Meet Congressman Walter B. Jones*******
East Carolina's conservative representative who has migrated from pushing "victory fries" for America's campaign in Iraq to skepticism on any stepped up American military force in Afghanistan.
A Republican (check his official website), he currently represents North Carolina's 3rd congressional district in the United States House of Representatives.
The district encompasses the Outer Banks and areas near the Pamlico Sound.
The district encompasses the Outer Banks and areas near the Pamlico Sound.
The political voyage of this conservative Republican tells something about the nuances of war and peace politics in this conservative pro military region home to the Marines' Camp Lejeune.
Indeed the Congressman's concerns dovetail with those of a number of veterans: that one great danger is that the American military will again be put in an impossible position: unreachable goals with limited resources.
As one veteran puts it, "to be set up agains for defeat as we were in Vietnam because no sitting President wants to be seen as losing."
*******
Indeed the Congressman's concerns dovetail with those of a number of veterans: that one great danger is that the American military will again be put in an impossible position: unreachable goals with limited resources.
As one veteran puts it, "to be set up agains for defeat as we were in Vietnam because no sitting President wants to be seen as losing."
*******
*******"Jones was initially a strong supporter of the conflict in Iraq, but then became one of the leading Republicans opposed to continued involvement in Iraq...
"Jones became well-known for leading the effort, along with GOP Rep. Bob Ney, to have french fries renamed "Freedom Fries" in House cafeteria menus as a protest against French opposition to the 2003 invasion of Iraq...
"He said of his previous position on the fries, 'I wish it had never happened...'
"In July 2006, the names were quietly changed back...
"He contends that the United States went to war 'with no justification...'
"On the subject, he said, 'I just feel that the reason of going in for weapons of mass destruction, the ability of the Iraqis to make a nuclear weapon, that's all been proven that it was never there.'
"He added that his change of opinion came about from attending the funeral of a sergeant killed in Iraq, when his last letter to his family was being read out...
"In an annual survey by Washingtonian magazine, Congressional staffers voted Jones the 'kindest member' of the House."
*******
I think your position is eminently relevant and wise. It provides a strategic pivot around which people of diverse viewpoints can rally.
Bravo,
Fred Moritz
Fred Moritz
*******
On Nov 18, 2009, at 5:43 PM, Congressman Walter B. Jones wrote:
Dear Mr. Moritz:
Thank you for contacting me to express your thoughts regarding sending additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan.
Thank you for contacting me to express your thoughts regarding sending additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan.
I appreciate you taking the time to share your views with me on this matter, and I am happy to respond.
As you may know, General Stanley McChrystal, commander of the North American Treaty Organization forces in Afghanistan, submitted a request to President Obama in August for 40,000 more U.S. troops to be committed to the region.
General McChrystal is a seasoned commander for whom I have great respect, and our troops serving in Afghanistan are doing so with honor and courage.
General McChrystal is a seasoned commander for whom I have great respect, and our troops serving in Afghanistan are doing so with honor and courage.
Obviously there is great debate the future of U.S. involvement in Afghanistan. Some, like Admiral Mike Mullen, want our troops to now combat Afghanistan's "culture of poverty".
Others, like conservative columnist George Will, believe "America should do only what can be done from offshore, using intelligence, drones, cruise missiles, airstrikes and small, potent Special Forces units, concentrating on the porous 1,500-mile border with Pakistan, a nation that actually matters".
What is undeniable is that the United States is running trillion dollar budget deficits as far as the eye can see, adding to what is already a record $12 trillion in U.S. federal public debt.
The money being spent "fighting the culture of poverty in Afghanistan'" (and therefore not being spent of roads, and schools, and jobs here in America) is being borrowed from our international competitors like communist China.
Our forces in Afghanistan are not being directed to eradicate the poppy crop in that country, which would help deal with the problem of drugs on American streets.
Rather, the money we are borrowing from China is being spent to stabilize the government of President Hamid Karzai whose Vice Presidential running mate in the recent disputed election was an ex-warlord who is widely accused of giving cover to Afghan criminal gangs and drug traffickers.
Rather, the money we are borrowing from China is being spent to stabilize the government of President Hamid Karzai whose Vice Presidential running mate in the recent disputed election was an ex-warlord who is widely accused of giving cover to Afghan criminal gangs and drug traffickers.
In fact, the Karzai government has been described by Economist magazine as so "inept, corrupt and predatory" that people sometimes yearn for restoration of the warlords, "who were less venal and less brutal than Mr. Karzai's lot."
What started out as U.S. involvement in one type of mission has clearly become U.S. involvement in another type of mission altogether.
After spending eight years of blood and treasure, our national policy in Afghanistan has drifted into an ill-defined strategy of 'doubling down' to protect the status quo, with no end in sight.
After spending eight years of blood and treasure, our national policy in Afghanistan has drifted into an ill-defined strategy of 'doubling down' to protect the status quo, with no end in sight.
The war in Afghanistan has now gone on longer than U.S. involvement in World War I and World War II combined.
Supporters of the status quo would have us borrow yet more money from communist China to send additional troops to reinforce an overall policy that President Obama has yet to articulate, much less gain support for.
Supporters of the status quo would have us borrow yet more money from communist China to send additional troops to reinforce an overall policy that President Obama has yet to articulate, much less gain support for.
I do not believe we are faced with the false choice between "doubling down" in Afghanistan or pulling out completely and creating a vacuum which might ultimately be filled by America's enemies.
Military experts have testified to Congress that there are a range of policy options between those two extremes that can protect America's interests in that part of the world, minimize American casualties, and which would do far less to hasten the bankruptcy of the U.S. Federal Treasury.
Military experts have testified to Congress that there are a range of policy options between those two extremes that can protect America's interests in that part of the world, minimize American casualties, and which would do far less to hasten the bankruptcy of the U.S. Federal Treasury.
I voted to authorize the use of U.S. forces in Afghanistan in order to rid that nation of Al-Qaeda training camps, and to remove from power those elements that gave shelter to those who attacked the United States on September 11, 2001.
However, I cannot support requests for additional troops until President Obama can first lay out a coherent comprehensively revised policy that rationalizes our continued involvement in Afghanistan, makes plans for a clearly defined end-point to that involvement, and gains the support of a majority of the American people.
Thank you again for contacting me. If I can be of further assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Walter B. Jones
Walter B. Jones
Member of Congress
*******
No comments:
Post a Comment