Letters in the Editor's Mailbag.

Byline: The Register-Guard

Horizon is clouded

Should we go to war with Iraq? We must undertake a pre-emptive strike, claim the hawks. No! It's unnecessary and will plunge the world into chaos, reply the doves. It's confusing when each side is stated so forcefully and persuasively.

Who is right? Can we even trust our leaders, or the media, to provide us with honest information? Or are we being manipulated for ulterior political or economic motives?

Each voice sounds reasonable and legitimate as it argues its case. But whatever way we turn, the horizon is clouded and storm warnings are up. At a time when the consequences are potentially so dire, it seems almost impossible to make a wise determination.

STEPHANIE SARNOFF Eugene

A willful blindness 

Once again, liberal Eugeneans amaze me with their special brand of logic. I've read that President Bush's stance on Iraq is motivated by anything from politics to oil. There is absolutely no proof, they say, that Saddam Hussein poses any significant threat to the United States. Surely more inspections would alleviate any risk, right?

Let's review: The man not only possesses chemical and biological weapons and is attempting to acquire nuclear capabilities, but has used them on his own people! Another U.N. Security Council resolution? He already violated 16 of them!

He has attacked other countries without provocation and has described the United States as the great Satan. Shall we wait until more American graves are filled to address this madman? That approach failed miserably for the former administration.

Remember the first bombing of the World Trade Center, the U.S. embassies and the U.S.S. Cole? We knew who was responsible for those atrocities, yet we waited too long. Thousands of Americans paid in blood on Sept. 11 for the Clinton administration's policy of "let's wait and see."

How is it that liberals can slap "Free Tibet" stickers on their Yugos, yet refuse the same help to innocent Iraqis suffering under Saddam's regime? How can they complain about our dependence on Middle Eastern oil, yet refuse Alaskan drilling, which would far reduce and perhaps eliminate that dependence? How can they support Bill Clinton and Al Gore's declarations of Saddam's evil, yet deny the same words simply because they came out of the mouth of a Republican president?

The self-proclaimed loopholes and willful blindness of liberal ideology continues to amaze me.

JESSIKA JENSEN Eugene

Iceberg dead ahead

Congressmen bravely speak from the land of Saddam Hussein and his "imminent threat." Why are they telling us not to trust Bush? Could it be patriotism at its finest? It'll be interesting to hear their words explained away. Food poisoning, perhaps?

To gain support for his desire to kill Iraqis, Bush tells China and Russia it's OK to kill breakaway rebels. Dealing in lives, America is about to become history's greatest peddler of human misery. With an attack on Iraq, the world will witness America revealing a foreign policy of global domination by military force.

President Bush doesn't care a dime about our health, our states or our children. He said he wants our kids to be the best educated, yet our 2002 federal discretionary budget gave more than 50 percent of our taxes to the military and 8 percent to education. He ransacks our budget surplus, hijacks our rights and is squandering our last chance for worldwide respect as a land of caring people with high principles.

Rather than creating a middle-class lifestyle for all, our oilocracy urges civilization to spend $4 billion daily on militarizing the world. Indeed, it's a time for acute concern and love of country. Instead of blaming state politicians for the plight of our schools and other programs, inform yourselves and speak out against Bush. It is our right and our duty, and unfortunately needs to be done. He's steering us into an iceberg, and the America we know will be doomed - morally and economically. If his plan succeeds, this president will permanently damage America's magnificent potential and its image around the world.

There's a word for that kind of crime: Treason.

BRIAN BOGART Eugene

What if we're wrong?

With all of the talk of killing the metaphorical rattlesnake in Baghdad, there's one point that appears to be missing from the argument: What if we're wrong?

What if there are no weapons of mass destruction? We've bombed Afghanistan into submission, increased our security and are allowing Israel to kill all the terrorists that they can with our weapons. We are catching potential terrorists here, and arrests are being made abroad. So it's hard to argue that the same intelligence source that missed the plot to attack the World Trade Center is right about Saddam Hussein's threat to the United States and that if we don't overthrow him it would be a grave mistake.

It's even more important now to ask if we should potentially kill thousands of Iraqis, lose an unknown number of American soldiers and spend at least $50 billion. Think about it when you put gas into your tank. It's going to have a lot of blood in it.

DEREK RYTER Eugene

Anarchists targeted

Once again, we have a riot in a neighborhood near the university - an event that always serves as a reminder of the injustice in our poorly named justice system. Will any of the students who threw rocks at the police serve seven years in jail, as one anarchist is currently serving? Will any of those who damaged police vehicles, committed arson and otherwise destroyed property be required to serve 23 years in jail, as another anarchist is doing? No, of course not.

