Copyright 2004 Times Publishing Company  
St. Petersburg Times (Florida)
June 19, 2004 Saturday 0 South Pinellas Edition
SECTION: EDITORIAL; Pg. 19A

LENGTH: 1999 words

HEADLINE: We now see the recklessness of U.S. war on Iraq

SERIES: LETTERS

BODY:
The 9/11 commission concluded Wednesday that there is no evidence that the Saddam Hussein regime had anything to do with the terrorist attacks. Nor is there any evidence that Iraq ever supported, funded or collaborated with al-Qaida prior to or following the attacks. Hussein was a secular dictator and was very distrustful of the Islamo-fascists who clearly represented a threat to his power. Even the Republicans on the commission, and those reviewing its findings, have had a hard time arguing with these conclusions.

Combined with the lack of WMDs, these findings now completely undermine the fundamental justifications provided by the Bush administration for invading Iraq. Despite these findings, Vice President Dick Cheney continues to insist that Hussein had a long history of collaboration with al-Qaida, and that weapons of mass destruction may still yet be found in Iraq.

It is time for the people in this administration to 'fess up to the fact that they made some major miscalculations in leading the United States into the invasion of Iraq - or that they deliberately misled the American public.

The invasion of Iraq was the first time in history that the United States invaded and occupied another nation without being directly provoked by an action or declaration of war. Furthermore, we did so without the support of the United Nations, NATO or the majority of our historical allies.

We are now stuck nation-building in Iraq at an enormous financial cost, and without any discernable near-term benefits. The Islamic community is more enraged at the United States than ever, arguably making us less safe than before 9/11.

Although the U.S. export of democracy into the heartland of Arabia may one day prove to be a visionary, quantum leap for peace in the Middle East, this was not the objective sold to the American public and the rest of the world to justify the so-called "liberation" of Iraq. Rather, we were told that Iraq constituted an imminent threat that must be put down immediately. In hindsight, the actions of this administration with regard to Iraq can only be viewed as reckless, and in this dangerous world the reckless should not be rewarded with a second term in office.
 
Douglas Robison, St. Petersburg
 
Bush is confronting world's evil

It hurts the hearts and souls of civilized human beings to see the recent beheadings of Nick Berg and Paul Johnson. The coming presidential election of 2004 may be the most important election in decades. The decision that we Americans make at the voting booths this year will be the deciding factor of the path that lies ahead for our future generations.

President Bush, whether you like him or not, has taken the offensive on terrorism. He is willing to confront the evil that exists in the world today, a choice that will surely keep us much safer in the end, as opposed to waiting for something else to go wrong in our homeland. I would much rather that it is this generation that fights this fight, instead of leaving our children and grandchildren with a much bigger mess to deal with.

These terrorists hate us. They hated us long before the war in Iraq and will continue to hate us because of what we represent, freedom. There is no room for negotiation with people who praise Allah while cutting off the head of another human being. These people are raised to believe that they will go to heaven if they murder us.

President Bush recognizes the evil that exists and understands it must be fought now, not later. The time is now, either we stand together as one nation or we show our enemies that we are weak, it's up to you.

If you are registered to vote, vote! If you are not registered, please register now, and ask yourself one question before you vote: Who would al-Qaida like to see win this election? It's time for the dreamers of a perfect world to wake up and confront what is knocking on America's front door!
 
Jeannine Seevers, Sarasota
 
Something to change people's minds

Re: Why are we in Iraq?, editorial, June 18.

Your editorial starts out saying, even though there was nothing "surprising or new" about the 9/11 commission investigation, it garnered large headlines.

What is new is just that - the large front-page headlines in the St. Petersburg Times and papers across America. Now maybe all the people who believe in a link between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida will question the administration more, and change their minds about the wisdom of President Bush and the Iraq war.

But George Bush and Dick Cheney are still defensive about the mistake and say that al-Qaida was in communication with Hussein's regime. Maybe so. But Hussein rebuffed them. If al-Qaida operatives approached Bush with a nefarious plan, Bush would certainly rebuff them. However by the same argument, would that also mean there is a collaborative link between America and al-Qaida?
 
Stephen Wilson, Safety Harbor
 
The wisdom of pre-emptive action

Re: Why are we in Iraq?

We are in Iraq because the Bush administration believes in the doctrine of pre-emptive action. The facts are that intelligence reported Iraq had weapons of mass destruction; Saddam Hussein was an openly hostile enemy of the United States; Iraq had used WMD; Hussein was a known sponsor of terrorism.

Had we made a pre-emptive strike against the al-Qaida camps and the Taliban in Afghanistan would we have had the attacks of 9/11? Perhaps not. Does anyone doubt that Hussein would at some point have shared weapons of mass destruction or the technology to build them with terrorists? Should we have waited for an attack using WMD provided by Iraq to kill thousands of our citizens before acting? The president would have been pilloried had this happened and he could have prevented it through means of a pre-emptive action.

