Letter to Senator Warner's Military Aide

Mr. Sam Zega

Hello Sam,

I have been traveling and thinking every day about writing to thank you for the conversation we had on April 28, 2008 about the continuing involvement of the U.S. in Iraq.

Your time is valuable, and I appreciate your willingness to listen to a constituent of Sen. Warner's.

It was my understanding from our conversation that Senator Warner is afraid of a collapse of the Iraqi government if the U.S. withdraws quickly. You said the "possibility" of collapse exists. Has Senator Warner considered other possibilities, other than "collapse"? Since so many Iraqis want us to leave, and I believe a nation should be able to run its own government independent of U.S. dictates, what are other possibilities? Could one be that Iraq is strengthened by our withdrawal and a "possible" source of friction is removed? I would like to know what other "possibilities", if any, have been explored, rather than just adopting the Bush agenda of "collapse" and a ceaseless war.

While you and I talked that day, the Washington Post listed the names of 16 soldiers who died in Iraq as a result of our presence. The next day on the front page above the fold was a memorable picture of two Iraqis carrying a badly injured two-year-old from a bombing in Sadr City. The boy died as a result of American shelling in Sadr City.

Consider if the location were Oklahoma City. Foreign soldiers camped nearby and shelled neighborhoods from which suspected terrorists resided. Does this make a difference?

I was struck by the similarity of the photo of the injured Iraqi child to the burned child carried by a fireman from the Oklahoma City bombing of 1995. I am sure you remember the photo: Who can ever forget it?

I do not have the power and influence of John Warner. I wish I did! I do not understand why Senator Warner does not use his power to end the tragedy of our involvment. How much time must we give the Iraqi government to stand up for itself? How long is "too long"? Like the simple analogy I mentioned to you on the telephone, what entity is going to say "no" to an unlimited check?

There are many who believe we continue our presence in Iraq because of lucrative Iraq War contracts held by private firms in the U.S. Is this possible?

(If I misconstrued any of your statements, I hope you will correct them. I am going to post my letter to you on my blog.)

Sincerely,
Patricia

Deaths in Iraq Between Sen. Warner's Letters

The dates of Sen. Warner's identical responses to me are March 21, 2008 and April 14, 2008 (Two letters were received April 14, both identical, both with the same date, both the same as the March 21 letter.)

During this 3.5 week period 58 American soldiers died in Iraq and Afghanistan. What has changed? Nothing. Sen. Warner stated in his three identical letters: "I am pleased the President agreed with my comments (to reduce forces) , and that an initial reduction of forces is beginning." What reduction in forces is "beginning"? Is the press hiding a reduction in forces? Is he talking about the surge, then the slightly reduced surge? This is not a reduction in forces. Could it be Senator Warner's staff has failed to change his template?

In the fall of October, 2006 Senator Warner took another trip to Iraq.

Why do representatives do this? What does it accomplish other than to reinforce their own political positions so they can say to their constituents back home: "See me! Look at me! I went! Things are going great" or almost so.

Things were not going so great that fall, and the Washington Post quoted Senator Warner on October 6, 2006:

"Warner blamed the Iraqi leaders for failing to improve conditions. 'You do not see them taking the levers of sovereignty and pulling and pushing them and doing what is necessary to bring about a situation in Iraq whereby the people are able to live, have sufficient food and fresh water, and have a sense of confidence in their government that they're going forward,' Warner said.

"But he said the situation is not beyond repair. 'We're not going to give up hope yet. Let's give it more time to work.'"

Senator Warner, how long, how long, how long is time enough? While you sit in your Senate chambers and talk about giving more time to permit the Iraqi travesty to "work itself out" how many more will die? Be injured? Senator Warner, you have the power to change the direction this hellfire blows. Please do it. Or have you already retired and are just bidding your time while others far away die from the hands of the weak in Washington, D.C.?

Letters from Sen. John Warner

Two have arrived: Both with the same postmark date (April 14, 2008) and identical content to the March 21, 2008 letter Sen. Warner wrote me in response to letters I sent him about the tragedy in Iraq.

During the three weeks which have passed between the letters, how many of our soldiers have died and been maimed as a result of this travesty across the ocean?
Yet, Senator Warner's replies are the same. What has changed? Nothing. Not in the Senate halls, at least, and yet we keep pouring humans and money and equipment into the abscess known as Iraq. Isn't it time we got rid of the abscess and pulled out? How many Iraqis are begging us to get out?

Was it about 18 months ago in the fall of 2006 that Sen. Warner went to Iraq and upon returning, said something to the effect "We've got to change something over there. I'm just not putting up with it anymore." I'll research this and post his exact words from that last trip he made to Iraq and the aggravation he expressed. What aggravation? How does his compare to the "aggravation" endured by soldiers (if still living) and family members who suffer the ill effects of Senator Warner's and his colleagues' failure to act?

Letter from Senator Warner March 21, 2008

Alas, except for a few benign updates, Sen. Warner's reply to me about my letter decrying Halliburton's sewage showers our soldiers take in Iraq, is essentially nothing more than what Sen. Warner has been sending for approximately 18 months about all things Iraq which is a summary of his lukewarm opinions about our involvement there. He totally ignored the subject of my letter (in another post):
]

In January 2007, the President proposed a surge of approximately 35,000 troops....the Iraqi government has not done its part.

He writes it's time "to put teeth into these words" quoting U.S. Amb. Ryan Crocker: "There is 'no blank check' for American involvement in Iraq." (Oh, yeah?)

Then he lists his tenth trip to Iraq last August! Is this the same letter he was sending out then?

Although Senator Warner is dissatisfied with the long deployments our soldiers endure, "I believe we must remain mindful of the realities currently facing our military" so the heck with shortened leaves! The soldiers must stay so we'll be ready! Ready for what? For Buzh to invade Iran?

Sen. Webb's automated responses are all identical no matter what the subject. At least Warner sends his replies to my mailbox although, sadly, they are the same. Perhaps because he is retiring, his office perceives no need to respond individually.
I can't help but wonder: Are there any live bodies on Capitol Hill who actually represent the people rather than themselves? Pray tell, who?