PUBLIC FORUM THE BEGINNING.

As a former soldier with nine years of active service, I find it confusing that some Americans are protesting the military action against the Taliban. I served my country in places like Somalia, Haiti and Central America, and I know what it is like to be considered fair game. It seems to me these peace-advocating citizens have little understanding of our adversaries. Time and again, Osama bin Laden has said that it is God's will that we be destroyed. This point was driven home on Sept. 11. We are in the beginning stages of a war of beliefs.

I fear that we may be in for more than the average American citizen can fathom. I believe in diplomacy, I've seen the ugly side of man in far too many places. I ask those who protest to wake up. We are at war. Our enemy is patient, fanatically dedicated, well-funded and has no remorse. Look at your children, your wives, your husbands; look at your family. Will it be whole after the next attack? Do you think that, given the opportunity, those terrorists waiting to commit their next cowardly act would hesitate if you and your loved ones were in their target area?

- Mike Rocha

Burbank

The disease

I am a combat veteran of World War ll and with all my heart, I wish my country success in the war it has now undertaken. My head tells me, paraphrasing Abraham Lincoln, the best way to win a war is to make a friend of your enemy. This is not done by making demands that leave no room for negotiation, nor can it be done by giving food and clothing to proud people as an act of charity while pounding our chest saying, 'See how good we are,' as the whole world looks on.

We need to ask, why do these people hate us so much to do what they did on Sept. 11, and then address that with the same fervor we show in preparation for war. For too long, we have directed our attention to the symptoms rather than the disease. The terrorists are the symptoms; the disease is the Israeli/Palestinian problem. If we do not address the disease, the symptoms will go on forever.

- Philip Wilt

Van Nuys

Losing the PR war

There are about a billion Muslims in the world. As far as religion goes, Muslims are far more faithful to theirs than so-called Christians. We have already allowed a tiny minority of Islamic fundamentalists to redefine Sept. 11 as war, rather than unspeakable crime. We are about to let them redefine it as a war of an unethical West against a value-oriented Islam. We are losing the public opinion battle in the Islamic world.

So far: Afghani bystander civilians - more than 100; U.N. aid workers - 4; terrorists - 0. Do we stop to ask whether we create more terrorists than we destroy?

- Martin Kotowski

Sherman Oaks

No politicians

They are correct in calling this a holy war. It is not something of our doing. This should be called a crusade to try and rid the world of terrorism. The politicians should not be allowed to have a hand in this fight.

The last few times politicians had a hand in any kind of combat situations, we, the U.S., came out on the short end of the stick, Desert Storm, Vietnam, Korea, also portions of World War II. You go in and let the bodies fall where they may. They started it, and we should finish it.

- B.E. Beiner

USMC, Ret.

Granada Hills

Canceling the Emmys

The cancellation of the Emmy Awards is a victory for the Taliban. During World War II, the USO came to the front lines with us.

- Raiford L. Langford

Sherman Oaks

Lax controls

We in America have been living in a fool's paradise with our lax controls governing our borders and the influx of illegal aliens. The loose security measures we implement in granting student, work and tourist visas is shameful. The same applies to our lax border controls.

Americans will be faced with continued terrorist incidents until our irresponsible and lax immigration policies are confronted and severely modified. ``Always we will remember the character of the onslaught against us,'' said Franklin D. Roosevelt, Dec. 8, 1941.

- Adelle Sternberg

Sherman Oaks

Galanter's argument

Re ``Galanter responds,'' (Public Forum, Oct. 9):

If Councilwoman Ruth Galanter's bathetic harangue were given a voice, it would undoubtedly be Donald Duck's. Her use of the term idealism adds nothing to her argument, since idealism is an unattainable reality in itself and is often mutated by those who invoke its name, e.g., Samuel Taylor Coleridge and his utopian community, Adolph Hitler and his genetic perfection, Karl Marx and his economic utopia.

The best that can be hoped for is to mimic a quasi-idealism by establishing a set of intelligent moral principles to help guide human conduct - but this means maintaining standards, exercising hard-edged honesty and liberating truth from the shadows. Maybe those on the City Council should do more reading between arguments on the need to create public urinals.

- Stephen Pettine

Canoga Park

Worry about us

Re ``Galanter responds,'' (Public Forum, Oct 9):

What a crock ... that letter was four paragraphs of nothing. Ruth Galanter should worry about our city, not the world. We have other elected officials for that. She should stick to counseling the citizens of L.A.

- Thomas A. Nave

Tarzana

Bad comparison

Re ``Galanter responds,'' (Oct. 9):

Let me get this straight. Ruth Galanter, a city leader, actually has the gall to even try to compare symbolic Earth worship to the American Revolution? No one dies for a tree, but many have died for this nation. Galanter, shame on you for trivializing the war that won our independence with such trivial matters as tree hugging.

- Denise Grimes

Valencia

Working with the chief

Re ``Safety first,'' Editorial, Oct. 3:

The Daily News got it right when it said that poor management is central to the LAPD being ``dispirited, undermotivated and potentially not up to the task'' of protecting our city during a national crisis. The Daily News also is right that the department needs to work with the Los Angeles Police Protective League to address problems for the good of the city.

As most observers of the LAPD know, recently the LAPPL has spoken out about public safety. We have said that if Chief Parks and the LAPD addressed and solved the issues at hand, we would be the first to praise them for a job well done. However, as the Daily News correctly points out, this is not occurring. Here are a few examples:

When the LAPPL put forth the ideas to stem the rising crime rate in Los Angeles, the chief said no. When the LAPPL asked the LAPD to fully restore community policing programs, the chief said no. When the LAPPL recommended alternatives to stop the proposed jail closures, which will have the negative effect of keeping out officers off the streets longer, the chief said no. When the LAPPL offered ideas to reduce the high number of dropped 911 calls, the chief said no. When the LAPPL suggested ideas to make the flying public safer, the chief said no.

Obviously, we are very disappointed by the cold shoulder these proposals - and many others we have not outlined here - have received by ``Chief No.'' But we are not discouraged. We are determined to continue to put forth constructive proposals in the name of public safety.

- Board of Directors

Los Angeles Police Protective League

- Mitzi Grasso

President