Letters To The Editor

Tue., Feb. 24, 1998

U.S. AND THE WORLD

No sense in going to war with Iraq

For several reasons, bombing Iraq is a terrible idea. I urge anyone who agrees to let out a hue and cry so loud and long that President Clinton cannot ignore it.

First, international pressure, economic sanctions and military force have proven ineffective in achieving our aims in Iraq, that of removing Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction and toppling him. Instead, these strategies have solidified Iraqi support for a leader many of them despise. More bombing simply hands Saddam the propaganda he needs to show the Arab world that the United States is the greatest evil, not Saddam.

Second, we can’t destroy Saddam’s most potent weapons in bombing raids if we don’t know where they are. Some of us remember the Vietnam War, where we failed utterly in our political objectives even though we used massive military force. What makes us think those tired old strategies can succeed here?

Third, the 1991 coalition so effective against Iraq is crumbling. That should tell us something. So if the use of force has dubious value, why risk lives?

Iraqis have suffered terribly under Saddam’s reign. Left to their own devices, Iraqi opposition groups will eventually topple Saddam on their own. If we normalize relations, we can eventually pressure Iraq through our Arab allies to give up the weapons of mass destruction through treaty and negotiations.

We have other options, but these require patience and wisdom. Let’s not allow our frustration and pride to override our good sense. Steven B. Rumsey Colville, Wash.

Sanctions only punish the oppressed

In a Jan. 20 letter to President Clinton, 54 U.S. Catholic bishops argued that United Nations sanctions imposed on the people of Iraq are immoral and should be ended. The bishops condemned the sanctions based on the horrific suffering they continue to bring to Iraqi civilians, particularly its children. Pope John Paul II has called the sanctions “a pitiless embargo,” saying, “the weak and the innocent cannot pay for mistakes for which they are not responsible.”

After more than seven years of sanctions, the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization reports that more than 1 million Iraqi civilians have died as a direct result of the sanctions. The United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund reports that 4,500 Iraqi children are dying each month. Recently, Dennis Halliday, U.N. humanitarian coordinator for Iraq, stated that Iraq would need about $30 billion a year to meet its current requirements for food, medicine and infrastructure. The recently proposed doubling of the U.N.’s oil-for-food deal, to $5.2 billion, falls well short of meeting these basic needs and doesn’t begin to address repairing Iraq’s shattered infrastructure, its totally collapsed medical system or its devastated economy.

The bishops correctly point out that it’s always immoral to target civilians, and the effects of the sanctions are on a par with the very weapons of mass destruction they’re intended to curtail. International law under the Geneva conventions prohibit denying civilians access to food, medicine and sanitation necessary for life itself. It’s time to end the sanctions imposed upon Iraq. Eileen Croghan, S.P. provincial superior, Sisters of Providence, Spokane

War activity a Clinton ploy

It has been about three weeks since I read an article in The Spokesman-Review that quoted Saddam Hussein as predicting President Clinton would commence military action against Iraq to divert the media from his other problems. Absurd, I thought. No matter how much hot water he’s in, he wouldn’t do such a thing.

Thursday morning, in the aftermath of the contentious town hall meeting in Ohio to explain what the U.S is doing, a White House aide was quoted as laughing and saying, “I think we probably bumped Monica Lewinsky” from the top of the network newscasts - and he was right.

This is a high-stakes game. The chips include American lives, Iraqi lives and a presidency.

The U.S. does not have a mandate to enforce the resolutions of the United Nations. If the United Nations elects to take military action, so be it. If Iraq invades one of its neighbors, we can probably blow it off the face of the Earth. If the United States attacks, it will be a war started by the United States, not by Iraq. But Lewinsky will be relegated to the back pages. Paul J. Allison Spokane

Avoid another no-win war

We must remember no-win Vietnam, no-win Korea, no-win Desert Storm. Many of our servicemen died - for what?

Our leaders are trying to align United Nations members to assist the United States in building a force to compel Iraq to submit to the U.N. inspections. If the diplomacy does not bring results, we in the United States, with a military force in place, must pull our forces out of harm’s way.

Congress and President Clinton should have letters of input from concerned citizens on this no-win situation. Don L. Dean Elk

War makes a great distraction

Another war with Iraq would be great for our country at this point. It would serve several purposes at once.

