[lit-ideas] Re: Open Letter To The President

  • From: "Mike Geary" <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2006 17:57:14 -0600

This is the funniest thing I've read in a while.  I assume it's from The Onion, 
isn't it?

Mike Geary
Memphis
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Brian 
  To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2006 4:39 PM
  Subject: [lit-ideas] Open Letter To The President


  Senator Jon Kyl and former CIA Director James Woolsey fairly summarize the 
reaction of the serious people to what some are calling the 
Baker-Hamilton-Chamberlain report:


  Dear Mr. President:

  You have just received the report of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group (ISG) 
with its 79 recommendations for policy changes, force redeployments and other 
course corrections with respect to the conflict in Iraq. We believe you have 
responded properly in welcoming this product -- but reserving judgment as to 
whether you will accept its suggestions.

  This is especially important because of the argument being made in some 
quarters that, in light of the unanimity exhibited by the distinguished 
Republican and Democratic members of this commission, the advice offered must 
be accepted in toto. As leaders of the bipartisan National Security Advisory 
Council of the Center for Security Policy, we would respectfully suggest that 
people of good will and expertise from both parties can - and in many cases do 
- come to very different conclusions than those offered by the ISG.

  In particular, members of our Council on both sides of the aisle strongly 
disagree with what is, arguably, the Baker-Hamilton commission's most 
strategically portentous recommendation:

  The United States should immediately launch a New Diplomatic Offensive to 
build an international consensus for stability in Iraq and the region. Iraq's 
neighbors and key states in and outside the region should form a support group 
to reinforce security and national reconciliation within Iraq, neither of which 
Iraq can achieve on its own. Given the ability of Iran and Syria to influence 
events within Iraq and their interest in avoiding chaos in Iraq, the United 
States should try to engage them constructively.

  As the ISG's own report documents, far from being proponents of stability, 
the Islamic Republic of Iran and its de facto colony, Syria, have gone to great 
lengths to destabilize the Middle East and, in particular, to prevent Iraq from 
becoming a free, democratic and peaceful nation.

  Americans have been murdered for nearly three decades by Iranian operatives 
and Tehran's proxies. U.S. and coalition personnel and civilians in Iraq are 
being slaughtered today by deadly Iranian I.E.D.s (Improvised Explosive 
Devices) and other weapons provided to like-minded Islamofascist groups.

  At the same time, the Iranian regime is working to acquire nuclear arms and 
long-range ballistic missiles with which to deliver them. When combined with 
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's repeated threats to "wipe Israel off the map" 
and bring about "a world without America," we face the prospect that, in due 
course, the mullahs running Iran will have the means to carry out their 
apocalyptic intentions.

  In our view, opening negotiations with Iran (and Syria) as suggested by the 
ISG will have several undesirable effects.

    a.. First, such negotiations will legitimate that increasingly dangerous 
regime and reward its violent and hostile actions against us and our allies. We 
should rather endeavor to discredit and undermine this regime.
    a.. Second, such a course will embolden our enemies who already believe 
they are sapping our will to resist them.
    a.. Third, such an initiative would buy further time for the Iranian 
mullahs to obtain and prepare to wield weapons of mass destruction.
    a.. Fourth, entering into negotiations with Tehran's theocrats will create 
the illusion that we are taking useful steps to contend with the threat from 
Iran - when, in fact, we would not be. As a result, other, more effective 
actions - specifically, steps aimed at encouraging regime change in Iran - will 
not be pursued.
  Finally, we trust that you will recognize the necessity of including Israel 
in any regional conference in which its security and other equities might be a 
subject of negotiations and that, in such settings and elsewhere, you will 
continue to adhere to the principle that America supports fellow democracies 
and eschews appeasement of terrorists and aggressors.

  In short, Mr. President, we encourage you to follow your better instincts. By 
all means, review, assess and, as appropriate, adopt the recommendations of the 
Iraq Study Group and those of the executive branch agencies you have 
commissioned. We urge you, however, to continue to reject any course of action 
that would signal that America has become a country that, to quote the scholar 
Bernard Lewis, is "harmless as an enemy and treacherous as a friend."

  Sincerely,

  Senator Jon Kyl

  R. James Woolsey 

  http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/index.jsp?section=papers&code=06-P_27

Other related posts: