Delano Herald Journal

Serving the communities of Delano, Loretto, Montrose, MN, and the surrounding area

Former servicemen agree action is needed in Iraq



“Iraq is a festering boil,” said former serviceman
Chip Guggemos of Winsted.

Guggemos was one of three veterans who were willing to
give their opinions about Saddam Hussein and the situation in Iraq.

The men had a roundtable discussion at the request of the
Journal.

“He (Hussein) is a cancer. If we let it go, it’ll
get worse,” said Pastor Gerald Boldt of Winsted. “I’d hate to
see (what happens) if we didn’t do anything.”

“President George W. Bush sees a threat. He is right
to eliminate the problem,” Boldt said.

Boldt was in the Army and Marine Corp for 23 years. He
served in Panama from 1988 to 1991. He attended the seminary after he was
discharged, he said.

“Bush is correct in taking the hard line with Iraq,”
said Chris Otto of Lester Prairie. “Hussein has used biological and
chemical weapons against his own people, he had an eight-year war against
Iran, he invaded Kuwait, and he sponsors and financially helps Palestinian
terrorist organizations.”

“This is not about oil,” he said. “This
war is about America doing what it feels is right and what is, I think,
right. We cannot have the world run by terrorists.”

Otto was in the Navy for 21 years. He served in Lebanon
and the Persian Gulf War. After being enlisted for nine years, he was commissioned.
He retired about 10 years ago as a lieutenant commander.

“The Bush administration should not have to link Iraq
to al Qaeda. We have reason enough to go in,” Guggemos said.

The United States and United Nations (UN) has tried democracy
with Iraq, he said. “We are in an even more justifiable position than
in 1990.”

“I think Bush is willing to back up what he’s talked,
and go it alone if necessary,” Guggemos said.

“But I am convinced that he probably was trying to
force the issue on the table of the UN to try to get the inspections going
again and to have a big stink if the inspections are stopped.”

“I don’t think he’s as anxious to go in there as some
folks think. I think he wants to give diplomacy and the inspections another
chance, but he knew it wouldn’t happen unless he says he’s willing to go
it alone, because that kind of forces the issue to the UN. That’s my suspicion,
but I’m not a fly on the wall in the oval office either,” Guggemos
said.

“It’s going to be a US effort,” he said.

Guggemos is a West Point graduate. He served for 13 years
and retired as an army captain infantry.

“I think most military do support Bush,” Boldt
said. He added that “from the perspective of former servicemen, we
support the president.” Otto and Guggemos agreed.

“Bush is being a leader ­ a national leader and
a world leader,” Otto said.

“We elected him, we’ll support him,” Boldt said.
“As a nation we have an obligation to consider what our president is
doing. I think our president is right in his consideration to eliminate
the problem (Hussein).”

Otto, Boldt, and Guggemos agreed that if protocol is followed
and Hussein does not comply to UN resolutions, action must follow.

“The first time he screws up and won’t let us into
a location, we go,” Guggemos said.

“I think the American people back Bush on this. However,
I feel we should give the inspections a chance, though I’m not very optimistic
that they are going to work. I also feel that we need to bring on board
as many allies as possible,” Otto said.

The issue was given considerable thought and reflection
by the men. “We’re talking about men and women dying over this, and
that is never to be taken lightly,” Otto said.

Our side or their side, Guggemos added. “Just because
they are wearing a uniform doesn’t mean it was done voluntarily.”

How do we attack?

The question of how to go into Iraq was not so cut and
dried, though.

Guggemos feels that Iraqi troops will not fight any harder
or even less harder than they did 10 to 12 years ago, he said. “I don’t
think they’re going to die for him anymore.”

“We could have completely destroyed their army easily
10 years ago, but if we did that, they would have been left open to invasion
from Iran, in particular, or Jordan and others possibly,” Guggemos
said.

“So we chose to leave them somewhat intact for their
own defense.”

From what he’s read about and seen on TV, Guggemos said
many Iraqi citizens do not support Hussein.

“What is bombing going to do to the country for the
next 10 or 20 years?” he asked. “Do we need to do this to that
area?”

Otto and Boldt disagreed with using troops.

“Bombs are more accurate,” Boldt said.

“The ‘smart bombs’ they (the US government) have are
so effective,” Otto said.

Guggemos later agreed with where Boldt and Otto were coming
from. “I think it (bombing) pertains more to mountainous areas, like
the bunkers in Afghanistan,” Guggemos said.

“The only mistake we made there was not having troops
on the ground to stop the Taliban from crossing over into Pakistan instead
of relying on the Afghan soldiers,” Otto said.

“I think the battle in Afghanistan will be looked
back upon as a turning point in the way we approach conflict in that part
of the world,” Boldt said.

The military uses the assets available to reduce the number
of American lives lost, Boldt said. “Peace through fire superiority:
eliminate the problem with as few American lives as possible.”

Guggemos agreed, saying the military does “an awful
good job trying to minimize civilian casualties.”

“Afghanistan and Iraq are two different places,”
Boldt said. Guggemos and Otto agreed.

“Iraq is not nearly as strong militarily as they were
during the Gulf War,” Otto said.

Otto brought up the subject of North Korea and asked Guggemos
and Boldt what they thought the difference was between North Korea and Iraq.

North Korea was found to have nuclear weapons in its possession
approximately one month ago.

“North Korea hasn’t attacked a neighbor for 50 years,”
Guggemos said.

That’s exactly right, Otto replied in agreement. “Also,
Iraq is much more do-able.”

“In diplomatic circles, each country is different,”
Guggemos said.

North Korea is a pimple compared to Iraq, which is a “festering
boil,” he said.

“Another difference between the two is the US worked
diplomatically (with Iraq) for 10 years after a war, knowing that they had
weapons of mass destruction, to no avail,” Guggemos said.

Now it’s time to do something, he said.

“Whereas, with North Korea, we only found out about
it a few weeks ago, so we have to give diplomacy a chance,” he said.

“It also brings out the idea that we need inspectors
on the ground (in Iraq) with absolute impunity,” Otto said.

Is there fear of a nuclear retaliation from Iraq if the
US attacks?

“I think they (the US government) know the threat
and potential there, and I think our intelligence sources would be able
to identify a threat and it could be eliminated,” Boldt said.

Otto doesn’t think our intelligence is that good over there,
he said. “UN inspectors won’t find anything because the Iraqi government
is an expert at hiding this stuff,” he said.

Though it is not certain whether Iraq has gotten a hold
of nuclear weapons, it is known that it has biological and chemical weapons.

“Twelve years ago there was some suspicion that Iraq
may have used biological and chemical warfare. Some soldiers are having
health problems now,” Guggemos said.

“Currently though, I understand it’s reasonable to
consider that if the order is given for something like that, Iraqi soldiers
just might not carry it out,” Guggemos said.

“Bush has put the Iraqi commanders on notice that
if they authorize the use of biological or chemical weapons, they will be
considered war criminals,” Otto said.

“Hussein is an evil man,” he said. “Given
time, what’s to stop him?”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.