Game Plans for Gates

As the death toll climbs among both Iraqi civilians and allied soldiers, it's clear that the war in Iraq is broken, and Bob Gates is now in charge of fixing it

You proposed four possible options that the new U.S. Secretary of Defense, Bob Gates, could pursue in Iraq [Dec. 4], but none included getting that country's neighbors involved. This narrow-minded arrogance — the presumption that we have all the answers — is exactly how the U.S. got to this point. It is time for the Administration to get other countries involved in finding a solution to the impossible situation the U.S. faces in Iraq. We might actually gain a small measure of goodwill, something we desperately need in the Middle East.
Lori Smith
Austin, Texas, U.S.

Bob Gates has no options. The U.S. has badly damaged both Iraq and itself, and it is simply time to bring the troops home. Military powers can no longer invade and successfully occupy other countries. Readily available explosives, lethal light arms and portable rockets can give any group of determined insurgents and suicide bombers the tools to defeat a foreign army, no matter how militarily superior it may be. If we want to change the world for the better, we must lead by example and by helping, not by bullying with our armed forces.
John Hilberry
New York City

The photo of six marines on the cusp of adulthood, seeking warmth from a small, crude fire in Iraq, reveals the callous incompetence of the Bush Administration. While President George W. Bush and new Secretary of Defense Gates ponder which "stay the course" strategy they should select for the war in Iraq, these young men may live only slightly longer than their fire. When a President declares war, he should have the courage to fight it. Bush's cowardly refusal to reinstate the draft and put more boots on the ground has thrown Iraq into a civil war. I pray Gates has the courage to admit defeat and bring our troops home.
Helen Tackett
Fullerton, California, U.S.

Why is the Bush administration worried about which exit strategy to use in Iraq? All it has to do is break out the old mission accomplished banner.
Abid H. Shaikh
Karachi, Pakistan

Facing the Enemy
In reporting on warlord Abu Deraa [Dec. 4], Time has once again given in to the urge to attach a name and a face to the enemy in Iraq, thus raising the illusory hope that the elimination of one key figure will solve whatever it is that is fueling the violence. But it didn't work with al-Zarqawi and won't with Abu Deraa because it's not about one man or even one organization. It's about the disintegration of a society in the aftermath of an unprovoked invasion and occupation. It's about us.
John Hubers
Chicago

Time for a Family Chat
Re Joe Klein's "A father's inadvertent wisdom" [Dec. 4]: There appears to be an elephant in the living room of the Bush household. When Daddy can't discuss Iraq with his son because the son is in denial and Daddy doesn't want the son to feel grief, we have a gravely dysfunctional family. The only solution is an intervention not only by the son's immediate family but by our elected representatives as well. Please, Daddy Bush, gather the family and have that talk with your son.
Marianne Ellis
Sacramento, California, U.S.

I can't help wondering what mommy can't say about a lot of things. It must be difficult — nay, painful — for this mum to keep mum, more than we'll ever know.
Clare Parsons Weaver
Manchester, Massachusetts, U.S.

Joe Klein is right that "The U.S. has lost the war in Iraq." Behind this there lies a bigger truth. For the past 50 years, the enormous military force of the U.S. has been at its most effective when it hasn't been fighting — for instance as a deterrent threat that helped keep the peace during the cold war. With one exception, when it has gone into combat, it has sooner or later retreated in defeat and left behind a mess to be cleaned up later. This happened in Vietnam in the '70s, Lebanon in the '80s and Somalia in the '90s. The exception was the liberation of Kuwait, but this achievement was devalued by President Bush Jr., who clearly regarded the situation in the area as unfinished family business that he had to revisit. So it is no surprise that the U.S. is now looking for a strategy in Iraq that will guarantee its exit, but little else.
Andrew Thorne
Dahlenburg, Germany

Can the U.S. Talk with Iran?
Walter Isaacson's suggestion that the U.S. should talk with Iran about stabilizing Iraq is delusional and dangerous [Dec. 4]. Iran might play along with the U.S. in order to gain time to complete its nuclear program so that it can control events in the Middle East and threaten the West. Iran has already been successful in helping humble the U.S. in Iraq, and it will surely pursue its goal of removing all Western influence from the Middle East. Discussing the stabilization of Iraq with Iran would be like discussing the stabilization of Poland and Czechoslovakia with Hitler.
Abraham Cohen
Thornhill, Canada

Isaacson argued cogently for dialogue with Iran and then sabotaged his arguments by name calling. Does it promote fruitful dialogue to call President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad "mad" and say he sounds "like a lunatic"? Has Ahmadinejad done anything remotely as mad and lunatic as invading Iraq? Demonizing and name calling are what have got us into this horrific mess in the Middle East.
Carl J. Ekberg
Purgitsville, West Virginia, U.S.

Even Isaacson admits that talking with Iran "will not persuade it to abandon its nuclear dreams right away." Then why should we engage in negotiations that will only embolden the Iranian regime and give it credibility in the Western world? Isolation of this rogue nation with sanctions is the only way to proceed, until its leadership is either changed or willing to stop its nuclear program, the avowed objective of which is to destroy Israel and dominate the Middle East.
Nelson Marans
Silver Spring, Maryland, U.S.

Green Gore
In "10 questions for Al Gore" [Dec. 4], the former Vice President dismissed people who doubt the science of global warming by likening them to "people who believe that the moon landing was staged in a movie lot in Arizona." I believe the earth is warming, but Gore is unfair. Almost everyone ignores the fact that water vapor is the greatest contributor to greenhouse-gas warming. Maybe if Gore would recognize that we cannot control global warming as much as we think, we could set aside such relatively unimportant issues and move genocide and starvation to the top of the political agenda.
Donnie Boyce
Lake Forest, Illinois, U.S.