Iraq, Iraqis "Wouldn't Exist Anymore"
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
As Governor of Texas, the Presidential hopeful warned us. If we were to select him as Commander-In-Chief he would not send mixed messages. Americans might have read George W. Bush's lips. Pressure would be applied in abundance. A thousand points of light illuminated the path the then possible Chief Executive proposed. Yet, no one wished to believe a prominent person, the son of a former President of the United States could be so cruel. Certainly, a candidate to the highest office in the land would not suggest that he would be happy to start a war while he worked to win the support of American people. Yet, there it was, in the smirk, in the statement, in the glint seen in the eyes of Governor George W. Bush. The date, January 16, 2000, one year and four days before the ready and willing combatant placed his hand on the Bible and recited the Presidential Oath of Office.
Americans entered a new age; the second millennium had just begun. Yet, the people had learned little from hundreds or thousands of years of history. While tuned into television, citizens did not need to read between the lines. The future President spoke directly of his intent. Journalist Wolf Blitzer heard the words and reiterated. Perchance, the Broadcaster, too shocked by a truth he thought awesome, offered the then candidate a chance to redeem himself. George W. Bush cognizant of how his words might be thought cocky, endeavored to lessen the concern, somewhat; however, he remained stalwart.
The words were ominous, they, the Iraqi's, would not exist any more. They hung in the air. Yet, people wanted to believe, as President, George W. Bush, (or whomever) would protect them. The public chose to suspend disbelief. With blind faith, supporters of the candidate followed their leader. Those who did not endorse the aspirant did not dare to fear the unthinkable. They thought they would or could "trust and verify." Few imagined the impossible would be their unwelcome truth.
Nearly two years later, circumstances afforded Mister Bush an opportunity. The September 11, 2001, attack on the Twin Towers allowed the former Governor, then President, to say, the world changed. However, in truth, while the people's perspective may have been transformed, the views George W. Bush expressed twenty-one months earlier were as they had been. The Chief Executive's sense of reality was static.
Commander-In-Chief Bush is consistent. As documented, at least since January 2000, Mister Bush intended to eliminate what he decided was a threat, Saddam Hussein, and the country known as Iraq. The harangue was heard and George Bush would stay the course.
George W. Bush Opines on His Presidential Candidacy;Blitzer: It's almost exactly nine years since your dad, the president of the United States, accepted a cease-fire with Saddam Hussein in Iraq in exchange for full Iraqi agreement to comply with U.N. weapons inspectors. But for the last year, there have been no weapons inspection teams in Iraq at all. If you were president today, what would you do about it?
Bush: I would continue to keep the pressure on the Iraqi government. I would continue to insist that inspectors be left -- allowed into the country. I would continue to insist that Iraq complied with the cease-fire arrangement.
Blitzer: But they're in violation of the agreement right now.
Bush: Absolutely. Absolutely. And we shouldn't be sending mixed signals. And if any time I found that the Iraqi's were developing weapons of mass destruction, they wouldn't exist any more.
Blitzer: Who wouldn't exist, the weapons?
Bush: The weapons of mass destruction, yes. I'm not going to -- they just need to hear that from a potential president, that if we catch them in violation of the agreement, if we in any way, shape or form find out that they're developing weapons of mass destruction that there will be action taken, and they can just guess what that action might be.
Blitzer: And you're not going to spell it out here today?
Bush: No, sir.
Ah, but he had shared the details. The candidate crafted a message and then, in the midst of the interview thought better of being so blatant. Perhaps, this election season, the American people might ponder the past. Citizens could consider pronouncements are portals. When the public listens to our current crop of Presidential challengers might the people acknowledge that a politician has power to change more than a policy. Lives will be altered with the stroke of a Presidential pen.
This time, will our countrymen contemplate the messages delivered when a Presidential hopeful is away from the persuasive scripts? Might Americans accept commercials do not reveal what is within a heart and soul. Stump speeches do not reveal authentic intentions.
