Letters

Sunday, Aug. 03, 2003
    • Untruth & Consequences

    "The next time Bush says we have to take military action because a country is threatening our security, how can we believe him?"
    JERRY HARRIS
    Houston, Texas


    LATEST COVER STORY
    Mind & Body Happiness
    Jan. 17, 2004
     

    SPECIAL REPORTS
     Coolest Video Games 2004
     Coolest Inventions
     Wireless Society
     Cool Tech 2004

    PHOTOS AND GRAPHICS
     At The Epicenter
     Paths to Pleasure
     Quotes of the Week
     This Week's Gadget
     Cartoons of the Week

    MORE STORIES
    Advisor: Rove Warrior
    The Bushes: Family Dynasty
    Klein: Benneton Ad Presidency

    CNN.com: Latest News

    Regardless of whether the CIA approved George W. Bush's State of the Union message before it was delivered [IRAQ: THE EVIDENCE, July 21], the fact remains that the President presented a piece of false evidence in support of the Administration's case for going to war with Iraq. The CIA HAD warned members of the President's staff that the intelligence was not good enough to make the flat statement that Saddam Hussein had "sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." Even though Bush cited the British government as the source in his statement, he conveyed a falsehood. It was Bush, not the CIA, who deceived Americans; it is he and his Administration that must be held accountable.
    GREG COX
    Wheaton, Ill.

    Those pernicious 16 words in the State of the Union speech will not topple the Bush presidency because the cumulative case for ousting Saddam was cogent, obvious and urgent. Arguments over such a trivial statement do not warrant this much hand wringing.
    KEVIN BARKER
    Bristow, Va.

    One man is ultimately responsible for declaring war on Iraq: George W. Bush. The scapegoating of CIA Director George Tenet for the false uranium intelligence report does not conceal the fact that Bush, acting on flawed intelligence, launched a war against a sovereign nation not imminently threatening the U.S. Congress should be held accountable as well. Here's the scorecard to date on Iraq: no uranium, no weapons of mass destruction and no end to the loss of American life, just an ever growing cache of lies and excuses.
    DAN NACE
    St. Louis, Mo.

    There is little justification for the partisan debate over whether there was sufficient evidence to go to war with Iraq. The pre-emptive strike was clearly in the U.S.'s national interest. It was an aggressive warning to terrorist-sponsoring states — especially Iran, Syria and North Korea — that there will be severe consequences for their dangerous behavior. The U.S. also provided enhanced protection to Israel, the only true democracy in the Middle East, and sent a strong message to Syria and the Palestinians that there is no alternative to peace. The U.S. assured itself of a favorable position on the availability of Middle East oil and freed the Iraqi people from a tyrant.
    REX SHANNON
    Santa Ana, Calif.

    Apparently it was worse for a President to lie to the American people about having sex with an intern than it was for a President to lie to the American people, justifying a war on the basis of forged documents about uranium products. One lie led to impeachment; I am afraid the other lie will lead to re-election.
    CAROLYN MAKI
    Midlothian, Va.

    There will always be a price to pay for freedom and security, and some mistakes will be made, even when intelligence is received from reliable sources. But the fact is that the Iraqi people, enslaved for 30 years by Saddam's crushing and terrifying government, can now begin to rebuild their lives. And we are no longer threatened by Iraq's possible use of horrific weapons.
    BARRETT C. CRANER
    Pleasanton, Calif.

    The U.S. did not go to war with Iraq solely because of Saddam's possible attempts to purchase uranium. The U.S. argued that Saddam's government possessed a variety of weapons of mass destruction and had a history of aggression. Iraq's war against Iran, the occupation of Kuwait and missile attacks on Israel in Gulf War I showed that Saddam's Iraq was a terrible danger.
    IAN REILLY
    New York City

    Bush's misstatement that Iraq attempted to purchase uranium was yet another example of a "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality.
    KEN RAY
    Orange, Calif.

    Seven Days, Seven Deaths

    Thank you for the article "A Soldier's Life," about seven U.S. servicemen [IRAQ: THE CASUALTIES, July 21]. I found it incredibly moving. What especially struck me was that five of those you profiled were my age, give or take a year. Living in a "college bubble" and being focused on campus life makes it very easy to forget that there are people my age serving on the other side of the world under enemy fire and far away from those they love.
    JOHN J. WALLBILLICH
    Ann Arbor, Mich.

    Thank you for your profiles of the soldiers who died. Please continue putting a face on the numbers. These young men and women deserve to be remembered, and the liars who put them in Iraq need to be held accountable.
    TONI BOUTWELL
    Myrtle Beach, S.C.

    Running on Empty?

    The one encouraging note in Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele's report on the U.S.'s impending fuel crunch was the success of Jimmy Carter's effort to reduce oil consumption, something that is clearly not a goal of the oilmen in the Bush Administration [SPECIAL REPORT, July 21]. The obvious solution to the energy crisis, though not the one Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney want to see, is conservation, mandated improvement of energy efficiency and development of renewable sources of energy. Pretty simple — unless your primary goal is increased profits for oil companies.
    CHARLENE M. WOODCOCK
    Berkeley, Calif.

    2. Previous Page
    3. 1
    4. 2