President Bush had the political courage to take the steps necessary to remove a threat before it came to realization. He acted, not reacted. It was and is the only sensible course to take. Many of those who criticize the president do so for one reason, political gain. They should be ashamed.
 
Mike Lyons, Apollo Beach
 
We were misled into war

Re: 9/11 commission.

We can argue as to whether or not invading Iraq was the right thing to do. We can argue whether it was worth more than 800 American lives (and still counting), 5,000 or so wounded, even more thousands of Iraqi lives, and hundreds of billions of dollars from our treasury along with tax cuts slanted toward the wealthy and a breathtaking budget deficit.

We can argue about whether the ends justified the means. We all know and agree that Saddam Hussein was a ruthless dictator to his own people and that he had on occasions been a threat to his neighbors (some of those threats we actively encouraged and supported as in his war against Iran), but after the 9/11 commission's report, there is no longer any argument that the reasons given to justify this war were honest - they clearly were not.

Iraq was not the central front of the war on terror as George Bush and Dick Cheney still claim, nor did Saddam Hussein have any meaningful connection with al-Qaida or any involvement in 9/11. All the reasons that were given to get congressional and U.N. approval before invading Iraq were wrong - there were no WMD; there was no imminent threat to our security; there were no links between Iraq and al-Qaida and no connection to 9/11. But we went to war anyway.

Iraq may yet turn out to be a better, freer and more stable country than it was before we invaded - or it may not. That remains to be seen. Does the Bush administration deserve to get a pass or fail grade depending upon how its high stakes gamble on this war plays out in the end? How can you trust a government that deceives you on the reasons it gives for the actions it takes? We were misled by those who asked for our trust and are sworn to uphold the public trust. They are undeserving of another term in office.
 
William Israel, St. Petersburg
 
Refusing to recognize reality in Iraq

Re: Us and them, editorial, June 12.

I guess I missed the memo that Baghdad Bob, the wacky spokesman for Saddam Hussein, is now writing editorials for the St. Petersburg Times. Just as Baghdad Bob refused to recognize reality and continued to spout what he wanted to see happen instead of what was really happening, you do the same.

You wrote in this editorial, "But now that it (the Bush administration) finds itself trapped in a bloody stalemate . . ." The liberal press and most Democrats would love that to be the case, but it just isn't so. An interim Iraqi government with officials recognized by the people, by leading clerics and even the French, Germans and Russians along with the entire U.N. Security Council recognize there is a specific, ongoing plan involved to turn sovereignty over to Iraq's new government. Every day, more and more Iraqi policemen and military forces take over for the U.S. forces. The bloody stalemate you refer to is only in your mind, at the top of your wish list. It just isn't reality.
 
James Tischler, Tampa
 
His mind is made up

You remember Baghdad Bob. He was the Iraqi spokesman who reported on television each evening during the war that the Iraqi forces were destroying the invading Americans. The whole city was collapsing around him and American tanks were roaming downtown Baghdad streets, and he still carried on about how the invading forces were being repulsed.

Baghdad Bob is gone now, but here in America we have our own Baghdad Dicky. The 9/11 investigation committee has announced that there is no credible data supporting the claim that Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida were in association. That doesn't bother our vice president who just this week made his oft repeated claim that there was a connection.

Perhaps the old admonition, "don't confuse me with facts, my mind is made up," is apt.
 
Neil A. Hilmer, Weeki Wachee
 
Bush critics deserved more attention

Re: Retired diplomats say vote Bush out, June 17.

I was taken aback looking for information in the Times regarding retired military leaders and diplomats assailing the Bush team on it inability to handle global leadership and the group's pleas to the country to change leadership. I finally found two tiny paragraphs on page 5A at the very bottom.

I think in a country nearing its next election that this information is very relative. In the Washington Post, it was reported: " "Our security has been weakened,' the former ambassadors and four-star commanders said in a statement read to a crowded Washington news conference. "Never in the 2 1/4 centuries of our history has the United States been so isolated among the nations, so broadly feared and distrusted.' "

The fact is that this country's credibility is now an issue with the world at large. I believe this action by the Diplomats and Military Commanders for Change should have made front-page news.
 
Laurie Atkins, Palm Harbor
 
Try a leave-and-spin approach

There is a very simple solution to the seemingly endless difficulties for our troops in Mideast. Just leave! Then let Bush political adviser Karl Rove spin a fanciful tale about the wonderful success of the military campaign in Iraq. Then the newscasters will report it, the newspapers will print it and the people will believe it. Hey, I think he has already started.
 
Greg Gordon, Ellenton
 
Share your opinions

Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731. They can be sent by fax to (727) 893-8675 or through our Web site at: http://www.sptimes.com/letters/

They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Please include a handwritten signature when possible.

Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length. We regret that not all letters can be published.

GRAPHIC: CARTOON, Don Addis; AMERICA ON GUARD FOR THAT TERRORIST ATTACK: A man stands inside the open front door of his home holding a frying pan for protection.

LOAD-DATE: June 19, 2004