Let us listen when a potential Commander offers his truest calculations. When a candidate speaks of possible combat, have faith. He or she will engage. If the same hopeful honors a citizen's right to bear arms, believe him (or her). Suppose surveillance is the subject. A potential President that promotes a need to spy on those he or she thinks may be terrorists will follow through. Holidays from taxes that build a healthy infrastructure, once proposed, will be part of the ultimate plan. When a presumptive Chief Executive claims he or she will reduce the cost of Health Care Insurance and yet, does not establish a means for better access to affordable medical coverage, realize, he or she will not provide an avenue for those who struggle with what is. What of energy, education, the environment; perchance Americans might acknowledge, no matter the issue, a person, a potential President will reveal him or herself in subtle ways.
Americans might follow the money, the man, and the woman. People, no matter their station know what they need to say and when. A hopeful President indebted to industry will not forget their allegiance, just as George W. Bush never forgot his. Loyalty to family, friends, and financiers leads many a Commander to combat or a multitude of convenient truths.
All actions begin with a thought. Words are windows into a being. Be assured; if an aspirant muses of what he or she "might" do, trust they will. Defensively, details may not be forthcoming before the position is secured. Nonetheless, once the keys to the White House are in hand the world will change to fit the new office holder's reality, when indeed he or she actually has not evolved.
Sources For Statement of War, or Peace. We, the people decide . . .
- Presidential Oath of Office. Inauguration.
- George W. Bush Opines on His Presidential Candidacy. Cable News Network. January 16, 200
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on July 7, 2008 at 09:44 PM in 'Regime Change' , Bush 43 Administration, Elections, Iraq War, Political Campaigns, Presidential Politics | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Petroleum and My Prayer
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
Dearest Mister George Walker Bush . . .
This morning as I sat in what I would wish to think of as my safe little sanctuary from danger, I watched you mount the stairs and ascend into Air Force One. The television announcer spoke of your impending trip to the Midwest. As one with family in Iowa, Wisconsin, and Illinois, I was grateful for your travel. I am certain the people in these regions will be comforted by your presence. Most will feel they have reason to hope that you will offer help. I truly appreciate you "swift" response to their needs. I am gratified that you have decided to fly high above the flooded terrain, and perhaps spend a moment with an individual or two. Perchance, you will speak to my sister or my Dad.
As I observed the day's news break on screen, I perused the printed page and realized the American people may have another reason to thank you. The New York Times reported Bush Calls for End to Ban on Offshore Oil Drilling. I am confident those on dry land, still able to drive through the streets are pleased. Your grand gesture will gratify them, belatedly if at all. The United States House Committee on Natural Resources thinks the move will not improve circumstances. I sigh.
There is no reason to let little details such as well-researched assessment get in the way of the glorious work you do Mister Bush. As you well know, the public cares not what the future might bring. The people prefer to be catered to in the immediate. I know you understand this Mister President. You felt the repercussions of a delayed action. I remember your late response to Katrina, and even to the September 11, 2001 attack on the World Trade Center Towers.
Woe, to the politician who does not take measures to calm the citizens quickly. Mister Bush, I am consoled as I witness all you have learned. Indeed, today, you quieted fears and felt the people's pain. You did as is necessary.
In this nation, an elected official who bows to the will of his or her constituency will be judged well. After all, as you are aware Mister Bush, the people are the power. The populace casts a ballot at the poll. Even for those such as you, an individual who cannot hold the office of the President again, that is as long as the Constitution remains unchanged, legacies are the legends of history.
Mister Bush, I applaud your heroism, your ability to reach out and to touch the common folk. Yet, while I might admire the actions you took on this 19th day of June, I only wish that consolations would clean the mess you created.
I fear each of the events of the day is the result of earlier enactments. What occurred in the Midwest is as much that the world has seen recently. Granted Mister President, you only preside over a portion of a North American continent; nonetheless, what is in our air travels overseas. Water also journeys to shores far beyond our horizon.
Contaminants and toxins permissible in the United States will be found in the heavens above foreign soil. Oceans, far from our homeland, will contain elements hurled into American waterways.
I know you might muse Mister Bush, as you did for near a decade ago, humans have little effect on the environment. Ah, but President Bush, as you now relent, we do alter the balance of nature. Decisions you made in our name, accelerated the cycle of unwelcome warmth on a globe too fragile to fight off the effects of a fever.
You, Mister Bush may have learned the laws of motion in your studies. As Sir Isaac Newton discovered in an Earthly environment, "For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." Perchance, as a Chief Executive and one who received a Master's degree in Business Administration, you are more familiar with a similar premise, economic in nature, "You scrub my back, and I will cleanse yours."
