SalemNews.com, Salem, MA

Opinion

September 11, 2013

Letter: Keep military resources in the U.S.

To the editor:

I am a World War II veteran. I have enough medals to decorate a Christmas tree. I was 19 years old, a medic with the infantry, in the Battle of the Bulge, and also a prisoner of war of the Germans. I truly believe that we were on the side of the Lord. The enemy was on the devil’s side.

Today I am an isolationist. I do not believe that we should send any of our soldiers, sailors, or airmen overseas to fight any foreign war for any reason, nor should we send military equipment as a gift or a loan to any foreign nation. If we are to aid any foreign nation we should limit this to food or medical supplies, if needed, but no military equipment or personnel.

I do not see China or Russia involved. In the Middle East, as a matter of fact, England, France and Italy are much closer to the scene but they do not show any interest in being involved. We are spending billions of dollars in countries that do not want us there. We do not understand them and they do not understand us. Could it be that maybe some high brass in the American military in conjunction with some manufacturers of the armaments would like us to be involved?

Instead, I suggest that we keep a big army here in our own country and not overseas. This army should be used domestically to fight forest fires, help the victims of floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, or any other natural disaster. The army should be well equipped to respond to these disasters in a timely manner. This home based military should be well trained and equipped for each type of national emergency.

When not needed for training in disaster relief, these same personnel should be well trained in military skills. They should also be used in activities such as building or repairing dams, finding ways to mitigate floods and forest fires, or building and maintaining bridges, rivers, canals and harbors.

Text Only | Photo Reprints
Opinion

AP Video
Comments Tracker
Roll Call
Helium debate
Helium