Issue link: https://www.epageflip.net/i/332510
GregStevens,Publisher Chip Thompson, Editor EDITORIALBOARD How to have your say: Letters must be signed and provide the writer's home street address and home phone number. Anonymous letters, open letters to others, pen names and petition-style letters will not be allowed. Letters should be typed and no more than two double-spaced pages or 500words. When several letters address the same issue, a cross section will be published. Email: editor@red bluffdailynews.com Phone: 530-527- 2151ext. 112 Mail to: P.O. Box 220, 545 Diamond Ave., Red Bluff, CA 96080 Facebook: Leave comments at FACEBOOK.COM/ RBDAILYNEWS Twitter: Follow and send tweets to @REDBLUFFNEWS "FromthehallsofMonte- zuma To the shores of Tripoli ... " — The Marines' Hymn WASHINGTON Two hundred and nine years after Marines visited those shores, dispatched by President Jefferson to punish Barbary pirates for attacking U.S. vessels in the Mediterra- nean, Marines are again in that sea, poised to return. If they are sent ashore, their mission will be to rescue U.S. citizens from the consequences of U.S. policy. Then they might have to do the same thing in Baghdad. The House Select Commit- tee on Benghazi should not consider the attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi its sole or even primary topic. Rather, it should begin at the begin- ning, with the U.S. military in- tervention in Libya's civil war 18 months before Benghazi. Today, Libya is an anar- chy of hundreds of rival mili- tias. The U.S. intervention, for which Barack Obama's phrase- makers coined the term "lead- ing from behind," was justified by "R2P" — the "responsibil- ity to protect" Libyans, espe- cially in Benghazi, from the supposed threat of genocide inflicted by Moammar Gad- dafi. This humanitarian impe- rialism quickly became an ex- ercise in regime change. But the prolonged attempt to as- sassinate Gaddafi from the air made no provision for a re- placement regime. The Benghazi commit- tee should hear from Alan J. Kuperman of the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Af- fairs at the University of Texas. In his policy brief "Lessons from Libya: How Not to Inter- vene," he says: Gaddafi did not initiate vio- lence against peaceful protest- ers. Rather, protesters initi- ated the violence that engulfed four cities. Media reports "ex- aggerated the death toll by a factor of 10, citing 'more than 2,000 deaths' in Beng- hazi during the initial days of the uprising, whereas Hu- man Rights Watch (HRW) later documented only 233 deaths across all of Libya in that period." Furthermore, when the U.S. and a few other NATO nations intervened in March 2011, "Gaddafi al- ready had regained control of most of Libya, while the reb- els were retreating rapidly to- ward Egypt. Thus, the con- flict was about to end, barely six weeks after it started, at a toll of about 1,000 dead. ... [The intervention] enabled the rebels to resume their at- tack, which prolonged the war for another seven months and caused at least 7,000 more deaths." The intervention en- couraged peaceful protesters in Syria to use violence in the hope of attracting an interven- tion. This increased the rate of killing there tenfold. And since Gaddafi fell, "sophisti- cated weapons from Gaddafi's arsenal — including up to 15,000 man-portable, surface- to-air missiles unaccounted for as of 2012 — leaked to rad- ical Islamists throughout the region." Perhaps including Iraq. The Benghazi committee is orga- nizing as Iraq crumbles, its army disintegrating as the en- emy approaches. In January, Fallujah fell to forces of the Is- lamic State of Iraq and Syria, an al-Qaeda affiliate. ISIS' con- quest of Mosul, Iraq's second- largest city (its population of 1.5 million equals that of Phil- adelphia), then Tal Afar, is re- dundant evidence that the U.S. experience in Iraq was the worst episode of squandered valor in U.S. history. Some will say that it would not have come to this if the Iraqi army had not been dis- banded, or if there had been better occupation planning, or if there had been a bigger oc- cupying force, or if an agree- ment had been reached to keep a significant number of U.S. troops in Iraq indefinitely, or if ... Enough. Here is a question for Republican presidential as- pirants: Given the absence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, and given that we now know how little we know about "na- tion-building" and about the promotion of democracy in na- tions that need to be "built," and given that Saddam Hus- sein's horrific tyranny at least controlled Iraq's sectarian fu- ries, and given that Iraq under him was Iran's adversary, and given that 10-year wars make Americans indiscriminately averse to military undertak- ings — given all this, if you could rewind history to March 2003, would you favor invad- ing Iraq? Barack Obama is conduct- ing the foreign policy retreat he promised, that then-Sec- retary of State Hillary Clin- ton facilitated without appar- ent qualms, and