In the financial world, the policies you endorsed illustrate that you embrace this "theoretical" truth. I recall your first hundred days in the Oval Office. Much to the benefit of business buds, who supported your rise, you chose to initiate practices that filled your friends' purses. . . . and oh, yes, these very guidelines damaged the milieu. Ooops.
- Bush administration marks 100 days in office (04/29/01)
- EPA drops objections to Florida rule that undermines Clean Water Act protections (04/26/01)
- Gale Norton nominates William G. Myers III as solicitor for Department of the Interior (04/24/01)
- Yellowstone snowmobile ban goes into effect, but perhaps not for long (04/23/01)
- Bush seeks to relax requirements of Endangered Species Act (04/09/01)
- Bush administration delays hard-rock mining regulations that protect watersheds (03/21/01)
- Bush withdraws new arsenic-in-drinking-water standard (03/20/01)
- Bush appoints industry apologist as regulatory gatekeeper (03/06/01)
- EPA upholds Clinton decision to clean up diesel pollution (02/28/01)
- EPA delays, then upholds, new rule protecting wetlands (02/15/01)
- White House announces regulatory freeze (01/20/01)
Indeed, you were a busy man Mister Bush, just as you have been today, and throughout your terms. You entered the White House and released the latch on barn doors throughout the nation. Domesticated animals, Americans, did not rush out, for they had long felt as though they were not in harm's way. Centuries of relative calm encouraged citizens, beasts of few burdens, to believe they were sheltered from storms. However, once the portals were open, predators, or was it you Mister President, ran in.
Marauders came though back gateways, side entries, windows, and slats in the ceiling. Perhaps these too were but friends of the fellow we all know as George, you, Mister Bush.
Oh, Sir, you must know, corporations, intent on earnings, ignored the warnings of environmentalists. Scientists could not be heard above the hum of oil drills. The clang of change as it fell into deep pockets muffled the melodious mantra of the few concerned citizens. This circumstances Mister Bush caused the globe to warm. Now the water falls from the sky without end. Levees poorly maintained or engineered break.
My Dad hopes his sump pump will not fail. My sister prays that her home will remain on a hill. My best friend fears for his roof. A friend in Racine, Wisconsin I hope is well. No one has been able to reach him.
Mister Bush, when you first arrived in Washington District of Columbia you changed the fabric of the land. You did not steward the territory we each occupy. Economic favors flourished as did environmental hazards. The rich grew richer; the poor did not prosper. Those who had wealth garnered dividends. Those with few resources received less. Now, we all suffer.
Wind and water does not discriminate. Homes, bought and paid for wash away in a torrid tempest just as shacks do.
Oh my dear Mister Bush, you promised to be the Compassionate Conservative. If only you had chosen to be the Consummate Conservationist.
Each day Mother Nature cries out. She weeps and the terrain floods. Her heart breaks, and tectonic plates move. Cyclones are the swell of tears her eyes cannot hold. Mother Earth pounds us with hail; she means no harm. Her children, under the tutelage of an oil moneyed man are out of control. She knows not what to do to get their attention. She throws what she has at hand, and hopes, perhaps, her brood will stop the insanity.
Mister Bush, please I plead, do not pander, or patronize. My Dad does not need cheaper fuel. He is a patient man and willing to wait for alternatives that do not leave him soaked and sorrowful in the next five-hundred year flood, which may occur only a month from now.
My sister would be content, if she could tell he son with certainty, she will leave him a world better than the one she grew up in. Sensitive as she is, my sibling hopes to bequeath her grandchildren with a glorious existence. However, as you fly to her home with promises too late, and replete of a skewed reality, she fears a dependency on fossil fuels will never end.
She too, just as Daddy, does not concern herself with what cannot be salvaged. Each requests that we secure the future, clean the environment, and do not drill for more oil, offshore or anywhere.
Mister Bush, the time is now. For as much as any American would wish to believe they are safe in their now dry homes, as long as we continue to rape the few resources we have left, as long as we waste, and want more and more "conveniences" no one will be secure.
As you peruse the cities and crops destroyed by rains and runoff, you might realize climate change is evidence of what you sowed. No promises will repair broken hearts. No policies that allow for more petroleum usage will produce calm or clean seas. We now reap the rewards of gluttony and gratification. It is not a pretty picture.
