YOU ARE HERE: HeraldMail HomeCollectionsIraq

Letters to the editor

July 03, 2006

Soviets had WMD, but we didn't attack them

To the editor:

For those who are puzzled by the continued close connection between Tony Blair and President Bush, even though their military venture in Iraq is in shambles, a recently published book will clarify the nature of the bond. Kevin Phillips in "American Theocracy" gives some vital facts which reveal the state of affairs regarding the quest for oil on the part of Great Britain and the United States.

Phillips points out that both world powers were keenly aware that domestic oil supplies had peaked - the U.S. in 1970 and Great Britain in 1999 - and, absent future newly discovered reserves, they faced a crisis of supply. Both leaders (wrongly, it turned out) saw Iraq as one readily available source.

This more than suggests that the basis of their close relationship was mutual need for a vital energy source required for economic survival. But the takeover of a sovereign state had to be dressed up as the need for a preemptive strike and the beauty of extending democracy in the heart of Islamic theocracies.


To put the matter bluntly, it seems pretty clear that whatever gap existed between these two leaders based on culture, personality or intellect, it was bridged by national demands.

The surprise is that so many normally rational people would consent to such a program. We need but to reflect on only one huge fact to see why the Bush-Blair blunder was so tragically flawed. We successfully contained the Soviet Union through a lengthy "cold war" even though it had a large army and nuclear bombs. Yet the Bush administration continues to argue that we absolutely had to invade Iraq - a country smaller than Texas - that had a small army (by comparison) and no nuclear missiles.

It is reasonable to conclude that Prime Minister Blair was driven by national self-interest and the perception that the conquest of Iraq was a "slam dunk." Both leaders will not concede that a preemptive strike violates our earlier tradition about what constitutes legitimate purposes of war. In addition, it should be self evident that it is immoral to bomb a country into powder "for its own good."

But this partnership has failed in its purposes. Blair's reputation as a skilled political leader has been severely damaged and George Bush - because he has a fixed term of office - will lame-duck his way to a sorrowful end. Who said "two heads are better than one"?

Allan Powell


Paper needs more good news

To the editor:

This letter is my opinion of why there should be a section on "positive writing," such as Christian-related subjects.

I feel there should be a section on positive writing because when readers open the paper and see all the negativity happening around the area, they can't help but wonder why someone doesn't print something more positive for a change?

I feel that if there were a positive section such as "the good word" as opposed to biased racial columns, then people would be more apt to read "the good news" as opposed to "the bad news." I think that people are tired of seeing all the publicity given to such articles like "racial profiling" or "hate crimes."

I feel that people would be more willing to share the good news that they read in the paper than share the bad news. Of course, we all hear bad news almost every time we turn on the TV. But I think it would benefit everyone to hear more good news and not so much bad news.

Christians everywhere should write and write and spread the good news so maybe, one day, our good news will outshine the bad news and enlighten people's spirits and lift their hearts and all the while give them something positive to read in the paper for a change.

If people out there reading this agree with me whole-heartedly, then let me and The Herald-Mail know by submitting your thoughts and ideas to The Herald-Mail. You can also let me know by writing to me personally and letting me know how you feel about the idea of a "good word" section in The Herald-Mail.

Kenneth Sorensen

Maryland Correctional Training Center


Thanks to clinic

To the editor:

A young man of whom we have become fond was the beneficiary of services from the Community Free Clinic recently when he broke his arm.

We want to say thank you to the Community Free Clinic and particularly to Lynne Kline for their generosity.

Hagerstown can be proud to have such an organization.

Curt and Sara Snyder

Clear Spring

The Herald-Mail Articles