Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Home / Opinion / Letters to the Editor / Security requires a strong military

Security requires a strong military

The Obama administration is contemplating major reductions in the Defense Department budget to help cut into the huge deficits incurred by the president and his Washington cronies. They plan on reducing our conventional military forces, and increase special operations units to combat the terrorist threats around the world.

An increase in special operations forces is warranted to target terrorist organizations, including al Qaida, the Taliban, Hezbollah, Hamas and other radical Islamic extremists in a number of countries. Additionally, large scale conventional military operations are necessary to pacify areas in host countries that house the terrorists, and staging bases are needed to launch targeted operations against the terrorists.

Let’s not forget about the threats posed by the large ground forces of Iran; the North Korean Army poised against South Korea; and the massive Chinese Communist conventional forces available to threaten Taiwan, Japan and other Asian countries. Due to its vibrant economy, which is growing by 10 percent annually, China has embarked on a significant upgrade of its land forces and strategic weapons systems, and has implemented a naval shipbuilding program that includes aircraft carriers and submarines. Russia is also upgrading its military.

We need to maintain robust military forces, both special operations and conventional forces, to combat terrorist organizations and deter countries from hosting terrorists, and to oppose the forces of totalitarian regimes in the world that threaten our national security and the security of our allies. History has taught us military weakness is the breeding ground for wars.

— Donald A. Moskowitz, Londonderry, NH

One comment

  1. To the Editor:

    Any attempt, by Arizona, to apply it’s statute on disability of elected officials, to U.S. Rep. Gabriella Giffords, would be patently unconstitutional. So says the United States Supreme Court. In U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 1995, the Court overturned Arkansa’s term limits for U.S. Reps. and U.S. Sens. They held that the Constitutional has specific qualifications for members of Congress, and voters or the Legislature can’t had to those stated qualifications.

    Attorneys for Rep. Giffords should seek a restraining order, in Federal District Court, in Phoenix, against the state of Arizona, to block enforcement. Bot the Governor and the Attorney General took oaths to uphold the Constitution of the United States. That includes U.S. Supreme Court decisions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *




Check Also

Arizona jobless rate for September at 8.2 percent

Here’s how businesses can win fed funds 

New details have emerged regarding how small businesses might be able to win some of the federal dollars flowing to the state of Arizona as part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.