This book includes a plain text version that is designed for high accessibility. To use this version please follow this link.
yourviews Don’t miss the Warrior-Family Symposium Sept. 9. See pages 10 and 118 for details.


MILITARY OFFICER


SEPTEMBER 2015 $4.75 THE OFFICIAL MAGAZINE OF MOAA | NEVER STOP SERVINGTM WWW.MOAA.ORG


Dealing Iran


with


Too many Americans, growing up without ever having to give anything but taxes to our nation, adopt … a rather self-serving attitude that the freedom and opportunities they enjoy





require nothing of them.


—Lt. Cmdr. Noel Holland, USN (Ret) ”


Some would call the nuclear deal responsible diplomacy; others say it’s folly. You decide. 52


Iran Agreement I believe any discussion of the [Joint Com- prehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)] and all other proposed agreements, arrange- ments, deals, and/or understandings with Iran [“Dealing With Iran,” September 2015] should place much greater focus on the dangers that they directly and indirectly create for the U.S., and that the JCPOA directly unleashes these three specifi cally identifi ed dangerous threats to the U.S.:  Gives Putin and Russia the free hand they have been seeking to dominate East- ern Europe (Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania, and Georgia), a major position relative to Poland, and further emboldens Putin and the Russian thrust to use Syria as a base for further penetration in the Middle East.  Allows Iran to expand the scope and depth of its entire global terror operations, including expanding its currently active penetration and terror networks in Cen- tral and South America.  Exposes the East Coast of the U.S. (New York, Washington, and Boston) to the direct threat of a nuclear attack and the entire U.S. to the direct threat of an electromagnetic pulse attack. — Lt. Col. Howard Laitin, USA (Ret) Torrance, Calif.


I suspect that I may not be alone with my uneasiness and uncertainty over the mer- its of [the recent deal reached with Iran over its nuclear program]. Is it worthy of citizen support, as so well explained in a recent letter signed by 36 retired generals and admirals? Or, should we oppose the deal based on various accounts including another letter, this one signed by 190 re- tired fl ag offi cers? After reading the thoughts of the two ex-


perts, I was left with one imperative ques- tion: if not the deal, what does the U.S. do? Peter Rough, the expert who opposes the deal, ends his commentary with, “By draw-


14 MILITARY OFFICER NOVEMBER 2015


ing on coercive powers, we should compel Iran into a fundamental choice: either your nuclear infrastructure or your economy, but you cannot have both.” While Rough’s sentiment suggests that a strong and deci- sive course of action exists, he omits details of what that coercive action would be. Fur- ther, is the U.S. left to be the sole enforcer of “no nukes for Iran”? Are we ready for yet another unprovoked war? Some say no deal is better than the deal


worked out. That might well be true if our partners in the sanctions were to stay on board, but recent events have demonstrated that is not happening. Uneasiness and the opinions of numerous distinguished retired fl ag offi cers aside, I reluctantly support the current Iran nuclear deal, and I urge Con- gress to cease its eff orts to derail it. — Col. Ross L. Meyer, USAF (Ret) via email


Service, Not Slavery [Capt. Michael N. Lewis, USN (Ret), “Na- tional Service,” Your Views, September 2015] sums up precisely and eloquently the compelling rationale for compulsory na- tional service. Too many Americans, grow- ing up without ever having to give anything but taxes to our nation, adopt — under- standably — a rather self-serving attitude that the freedom and opportunities they enjoy require nothing of them. It is a selfi sh, though far too prevalent, attitude. As to [Lt. Cmdr. John S. Baltutis, USN


(Ret)’s] opposite view — well, all I can say is that I had never before realized that na- tional service in whatever form was slavery and that Attila, Hitler, Stalin, and Saddam were “progressives.” — Lt. Cmdr. Noel Holland, USN (Ret) Life Member via email


It was an interesting response by Lt. Cmdr. John S. Baltutis, USN (Ret), to the article


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100