Letters to the Editor

In his Friday column, Jim Hoagland writes, "There was not a word of overstatement in Bush's indictment of Iraq's Baathist regime, which I have reported on and analyzed since 1972."

Has Hoagland discovered weapons capabilities in Iraq that remain unknown to the rest of us? If Saddam Hussein had nuclear weapons, we would know of it because nuclear weapons have to be tested and we monitor the whole world for such tests. If Saddam had the temerity to test such a weapon, he would know he was signing his own death warrant.

But if he had such a weapon (acquired mysteriously and secretly), he has no means of delivering it anywhere near us. And if he threatened his neighbors, both Iran and Israel have ground-to-ground missiles already developed that would wipe him out.

No, President Bush did not make his case against Iraq as a threat to us. He did, however, open a nasty can of peas which, in their rush to praise his logic, the media have overlooked: If ignoring U.N. resolutions is grounds for war, the United States will have to start pre-emptive strikes against our ally, Israel, which has ignored several U.N. resolutions regarding the Palestinians. But it is only Iraq against whom we apply this logic, and it is only Iraq -- whose children have been dying by the thousands during more than 10 years of sanctions -- against whom Bush would have us make war (with Hoagland's approval).

Shame on Hoagland for being a journalistic toady.

Kevin O'Morrison
Edmonds

Bush should consider a non-violent approach

Why does President Bush present only two possibilities in how to deal with Iraq? Bush's choices are to either take up arms against Iraq or let Saddam Hussein do whatever he wants. There is a third way more effective and humanitarian than either of the first two.

This third option is non-violent resistance. Many Americans think non-violence won't work against Saddam. This is because mainstream media have failed to inform us about the cases in our recent history where non-violent action has produced amazing results. One notable example is the fact that the Slobodan Milosevic regime was brought to an end by a non-violent student resistance. This incredible story is told in the documentary film "Bringing Down a Dictator" (now available through King County Library).

Non-violence can transform adversaries in a way that is impossible through other tactics. Soldiers who are charged to defend a dictator witness the great courage of individuals who are willing to risk their own lives but unwilling to endanger another person's life. This display of courage and love transforms the soldiers so that they refuse to fight. Soon the dictator will have no army left to defend him.

Our country is setting up a program to train the Kurds in military tactics. This kind of war would last for years and thousands of lives would be lost. Why not train the Kurds in non-violent resistance? This tactic has already been proven to be more effective, takes a shorter period of time and greatly reduces the number of lives lost.

Linda Ellsworth
Bellevue

SOME TRADEOFF

City services cut while ball fields get the money

Mayor Greg Nickels threatens to cut funds from youth service groups ("Nickels to youth service groups: Prove it," Friday) because the city faces a $60 million budget shortfall. Is it ironic or just insane that this same mayor and the city's parks department support spending $60 million to construct wetlands and lighted, artificial turf ball fields at Magnuson Park? What a trade-off: Cut the police, fire department and youth services while spending $20 million for excavation of a puddle at Magnuson Park next to Lake Washington and $40 million for 23 acres of lighted artificial turf.

And the real kicker is that the constructed wetlands will actually eliminate public access to about 40 acres of parkland. It seems the corporate boardrooms are not the only places lacking in fiscal and ethical responsibility.

Fletcher G. Shives
Seattle

ON THE RECORD?

Who are the 'sources' at White House, Pentagon?

I looked through the papers the other day and noticed that almost all the discussions of terrorism and Iraq were laced with phrases such as "Today, sources in the White House," "In the Pentagon, sources said . . ." and "Sources in the FBI reported that . . ."

Wow, who are these "sources" and why don't we know who they are? What are the political leanings of these "sources"?

In my mind, most of this so-called news could be a complete fabrication, or at least a gross exaggeration, and might be specifically designed to manufacture popular domestic support for the current U.S. foreign policy.

In other words, propaganda. These above-mentioned phrases occur so regularly that I believe we have become numb to them.

"Sources in the White House" is a dark and tragic joke. I find it extremely likely that we are being lied to. I suggest that, as an exercise, you read the paper and see how many times you see phrases like the ones I have mentioned and think to yourself about to what degree you believe what is being said.

Paul Spitalny
Kirkland

HORSEY CARTOON

Americans are very mindful of world affairs

I am disgusted and offended by David Horsey's cartoon in the Thursday P-I. George W. Bush is depicted in uniform, urging a "soccer mom" to support his pre-emptive strike on Iraq. Her response is that she is too busy with daily chores and that he should talk to the neighbors.

The implication of this is that the American people are detached and self-absorbed, concerned only with the details of daily life, too busy to pay attention to the world around them. I reject this view.

As long as I can remember, someone has been accusing America of being decadent. We heard this from the Soviet Union when I was growing up. Now we hear it from right-wing reactionaries such as Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, who blamed Sept. 11 on our secular culture, and of course we hear it from Islamic fundamentalists who claim that Western civilization is decadent and evil.

I think the behavior of the firefighters, police officers and the countless volunteers and rescue workers in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks demonstrated clearly that this country is anything but decadent. Americans have made every effort in the past year to learn more about the world around them. We are not a nation of ostriches.

Perhaps Horsey intends to suggest that anyone who doesn't wholeheartedly support Bush's plan to attack Iraq is self-absorbed and uninterested in the world around them. I find this notion insulting.

Iraq may well represent the threat that the president, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld insist it does, but asking questions and raising doubts is part of our civic duty as Americans. Once we stop debating issues, we've stopped being a democracy.

In any event, Horsey should take a look at the polls that indicate that a substantial majority of Washington state residents support making war on Iraq.

What's he complaining about, anyway?

Marc Szeftel
Burien

YEMENI STUDENTS

Florida school right to deny entrance

I applaud the Florida school for denying further education to three Yemeni medical students. Who would want a medical professional who was so irresponsible as to create a hoax of a pending terrorist attack?

Those attempting to defend the students' position should look at the broad picture before jumping to condemn the school for its action.

Higher education is a privilege, not a right.

Ed Anderson
Kirkland

MARIJUANA

United States needs to get on legalization bandwagon

Friday's article "Nevada voters may legalize marijuana" was really part of a larger picture. The entire Westernized world is rapidly decriminalizing marijuana. Canada will in the next five years join Holland, Belgium, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Portugal, Spain, Jamaica and England in decriminalizing marijuana for adults.

Those countries have abandoned the lie that marijuana is in any way more dangerous than alcohol or cigarettes and have realized that prohibiting marijuana causes more problems than the drug itself.

Les Burnham
Seattle

Add P-I Opinion headlines to