Kirk's experience crucial for Israel
Congressman Kirk has an exceptional record in the 10th Congressional District.
The recent letter to the editor titled "Seals shows more support for Israel" which accused Congressman Kirk of being inconsistent in his support of Israel is outrageous and misleading. Congressman Kirk has been, and continues to be, one of Israel's greatest supporters in Washington. He knows that Israel is an island of freedom and democracy in a sea of tyranny and the U.S.' most dependable ally in this area.
Listing all of the ways Mark Kirk has helped Israel would take more space than a letter to the editor allows, so I will limit myself only to his most recent accomplishment. Only a few weeks ago it was announced that the United States will be deploying our most powerful radar system in Israel to defend against missile attacks from Iran. The radar will be manned by U.S. military personnel, and coupled with anti-missile systems it will provide defense for U.S. forces and for its allies in the Middle East. Mark Kirk was the idea's first and most outspoken champion.
Congressman Kirk is also a naval intelligence officer who served during the 1991 Iraq war and in Bosnia, Kosovo and Haiti. He serves now one weekend a month at the Pentagon. Through his intelligence work he is very knowledgeable about the Middle East and Europe. That "hands on," on-the-ground experience isn't something you can get by reading a report and is essential when making decisions upon which lives hang.
And what is Seals' record? I take issue with the claim in the letter's title, that Seals "shows more support" for Israel. Exactly how has he shown more support? His own Web site shows that Mr. Seals has not served on any civic, municipal, county or state political entity. He has no record of support for Israel; no accomplishments he can point to. Talk is cheap. Anyone can talk. We need leaders in Congress, and leaders act.
So it comes down to this question: Who is better for Israel? A proven Congressman who has served in the military, has intimate knowledge of the situation in the Middle East and has a strong record of extraordinary support for Israel? Or an unproven politician with no record of service in the military or government, and who offers words instead of deeds as proof of his "support" for Israel? The answer is obvious to me. That is why I'm voting for Mark Kirk.
Amos Turner
Highland Park