Submitted by Rick Geiger, Nov 10, 2006 08:47

Thank you Mr. Lipsky for the excellent editorial. As someone who has strongly supported President Bush in the war on terror and in the Iraq campaign, as I still do, I must say that I am now as worried about the President's management of the war as I am about the Democrats cutting off funding for the war. What the Congress did in cutting off funding to South Vietnam put shame on us as the people that elected that Congress. And I do not doubt that this new Congress will attempt to do the same thing in Iraq. But even though I hate to say it, most of the blame for the current situation falls squarely on the President. President Bush is an honest and caring leader and some of his leadership has been visionary and inspiring. But the President has a penchant for "steady" leadership when what has been needed in this war is decisive leadership. Yesterday I read where the supplementary budget request for the war will be $160 Billion. There can be no stronger supporter of this war against terror than me, but if I were in Congress I am not sure if I would vote for that request. My question of the President would be why are we not being more decisive in the use of weaponry and tactics to destroy the enemy. I would not be willing to vote money for a holding action when much that money went to Iraqi politicians that are not supportive of our war on Islamic terrorism and in our coming battle with Iran. I would not be willing to spend money for a holding action that continues to get American troops killed because the Iraqi government is not willing kill Muqtada al Sadr and his army. We should have killed them 3 years ago. The President needs to get generals that propose a plan to totally destroy the enemies ability to make war; a plan that uses whatever is necessary to win the war. Not a plan that merely hopes that Iraqi goverment officials will do what is necessary, but rather a plan that tells them that either they do what is necessary or they will be superceded. This is war for goodness sake. We cannot be feint of heart when American soldiers are dying and we have other battles that need to be won to win the war against the Islamic radicals and jihadists. And I must say that having James Baker involved telegraphs to me, I hope mistakenly, that the President will propose "peace with honor" that as in Vietnam will bring neither peace nor honor.

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.