Letters

(2 of 5)
T

Reading about Ralph Nader, his effect on the 2000 election and his possible effect on the 2004 election infuriated me [Oct. 4]. Who does this man think he is? Nader is a self-important egomaniac who is under the illusion that he and his naive, deluded supporters actually matter. This stubborn idiot is willing to take votes away from the Democratic presidential candidate (with the gleeful support of the Republicans) and put the far right in control for four more years. He has zero chance of winning anything except the opportunity to have a devastatingly negative impact. Why should he be allowed that sort of influence? Go away, Nader, and stay away!
ROBERT BERMUDEZ
Farmingdale, N.Y.

Nader has sadly morphed from a selfless consumer advocate to a self-absorbed egoist and Republican pawn. His insatiable need to extend his 15 minutes of fame illustrates what a poor leader he would be. For those who question whether a vote for Nader is a vote for President Bush, they need look no farther than the Oval Office.
SPRING DAVIS
Durham, N.C.

Somebody ought to tell Nader that a Bush victory in November could doom much, if not most, of what Nader has achieved. At least two Supreme Court Justices are expected to retire before 2008. If Bush is re-elected President, he would almost certainly nominate hard-line conservatives. A solidly conservative court might eviscerate or kill laws that have made Americans safer, healthier, better housed and more financially secure.
GINNY PAULSON
Colesville, Md.

The Fight for Iraq

You asked whether the Iraq war can be won [Oct. 4]. There can never be a final victory there as long as President Bush fails to face the realities on the ground. He continues to say "freedom is on the march," even though the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, representing the consensus view of the U.S. intelligence community, presented the possibility that there might be civil war there. A number of military professionals say more troops will be needed to secure Iraq's elections next January. Members of the President's party have also spoken out about the dangerous conditions in Iraq. The sooner the President acknowledges the stark realities there, the sooner he can answer the question of whether we are taking the right approach to winning the peace.
ROBERT TORMEY
MAJOR, U.S.A.F. (RET.)
Escondido, Calif.

Pessimism and defeatism never won a war; in the long run, strength, steadfastness and patience will.
MARY BRANNON
Oklahoma City, Okla.

One of the goals you said we need to meet to win the war in Iraq is to train Iraqi military forces to take over the job of maintaining order. But during the Vietnam War, we spent years training South Vietnamese troops to take over the fighting. The North Vietnamese, however, easily prevailed as the war reached a climax. The Administration suggests that the Iraqi army, when trained, will be able to subdue the wave of terrorism sweeping Iraq. This is utter nonsense and just more political spin.
LARRY MERCER
Yakima, Wash.

The insurgents in Iraq can identify U.S. troops, but American soldiers cannot identify the terrorists. They can blend in with the population, smile, shake our hands, thank us and take our money one day, then attack us the next. This could go on indefinitely as casualties increase with no end in sight. We cannot win this war. The election of a puppet government in Iraq will not end it. If we return Bush to office, we are telling the President and the world that we support the war. Bush will take this as a mandate to continue his war. We are betraying our responsibility to the world, our nation and our troops by allowing this situation to continue. It must end — now.
BILL WELCH
Blue Springs, Mo.