Letter to the President

Copy of a letter to the President, Virginia’s two Senators, and Representative Rob Whitman.

The Honorable Barack Obama

President of the United States

The White House

Washington, District of Columbia

Dear Mr. President:

Given the recent events in Paris it is clear that DAISH is an clear and present danger to the peace and stability of the world.

The civilized world can no longer stand by and allow DAISH to terrorize the peoples of the Middle East and the world through violence and intimidation.

I would urge you to immediately form a coalition of willing partners, to include the Russian Republic, to conduct sustained military against DAISH.

You should immediately address the Congress of the United States and ask for a Declaration of War.  DAISH is more than a terrorist group; it is a transnational terror group that has all the attributes of a nation state and therefore a Declaration of War is right and proper and will fully establish the seriousness of our purpose.

Along with the Declaration you should immediately mobilize the Reserve Components of the Armed Forces of the United States, ask Congress for a 3 to 5 percent surtax on income to pay for the war.

I remain, with kindest regards,

Respectfully your,


Henry J. Foresman, Jr.


Senator Tim Kaine

Senator Mark Warner

Representative Rob Whittman

Über keydet1976

Retired as a Colonel in the United States Army after 33 years of service. Graduate of the VMI, MA in History at JMU, completed course work for Ph.D in History University of Tennessee.
Dieser Beitrag wurde unter The Long War veröffentlicht. Setze ein Lesezeichen auf den Permalink.

5 Antworten zu Letter to the President

  1. John Minehan schreibt:

    Very professional and well reasoned.

    A couple of reservations:

    Do we legitimize IS by treating it like a nation-state?

    Do we lose sight of the fact that IS does not consider itself a Westphalian nation-state and, in fact, views the entire concept as fundamentally illegitimate? (When I was in law school, after the East African Embassy bombings, I think I offended a couple of my professors who were advocating, in a public meeting of the International Law Society, that the perpetrators be dealt with through the mechanisms of International Law, by pointing out the fact the perpetrators did not see any legitimacy in the system they were advocating we use to try them.)

    Practically, given the fact that we are on opposite sides from the Russians on the Ukrainian controversy, our support of what the Russians are doing against IS should be far less open. Perhaps something as simple as giving them a free hand in Syria, while we continue to support the Government of Iraq („GOI“) and coordinating (or perhaps a better term might be „de-conflicting“) our efforts.

    My personal opinion is that there is NO POPULAR SUPPORT for any expansive military operations in the Middle East and that Sec. Gates’s (and Sec. Marshall’s) views on land wars in Asia should be respected.

    Given that, it may be time that the US abrogates the NATO Treaty, which could potentially draw us into this (or other wars) not of our choosing. That seems unfair, as the French followed us into Afghanistan after 9-11, but nations don’t have permanent allies, they have permanent interests, to paraphrase Lord Palmerston.

    Russia and the PRC tipping the scales of this Islamic version of the 30 Years War toward Iran (and then having to deal with the rise of an Iran-centric Shia Caliphate) seems to be more in our national interest than a wider role in this war, in my opinion.

    Gefällt mir

    • keydet1976 schreibt:

      We can not consider DAISH a Westphalian nation state in the sense the treaty of Westphalia established.
      Having said that we need to see it as a nation state in the sense they have a central governing organization but their state crosses state boundaries and exist in area controlled by other nations. In other than geography they are a nation.
      Do we give it legitimity no we must refer to it as DAISH, and then we must hunt them down until they are either dead or they give up.

      Gefällt mir

      • John Minehan schreibt:

        I’m not sanguine about our ability „hunt them down until they are either dead or they give up.to.“

        The feasible strategy might be to support the Iranians in their fight with IS, and then deal with the probable outcome: an Iran-centric Shia Caliphate, which will primarily be Russia and the PRC’s problem. This kind of hand-off of serious threats from declining to rising Great Powers is not unknown, The UK and the US in the two 20th Century World Wars, the Hellenistic States in the Western Med and the Romans as to the Carthaginian threat and the Persian threat being faced by successively Hellenic City States, Macedon, Hellenistic Kingdoms, Rome and ultimately the Romaioi are notable examples.

        Gefällt mir

  2. vmijpp schreibt:

    Don’t bet on it. The individual who would have to go to Congress for said declaration still believes IS / DAISH is the „JV“ team. In fact, just friday he said they were contained. Look somewhere else for leadership and resolve.

    Gefällt mir

  3. LBL '94 schreibt:

    I have been thinking long and hard about this entire subject, and just read this from Bernard Henri-Levy, I humbly submit it for consideration. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bernardhenri-levy/war-thinking-the-unthinka_b_8590406.html

    Gefällt mir

Kommentar verfassen

Trage deine Daten unten ein oder klicke ein Icon um dich einzuloggen:


Du kommentierst mit Deinem WordPress.com-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )

Google+ Foto

Du kommentierst mit Deinem Google+-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )


Du kommentierst mit Deinem Twitter-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )


Du kommentierst mit Deinem Facebook-Konto. Abmelden /  Ändern )

Verbinde mit %s