Occupation won’t help capture bin Laden

Today marks the beginning of the ninth year of the U.S. war in Afghanistan. What was the reason for this war in the first place? To capture Osama bin Laden and all those responsible for the treachery carried out on Sept. 11, 2001.

It's now eight years later and one rarely even hears the name Osama bin Laden anymore. No one can give a straight answer as to why we have 68,000 troops in Afghanistan, with a pending request from the military for 40,000 more. We should capture bin Laden and his al-Qaida associates, but we have not done it and cannot do it by occupying and attempting to remake Afghanistan.

President Barack Obama is under intense pressure to go along with the request for more troops, and it will take more courage for him to say no than to say yes. If he listens to the people, he will not only say no but will refocus on our only legitimate reason

for being there and reduce our military occupation.

Congress should say that no funds will be authorized for additional troops. Let us act now to avoid the following scenario of Oct. 7, 2012: “We have to send more troops to Afghanistan, or the deaths of the 5,000 Americans will have been for naught. And we must authorize another $150 billion for the war to support our troops in the field.”

We, the undersigned veterans, have heard that song before.

Ed Flaherty

Roscoe Porch

Thomas Kelly

John Jadraev

Iowa City

Paul Deaton

Solon