Zuckerman's editorial is on the mark. Our country is faced with a dilemma arising from an ill-conceived war. We only hear the alternatives of staying or leaving, both of which appear undesirable. Perhaps we should consider the alternative of our occupation of Germany and Japan following World War II by disbanding the current national government, instituting full martial law, and gradually introducing democratic governance from the bottom up. If this is considered impossible from the standpoint of world opinion or assessment of probability of success, we need to realistically assess, on an apolitical basis, if staying the course under current conditions has any reasonable chance of improvement. If not, we should cut our losses and leave.
I.T. WAALAND
Mission Viejo, Calif.
As a longtime avid reader of U.S.News & World Report, I usually agree with Zuckerman but not this time. To stay the present course is to continue a disaster, a complete debacle from all angles: massacre of thousands of innocent Iraqi people, total disregard for our volunteer servicemen (referring to "One Soldier's Story" about Staff Sgt. Darrell Griffin in the same issue), the destroyed Iraqi infrastructure, rampant corruption, massive oil theft, highly questionable reasons for starting this war in the first place. Meanwhile, we failed to get those who caused 9/11. Because of the war, our pathetic foreign policy has alienated everyone, and now a stronger al Qaeda, I believe, leaves us much less secure. Get all the Iraqis who support the United States out, get our servicemen and women out, and fix our disastrous foreign policy.
BERNIE RACHEL
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
Zuckerman is correct that we cannot just pull out of Iraq. We can and must, however, redefine, in the narrowest of terms, our interests there. We hear the nonsense from Bush and several others that if we withdraw, al Qaeda "will follow us home." The more probable event would be a concerted attack on Israel. We would be back to defend it and be in a worse position with regard to our regional allies and the indubitable internal conflicts they would experience. These national tensions are already boiling up in Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt.
DAVID HORN
Oakland, Calif.
Zuckerman is much more informed on current affairs than I am, but I do have the perspective of having been a U.S. Army chaplain in Vietnam in 1968 and 1969. I see a great correlation to what we are now bogged down in. My basic question is: If it is too soon to leave, when might it not be too soon? Vietnam ended with our saying we would leave weapons and materials to allow the South to defend itself. Any thinking person at that time knew we had already failed, and the politicians were looking for a way to save some face.The prospect of longer-lasting, negative impact on our country is far greater now than the Vietnam catastrophe. The basic issue is not to get into situations of "Too Soon to Leave" but rather to look at how we have been too slow to learn.
DON BEESON
Cassville, Mo.
advertisement