*The following missive was written prior to the belated but prudent (11/2010) withdrawal of American combat troops from Iraq.

On the other hand, American combat troops are still on duty in Afghanistan, while at the same time, President Obama has publicly announced that they will be withdrawn in 2014. One may only ponder why the lives of young soldiers are still being sacrificed in - and otherwise subjected to - a war with a foreordained agenda of irresolute closure...

*What The Flock Are We Doing In Iraq?
Blaming Veterans for Executive Policy

As of 11/6/09, the Army psychiatrist, Nidal Malik Hason, has not only killed and wounded dozens of people at (the ironically disarmed, weapons restricted) Fort Hood, Texas Army Base, he has cast another ominous shadow on what was already - since 9/11 - a very controversial issue; reintroducing fragile questions, including religious undertones - as they relate to (well intended and otherwise motivated) Muslims in America, and activating questions regarding America's motive(s) for armed presence in the Middle East.

Very unfortunately, this appears to be a pejorative problem, for which there is no easy solution. Vets and apolitical citizens are being blamed - and are suffering and dying for - questionable executive policy. The unreliably reported lessons of Vietnam, and the failed - eight year - Russian Expedition into Afghanistan enter this foreboding incumbency. Constitutionally fortified issues of Free Speech are being compromised - displaced with citizen fear of government (and qualified elements of the 'Homeland Security' and 'Patriot' acts: which nullify the former requirement for a judge's order to tap telephones, and void 'due cause' for satellite reconnaissance directed upon law abiding citizens.
Rogue gvt. did obtain these constitutional transgressions by way of the occurrence of the World Trade Center attacks and all of the collective tragedies of 11 September 2001).

Excersizing fundamental American Principles of Free Speech has evolved into grounds for suspicion of 'terrorism'. The cost and consequences of American Armed Forces in the Middle East is escalating on many fronts which are a challenge to American Constitutional mainstays and domestic tranquility.

Caveat: America cannot be conquered from the outside, but, she can - and may - be compromised from within.

I very sincerely hope I am wrong about this, but, I think we are far from seeing the resolve of this convuluted dilemma. I am an American born veteran, sworn to defend the Constitution of the United States from all her enemies, be they foreign or domestic, whomsoever.

Incidentally, I wish to emphasize here, that I consider violent revolution to be counter revolutionary. I believe that the - overdue - revolution should, and will, occur, on a platform of liberated - and responsible - communication.

"Beware, the military-industrial complex, lest they lead you into war for profit". - Dwight David Eisenhower. Supreme Comdr. of Allied Forces; President of the United States.

With regard to the issue of 'politics', that casts a very wide loop in the connotations of its meaning - politics frequently if not characteristically encompasses ethics. Moreover, this is an international issue certainly having much to do with 'religion', and the religiously motivated behavior of people and nations.

The ethical considerations include the fact that Bin Laden - until further notice - has vanished. Hussein has been executed for war crimes.

Terrorist suicide pilots, bombers and shooters increase with each day of American occupation (by any other name) in the MiddleEast. All of these subjects are affiliated with religion ('Jihad') - which has much more to do with ethics than politics.

Then there is the ethical (and 'political') - disgracefully unlearned - lesson of Vietnam, and certainly that of Afghanistan having routed the Russians, in the wake of a failed eight year effort to subdue them. It is my qualified opinion that ethics has a great deal to do with what can evasively be called a 'political' issue. By definition, certainly not a 'local' political issue.

The emergence of the *Patriot and *Home Security Acts - since 9/11/01 (- All of the suicide pilots having in fact been trained to fly multi-engine commercial jet aircraft by American funding and American instructors -) has raised strong ethical issues having to do with the national suppression of Constitutionally protected elements of American rights and freedoms (*the tapping of phones without a judge's order or due cause, and, the *implementation of satellite reconnaissance, targeting U.S. Citizens, again: without a judge's order or due cause).

Indeed, these considerations may be called 'politics', but it is in fact the activation of martial law in the absence of any declaration of war: there are strong issues of ethics in the foreground of all these very controversial issues, which show every indication of growing worse, instead of better.

It remains to be seen, whether or not the so called 'Homeland Security' and 'Patriot' acts will be lifted when the grotesquely *scheduled end to the (undeclared) war in Afghanistan, *expires.

The issue of PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder) utilized as any kind of premise or political platform for excluding veterans from rights to legally own and/or carry arms, casts a revealing light on the anarchistic and anti-constitutional inclination of any local, state or federal policy or law which would disarm quite anyone at all for no palpable reason of medicine or justice. May this topic remind the reader that American government offices (at all levels of administration and law enforcement) abound with veterans (and traumatised civilians) diagnosed with PTSD. Such a deprivation would only add greivous dictatorial insult to sacrificially patriotic injury:

All gave some. Some gave all.

May God Bless America, the Constitution of the United States, and all military and civilian personnel who serve to protect Her.

Best regards,
- Kai