To the editor,

Friday’s editorial attempts to address many people’s concerns about the need for war on Iraq with the statement “while some … contend that the United States, particularly George W. Bush, are selfishly seeking to do away with Saddam for personal and political gain, the facts do not support that argument.” However, the same editorial says, “We can only hope Secretary Powell indeed has a smoking gun or two to bring the issue into sharp focus.” I wondered which facts don’t support the argument? That fact that there are no real facts?

President Bush implores us to believe an Iraq attack would be in our country’s best interests, perhaps defined as protecting us from future harm. Yet, others (including the CIA) make the point that war could be stirring up a hornet’s nest with dangerous consequences for years, if not decades, to come. I don’t know about you, but that doesn’t leave me feeling “protected.”

It seems to me that (1) an administration with a sincere concern for our future well-being and safety would be better at listening to us, (2) a president genuinely concerned about our “rights” would be mindful of our rights to breathe clean air and drink clean water, (3) a leader of the world’s most powerful (read rich) country would use his power and influence to set an example of progressive action and innovative thinking different from past generations.

How sad that we are using our wealth and power for bullying and arm-twisting instead of leadership. It all leaves me embarrassed for our country and afraid for the future.

Mark Zwahl,

Lawrence