Mister Bush, tomorrow does come. Our actions today will be the cause. The effects of your past performances are what you see today in Iowa, Wisconsin, Illinois, Missouri . . . Let us no longer wash the back of a egocentric executive, at the expense of the environment. Instead, kiss my sister, hug my Dad, and if you can find my friend, lost in the tragedy, please tell him I love him.
Resources, No More Oil . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on June 19, 2008 at 12:00 PM in Bush 43 Administration, Energy Enigma, Environment, Global Warming | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Impeachment, "Off the Table" and On the House Floor
Kucinich Impeachment Articles mention RAW STORY
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi may say impeachment is off the table; nonetheless, on June 9, 2008, Congressman Dennis Kucinich placed it on the floor. For five hours, the Ohio Representative stood before his colleagues and an expectant national audience. Kucinich spoke of what has remained unmentionable for far too long. The President of the United States of America has committed high crimes and misdemeanors.
The contents of thirty-five articles affirmed President George W. Bush deceived the nation. Congressman Kucinich contends, the President violated his oath of office. The Commander-In-Chief led our country into the Iraq war under false pretenses.
On hundreds of occasions, George W. Bush made use of signing statements. These declarations allowed the Administration to disobey laws. With the stroke of a pen, the President proclaimed a ban on torture was extraneous to his reality. Mister Bush decided to shun provisions he endorsed and proposed when he explained the need for a Patriot Act. The list of laws George W. Bush disregarded is extensive.
A year ago, the Ohio Congressman and former Presidential hopeful, introduced a resolution to censure Vice President Dick Cheney. Dennis Kucinich understood that this Vice President exerted more power than any other person who previously held his position. Indeed some argue, Dick Cheney is more if not equally culpable for crimes enacted by the Executive Branch. The resolution censure Cheney was referred to the House Judiciary Committee. Thus far, no action has been taken on the motion.
However, members of the Committee have verbalized their support. Florida Representative Robert Wexler, Congressman Luis Gutierrez from Illinois, and Tammy Baldwin, Wisconsin vehemently called for hearings. The three believe as does Dennis Kucinich does, grounds for an arraignment are sufficient. For these outspoken Representatives, Vice President, Richard Cheney, along with the President, George W. Bush violated the War Crimes Act of 1996. They ignored the anti-torture Act. Bush and Cheney authorized the abuse of detainees, who have been illegally held at the Guantanamo Bay Prison Camp.
The President and Vice President repeatedly sullied the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This law requires court approval for presidential wiretaps. None were obtained before millions of Americans telephones were bugged. The President defiantly dismisses any public concern. He has no problem with deferring the public's right to privacy.
Early in their joint terms, George Bush and Dick Cheney warned, there was an eminent threat of a nuclear attack. They said the United States was in danger of inhalation. Desirous of oil in the Middle East, Texas tea tycoons alleged Saddam Hussein purchased uranium in Niger. Evidence furnished by envoy, Joseph Wilson validated this was not true. Nonetheless, the Chief Executive and his chum declared the leader of Iraq wanted aluminum tubes for uranium enrichment. George W. Bush and Richard Cheney understood the claims were fallacious. The two Executives would take care of any attempt to present accurate information to the people. The Administration would destroy the messenger.
Mister Bush and Mister Cheney were aware that others within their Administration questioned the validity of Intelligence Reports, which stated a need for concern in reference to Iraq. At least one, former Secretary of State Colin Powell tried to convince the President and his Vice an attack on Iraq was unadvisable. Not to be dissuaded, the two "leaders' withheld facts form the public. The Administration purposely warped the data in an attempt to usurp Congress' Constitutional powers to declare war.
Yet, regardless of the volumes of reports released over the course of many years, Congressman Kucinich and those on the Judiciary Committee who support censure, have much opposition.
Former Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman, who served on the House Judiciary Committee during the impeachment of Richard Nixon, does not disagree with the Representatives who endorse impeachment of the current Administration. Conservative Constitutional Scholar Bruce Fein, a Republican who served in the Reagan Justice Department does not quarrel with the need to commence hearings. Former Senator and Democratic presidential nominee, George McGovern published an op-ed, demanding impeachment proceedings for both Bush and Cheney. None of these esteemed individuals question the motivation or the measure.