that many Americans said they wanted until it began to make them queasy. The Republican chal- lenge is to articulate a policy that fills the vast space be- tween this retreat and the ru- inous grandiosity of the "free- dom agenda" of Obama's pre- decessor. Americans prefer not to think about, and rarely al- low elections to turn on, for- eign policy. Events, however, are not cooperating. Trotsky probably did not really say this, but someone should: "You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you." GeorgeWill'semailaddressis georgewill@washpost.com. George Will Obama's foreign policy of retreat Observationsontribalsplit Editor: I am writing to you because of an injustice that is occurring right under our noses. The No- maki Tribe of Paskenta is be- ing swindled and railroaded by red tape and politics. Someone needs to step in. Let me assure you that I am in no way involved in either side of this dispute. I have sim- ply read the evidence at hand and have questions that no one seems to be answering. Perhaps that is where you could step in. Why is it that the coun- cil members, save Andy Free- man, are what one would con- sider moderately wealthy and the tribal members are not? Million dollar homes, a private jet for their exclusive use and money to burn on just about ev- erything. There are tribe members who have no homes, no cars, no jobs, nothing. They are poor. Where is the money going? This is eas- ily investigated. My theory is that the ousted members, from the start, tar- geted this tribe as an easy mark for opening and control- ling a casino, using the tribe as a front for their own greed. Bi- ased much? Maybe, but facts are facts. The ousted members reaped all the benefits while the actual tribe continues to scrape by and barely make a living. What, as a concerned citizen, can one do to see justice for these people? It's time to take sides. I know which side is in the right. Do you? — Kiley Willard, Paradise Reasons to support the State of Jefferson Editor: While I acknowledge break- ing off from the State of Cali- fornia would involve substan- tial work, in the end I believe it would be best for the North State. After all, the needs, wants and values of the urban centers of the south are grossly different from those of the rural population of the north. It ac- cordingly makes sense that the governments of the North State should not be subject to the south's decision making that's both uninformed and apathetic about North State issues and exploitative of its resources. One example is the "fire tax" the south has fraudulently and deceptively imposed on rural Californians. In my opinion, this is nothing more than a ma- nipulative scheme to shore up the south's irresponsible bor- rowing and spending. That is, by preying on the little guys up north that don't have the voting power to fight back. Another example is the ridic- ulous statewide application of rules restricting the burning of yard waste. While these may be understandable and sensi- ble in densely-populated ar- eas, they only antagonize North State residents by forcing them to endure the inconvenience of complying with insensible re- strictions. An example is that all burning must be completed by 5 p.m. to accommodate the possibility that a neighbor will raise a fuss over the faint odor of smoke during the few min- utes he spends outdoors each day. Meanwhile, chronic noise pollution from dog barking goes unchecked. Another example is illegal immigration. The urban cen- ters of the south enjoy having cheap Mexican labor to work their farms and factories. They accordingly encourage immi- gration — irrespective of the long-term negative effects on California's air, water and al- ready-swelling population. In- stead of discouraging the ero- sion of the nation's native lan- guage by requiring Mexicans to learn and communicate in English, governments reinforce their not doing so by publishing and allowing commercial com- munications to be in both Eng- lish and Spanish. Another issue is water. The North State shouldn't have to endure damage to our wild- lands and fisheries by build- ing dams in the North State, nor should we be forced to en- dure the exhaustion of existing North State water resources to accommodate rampant popu- lation growth the south refuses to control. Another example of the south's negative impact on the North State is legalization of the private growth and use of medical marijuana. Again, this issue has had enormous neg- ative impact on the rural ar- eas of the North State. That is, not just by making enforcement difficult by blurring the lines between medical and recre- ational marijuana use, but also from people laying waste to land and water resources grow- ing it. If the south really wants and needs to help people with pain relief, it would pass legis- lation facilitating easier access to prescription drugs. That it doesn't only demonstrates the legalization of growing medi- cal marijuana is nothing more than a facade for enabling resi- dents to use