Letters

Do You Want This War?

"It doesn't really matter what we want. Bush has made it clear that his decisions are not based on what the people of this country wish." PEYTON HIGGISON Brunswick, Maine

Asking "Do you want this war?" is like saying "Do you want a root canal?" [COVER STORY, March 3]. Most people take care of a problem before it results in severe pain. We can deal with Iraq now or face an even bigger problem later on. BARRY G. BADGER Manheim, Pa.

President Bush's big-stick attitude toward Iraq may resonate with a large segment of the U.S. population, but it shows a serious lack of understanding of what international statesmanship should be about. Bush's approach is alienating friend and foe alike. He is causing irreparable damage. ROSE F. BUSCHMAN Garden City, Kans.

Yes, I want this war with iraq. What country besides the U.S. has the ability and the guts to stand up to the dictators of the world? Were it not for Americans' willingness to fight for freedom, the world would be thrown into total chaos. America is the last great hope for freedom around the globe. WALLACE HALCOMB Williamsburg, Ky.

Bush should read Barbara Tuchman's book The Guns of August, on the events that led to World War I. He does not realize that a war with Iraq would destabilize the Middle East and, as other countries take sides, set the stage for the possibility of World War III. ROBERT J. POHL Lockport, N.Y.

Yes, I want war, and while we're in that awful neighborhood of the Middle East, I want fundamentalist Islam to be crushed and oil profits confiscated as reparation for the Sept. 11 attacks and security costs. Then we Americans should retreat behind our borders absolutely. Those wishing to benefit from the Middle East are welcome to rebuild it themselves. ROBERT C. RHODES New York City

I'm sure that Bush wanted a peacefuL solution as much as the rest of the world did, but he is intelligent enough to know that sometimes that is impossible. PATRICIA MCTAVISH Nevada, Texas

What I want is a president who will spend as much time on the American economy as he appears to spend on making plans for Iraq. I want a President who will take the bull by the horns and deal with health-care issues. RICK GILLIS Houston

I was sure glad to find out that the safety and security of the U.S. are dependent upon the opinions of the leaders of Cameroon, Chile, Guinea, Syria, Angola and Bulgaria. JAMES T. TUCHSCHER Long Beach, Calif.

--TIME's cover illustration of President Bush as Uncle Sam drew varied reactions. "The cartoon was disrespectful and offensive," wrote a Cincinnati, Ohio, reader. "Belittling our President is inappropriate at this difficult time for our country." Objecting on an entirely different ground was a Maine man who declared, "Bush does not even come close to having the qualities that I have always attributed to Uncle Sam: honesty, integrity and concern for all Americans." And a 9-year-old Kentucky girl saw an unusual resemblance: "The picture looks amazingly like the actor Gene Wilder in Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory!"

Support for U.S. Soldiers

In your report about the troops near the Iraqi border [WORLD, March 3], you quoted a Marine private who asked, "Are the protesters going to spit on us when we go home?" The answer is a resounding no! I just want you to come home safe and sound, not in a body bag. I am protesting an unprovoked war that may kill thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians. CONNIE SLEMMER Menlo Park, Calif.

Your article noted that commanders argue that if you let a 19-year-old sit around too long, "he will start to think about what killing means." Isn't that what all of us should be doing? JAN HUNT Sunriver, Ore.

The World Considers Saddam

Because of its Iraq policy, the U.S. has lost the respect it had as an impartial nation [COVER STORY, March 3]. Saddam Hussein is bad, but war is not the way to remove him. It serves only to make him a hero to Muslim nations. SYED SALMAN KHALIQ Lahore, Pakistan

Saddam is a threat to the lives of his people, and that alone warrants his immediate removal. If we lived under similar conditions, wouldn't we want someone to come to our rescue? For our children and their future, wouldn't we try our best to give them a chance to be free from terror and persecution? War is never the perfect solution, but sometimes war is the only thing that can lead to peace in the long run. BRANDON GRANT FABER Johannesburg

I have always admired U.S. citizens for viewing with extreme skepticism any politician they voted into office. Such skepticism is needed now more than ever. Repression of Saddam will not mean an end to terrorist acts by groups like al-Qaeda that operate out of a number of countries. It will only mean justification of al-Qaeda's claims in the eyes of many who formerly sympathized with the U.S. JO-MARIE CLAASSEN Stellenbosch, South Africa

The Iraqi people may deserve a better government, but would they (and the rest of the Islamic world) accept an American protectorate? This would lead to an outbreak of terrorism and could destabilize moderate Islamic countries. How can the Bush Administration be so shortsighted? Iraq may not be the only country that needs a better President. MORENA NANNETTI Munich