The only deterrent to the necessary action is found on Capitol Hill. Politically savvy officials in the nation's Capitol choose to set a precedent that historians' caution is unwise. Elizabeth Holtzman states.
Whether or not they bring electoral rewards in 2008, impeachment proceedings are the right thing to do. They will help curb the serious abuses of this administration, and send a strong message to future administrations that no president or vice president is above the law.
Sadly, her words will not be heard on heeded. Too many Democrats and Republicans have become deaf and dumb to the proper rule of law. For too long, average Americans and elected officials trusted the Chief Executive. They allowed themselves to be persuaded by a unscrupulous President and his Vice.
The people may no longer have faith. Perhaps, the public is just too embarrassed to face the fire. The adage heard in the halls of Congress and on the streets of many a city is, "We hired them. If we dismiss the two, what might that say of our judgment." Hence, Americans lay bare the lie, we have learned nothing from history.
A vote on the Resolution is expected on June 11, 2008. Those in support of impeachment can only hope our Representatives will act more responsibly than we, the American people, or our Administration has.
References for what might never be officially realized . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on June 9, 2008 at 11:36 PM in Bush 43 Administration, Congress, Congress and Bush, Impeach GW Bush, Iraq War, Richard [Dick] Cheney, Vice President | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Six Months. Six Years. Six Centuries. Perpetual War
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
Many Americans may wish to believe that if Arizona Senator John McCain were elected, he would ensure that this nation remains engaged in battle for eons. The conventional wisdom is Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton will "bring the troops home." Citizens, mostly Independents and Democrats, may blame the Republicans for conflicts that seem endless by design. Of course, when war is in question, countless Americans contemplate the current conflicts. Nearly everyone with some exceptions, places the onus on President George W. Bush, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, or any of the other Neoconservatives in the Cabinet. Yet, these individuals and groups are not the only creators of combat. Any man or woman who believes, at times, war is the best, last, or the only option is culpable. Citizens throughout the globe have accepted the notion wars will always be. Hence fighting is, forever.
The Hundred Years War lasted from 1337 through 1453. The Eighty Years War [1588 – 1648] filled most of the next century. The Thirty Year Conflict [1618 – 1648] began before the latter hostilities were resolved. The Crusades [1095 – 1291], a series of related military clashes filled more than another century. The Northern Crusades, also known as the Baltic Battles began in 1193 and remained uninterrupted through the 16th century. Native Americans recognize that in the 19th Century the United States was perpetually at war. History that is more recent is no less explosive.
Since V-J Day 1945 ("Victory over Japan" and the end of World War II), we have been engaged in what the historian Charles A. Beard called "perpetual war for perpetual peace." I [Gore Vidal] have occasionally referred to our "enemy of the month club": each month we are confronted by a new horrendous enemy at whom we must strike before he destroys us. The Federation of American Scientists has catalogued nearly two hundred such military incursions since 1945 initiated by the U.S.
Nonetheless, Americans are repeatedly asked to believe that in six months all will be well. Citizens in this country [and that] have trusted their leaders. We, the less powerful, apathetic, anxious persons, are patient and perhaps hopeful. Populations do not acknowledge, that even when weapons are not wielded, the public is split. Man battles those he perceives as foe.
Political Parties bicker; however, the blood spilled is less visible. The battles are slightly less volatile. Nonetheless, within this nation, just as outside our borders, we are at war. In April 2008, individuals, Independents, persons who identify themselves with the Grand Old Party, and John McCain, may think themselves traditionalists. These persons may accept that often humans to do as was done. Democrats, the self-proclaimed do-gooders, who clamor for change, may tell us when they are in office peace will be restored. Yet, in truth, the plans the Progressives submit are no more tranquil than the ones Conservatives put forth. Troops may be reduced, but . . .
“So, let me be clear,” Clinton said today. “Under my plan, withdrawing from Iraq will not mean retreating from fighting terrorism in Iraq. That’s why I will order small, elite strike forces to engage in targeted operations against al Qaeda in Iraq. This will protect Iraqi citizens, our allies, and our families right here at home.”On a conference call with reporters this afternoon, a Clinton staff member went into further detail on her statement.
