Dear Mr. Simon: The interview I saw was deficient. I’m sorry to say, I think the interviewers were as much at fault as the subject. Two examples:
1. Senator Thompson said this nation needs to make a “financial commitment” to “rebuild our military.” The nation has three choices to do this:
a) borrow the money in the manner of Reagan and Bushes pere et fils.
b) raise taxes in the manner of the Clintons past and future (and then spend the dough on social programs and borrowq the money anyway)
c) cut spending elsewhere, not successfully done since Coolidge, nor even tried since Truman.
You could say that paying for the war on terror is an ancillary issue to fighting it. But after seven years of deficit financing, I think it has to take a higher place. I agree with the Winston Churchill of 1936. Talking about rearming Great Britain, in a time of great pacificism, he said, the country will always do its duty when the true facts are put before it. Stanley Baldwin did not agree, and the results are evident to us today.
Discussing this would be a first step in Senator Thompson’s intent of “bringing the people along for the ride.” He did not do so in this case.
2. But go back even farther: “rebuild our military.” Said forces are not just tanks and planes and ships. They are also men and women. I don’t know if you saw this article (via INSTAPUNDIT):
http://abumuqawama.blogspot.com/2007/11/petraeus-picks-next-generation.html
General Petreaus is being summoned home to lead a promotion board in the Army, where the colonels of today become the generals of tomorrow. It is fair to say that colonel to general is the hardest step in an Army career. Picking future generals is a hugely important task. But is it important enough to bring Petraeus home? In August 1943, did George Marshall telegraph Eisenhower asking him to come home to help pick the next set of generals? Not hardly; Eisenhower had other tasks to do, e.g. winning the war. So why is Petraeus being brought home for this task? The article says it is because Petraeus’s presence is the only way the Army at large and the public, can have faith that the next set of generals in our country can have the right set of skills to fight the war on terror. If true, this is a horrific indictment of our Army, which requires prompt attention. What would Senator Thompson do about this?
Mr. Simon, your position on the war is sufficiently sturdy for you to ask the toughest questions. Tough questions from you will not be seen as “gotcha” journalism as practiced by such $5 million liars as Tim Russert against Mr. Libby. If the hawks can’t ask the tough questions, this nation is in a pickle.
I apologize for the enormous length and am ready to face any replies. But this interview didn’t do what it needed to.
Sincerely yours,
Gregory Koster
