the 2nd invasion of Iraq destabilized the Mideast, further enabling a multiplicity of anti-American, anti-Israeli, and anti-non-militant-Muslim terrorist groups, many of which have coalesced to form ISIS;
· that the Taliban never left Afghanistan, just retreated out of the major cities into the countryside.
Mr. Galvin’s letter leaves me to wonder what he believes we should do to achieve his notion of a “military balance of power” when our expenditures on behalf of the military exceed the sum of the expenditures of all the next 21 largest militaries of other nations. How balanced is that? We have been using intimidation and waging war for a long time. We should have learned by now whether or not that has been a successful approach to world peace. Or is there some other goal?
“W”’s actions absolutely did not make the United States nor any other part of the world safer – the consequences of his acts are exactly the opposite, and we are still paying the price for them.
I am sorry to dissent, but I am firm in MY belief that our country’s interests are best served by a world view and foreign policies that allow a chance for peace and accommodates other beliefs without leading us to the brink of war and pushing us over into it.
