Unfettered Letters

Questions about Gitmo

Four questions about The Star’s endorsement of bringing Guantanamo terrorists to Kansas City (1/24, Opinion, “No ideal solution for Gitmo detainees”):

1. If Obama’s premise for closing Guantanamo is to enhance U.S. prestige, won’t the Kansas City area become a substitute for the worldwide anger that necessitates closing Guantanamo? Why will they love Kansas City more?
2. If one person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter, is The Star in favor of the Kansas City area becoming an international mass protest site? International travel to KCI is a breeze compared with getting to Castro’s Cuba.
3. Obama has suspended the military commissions trying the Guantanamo terrorists. What is The Star’s position on the magnitude of the security, logistical and transportation challenges required to give Guantanamo terrorists their day in Kansas City civilian courts? Would those challenges be equivalent to establishing metro area light rail?
4. The news article “Could Fort Leavenworth become the new Gitmo?” (1/23, A-1) quoted only Republican politicians on this critical metro area issue. The Democratic politicians with affected citizens (Sebelius, Cleaver, Moore, Funkhouser, McCaskill, Nixon) were amazingly mute. Did The Star forget to interview them? Did they have nothing newsworthy to say? Just wondering.

Phil Brewster
Overland Park

Only 17 troop deaths in December?

The subhead under the article “Casualty figures met with caution” (1/3, A-1) read “U.S. had only 17 deaths in December.” Why only 17 deaths? Don’t those 17 matter?

That abstract figure, 17, stands for 17 men and, possibly, women who will never walk again or see the blue sky or feel the soft breezes of the spring of 2009. Those 17 left behind 17 families that will grieve and never be fully comforted.

Each of those 17 people’s lives was priceless. The media’s take on these dead soldiers leaves those 17 lives without importance.

Patricia Keens
Kansas City

Disgusted with Phelps’ funeral protests

The propensity of Fred Phelps’ church to protest at military funerals, as backed by the American Civil Liberties Union, is absolutely disgusting (1/9, Local, “St. Joseph sued over ordinance”).

These soldiers died for this country. They died to continue to protect the rights of all citizens, and these people show their appreciation by parading with disparaging signs at their funerals. What’s worse is that they don’t know the soldiers. They don’t know about their families and loved ones, and they don’t feel the sorrow of their loss.

I guess their motivating factor is that they might get their picture in the paper.

John Gaines
Prairie Village

Wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan

I just watched a television special on the wars in Afghanistan and the tribal areas next door in Pakistan. The wars are not going well, to say the least. The situations look hopeless from a military point of view. A few extra U.S. troops are not going to turn the wars around.

NATO is not doing much, if any fighting. There is no strategy to win, and our too-few troops in Afghanistan are like sitting ducks in remote outposts, much like Vietnam.

Both countries have unpopular governments. We are losing the support of the local populations. The Taliban or insurgents and al-Qaida are talking about taking over neighboring Pakistan.

The big problem with a takeover in Pakistan is that Pakistan has nuclear weapons. It may be time for letters and phone calls to our representatives asking, “What are we doing there? What is the plan to secure the nukes?”

Clark Redick
Mission Hills

Armor for troops

I generally enjoy reading syndicated columnist Rhonda Chriss Lokeman because I can always use her writing to point out to my students how the use of fallacy weakens an argument. However, in her column “Wishes for those who made headlines in 2008” (12/28, Opinion), Lokeman writes, “To U.S. troops: finally all the body and vehicular armor they were promised to carry out their missions in Afghanistan and Iraq.”

Ms. Lokeman is plain wrong. The facts are, the U.S. military has had the best armor available for the last several years. Through expedited development, testing, procurement and fielding (flying vehicles on aircraft versus using slower and less expensive sealift), the MRAP (mine-resistant ambush-protected) vehicle was in the hands of soldiers and Marines in record time.

The results of such efforts — a significant reduction in casualties. Through Rapid Equipment Fielding and Rapid Fielding Initiative, the Army identifies unit and individual requirements to meet capability gaps, procuring and issuing life-saving equipment in record time. Other services have equally successful rapid procurement programs.

