I recently posted in the Opinion Forum at DelphiForums on a thread regarding veteran participation in the anti-war movement. The following posting from Tom Jasper, a fellow vet, shows that he didn't take his oath of office very seriously:
It is not a mistake. And I'm a vet of the Vietnam era (Air Force '66 to '75) and I was also around the Gulf War (civilian in Dhahran) and I have knowledge of the Arab ways of doing things with 16+ years in Saudi. I also have lots of time in Thailand and am somewhat knowledgeable of portions of SEA and the people of the region.
The solution as put forth by Bush is not only workable, it is the only workable method to achieve and maintain stability in the middle east. Sadaam's attempts to get and keep some influence over what must be considered one of the most strategic of areas must not be allowed. Those with alternatives (France, Germany and Russia) think that they can deal with Sadaam and make money (as they have done over the last 10 years); they do not consider the Iraqi people worth upsetting their economic plans. That is a pathetic and sickening thing. To even consider what Sadaam would do to the Gulf Arabs if given his release would be horrendous. In global economic terms the use of oil as a weapon by Sadaam – which is a real threat would be devastating (and less so for the US than many other countries).
Support for "Bush's" plan is much greater in the middle east than in Europe and there is support even within Europe.
You seem to be following the mould of the Euro-garbage into anarchy and hate of some authority even while supporting those seeking it directly through a multitude of organizations directed at the young and intellectually challenged.
I'm proud of my military time – and can see "why Vietnam" since it saved much of the rest of SEA. I really have little regard for the few vets (yes, a very few) that publicize their dissatisfaction with what they did or what their jobs were or where they were stationed.
I love Tom's little dig at those of us involved in opposition to the war movement. I'm a libertarian who believes in adherence to the Constitution, not some statist who believes that the we have the right to declare war on anyone we don't like. Is Saddam a bad guy? Yes, but he isn't the only bad guy out there. He is, however, an embarrassment to the sitting President's daddy. While the Bush plan might work, it isn't allowed Constitutionally, but that never stopped statist government worshippers before and won't stop them now. He doesn't have the constitutional authority to nationbuild and act as world's policeman. Tom can have "little regard" for me or my colleagues if he likes. I have little regard for statists like him, who act as lapdogs for the Administration and show complete disrespect for Constitutional restraints against war-mongering and violations of national sovereignty.