Unfettered Letters

U.S.-Iran relations

Lee Judge’s cartoon (7/12, Opinion) depicting the U.S. threatening Iran is hilarious, if your sense of humor appreciates sedition. To be fair, Judge would have to show the forces and material moving from Iran into Iraq to sustain the insurgency that we all would like to see ended. Leaving that out of his cartoon was dishonest.

While it would be initially unpopular and controversial and has not been openly discussed, the simple solution to the quagmire in Iraq might be to attack Iran. They seem to want a confrontation with the U.S.

They have funded, supplied and assisted in staffing the Iraqi insurgency, and it would be better to engage Iran now than after they develop nuclear weapons.

Mike Wheeler
Kansas City

Appreciating people of Iran

At a time that there is a hostile environment between the U.S. and Iran, it was refreshing to read the “As I See It” column by Nancy Cramer, (6/7, Opinion, “A breathtaking journey to Iran”).

Cramer’s views, based on three weeks of observation and interaction with ordinary Iranians, expressed a positive experience. Her column demonstrates the importance of intercultural relationship and communication among peoples and nations.

On the other hand, it was a sad commentary to read a different opinion by another reader, Frank J. Smist Jr. (6/11, Letters). His reply appeared to be very narrow and was objecting to a sincere expression of a teacher who actually had a good experience in Iran.

While he was finding celebration in the teacher’s retirement so she would not expose her students to “ignorance,” apparently he had no difficulty exposing the Kansas City community to his own narrow view.

Manny Pedram
Kansas City

A visit to ‘breathtaking’ Iran

Thanks for running Nancy Cramer’s essay on her “tourist” trip to Iran (6/7, Opinion, “A breathtaking journey to Iran”). Forget that Iran is now refining nuclear materials for many bombs and has threatened to make Israel extinct. Forget that Iran is helping to kill U.S. soldiers in Iraq.

Let’s go happily to Iran, eat the food and buy tourist trinkets. And, most important, let’s blame the U.S. and the Bush administration for everything.

I’m glad Nancy Cramer is retired from elementary school teaching. Future students will not be exposed to the ignorance she’s peddling.

Frank J. Smist Jr.
Prairie Village

Talking is not ‘appeasement’

On Thursday in Israel President Bush described those (read Sen. Obama) who propose talking to Iran about Iraq as delusional. But on the very same day Bush’s own Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, said in The Washington Post that the U.S. should construct a combination of incentives and pressure to engage Iran, and may have missed earlier opportunities to begin a useful dialogue with Tehran: “We need to figure out a way to develop some leverage … and then sit down and talk with them.”

Of course, any reasonable person, even members of Bush’s cabinet such as Gates and probably Condoleezza Rice, understands that engaging Iraq and Syria in discussions could be productive. Talking is not appeasement.

We have tens of thousands of our finest young people coming home physically and mentally maimed from this nonsense. We need to find a way to extricate ourselves in a way that protects our interest. Of the three candidates left, only Sen. Obama seems to proffering sensible ideas to accomplish this.

Talking to Iran and Syria flat makes sense.

Greg Cenac
Weatherby Lake

Iran bombs report

I’m more than a little confused by the choice of headline Monday (1/21, A-1, “Fewer hit with Iran bomb; U.S. military officials say Iranian militants have smuggled fewer weapons recently”) because the first sentence of the article seems to contradict the premise of the headline by saying the bombs are only “thought to come” from Iran.

So which is it, are the bombs from Iran or not?

After a cursory search on the Internet, it seems that there are plenty of conflicting reports as to the actual origin of the EFPs (explosively formed penetrators).

Is The Star trying to rush us into another war? Aren’t two enough for now?

The last thing this country needs is more irresponsible reporting and misinformation.

Matt Nelson
Overland Park

Iran bombs?

The Jan. 21 front-page headline “Fewer hit with Iran bomb” is misleading and belligerent. The headline conveys a sense of a direct bombing campaign by the Iranians and could have been mistaken for a press release directly from the Bush administration.

Journalists should be wary of taking this administration’s word as gospel. They have been continually shown to be incorrect at best and criminal at worst.

Even the lead of the article lends some doubt to the assurance of the bomb’s origin by the administration by referring to the weapon as merely “thought to come from Iran.” Though the device may well have originated in Iran, it is clear that we should no longer allow the administration’s estimates to be delivered without restraint.

Sean Foley
Prairie Village

Strait of Hormuz incident

Apparently Dan Nastali (1/15, Letters) never paid attention in geography class, otherwise he would know that the Strait of Hormuz is a major shipping channel between the Gulf of Oman and the Persian Gulf.

It is the only sea passage to the open ocean for many of the Persian Gulf states and it is commonplace for U.S., British and other warships — not to mention all other types of maritime vessels — to pass through this strait in accordance with the “transit passage” provision of the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea.

U.S. Navy vessels passing through this strait is hardly provocative, as this occurs routinely. However, Iran sending possibly armed speedboats out to confront our passing warships is definitely a provocative act and would have justified a defensive response from the U.S. ships.

Additionally, Mr. Nastali’s reference to the Gulf of Tonkin icident is irrelevant, as this body of water is in no way comparable to the Strait of Hormuz from an international shipping waterway perspective.

Bill Delich
Iola, Kan.

Tuesday’s paper included a letter from Dan Nastali who criticized George Bush for talking tough to Iran after speedboats recently approached and menaced Navy warships moving through the Straits of Hormuz. Perhaps Mr. Nastali should remember that it was a small boat like this that approached the USS Cole.

T.J. Snyder
Mission Hills

Straight of Hormuz incident

It seems that George Bush would like to commit our country to one more little war before he leaves office (1/10, A-10, “President talks tough on Iran”).

If Iranian warships had appeared off the coast of the United States, that might be considered a “provocation.” When Iran responds to American warships off their own coast by sending out a few speedboats — yes, speedboats — one might ask who is provoking whom.

For those who were not around in 1964, I suggest that an Internet search on “Gulf of Tonkin” might prove enlightening.

Dan Nastali
Kansas City

Say no to more war

Despite the official report that Iran halted its efforts for nuclear weapons four years ago, it’s likely Bush will continue to push for war in Iran at any cost. That’s the clincher here: at any cost.

We’ve lost nearly 4,000 troops, with thousands more wounded, in a war costing hundreds of millions of dollars a day. The Iraq war has destabilized the region and (according to CIA reports) created thousands of new terrorists. This has been quite the opposite of the “success” touted in the Orwellian “Newspeak” used by the current administration.

Continued war — expanded wars — enrich war profiteers like Halliburton and Blackwater but impoverish all the rest of us.

It’s time to look out for the people rather abdicating our brains and hearts to ideological lies.

No more money for Iraq. No more wars of aggression. We can no longer bear this cost.

A.J. Burdick
Kansas City

Report on Iran, nukes

What a surprise to learn that the most-briefed man on the planet — after warning us of impending World War III — can’t be faulted for his statements over the past years, since as he wasn’t aware of the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran.

As the president himself stressed, he was ostensibly left out of the loop until last Tuesday. Wow! I can’t even imagine the kind of security clearance it must take to gain access to that kind of information. Dick Cheney and Condi Rice were also out of the loop? Where have we heard that before?

This president learned from his father, who was vice president at the time of Iran-Contra, who uttered, “I was out of the loop.” Former head of the CIA and having more to do with running the country than a script-reading, front-man president actor, he was not privy? He was out of the loop? Right.

Like his father’s, George W. Bush’s whole presidency has been one big lie after another. Just what we need, another war with a Middle East oil country.

Kenneth Kassen
Shawnee