Letters

Iraq: State of Siege

"The U.S. should not be surprised by the Iraqi insurgency. Iraqis see the American and coalition forces as occupiers, not liberators." DERRICK ELLISTON London

The most dangerous development that Americans face in Iraq is the menacing union of Sunni and Shi'ite radicals [April 19]. The members of the two main branches of Islam often don't respect each other. In Iraq there has always been a big gap between the Sunni government under Saddam Hussein and the country's Shi'ite majority, which was suppressed by the dictator and his followers. Now that Saddam is out and others are in power, both Sunnis and Shi'ites are disappointed and will start to fight hand in hand for an independent Muslim country. SIDHA BAGHAVATHA Bhopal, India

Thugs is at best an inadequate word for the Shi'ite militiamen of cleric Muqtada al-Sadr who have been battling the U.S. Thugs are what police deal with on city streets. But U.S. troops in Iraq aren't getting rolled for their wallets. Fighters using rocket-propelled grenades and firing at Apache helicopters are more than common thugs. These people are guerrillas, soldiers, insurgents, rebels or terrorists. Calling them thugs only downplays the difficulties in Iraq. Once President Bush and the American people realize we're not dealing with thugs, then maybe we can come up with the number of troops necessary to combat this violence. REGGIE NEWTON Chicago

The photographs of U.S. troops in Iraq made me weep, and for someone who lived through the Vietnam War era, that is saying a lot. These soldiers are the salt of this earth, but it is criminal for U.S. troops to try to "liberate" a society that obviously functions better under a murderous dictator. The Iraqis are merely waiting to see who comes out on top. They do not deserve to have U.S. soldiers fighting for them. The Iraqi men who were trained to protect and defend their people tuck tail and run. Not one American life is worth the so-called liberation of Iraq. If the Iraqis don't want to defend their country, why should we? How can you win the hearts and minds of the heartless and mindless? MARIE HARFOUSH Claremont, Calif.

It is not the Bush Administration that is facing a test in Iraq; it is the American forces over there, and they are getting killed every day. The U.S. did not send enough troops to Iraq to begin with, nor was there adequate planning for the period after the war. Bush thought we would be finished in a few months, that we would just plug in democracy and say, So long. What stupidity. PETER SEYMOUR Raytown, Mo.

Decisions, Decisions

There are "no easy options" among the Bush Administration's difficult choices in Iraq [April 19]. But here's one scenario: Replace the head of the Coalition Provisional Authority with an experienced mayor of a large city. Add to the military a police force that knows how to deal with an unruly urban civilian population. The one thing the U.S. should not do is "stay the course," as advocated by President Bush. PETER R. LANTOS Erdenheim, Pa.

Could it be that the average Iraqi citizen has no job and is left with nothing to do but wage war and rue the indignities of a foreign occupation? Wouldn't an economic strategy that puts most Iraqis to work defuse the escalating hostilities? Applying American brainpower instead of firepower might serve to temper the Iraqis' unfortunate propensity for self-destruction. CHRISTINE E. BRADY Chula Vista, Calif.

I was not in favor of this war, and I don't believe this country can take four more years of Bush and his tactics. However, the U.S. cannot leave Iraq now and abandon the Iraqis, most of whom just want peace and security. We believe in human rights. If we pull out our troops, there will be a civil war with many innocent victims. We must stay and finish the job. We need more troops and we need to be more aggressive, even if it means destroying mosques or neighborhoods. PHYLLIS L. TRUITT Evansville, Ind.

How can the U.S. expect to invade a country with a history of factional infighting, religious extremism and despotic rule and force democratic ideals on a people who, for the most part, see Americans as unwelcome occupiers? Perhaps it is time to admit our mistakes and let the Iraqis decide their fate. To remain in Iraq, using tit-for-tat retaliatory violence, only increases anti-American sentiment in the Middle East and elsewhere, and makes the world even more unsafe. FRANK BENSON St. George, Utah

A Guide to the Big Picture

Joe Klein criticized Condoleezza Rice, President Bush's National Security Adviser, for being impractical in her strategic approach to world issues [April 19]. But Klein is misguided. An impractical thinker looks at the bigger picture, including the larger results of actions. I would take an impractical, big dreamer over someone focused on tactics who has lost sight of what is important. JEFFREY I. KAPLAN Paramus, N.J.

In arguing that Bush's foreign policy is strategic rather than tactical, Klein misses an important point. Bush seems to rely on one factor: force. If the President's foreign policy were a novel, it would be titled America Uber Alles: Might Makes Right. Bush treats our allies with the same contempt and coercion that he uses on our adversaries. His worst failing may be that to garner domestic support, he has bypassed patriotism and resurrected nationalism. Our government has gone back to the bumper-sticker mentality of MY COUNTRY, RIGHT OR WRONG. But being a bully is not a viable strategy. LAWRENCE J. RYAN Eugene, Ore.

Klein's Essay illustrated Einstein's famous saying that imagination is more important than knowledge. Bush claimed that he would have done something if he had known exactly when and where al-Qaeda would strike. The statement makes plain the Administration's failure to appreciate that the mishandling of the threat from al-Qaeda was not a failure of intelligence but a failure of imagination. MICHAEL H. WEISS Marina del Rey, Calif.

