Dear Editor,

Regarding Mark DeMeo’s stance on the issue of whether or not to withdraw from Iraq, please keep in mind America’s previous stance on a similar situation, Vietnam.

Now, if you do some research, you’ll see that a lot of politicians and some Americans thought that if we pulled out it would spell disaster for Southeast Asia. People thought that Communism would continue to spread, and America’s interest weakened.

But we left anyway. And what happened? Not much. Just a lot of dead bodies to bury, and for what?

So sure, we can stay the course in Iraq. Which means hundreds of civilians dying every month, as well as U.S. troops. We can continue to allow the country to fall apart into violence as our troops kill some terrorists here and there in a futile attempt to hold the dike with their finger.

Now remember, before we showed up, they weren’t there. But ever since we’ve arrived, the whole of the Islamo-facsist world has decided to descend upon Iraq for some excellent training, training that they will continue to get as we remain.

If we do leave, there is a good chance Iran will use its power to institute a pro-Iranian government at the cost of more bloodshed. But if we stay, we’re just holding off the inevitable.

Staying the course is a poor excuse for supporting Bush’s policies and giving his continued blundering a subtle nod of approval. Being there has done nothing but weaken our country and strengthen our enemies. And it will continue to do so the longer we remain.

Bush says that if we don’t fight them there, we will have to “fight them on the streets.”

My question to him is, how are they going to get to our streets? Will they invade our shores like Vikings? Sweeping in with their powerful navies? Perhaps they’ll paratroop in using their advanced air force that can cross oceans on a single tank of gas? Maybe their army will sneak through the Mexican border in the middle of the night? The realistic possibilities are endless, aren’t they?

Brandon Holmes

Loyola Alum

Class of 06′