A war would draw a lot of embarrassing attention away from our noble president with regard to this whole Monica Lewinsky mess. It would also give us a chance to test out all of those fun weapons of destruction we’ve been spending millions of tax dollars on since the last war with Iraq. After all, what’s the use of having them if we’re not going to use them? No one will complain that loudly about thousands of dead Iraqi women and children. They’re half dead anyway, as a result of the sanctions we’ve held against them these past several years.

Additionally, it’s high time we reminded the world that we are in control and that in the whole scheme of things, our opinion is the only one that matters.

Unfortunately, there is this little matter about the American people not buying into this plan. Not to worry, though, as foreign policy observer Noam Chomsky pointed out, if there is not consent by the U.S. citizens regarding a policy that our leaders want to carry out, it’s easy enough to manufacture it.

A good example of that was the polls on public support for the 1991 war on Iraq. They showed that the huge majority of people favored the war. It was only long afterward that numbers came out showing a smaller percentage supported the war. So what, if we don’t agree with this war? Our highly moral leaders know what’s best for us. Molly B. O’Connor Spokane

Fighting for a lower purpose

Iraq - the U.S. equivalent of Gallipoli.

Our hero, Willie the warrior, conqueror of Bosnia and liberator of Haiti, now points his legions toward Iraq.

Do not be disheartened that he has reduced our once proud forces by 40 percent. Just remember that those remaining forces now have more women noncombatants than at any time in history. You can also take solace that the gays and lesbians of the United States can march side by side with your sons and daughters.

There are many other benefits to conducting an air war that has a zero chance of upsetting a despotic dictator. Henceforth, we won’t be bothered by commentators telling us news about our leader’s allegedly adulterous lifestyle or alleged attempts to suborn perjury by grand jury witnesses. Instead, we can get the body count from the evening network news.

Please try to be forgiving when you reflect on our commander in chief dodging the draft during the Vietnam War. After all, we should be able to choose the wars we want to fight. Major R.L. Allen, USMC retired Spokane

IN THE PUBLIC EYE

Reno is Clinton’s cover-up enabler

With the ongoing stench of sexual exploit allegations against President Bill Clinton, a relationship with one woman - Janet Reno - is far more evil, dangerous and damaging to the country.

From the start, when she fired all 93 of the U.S. attorneys so she could install her own lackeys, Reno’s mission has been one of keeping the American public and Congress from finding out the sordid truth about how the Clintonistas run this country and the criminal involvement of the principals. The list of allegations is shocking: the selling of the White House to China and the Lippo Group, Travelgate, Whitewater, Tyson, Ron Brown, Webster Hubbell, the FBI files abuse, the Indian casino scam, Hillary’s outlandishly successful futures trading with Tyson’s commodity trader, Arkansas’ Mina Airport and the drug trade, close friend Lassiter and the cocaine trade, and the very convenient deaths of an inordinate number of people who could have testified to the facts in these events to the enlightenment of the country and probably the indictment, conviction and imprisonment of a lot of crooked politicians.

We need to make Reno and her Justice Department give us a full and honest account of all these events and to stop the whitewash and the stonewalling. Character, honesty and integrity do count. The future of our free country demands it! R. P. Grunwald, M.D. Valleyford, Wash.

GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

Clinton excusers blowing smoke

As I read the three pro-Clinton letters on Feb. 15, I thought, no wonder they like President Clinton, they’re just as good at distorting the truth.

Andy Kelly, Clinton has not eliminated the national debt. It’s growth is still exponential. The Republicans have balanced the budget for which Clinton takes credit. Clinton’s State of the Union address should clarify that he’s for big government.

And it was not President Reagan who sent the debt into orbit with tax cuts in the 1980s, but Democrats who increased spending tenfold in eight years, with Reagan having no line-item veto.

Kelly forgets that Whitewater cost the people of Arkansas millions of dollars, that the Arkansas grand jury, not Kenneth Starr, has already convicted more people than the Democrats’ Iran-Contra prosecutor.

Clinton says he’s innocent. Kelly and Paul A. Lenoue don’t believe their guy, so they go off in all directions, blaming moralists, Reagan, George Bush and Starr. All feminists should be offended by Kelly’s chauvinist statements. Kelly backs his letter with proof, “ask Bill Cosby and others” and quotes from Mother Jones, “90 percent of the media are owned by Republicans.”

I never heard of Mother Jones or “others.” They must be good liberal sources. I do know a survey of people in TV, radio and newspaper reported over 90 percent voted for Clinton in 1992 and that that bias has shown.