Briefing the President

After reading about the recently declassified Presidential Daily Brief of Aug. 6, 2001, titled "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US" [April 19], I found it difficult to accept Bush's view that the memo contained no indication of a terrorist threat or a time and place of attack. The brief stated that there were "patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks" and that "a group of Bin Ladin supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives." How much more detailed did the memo have to be? BEN ADAMS Los Angeles

Hindsight is always 20/20, and unless we elect a President with ESP, there will always be mistakes to learn from. ORLANDO ASHAH JR. Bridgeport, Conn.

Of War and Taxes

Andrew Sullivan's proposal for an added $1-a-gallon gas tax to pay for the war in Iraq was insightful and timely [April 19]. A majority of Americans initially backed the war, and it is appalling to watch that support vanish as people are asked to do more than place flags on their SUVs. Keeping the gas tax at its current level only serves to enrich OPEC nations at the expense of the U.S. The heads of Ford and General Motors have already voiced support for an increased gasoline tax. It's time for the rest of America to join them. NEAL GORDON Los Altos, Calif.

Tax gas? Or simply a way to tax the poor some more? While Sullivan's proposal sounds admirable because it aims to discourage Americans from buying gas-guzzling SUVs and would help pay for the war, it is nothing more than another effort to shift the tax burden to the poor and middle class. RALPH LANNI Princeton, N.J.

Before we go hunting for other taxes to levy, why don't we go after corporations and make sure they pay their fair share of what they owe? ANITA G. IMMELE Carrollton, Ga.

Slow and Steady

It was at once sad and edifying to read that British navy mascot Timothy the Tortoise died in Britain at age 160 [April 19]. Despite wars, ethnic and religious strife, environmental destruction and the ongoing extinction of wildlife species, Timothy was a fortunate tortoise who endured and endeared during a monumentally long existence. BRIEN COMERFORD Glenview, Ill.

Very Special Delivery

Re your report "Too Posh To Push," about the increase in scheduled Csections [April 19]: Are women seeking caesarean births because they are worried only about fitting their babies into their schedules? Hardly. Your story noted some risks of natural childbirth (pelvic-floor damage and incontinence) but focused primarily on nonmedical reasons for C-sections. Most men, however, would not volunteer to spend the next 40 years with bladder and bowel problems. Why should women? More time needs to be spent on women's health issues and less on preserving low surgical birth rates and saving money. KARI ZANGERLE Phoenix, Ariz.

Pregnancy and childbirth are not diseases; they are just the beginning of a long and demanding but rewarding adventure. Nothing in your kid's life will be predictable. If you're not willing to wait for your baby to be delivered naturally instead of by C-section, you're not ready to be a mother. You won't be able to schedule your life after the baby is born. CHANTAL ROUDIER Marseilles

Expectant moms should be prepared to give birth naturally and as happily as possible. I do not understand mothers who want C-sections and completely refuse to suffer to deliver their children. You cannot effortlessly take a baby out of the mother's womb in the blink of an eye like a magician. These women want their comfort, but do they care about what their babies feel? A baby can take an active part in birth when labor starts naturally. Of course, pain relief and Csections are useful and necessary in some cases. I am firmly in favor of providing women with more information about all aspects of labor and delivery. ANNE MARENGHI Les Breviaires, France

The Death of Jesus

"Why Did Jesus Die?" Was a clear exposition of traditional theological interpretations of his death [April 12]. But it did not include the insights of liberation and feminist theologies. Latin American liberation theology, born in the 1960s amid that region's poverty and oppression, includes a focus on the social dimensions of sin and grace. Thus the death of Jesus and his Resurrection are a liberation from the power of both personal sin and social sin, such as injustice, racism and sexism. Feminist theologians ask, Can a Saviour who is male save women? Some say yes, seeing in the death of Jesus the gift of his whole self for the sake of his mission of liberation. As servant and Saviour, Jesus affirms that all, men and women, are called to the same depth of self-giving. SUSAN RAKOCZY Hilton, South Africa

Why couldn't Jesus have died a natural death like Buddha, who was also a great teacher of millions? If Christianity holds that Jesus' death was predetermined, then why blame anybody, whether Jew or Roman, for his death? If Jesus was regarded by Rome as a rebel against Caesar, then his execution was in conformity with Roman law. The Jews of Jerusalem, who lived under a brutal Roman occupation, were virtually powerless. Centuries later, after the Roman Empire adopted Christianity, blame was shifted from the Roman Pontius Pilate onto the Jews. That was a clear case of rewriting history, and we Jews have suffered terribly as a result. Jesus would overturn the tables of the Hollywood money changers in shock and anger if he knew what a travesty had been made of his life in Mel Gibson's film The Passion of the Christ. DAVID ZOHAR Jerusalem

You failed to mention Jesus' role as a messianic reformer of the Jewish faith. He addressed his countrymen and their hopes for release from occupation by the hated Romans. That brought him into direct conflict with Rome, and that is why he was killed by the Roman method of crucifixion. ROGER PAYNE London