Frequently asked questions:
Q. Are you anti-military?
Absolutely not. I was literally born on a U.S. military base in Germany. My mother did not make it to the base hospital as I was born in a government issue apartment on the base. I was raised as an Army brat traveling from base to base. I enjoyed the exposure to other cultures. My father was a retired Lt. Col., U.S. Army. As a young adult in college, I enrolled in R.O.T. C. (Military Science) courses, but later chose graduate school programs and work with the U.S. Dept. of Justice.
Anti-war does not mean anti-military. There are a few crack-pots who are anti-war and anti-military, but they do a disservice to the cause of peace and to others who are anti-war and very pro-military. Most anti-war activists are anti-war and support the troops and want the troops to come home from wars — alive.
Q. On the presidential heroes page there are presidents who had extensive military service. How can they be anti-war?
A. Some of the best presidents ever and some of the best who advocated diplomacy were those who had extensive military service. The best presidents page lists my favorite presidents of all-time and all of them had military experience:
1. Dwight Eisenhower: General of the Army
2. James Madison: Colonel, Virginia Militia
3. George Washington, General of the Armies, a 6th star added post-humously
4. Thomas Jefferson, Colonel, Virginia Militia
5. Abraham Lincoln: Captain, Illinois Militia
6. Gerald Ford: Lt. Commander, U.S. Navy
7. Ronald Reagan: Captain, U.S. Army and Army Reserve
For some reason, many former military leaders and heroes tend to be great leaders and agents of peace when they get into presidential power. Maybe it is the exposure to real combat that makes them knowledgeable about the realities of war and why it should be avoided if at all possible.
Q. On the home page you list wars started by Democrats, including WWII. Are you saying that those wars, including WWII were unjustified?
A. No, not all wars are unjustified. WWII involved a direct attack on us at Pearl Harbor where almost 3,000 Americans were killed. We had a specific enemy and a specific target. It was not a unilateral preemptive attack like the Iraq war.
Q. What about the 3,000 who died in the WTC towers and at the Pentagon?
A. 16 out of the 19 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia and none of them were Iraqi. The terrorists were al-qaeda trained by bin Laden in Afghanistan with the full support and aid given by the then Taliban government of Afghanistan. Even in Afghanistan, it was a nation which harbored bin Laden, but did not directly attack the U.S. How long are we going to stay there and what is the mission at this point? Most of the Afghan people do not even want the U.S. presence there.
Q. Why is it then that it is the Democrats who were anti-war right in regard to the Iraq war?
A. Some Democrats were anti-war in regard to Iraq, because it was not their war. It was started by a Republican president. It is all partisan politics. When a Democrat president starts a war, the Democrat Senators and Congressmen support the war and the Republicans tend to go against it. When a Republican president starts a war, the Republican Senators and Congressmen support the war and the Democrats tend to go against it.
Only a few brave Senators and Congressmen will go against partisan politics and vote their conscience. Here is a list of Senators and Congressmen who are Republican and voted against the Iraq war:
Senator Lincoln Chaffee (R-Rhode Island)
Gresham Barrett (R-South Carolina)
John Duncan, Jr. (R-Tennessee)
John Hostettler (R-Indiana)
Amo Houghton (R-New York)
Jim Leach (R-Iowa)
Ron Paul (R-Texas)
Several conservative commentators and leaders, including then Governor George W. Bush (Texas) argued against the Clinton war in Kosovo. Bush and others criticized the war, stating that “there was no exit strategy and no planning or consideration for losses on all sides.” source: crooksandliars.com
Q. Pres. Bush has said that opposing the Iraq War sends a bad message to the troops. How can one respond to that point?
A. That is the logical fallacy of the Straw Man. It is taking the attention away from the facts. Take for example a completely unjustified hypothetical war, such as the president ordering a war after getting some coffee spilled on him during an international conference from another leader. Instead of focusing on the triviality of the reasons for war, shifting the attention to the troops, who are just following their orders.
It is a logical fallacy to say that all wars are justified, just as it is to say that all wars are unjustified. Each situation needs to be examined on a case by case analysis.
Q. When Pres. Bush left office he was trying to redeem his legacy by pointing out that there has been no new terrorist attacks on America since 9-11. Is this a valid point by Pres. Bush?
A. How many times has America been attacked on U.S. soil? The War of 1812, Pearl Harbor, and on 9-11. That is three times in well over 200 years. Not getting attacked on U.S. soil is nothing new and certainly not an achievement; more of an expectation of a super-power surrounded by two great oceans.
Q. After an unpopular president leaves office and after an unpopular war is long over, does not history tend to judge the war in a favorable light?
A. Only if it the war was justified. This has not happened with unjustified wars. Still after many decades, history has not judged the Vietnam War a good war, nor the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, or other unilateral attacks by superpowers.
Q. In your opinion, are there some wars we should have gone to, but did not, or are you a strict isolationist?
A. Opposing some wars does not make one an isolationist, just a realist. Not all wars are justified and not all wars are unjustified. If we really want to be a world leader and stop genocide, as we did in World War II, then some wars that we should have gone to — but did not include:
Cambodia, in the 1970’s to stop the Khmer Rouge (supported by Nixon, but did not happen due to the recent unpopular Vietnam War).
Rwanda, in the 1990’s to stop the genocide of the Hutus.
Sudan, in the 1990’s and continuing in the 21st century, in Darfur.