Haig's Command

To the Editors:

Your interview with Secretary of State Alexander Haig [March 16] confirmed my faith in his ability to chart our course. His positions on human rights, relations with NATO, contact with China and Soviet adventurism are realistic and in the best interests of the U.S.

Joseph J. Salus

Hammond, Ind.

According to Haig, the threat of Communism is paramount to the threat of right-wing military dictatorships. Frankly, I see no difference between the two. Alexander Haig and his foreign policy beliefs are dangerous to the U.S. and, ultimately, to the world.

Richard M. Gureghian

Boston

Leonid Brezhnev has finally met his match. This country cannot survive as a free nation unless we project some determination to defend ourselves and our allies. Haig has this determination.

Barbara Bloom

Owings Mills, Md.

Secretary Haig should follow Teddy Roosevelt's advice: Speak softly and carry a big stick. Like most politicians, he talks too much and too stridently.

Irene Moore

Troy, N. Y.

You rib Alexander Haig for his Piltdown treatment of the English language. To those of us who share the general's khaki complexion, Haigledygook is the creative flowering of basic Army jargon.

The good officer and NCO know the value that the military (and the Government) sets on saying nothing well. Why grope for the single best word when the Army offers a bulging granary of verbal corn?

David Finnell

Captain, U.S.A.

Kaiserslautern, West Germany

Profit by Bribery

In discussing payoffs by businessmen in making foreign deals, "Big Profits in Big Bribery" [March 16], you failed to understand that it is extortion, not bribery that is the problem. Until all exporting countries agree not to submit to extortion, the practice will flourish. The 1977 Foreign Corrupt Practices Act makes no more sense than would unilateral disarmament. The law does nothing more than penalize the U.S.

J. Richard Soars

Lewisburg, Pa.

You portray Western business concerns as honest but unfortunate victims of greedy villains of the Third World. Yet it is commonplace for American businessmen to spend billions of dollars annually converting good will and influence into profits. To accomplish this, great care is taken to retain the "properly positioned" law firms, the influential former military generals, prestigious interlocking corporate directors, graduates from the "right" business schools, effective political lobbyists, influential public relations companies, relatives of prominent people. And the U.S. Internal Revenue Service will accept the accompanying costs as legitimate business expense.

Consequently, it is surprising that you consider the employment of influential foreign nationals to be corruption. These people mostly work very hard and provide honest business information.

Khalid Abdullah Tariq Al-Mansour

San Francisco

Darwin in the Dock

Your article "Putting Darwin Back in the Dock" [March 16] was helpful in dealing with the creationist campaign to have the biblical version of man's origins taught in the schools. But if there are problems with Darwin's theory of evolution, there are also problems with the creation story. Genesis gives two accounts of the beginning. The first and second chapters differ significantly in describing how it came about. The Bible educates Jews and Christians about who created the world and why. It does not teach when or how. I am content to leave that to science.

(The Rev.) Russell C. Block

Berkeley Heights, N.J.

If science teachers now must teach creationism as well as evolution, which version of creationist dogma do they offer --Christian, Taoist, Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim or polytheism? Religion-based versions of creation should be given in a religion course, not in a science class.

Kimon T. Bird

Fort Pierce, Fla.

Teaching creationism in schools does not promote religion any more than evolution does. Both require belief. Actually, the origin of man is more than a matter of science vs. religion. If man was created by a determined act, then we can infer that man is worth something to his creator, and not just an evolved housefly, with no purpose and no destiny.

Wendell J. Brane

Markle, Ind.

From which of the apes did man get his ability to debate his own origin?

Dennis Martin

San Dimas, Calif.

Rendering an Opinion

In "Thunderers on the Right" [March 16] you attribute to me advocacy of "nuclear superiority" for the U.S. In fact, I have never advocated anything of the kind. What I have stated on numerous occasions is that Soviet leaders, having formulated a war-fighting nuclear strategy, consider nuclear superiority desirable. Then, in response to the question on what "nuclear superiority" meant, I answered with the phrase you cite: "Convincing your opponent you are willing to use this force." This is the view of Soviet leaders, as rendered by me, not my own opinion.

Richard Pipes, Senior Staff Member

National Security Council

Washington, D.C.

Banking Your Own Blood

You reported on the recycling of a patient's blood that has been lost in the course of an operation [March 16]. Auto-transfusion is also used in another way. A patient undergoing elective surgery is asked to contribute blood two weeks before and another batch one week before the operation. This is done, of course, provided that the blood count is adequate. The two units of blood are then stored and are used, if needed, by the patient. Today we do approximately 80% of our elective surgery making use of autotransfusion.

Reuven K. Snyderman

Rutgers Medical School

Piscataway, N.J.

Strange Friends

The U.S.'s "special relationship" with Saudi Arabia [March 16] is a fraud. The Saudis pretend to be America's great friend in OPEC, yet they never fail to raise their oil price. They also complain bitterly about our stockpiling in order to thwart the blackmail of another embargo. Now they insist that the U.S. arm them with offensive weapons. The Reagan Administration's acquiescence will enable the Saudis to achieve their ultimate goal of destroying Israel.

Nathan Wayne

Richmond

Address Letters to TIME, Time & Life Building, Rockefeller Center, New York, N.Y. 10020

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.