Liberals like Kelly and Lenoue haven’t been worried about reporting the truth since Reagan’s first election. Now, they complain like conservatives. Clinton has taught them well. James C. Allen Spokane

Government makes elder care harder

Donovan M. Bush (Letters, Feb. 18) stated his frustration with the government’s stupidity. I agree completely with him.

I am trying to provide care for my 85-year-old father in his home. I am a gerontologist-paraprofessional, N.A.C. The doctors are in complete support and agreement that I am more than qualified to provide care for my father. Yet Medicare will not pay for supplies and personal wound care medications unless I take him to the doctor’s office or for outpatient care at the hospital. This requires at least one trip a week (20 miles round trip) to the doctor’s office, the doctor’s time, the expense of a visit or a huge bill to the insurance company for outpatient treatment.

This doesn’t take into consideration that it’s very emotionally difficult for our seniors to rely on family.

I challenge any government official, including our president, to do what many of us try to do with our income and our elders’ income. It is the average American who is being hurt.

It seems one needs to be at or below poverty level or financially well off to provide care for a family member. With the help of God and support from a wonderful husband, I will succeed. Mary L. Phillips Spokane

LAW AND JUSTICE

Ostrander was railroaded

The conviction of Chris Ostrander for resisting arrest and obstructing a police officer is a classic example of the miscarriage of justice that prevails in Spokane, if not the rest of our country.

I know Ostrander and can attest he is nonviolent. He just had dared to question a plainclothes policeman in an unmarked car. Anyone can claim to be a policeman, and a citizen has a right to question the claim and request identification. What right does a representative of the law have to grab someone by the hair, drag them from their car and use physical force on them?

The fact that Ostrander doesn’t drive a BMW and dress in a three-piece suit doesn’t gives prejudiced cops the right to presume he’s a no-account. Even a suspended sentence would not be fair since it would give Ostrander a criminal record he does not deserve.

We definitely need a board of citizens with the power to review police brutality and overrule police findings when the evidence justifies doing that.

The problem is that a cop’s word is always believed when there are no witnesses or when there are only other cops to support the story. Too bad no one was there to videotape Officer Tim Madsen’s actions; there might have been a totally different outcome.

Wake up, Spokanites, before it’s your hair getting jerked out for daring to question authority. H.A. Krauss Spokane

Dogma gets best of logic, fact

Penny Lancaster claims in her Feb. 17 letter that “As long as men fantasize to pornography, there will continue to be an increase in rape.” Lancaster fails to realize the difference between correlation and cause. Many rapists brush their teeth on a daily basis, but that doesn’t mean Colgate causes rape.

Most customers of pornographic material do not prey on women. To claim that pornography causes rape and molestation is to ignore the facts, and it excuses indefensible behavior by suggesting that rapists’ actions are nothing more than reactions to pornography.

Lancaster’s contention seems to be that human beings are not rational creatures and are so susceptible to becoming violent that an issue of Penthouse magazine will cause a person to become a sexual predator.

To maintain freedom, we must stand up to those who, like Lancaster, want to prohibit what they don’t like. The First Amendment means that Lancaster has the right to criticize pornography. It also means that establishments like Deja Vu have the right to keep their businesses open.

If freedom means anything, it means that we must all put up with what we may find to be disagreeable. Because Lancaster finds pornography to be objectionable does not mean that it should be banned.

Morality activists like Lancaster, who want us to live in a world censored according to their moral or religious extremism, must not be ignored, for they are perhaps the greatest threat to a free society. Dave M. Anthony Spokane

Meet Our Journalists

Jesse Tinsley

Meet Jesse Tinsley. As a certified drone pilot, this veteran Spokesman-Review photographer often can be seen capturing beautiful aerial photographs of our region. Sometimes though, the job requires getting down with the dogs.
Jim Meehan

Jim Meehan is no stranger to Zag Nation. As the lead writer covering the Gonzaga men’s basketball team, he tells the stories behind the game and gets fans a bit closer to their favorite players.
Molly Quinn

There is no artist in Spokane like Molly Quinn. Her whimsical style is instantly recognizable to readers of The Spokesman-Review. She has painted gorgeous illustrations that instantly elevate the journalism accompanying it. She brings to life the stories that defy photography. She makes our pages better.
Rob Curley

Spokesman-Review editor Rob Curley loves to talk with people and learn about their lives, whether it's a best-selling author or a stranger he meets downtown on his walk to lunch. It's that inquisitive nature combined with a playful sense of storytelling that helps make our newspaper different than most.