I invite Ms. Lokeman to meet my students at Fort Leavenworth. Perhaps the facts, from those who use the equipment, will change her opinion.

Michael E. Weaver
Assistant professor, Combined Arms Center, U.S. Army Command & General Staff College
Fort Leavenworth

Slow down on nuclear plant proposal

Kevin Collison’s article on plans to build a new nuclear weapons parts plant in south Kansas City (12/18, Business, “Proposals for weapons plant in for review; Decision on which developer will build south Kansas City project is expected early next year”) raises important questions.

First, what’s the rush? President-elect Obama has pledged to work toward a world free of nuclear weapons. If he makes progress on that goal, we may not need a spanking new nuclear weapons plant.

Second, we need more information about the companies involved. What are their health, safety and environmental records? What is their financial condition? By refusing even to name the bidders, the General Services Administration is preventing the taxpayers from considering these questions before a winner is chosen. We need more transparency and accountability before this project goes forward.

William D. Hartung
Director, arms and security initiative, New America Foundation
New York

Special Forces are called for in Iraq

Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ comments about transitioning to Special Forces are right on target (12/4, A-9, “Pentagon moves to step up military’s ‘irregular warfare’”). But they’re a bit late. Greece (’40s), Vietnam (’60s) and Desert Storm (’90s) all utilized Special (as opposed to conventional) Forces effectively while minimizing casualties.

Tanks and infantry did not win these campaigns; Special Forces did. In Desert Storm we could probably have had tanks in Baghdad in less than 48 hours and taken out Saddam Hussein on Day 1. But perhaps some military leaders were worried about a lengthy occupation with a lot of guerrilla warfare, which is exactly were we are today.

A timely withdrawal of conventional forces does not equate to “defeat.” Just what constitutes “victory,” anyway? Iraq and Afghanistan are not conventional wars. Transitioning to a Special Forces strategy will allow us to better assist Iraq in rebuilding, self-governing and joining the 21st century world community.

Andy Miller
Grandview

Offutt Air Force Base maintenance

After reading the accusations against the maintenance standards at Offutt Air Force Base (11/30, A-1, “Mechanics concerned with aging fleet’s safety”), I must say that I’m blown away.

I was at the meeting for Star reporter Mike McGraw at Offutt. In this meeting he was shown all of the factual aspects of the 55th MXS at Offutt. For example, their safety rating is second to none, and they were awarded Benchmark during last years Logistics Standardization and Evaluation Team inspection. Of course, this didn’t get much space in his article.

As far as the civilian employees are concerned, these people are incredible, and I’m honored to surround myself with them. The mechanics, welders and machinists are extraordinary people doing extraordinary things.

The inspection section supervisor is an incredible woman. She’s very knowledgeable of our aircraft. She is constantly educating herself on the many changes these airplanes go through. She demands that her employees do their jobs safely and professionally.

I am thrilled to be associated with these phenomenal people. These are my brothers and sisters. These accusations about us hurt, but we’ll not let them bring us down.

Philip English
Vice president, American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1486
Papillion, Neb.

A bridge to lasting peace?

What are they smoking at Fort Leavenworth? The “As I See It” column by Lt. Col. Phillip Mead (12/1, Opinion, “Our military is building a bridge to lasting peace”) was a paean of self-praise.

Instead of troubling himself with the rosy future of Afghanistan or Iraq, this young Army leader might consider spreading his sunshine music among some of the more depressed areas of Kansas City.

Mead might also want to remind himself on the dangers of believing one’s own propaganda and the undisputed truth that patriotism is often the last refuge of a scoundrel.

Ray Finch
Lawrence

It’s time for Robert Gates to go

I am very concerned about the notion of Bush’s Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, staying on at the Pentagon. Gates has vocally opposed Barack Obama’s withdrawal plan for Iraq. Gates has also become the leading voice in the Bush administration pushing for an aggressive nuclear weapons posture. And even many conservatives have argued he has a habit of skewing intelligence to fit his predetermined policy preferences.

Obama’s desire for a diversity of views around the cabinet table is refreshing. But Gates’ support for the policies of the past makes him the wrong person to lead U.S. military and foreign policies in a new direction.

Vic Burton

Kansas City