The fundamental question is, what is wrong with a nation or society that wants war? America was very happy to arm and support Saddam and Iraq in the '80s, but now it has decided that Saddam is global enemy No. 1. America invaded Afghanistan, but now the Afghan people continue to live in a broken nation. Regimes like North Korea's pose a greater threat to world peace than Iraq's. DAN RABINOVICH Montreal

Instead of offering billions of dollars to Turkey for support, the U.S. would be much wiser to use the money to get Saddam and his cronies to leave Iraq and settle in a safe place. SHAKIR LAKHANI Karachi

The objective of U.S. foreign policy is to liberate the Iraqi people from Saddam so that they will be forever indebted to the U.S., as Americans believe Europeans ought to be for their liberation from the Nazis. If the price of such freedom is being deprived of your cultural independence, is it true liberation or just another occupation? MICHAEL MUNK KUCIREK Odense, Denmark

Debating the Morality of War

In "No, This War Would Not Be Moral" [VIEWPOINT, March 3], Duke theologian Stanley Hauerwas asserted that by describing Saddam as evil, Bush "gives this war a religious justification." But religion has nothing to do with legitimizing this war. Saddam's immoral behavior provides the basis for action. He has used poison gas on the Kurds, supplied money to suicide bombers and built lavish homes for himself--all while Iraqis starve. These actions are evil and alone provide more than enough moral justification for war. Going to war is never the first option, but when all others have been exhausted, it is necessary and moral in the face of monumental evil. RYAN SCALISE Alexandria, Va.

Hauerwas got it right. Too many people in America believe we are appointed by God to eliminate evil in the world. Do they honestly think that supplanting Saddam will end evil? Won't it be a call to arms for all militant or angry Muslims, whether or not they support Saddam today? It's too bad that Saddam wasn't finished off in 1991. But there is no justification for mandating his end just because he deserves it and we are frustrated by his presence. There must be better, more creative ways short of war. Otherwise, where does this process end? EFREM LIEBER Fountain Hills, Ariz.

My heart wants peace, but the fuzzy thinking of the antiwar side makes it impossible for my head to follow. Hauerwas' recommendation that we ask "Iraqi Christians what we can do to make their lives more bearable" does not address the central issue of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of a ruthless dictator bent on territorial expansion. Hauerwas' assertion that the 9/11 attacks were not an act of war but acts of murder is similarly woolly. If the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center were not an act of war, I don't know what is. JANET LAWSON Concord, Mass.

Columnist Andrew Sullivan's commentary "Yes, a War Would Be Moral" makes the best case possible for the war against Iraq by arguing that this situation is a continuation of a just war that was never resolved. However, Sullivan loses credibility by ignoring Bush's efforts to market the war as a response to Iraq's alleged involvement in the 9/11 massacres, when, in fact, such a connection is questionable. It is unrealistic to expect people to look beyond the lies the Administration is telling and concede that its policies are correct, regardless of its unwillingness to tell the whole truth. MICHAEL DUDASH Denver

Naturally Dangerous

The death of baseball pitcher Steven Bechler may have been linked to the herb ephedra [HEALTH, March 3]. It brings to the fore a problem that needs urgent regulatory attention. Alternative-medicine gurus and the burgeoning over-the-counter drug industry have fostered the notion that anything natural is safe. Well, the poisons strychnine, belladonna, ricin and botulin are all natural. Legislation is needed to prohibit advertising that implies "all natural ingredients" means "safe." HERMAN BIEBER Kenilworth, N.J.

Sleepwear for the Day

RE "The Pajama Game," about trendy teens wearing their pajamas on the street [YOUR TIME, March 3]: Kids may think they just created this fashion craze, but it's a new spin on an old tune. I remember the radical concept of wearing nightgowns as cocktail-party dresses, back in the '70s. The idea then was that clothing standards had shifted so much that no one would recognize the garment as a nightgown. Now kids seem to be saying that since their parents aren't there to help them get dressed, we have to accept them in their jammies. Wow, there are some people who say the baby boomers never gave up childhood. This group isn't moving out of preschool. JAN SAVELLE Saline, Mich.

Correction

TIME's story on John Walker Lindh [NATION, Oct. 7] reported that, according to businessman Khizar Hayat, Lindh and Hayat had had a homosexual relationship when Lindh was in Pakistan. Hayat denies telling TIME that his relationship with Lindh was sexual. In addition, in the table of contents line that referred to the article, TIME characterized Lindh as a "terrorist." This was an error, since all terrorism charges against Lindh had been dropped.