and profit from its recreational use at the expense of public and environmental health and safety. Another example is prisons. Instead of the south combat- ting the swelling prison popula- tion by instigating effective so- cial and prisoner reform pro- grams, it just endangers society by releasing unreformed pris- oners early. Northern and Southern Cal- ifornia are two completely- different worlds. The south- ern-controlled California gov- ernment has long proven to be corrupt, inefficient, and in- comprehensibly wasteful in managing even its own af- fairs. We certainly can't rely on them to effectively man- age those of the North State. The North State should ac- cordingly break free from the south and take control of its own destiny before the task becomes even more monu- mental than it is now. — Nathan Esplanade, Rancho Tehama Your opinions Cartoonist's take Many Americans probably yawned when they saw the news that Spain's King Juan Carlos de- cided to abdicate the throne in fa- vor of his son, Prince Felipe. But they should have been in awe of the King's name. He's a historical figure who displayed guts despite personal danger in helping mod- ern-day Spain become a democ- racy. The reign in Spain has been anything but plain. On two key occasions, Juan Carlos Alfonso Victor Maria de Borbon y Borbon-Dos Sicil- ias championed the democracy Spain has today. He didn't brag about it. He just did it. The story starts with Spain's late dictator Francisco Franco, who, as Satur- day Night Live used to say, is still dead. Although many Americans probably think Franco was the guy who canned spaghetti, in the 1920s he was Europe's young- est general. He fused monar- chist, right-wing and fascist sup- port to defeat the Spanish Re- public in the 1936-1939 Spanish Civil War, which cost one million lives. He installed himself dic- tator in a totalitarian state with all the repressive bells and whis- tles. He seemed to be a natural World War II ally of Germany's Adolf Hitler and Italy's Benito Mussolini's, but refused to be bul- lied and shrewdly kept his coun- try from being sucked into it. Hit- ler reportedly said he'd rather have four teeth pulled out than to meet again with Franco. In 1969, Franco named Juan Carlos the next Spanish head of state. But it was clear Franco in- tended the real head of state would be his best bud, Admi- ral Luis Carrero Blanco, who he named Prime Minister in June 1973. Six months later, Blanco died when the Basque separat- ist group ETA set off explosives under his Dodge Dart as he re- turned from church, sending the car 66 feet into the air. I arrived in Spain in May 1975, and was the Chicago Daily News' stringer in Madrid. After Franco died in November 1975, I became The Christian Science Monitor's Special Correspondent (super stringer). The popular joke then was about Blanco arriving at the gate and saying to St. Peter. "I'm Luis Carerro Blanco." St. Peter re- plies: "It's OK if you're here — but did you have to bring your car?" Once Franco died, the coun- try's left and most younger Span- iards demanded Francoism's end and clamored to be part of Eu- rope. Many rightists demanded the status quo. The Basque sep- aratist ETA continued its violent campaigns. Pro-democracy jour- nalists were sometimes grabbed off the street and beaten brutally by ultra-right thugs who many insisted were pro-Franco para- military. Editors and diplomats privately told me they knew Juan Carlos wanted to move Spain to democracy and was quietly in contact with the country's dem- ocratic forces and leaders. But many thought he'd fail. Juan Carlos appointed a se- ries of Prime Ministers who advo- cated "evolution without revolu- tion" but The Real Deal emerged when he appointed technocrat Adolfo Suarez in July 1976. Su- arez moved swiftly to enact re- forms to help transform Spain into a bona fide democracy and, in 1977, became Spain's first dem- ocratically elected Prime Minis- ter since the civil war. One year later Spain's voters approved the country's first democratic consti- tution. But danger remained. In 1981 some Army officers tried stag- ing a coup. Juan Carlos is cred- ited with having squelched it by going on TV in his army uniform, calling for the democratic govern- ment's continuation and making it clear to the military where he stood. He had definitively proven his democratic creds. In recent years, a series of scandals blemished the royal family, including a politically dumb hunting trip by the King to Botswana at a time when Span- iards were suffering due to the economy. In deciding to step down, Juan Carlos again showed himself politically astute: his son Prince Felipe enjoys a 77 percent approval rating. Joe Gandelman is a veteran journalist who wrote for news- papers overseas and in the United States. He can be reached at jgandelman@themoderatev- oice.com. Joe Gandelman Juan Carlos' courageous reign in Spain OPINION » redbluffdailynews.com Thursday, June 19, 2014 MORE AT FACEBOOK.COM/RBDAILYNEWS AND TWITTER.COM/REDBLUFFNEWS A6