THE DAILY STANDARD welcomes letters to the editor. Letters will be edited for length and clarity and must include the writer’s name, city, and state.
*1*
I believe that the majority of Afghans have supported the American military intervention in Afghanistan that led to the elimination of the Taliban regime (David Brooks, “Tragedy” in Afghanistan). I am one such Afghan, despite the massive civilian casualties of the American invasion of Afghanistan.
However, current American policy on Afghanistan, and the human-rights violence of its troops in this poor and unfortunate country is not less inhuman than the Russian invasion of 1980s. One thing that brings the Bush administration’s policies very close to Brezhnev’s policy is its ceaseless support and alliance with the Afghan warlords and militia who have the blood of tens of thousands of Afghans on their hands.
Most unfortunately, the American government losing all its sympathizers in Afghanistan. Liberation from the Taliban was replaced by inhuman atrocities of the warlords, those Soviet-trained career killers and criminals that are now friends of the Bush administration.
I think if the United States does not help Afghans get rid of these warlords, the Bush administration will be facing bloody and protracted guerilla warfare.
Let’s prevent this from becoming a reality
–Ehsan Azari
*2*
Thirty years ago I served with the Peace Corps in Afghanistan. We made trips to Kabul for supplies every eight to ten weeks, so I was very familiar with the city and the Afghans living there.
There was no news presence in either the city or the country at that time. As a result, there really is no base line for comparison with almost all the reporting done today. It comes as no surprise to me that economic activity has resumed. It comes as no surprise that some are left behind. A report that only sees things from the eyes of a tourist without regard to the cultural dimension of the Afghans is not only shallow, but misses the real story of a complex and interesting group of people. I wish that I could return and see how things have really changed.
–Judley Wyant
*3*
Fred Barnes argues that the Democrats have to move right on the terror war in order to achieve electoral success (Securing a Democratic Future). This is much like advising a midget he needs to grow four feet to make it in the NBA. Barnes is correct that an attack from the right on Bush’s war on terror would succeed (especially if we do not depose Saddam within a year)but no Democrat can make it and survive the primaries. Any presidential candidate urging a wider and faster war in the Middle East and a greater federal role in terrorist prosecutions would be slaughtered by the base of the Democratic party. It’s a good strategy but, as the saying goes, “if a toad had wings it wouldn’t bump its 9bottom) when it hopped.” Democrats reading The Daily Standard have a right to ask if Barnes has any practical advice for them.
–John Vecchione
*4*
Egads! Let the Dems continue to drift leftward toward permanent minority status! This is one of the few columns that have actually proffered the party a semi-workable strategy. If they do adopt this strategy, however, there are two dangers: (1) If they can’t feign sincerity about a critique from the right, the electorate will punish them; and (2) Bush is nimble enough to respond by smiling and saying, “Okay, I can go along with a move to the right,” and tacking rightward where necessary.
–Jim Woodburn
*5*
I was at the ice bowl, zipped up in a sleeping bag with thermal undergarments and loved every minute of it (Stephen F. Hayes, Weather on Not: The Super Bowl, Outside, in the Cold). There was a time many, many years ago when certain factions in the NFL tried to get rid of Green Bay as a venue for big time football. “Bush league.” “Country bumpkins.” “Hick town.” Let’s bring football home to its cradle.
–Mary Mertz
*6*
There is just one problem with Fred Barnes’s suggestion for Democrats and their consultants: the Democratic party’s constituency.
The Democrats have spent decades chasing out of their party people who don’t believe that America is the source of all that’s wrong with the world. They succeeded in shrinking the “big tent” so that the only voice left is the “Amerika,” PC “salad bowl” set. A politician running against that mindset in the Democratic primary is doomed. The Democratic constituency, as the party has come to shape it, will not stomach a move against the Vietnam, McCarthy-McGovern orthodoxy that American power must be opposed and constrained (unless, of course, they are in charge).
The Democratic party today embodies the Founding Fathers’ nightmare: faction. If you are for it, they must be against it. Better a voice in the wilderness in a land of apostates than to be contaminated by compromise and consideration
The pruning of the Democratic electorate and the prevalence of Gerrymandered districts that gives the left electoral security means that it is not possible for Democrats to go right.
–Mitch Gibson
*7*
The problem in Afghanistan seems to be that, although Kabul is being slowly revived, this optimism does not spread to Kandahar, Jalalabad, or Herat. The old conservative structures installed by the Taliban are still in place, and indeed, ex-Talebs roam about the countryside freely. Surely it is time for the coalition ISAF to increase its protectorate beyond Kabul for Karzai’s, and the central government’s relevance, outside Kabul is zero.
–Jonathan Mark
*8*
I believe Fred Barnes missed one of the more subtle points made in the last election. What I haven’t seen in the press is the realization that a large portion of the public has finally figured out that people who will do or say anything to get elected, shouldn’t be. If the Democrats should do an about face on security, as Barnes suggests, I believe it will be recognized for what it is, phony, and they will alienate even more people than they did last November.
–Steve Anderson
*9*
I couldn’t agree more with Fred Barnes’s assessment of the Democrats’ need to change their rhetoric on the war. Despite the mid-term gains, I seriously doubt that there’s been a sea-change in the political alignment of the American people with the majority now siding with the conservatives on everything from abortion to the environment to health care to ANWAR (though I do believe that we’re making strides). Nevertheless, I agree that a real realignment could begin in earnest if the radical left continues to hijack the message of the few remaining centrist Democrats.
–Chris Symank
*10*
I think it was the psychologist George Miller who first noticed the pattern David Brooks points out. Like Brooks, he was able to declare older problems “cleared up” when the patient stopped complaining about his original maladies and began new complaints about other problems higher up the chain.
–Harry Honeycutt
