Iraq altered military’s plans

09/02/2005

Stars & Stripes
September 1, 2005

Recent coverage of the Army National Guard’s recruiting slump shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone (“Army National Guard still in recruiting slump,” article, July 14; Okinawa and Japan editions; “Army Guard still short on recruits,” Korea edition). Most guardsmen joined because they thought they wouldn’t be deployed overseas and into a combat zone. The guard, as I remember it from my younger days, was a stay-at-home force. The mission was to help protect its state in the event of civil disturbances, natural disasters or activation if America’s shores were invaded by a foreign army. The active army was the real fighting force, the reserves backed them up by replacing active-duty members who were deployed and, if the reserve was activated, the Guard would replace them and maintain the camps from which the forces went into combat.

It’s interesting how missions change at the whims and fancies of our politicians, who have little experience to know what war is really all about. I wonder how many of our grand politicians who promoted the Iraqi conflict have immediate family members or relatives in harm’s way. Not very many, I’d bet.

As for the conflict in Iraq, I don’t agree with it. However, I support all the soldiers there and wish them a safe return from their ill-conceived and ill-fated mission. Even as I write this letter, the hopes for a democratic government are fading into an Islamic theocracy that limits the freedoms provided for in democratic nations. Perhaps we have another Iran.

So what have we really accomplished, except lost the lives of many young Americans and destroyed the lives of others. Who’s going to help rebuild the businesses and lost jobs suffered by our guardsmen? Perhaps our politicians can find it in their hearts to donate 40 percent of their salaries for the next several years to a fund designed to help those who suffered most. Don’t use tax moneys; use the lawmakers’ personal funds.

As for democracy, we should have learned by now: You can’t force it on a country. It must come from within; the hearts, minds and ideals of all the citizens working together — learning how to compromise today and not renege tomorrow.

As for the local insurgents/terrorists: The Iraqi citizens, without a doubt, know who they are. In such a tight tribal society, there is no way “We don’t know” is plausible. They should stand up as a community and fight together against the insurgents. Identify the insurgents to their local police or government forces. Do it as a whole community, not individually.

Put a bounty on the heads of the terrorists turned in by the community. The bounty would not be given to an individual but to the community operating funds, where it will be used for the needs of the entire community — i.e., school equipment and texts, hospital equipment, water pumps, electrical power upgrades, etc. Something the whole community can benefit from.

Finally, what about all those Iraqis who sought asylum from Saddam Hussein and went to the United States or Europe? Where is their rush to go back home and rebuild their country? Saddam is gone. They should have their asylum status revoked/terminated and told to go home and rebuild the country they love. Also, citizenship paperwork should be re-evaluated, since the threat of political persecution is, supposedly, no longer there. If they wait much longer, they will not be accepted back in Iraq because the local citizens will say: “You didn’t suffer as we did.” They will be looked upon as parasites and leeches.

So if all the Iraqi people don’t want to fight for and develop their nation as a democracy, there is no way we can successfully force it on them. Democracy comes from the hearts of a country’s citizens, not foreigners.

Sgt. Maj. T.G. Padamonsky (retired)
Naha, Okinawa