Letters

• Share

An attack on Iraq would only validate Osama bin Laden's dangerous extremism and further destabilize the Middle East.
HAROON MOGHUL
Somers, Conn.

LATEST COVER STORY Mind & Body Happiness Jan. 17, 2004 Past Issues Tsunami Jan. 10, 2004 ----------------- Person of the Year Jan. 3, 2004 ----------------- Secrets of the Nativity Dec. 13, 2004 ----------------- The Stealth Killer Dec. 6, 2004 ----------------- Coolest Inventions Nov. 29, 2004 ----------------- Battle for Fallujah Nov. 22, 2004 ----------------- Four More Years Nov. 15, 2004 ----------------- The Joy Of Sox Nov. 8, 2004 ----------------- The Morning After Nov. 1, 2004 ----------------- The God Gene Oct. 25, 2004 ----------------- The Vote Battle Oct. 18, 2004 ----------------- Visions of Tomorrow Oct. 11, 2004 ----------------- The Tragedy of Sudan Oct. 4, 2004 ----------------- CBS Controversy Sept. 27, 2004 ----------------- America's Border Sept. 20, 2004 ----------------- Struggle Within Islam Sept. 13, 2004 ----------------- World of George Bush Sept. 6, 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 graphics >> More photos >> MORE STORIES Advisor: Rove Warrior The Bushes: Family Dynasty Klein: Benneton Ad Presidency More Stories >> CNN.com: Latest News

Your article on how President Bush is making his case for an attack on Iraq [Special Report, Sept. 16] highlighted a central danger: "If the last Gulf War helped inspire evil in [Osama] bin Laden, will a new one create many more like him?" Saddam Hussein is no more dangerous now than he was before Sept. 11, 2001. Even a successful effort to change the regime in Iraq would not reduce the number of radical extremists who want to see a weakened America. Though the world surely would be a better place without a madman like Saddam, let's set an example for our global neighbors: diplomacy, education and tolerance are the answer; violence is not.
SETH ASHLEY
Columbia, Mo.

How many more Sept. 11s must we endure before we finally take the fight to the terrorists? Isn't the U.S. the most powerful nation in the world? If ever there was justification for the use of power, the fight to end terrorism is it.
JEFFREY BASFORD
Poway, Calif.

We had damned well better be ready for war, because we've been at war since September 2001. This war is different from any we have fought before, and the politically correct will never like it. It has overt and covert operations, some of which will be pre-emptive. Soldiers will die, some by enemy fire and some by friendly fire. Innocent civilians will be killed. This war will be long, and we had better keep the resolve that we will need to see it through. It's not nice, but it is necessary.
DAVID C. MORTENSEN
Pocatello, Idaho

President Bush's plan to attack Iraq is a shrewd political maneuver designed to change the target of the war on terrorism from the cunning, elusive and charismatic bin Laden to the oppressive, lackluster and immobile Saddam. This new focus provides a cover for our failure to catch the real terrorist leaders.
JOEL RETT
Olympia, Wash.

If the U.S. can assault a nation based on the speculation that it might one day acquire weapons of mass destruction, why shouldn't India open fire on Pakistan, which has nuclear weapons today? Starting a war with Iraq is simple. The consequences are not.
JOHN NUNES
Milton, Mass.

As a combat veteran, I believe that if we do not go after Saddam, we will one day face a weapon of mass destruction from Iraq in our homeland. We need to take the initiative, with or without international support. I was in Hiroshima in 1950, and there the horror was visible five years after the bombing. We don't ever want to see that in this country. It would make the destruction of the World Trade Center look like a church picnic.
ANDY EMERY
San Marcos, Calif.

The World Nervously Watches

After Sept. 11, America had moral authority and international support as well as military might. If it acts against Iraq without U.N. backing [Special Report, Sept. 16], the U.S. would undermine not just itself but also the central pillar of world order since the last world war. It would polarize the globe into Arab vs. non-Arab while rendering impotent the only organization that might prevent a division that would provide the basis for the next, and final, global conflict.
RICHARD THOMAS
Bexhill-on-Sea, England

As shocked as I was by the mindless, horrible events of Sept. 11, I would nonetheless like to urge the Bush Administration to tread very, very carefully. Most of the world's Muslims do not understand the American ideas of democracy and capitalism. America has been portrayed as an enemy to them. It is therefore extremely important that the U.S. win the confidence of the Islamic countries and provide concrete proof against Iraq before attacking. Bin Laden wants to turn all Muslims against the U.S. America must not let this happen.
ANKITA SRIVASTAVA
Allahabad, India

America is getting a little carried away with all this talk of a pre-emptive strike. A superpower it may be, but omnipotent it is not, as 19 young men proved on Sept. 11. Bush would do well to dwell on that. He is starting a vicious cycle that America will find hard to end.
KHWAJA ABDUL WAHEED
Lahore, Pakistan

I don't believe for one minute that the U.S. government wants to go after Iraq for the reasons it is giving. The real reason is oil, and once Saddam has been ousted, he will be replaced by a puppet. The evil that Americans are looking for is in their own country. It is called greed.
SUZANNE SAUVE
St. Adolphe d'Howard, Que.

Ten Australians were killed in the Sept. 11 attack, and Australians feel a bond with citizens of the U.S., especially on the anniversary of that day. The Twin Towers can be rebuilt, but lives can never be brought back. The U.S. is right to take action against Iraq to ensure that terrorists cannot do it again.
TOM MINCHIN
Melbourne

Look for Reasons Why

Senator John McCain wrote about the need for a regime change in Iraq [ESSAY, Sept. 9]. He supports a war against Iraq in the name of a crusade for democracy and liberty. But the U.S. and other Western countries get along very well with many nondemocratic governments all over the world, so long as they buy America's products and sell us cheap raw materials. In the supposedly irrational hatred of the West, there is some rationality, and it is a pity that this side of the story is not noted by McCain. We care for our well-being and our liberty, but do we care for the well-being and liberty of others? There is more than just a perverted interpretation of Islam to explain the hatred of America and the West in many parts of the world.
JEAN VALLET
Canmore, Alta.