“In terms of the exact size of the small force that would be there to deal with these residual missions, that’s something that would really need to be determined at the time on the basis of consultation with the field commanders and the senior military leadership,” said Clinton campaign national security director Lee Feinstein. “In terms of the schedule again, Senator Clinton has talked about a rate of one to two combat brigades a month. She said that she would hope she could have nearly all of our combat troops out within a year’s time.”
When pressed to clarify how small the strike force would be, Feinstein maintained that it would be left to military commanders to decide, but that “small is small.”
When we see our soldiers as only statistics, or civilians affected by combative actions as little more than collateral damage, size is negligible. Four thousand plus American deaths, four million Iraqi refugees, the words do not speak to the scope of death and destruction. Numbers are but a note.
A hundred years is only a century. A brigade is but one. A battalion, comprised of three or more companies, although large might be defined as the same. After all, a division is but a single group. A thousand troops may seem significant; however, if the number is well framed, or hidden in confidential reports the public may accept a continued deployment. While those who want an end to the war in Iraq focus on the future as presented by Presidential aspirant John McCain, we cannot forget the hopeful Commanders, Hillary Clinton, or Barack Obama.
Is this more proof that no matter who is elected, some troops won't be leaving Iraq anytime soon. The New York Sun: "A key adviser to Senator Obama’s campaign is recommending in a confidential paper that America keep between 60,000 and 80,000 troops in Iraq as of late 2010, a plan at odds with the public pledge of the Illinois senator to withdraw combat forces from Iraq within 16 months of taking office.”“The paper, obtained by The New York Sun, was written by Colin Kahl for the center-left Center for a New American Security. In ‘Stay on Success: A Policy of Conditional Engagement,’ Mr. Kahl writes that through negotiations with the Iraqi government ‘the U.S. should aim to transition to a sustainable over-watch posture (of perhaps 60,000–80,000 forces) by the end of 2010 (although the specific timelines should be the byproduct of negotiations and conditions on the ground).’”
Might we consider diplomatic dialogues, be they with John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Republicans, or Democrats, based on history, may be no better than they were in the past. It seems for ages humans have been dedicated to deliberate destructive dissensions without end.
Americans who claim to love peace may wish to condemn a Presidential aspirant who admits, we will be at war for six more months, six more years, six more decades, or six centuries. However, Progressives need only look at the past and the pronouncements proposed by Democratic hopefuls. We, the people may wish to realize war will likely remain in the wind regardless of who is in office. Perhaps, if each individual, in every nation decided to reject warfare as an option, we would not battle through eternity.
Living life in peace . . .
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one
~ John Lennon [Singer, Songwriter]
Words and War . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on April 9, 2008 at 11:00 PM in Afghanistan, Bush 43 Administration, Hillary Clinton, Iraq War, Violence, War and Peace, War is in the Wind, War, The Last Option | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Vice President Dick Cheney Defines Fallen Soldiers; Volunteers For Death
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
In a "glowing" statement, perhaps meant to glorify the horrific deaths of the soldiers slain in Iraq, Vice President Dick Cheney offered, "I think it's a reminder of the extent to which we are blessed with families who've sacrificed as they have." The man who, in his youth sought five deferments in order to avoid service during the Vietnam War, went on to state, "A lot of men and women sign up because sometimes they will see developments." Richard B. Cheney helps us to recall the terror Americans felt as they witnessed the Twin Towers fall on September 11, 2001. He explains, this event and the thought of a terrorist threat "stimulated a lot of folks to volunteer for the military because they wanted to be involved in defending the country." "The thing that comes through loud and clear is how much they are committed to the cause, to doing what needs to be done to defend the nation," Cheney proclaimed. Yet, citizens cognizant of the reasons for a possible rise in recruitment remember more than a moment that changed the course of life for many young men and women.
Promises made by this Administration were ample. The pledge to protect and defend was the battle cry in the States. Those whose parents sacrificed to secure a life in America believed, to serve in the Armed Forces would be an honor. Jesus Suarez was one of many immigrants who felt a need to fulfill a commitment to his homeland, past and present.
Yo Soy el Army
If you're an immigrant, at least Uncle Sam wants you
By Deborah Davis
Metro Active
September 19, 2007JESUS wa