Summer Sale Extended! Get unlimited digital access for 13 weeks for $13.
Readers Respond
News Opinion Readers Respond

Nuclear threat keeps U.S. troops overseas

Nobody wishes for peace more than a veteran. As someone who deployed to a combat zone and knows what it's like to endure deep pangs of family separation and be awoken at 3:30 a.m. because there's a large group outside your post who is trying to kill you, I would love nothing more than to see every American come home.

And that is precisely why we must do everything we can to keep Iran from developing military-grade uranium. America is not an imperial country. We have only ever asked other countries for enough land to bury our dead. Today, America maintains forward presences primarily for one reason — unfriendly and unstable countries with nuclear weapons.

Europe pays us to be there because Russia'sgovernment still can't be fully trusted with nukes. We're concentrated in South Korea because of North Korean nukes. President Barack Obama is calling for new forces in Southeast Asia to counter China's unpredictability. And if Saddam Hussein had allowed inspectors full access to Iraq, we never would have gone in there. We (incorrectly) assumed he was hiding nukes from us, when he was actually hiding the fact that he did not have any from Iran. Who knew? Lastly, we're ultimately still in Afghanistan as an indirect means of keepingPakistan's nukes out of the hands of extremists.

Looking forward, if Iran gets nukes, its people will risk the permanent servitude that North Koreans endure. And Saudi Arabia will most certainly want its own counter-arsenal. We will comply because our oil addiction will demand that we do. All subsequent plans for securing our energy supply and protecting Americans from "loose nukes" will undoubtedly include developing a new, large permanent base in Kuwait.

And nobody wants that — especially veterans.

Larry Smith, Timonium

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Iran deal a 'Pandora's Box'

    Iran deal a 'Pandora's Box'

    If we believe that Iran will cease its nuclear program and its support for international terrorism after the agreement is signed, we are living in a fool's paradise ("Sen. Ben Cardin says U.S. negotiators got 'awful lot' in Iran deal," July 23). The argument that Iran will no longer develop nuclear...

  • Cardin, Mikulski should stand up to Obama and reject Iran deal

    Cardin, Mikulski should stand up to Obama and reject Iran deal

    Contrary to the letter "Ben Cardin needs to make up his mind and support the Iran deal" (Aug. 5), this is the time for Sens. Ben Cardin and Barbara Mikulski to demonstrate that they are a statesman and stateswoman respectively and not simply political supporters of President Barack Obama. Their...

  • Congress should have a say in any Iran deal

    Congress should have a say in any Iran deal

    Under normal circumstances, Congress should not get involved in preliminary treaty negotiations, since it has the option of refusing to pass the document by not mustering a two-thirds vote of approval.

  • U.S. negotiations with Iran are a dangerous farce

    U.S. negotiations with Iran are a dangerous farce

    Having missed a July deadline for reaching an agreement with Iran over its nuclear program, the six world powers party to the talks -- the United States, Russia, China, France, United Kingdom and Germany -- have set November 24 as their new deadline. Iran says there will be no extension if a deal...

  • Iran is not at fault for stalled nuclear talks — Israel is

    Iran is not at fault for stalled nuclear talks — Israel is

    Unfortunately, the skilled Iranian negotiators have already won the game against a concession-minded P5-1 array of nations headed by the United States ("Iran's dangerous game," June 5). With funds now flowing into Iran and even more lucrative trade agreements being discussed with that nation, Iran...

  • Iran deal offers hope

    Iran deal offers hope

    When the Iran deal was announced by Secretary of State John Kerry, I was elated that the negotiators were at last able to reach a reasonable agreement. While some people are asking that we hold out for more, I agree with those who say that we have moved Iran as far as we can move her at this time...

  • Don't compare Israel to Iran

    Don't compare Israel to Iran

    To the letter writer who stated that Iran is in compliance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, I have the proverbial bridge I wish to sell him ("Iran is not at fault for stalled nuclear talks," June 15). What nonsense!

  • Shouldn't we read the Iran deal before supporting it?

    Shouldn't we read the Iran deal before supporting it?

    I find it un-American that your paper and many in Congress can apparently make a decision to agree with the proposed Iran nuclear deal without reading it or knowing what the side agreements the UN made contain. You are all taking the word of people that have a record of distorting the facts or...

Comments
Loading
86°