Topic: foreign policy
You are viewing the most recent posts on this topic.
November 30, 2013 at 8:11 AM
Israel should have the right to exist on the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people
Your recent editorial calling on the West to give peace a chance with Iran is dangerously naive and misguided [“Give peace a chance in Iran, Opinion, Nov. 27].
The deal violates at least six Security Council resolutions calling on Iran to close down its nuclear activities. Not slow them down; close them down.
The deal, which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has rightly criticized, grants Iran the right to continue enriching uranium. It would be more beneficial for the world if Iran granted to its own citizens the rights Americans enjoy.
They should grant Israel the right to exist on the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people, a right that was recognized and ratified by the League of Nations in 1922, instead of calling for a new holocaust to wipe Israel and the Jewish people off the face of the earth. Iran is a rogue nation, in conflict with every other country except those ruled by Shiite Islam, with a bad human-rights record. Iran is now correctly calling it a victory, and a defeat for the West, which is led by the United States.
August 29, 2013 at 7:37 AM
Follow legal procedure
Please urge President Barack Obama to respond to the war crimes in Syria through the lawful channels of the United Nations and the International Criminal Court. [“U.S. preparing evidence trail of chemical attack in Syria,” page one, Aug. 28.]
We should also use this as an occasion to propose the strengthening of the ability of the U.N. to respond by eliminating the veto power of permanent members of the Security Council, which often delays effective international peacekeeping action.
Further unilateral military action by the United States outside international legal channels would be the greatest crime of all.
Daniel Clark, Walla Walla
Learn from past mistakes
Any U.S. military intervention in Syria would be a disaster.
History will tell us that if we intervene in Syria, no matter who wins, they will hate us. Let them fight it out among themselves. We will find a way to work with the victor, just as we have with the present regime that we now find so intolerable.
More than twice as many American lives were lost in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan than on Sept. 11.
Afghanistan will never change, and Iraq went from being Iran’s worse enemy to one of its best friends. No American oil company wants to risk investment there, so Iraqi oil now flows into China.
Iraq has already reached the status of the worse foreign-policy disaster in American history, and it is going to get worse. Let us not repeat the same mistake with Syria.
Marshall Dunlap, Kent
March 20, 2013 at 4:00 PM
‘The invisible hand’
I thought E.J. Dionne Jr.’s review of the United States for the past 80 years was superb, even though it omitted some significant bad things in the “good” years (such as the long delay in ending racial segregation and the carpet bombing of civilians in World War II). [“American power, home and abroad,” Opinion, March 19.]
However, I believe there is a different way of viewing it. Dionne described some of what I am referring to in writing “And we fought poverty, for moral reasons, but also because we wanted to show the world that we could combine our market system with economic justice. We forget that we succeeded.”
It seems to me that worshippers of economist Adam Smith’s mysterious and magical “invisible hand” cannot possibly agree with that success. In his 1776 “The Wealth of Nations,” Smith proclaimed, “Every individual in pursuing his or her own good is led, as if by an invisible hand, to achieve the best good for all. Therefore any interference with free competition by government is almost certain to be injurious.”
Both have been tried in those 80 years, with Smith’s belief in magic ascendant in the last half but now being challenged. Conservatives’ unswerving belief in the invisible hand leaves them no choice but to claim that any current failure (such as the hidden hand’s inability to deliver that “best good for all”) must be due to either government interference or losers being too lazy to compete. Conservatives are now meeting to review their strategy for meeting the current challenge. However, they cannot choose anything other than trying to improve their evangelical advertising.
– Edward George, Renton
Trending with readers