They are, for the most part, well-moneyed, apolitical and white. You can also be sure that the Lane County district attorney's office won't be issuing a memo stating, "No plea deals with student rioters," as they did when anarchists were accused of the same crimes.

Anyone who still believes that the justice is fair and impartial should consider these disparities. Anyone who believes that anarchists who cover their faces with masks at demonstrations are cowards, should think about the special injustice system that operates for people who have a radical political perspective, as well as those who are poor, people of color and others on the wrong end of the power dynamic in this country.

TRACY SCHARN Eugene

18-year-olds not ready

I disagree with The Register-Guard's Sept. 30 editorial on Measure 17, which would lower the minimum age limit for legislators to 18 from the current limit of 21. While I respect the newspaper's enthusiasm for inviting young people into the political system by dropping hurdles, I'm also a realist and have some experience in this area.

At 18, I was very sure of my political views and was active within the Republican Party. I espoused a lot of beliefs which seemed very clear-cut, and I made my choices based on a very rigid set of views. While this seemed completely reasonable at the time, I've learned that bills and mandates are passed and created with more than just ideals and some textbook examples. I believe it is next to impossible to attain that knowledge at the age of 18, and frankly I'd rather see the minimum age of legislators raised to 30.

Attitudes and beliefs tend to be tempered with real-world experiences. If I had the opportunity at 18 to serve in the Oregon Legislature, I can guarantee that I would have regretted about 75 percent of the decisions and votes I would have cast. While my core ideals and beliefs are somewhat different now, the real-world experiences I have gained over the past 10 years in the workforce have given me insight that I couldn't possibly have at 18.

Are you ready to throw chance to the wind? Are you ready to allow a kid fresh from the prom the ability to vote on your income taxes, urban growth boundaries, highway projects and natural resources? Though the newspaper claims that there isn't a financial effect from approving this, I'd suggest that rash decisions made by a lack of real-world experience will cost us plenty. One look at the Legislature as it stands now is evidence enough of that!

BILL ROYLE Brownsville

Stop Saddam early

After reading mostly unchallenged frothy rhetoric that has been spilling over onto The Register-Guard's Mailbag opposing President Bush's Iraqi war plan, I'm compelled to express my sentiments. Also, where were all these opinionated doves fighting for Mailbag space when President Bill Clinton's orders led to killing innocent people in Iraq, Serbia, Sudan and killing malnourished field mice in Afghanistan without congressional approval?

I won't repeat analogies comparing Saddam Hussein with Adolf Hitler because, for one reason, many people tailor history to blend with their ingrained beliefs. Many idealistic but unrealistic people believe our ultimate goal for attacking Iraq is oil. If Saddam develops a deliverable nuclear weapon and takes over other oil fields, they will be correct. Our military personnel would then be at great risk trying to throw out the bum. I hardly think those brave warriors would appreciate those legislators who had stalled their war vote until after the election, or for another time to better their political positions.

Some allies oppose us because of their selfish self-interests. The United Nations is too often indecisive. We need to spot drill for oil and gas in the isolated, desolate Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Very few people visit there. It's so lonely and depressing that half the caribou are on Prozac. Some people want to spend more money to develop hydrogen fuel cells. It's not that easy. Do you remember the Hindenburg?

ROBERT DAVID SMITH Eugene

Union hurting economy

It seems to me that we no longer have to be concerned with al-Qaeda ruining our economy; we have the longshoremen's union taking advantage of us at our country's ports of entry.

JAMES A. COX Eugene

Speak up, citizens

The best time to stop this disastrous war is before it starts - before more of the world's children are traumatized, bloodied, maimed and murdered.

Speak up, fellow citizens. If you've spoken up already, speak up again! Tell your congressional representative to vote no on the war resolution. Tell our senators to slow the juggernaut, to filibuster - as Sen. Robert Byrd has suggested - until the administration comes to its senses and turns toward peace.

CHARLES GRAY Eugene

CAPTION(S):

The Register-Guard welcomes letters on topics of general interest. Our length limit is 250 words; all letters are subject to condensation. Writers are limited to one letter per calendar month. Because of the volume of mail, not all letters can be printed. Letters must be signed with the writer's full name. An address and daytime telephone number are needed for verification purposes; this information will not be published or released. Mail letters to Mailbag, P.O. Box 10188, Eugene, OR 97440-2188 Fax: [phone] E-mail: [e-mail]