February 2

Protesters not loyal subjects ...

Letters index(Click on date to jump ahead)

February 2 Protesters not loyal subjects... ...and they don't speak for all Puerto Rico wants it all Pressed for an explanationFebruary 4 Everything in its place No fun reading about Japan Waddle should blame himself Brass, lend me your ears We need a united States Turkish delight?February 5 France, Germany ignore past Respect servicemembers' role Approach to Iraq hypocritical Healed, then back on the fieldFebruary 6 Put security in the front seat Child-care woes difficult to fix Learning from their dedication CorrectionFebruary 7 At a loss for shuttle families Professional look paramount Demonstrators an asset Military's commercial appeal Trying time with Tricare billsFebruary 8 Yet we still buy oil from Iraq No praise for patrol's pitch Don't ignore 'Beyond Vietnam'

Watching recent news coverage of anti-war rallies brought to mind one question for the protesters: “Whose side are you on?” Everyone has the right to free speech as stated in the First Amendment of our Constitution. But one must look at who they support when they use their free speech rights.

First, the protesters probably didn’t know who funded their demonstrations. Past demonstrations have been funded by organizations such as the Communist Party without the protesters even knowing it. We know that that entity doesn’t support free speech.

Second, the protesters indirectly support Saddam Hussein’s regime. This means they indirectly support torture, starvation, a lack of rights, death camps, etc. They also indirectly support Kim Jong Il and his North Korea regime. That means gulags bigger than Washington, D.C., up to three generations of families punished for saying something wrong or against the government. It also means rape, torture, mass starvation of one’s own people and humiliation. They also indirectly support Hamas and other terrorist groups that target innocent U.S. and foreign civilians, regardless of theological or political background, to get their point across.

Last, they indirectly support Osama bin Laden and his cronies. One must only remember the events of Sept. 11, 2001, to think of what he’s done. I suppose the demonstrators even protested against the war in Afghanistan. But look now. See a country that, although still struggling, is beginning to recover. Its people are enjoying more freedoms than ever before.

Yes, the anti-war movement probably would protest war even if a weapon of mass destruction was set off in the United States. And again the question arises: “Whose side are you on?”

Sgt. 1st Class Michael WischnewskiCamp Bondsteel, Kosovo

... and they don't speak for all

I would like to send this note to the men and women who are serving our country in this time of uncertainty: There is a small minority of people who are running their mouths saying war with Iraq is wrong and this conflict is over oil. The truth is these people have never supported the military or anything else positive in this country. These people would have made similar comments in the 1930s about staying out of a war with Adolf Hitler.

I do support you and your mission; without the sacrifices that you and your families are making only God knows what would happen. May God bless you for your work, and may God keep you safe.

Paul HorvathSomersworth, N.H.

Puerto Rico wants it all

In response to the story in the Jan. 18 News Tracker “Vieques bombing range,” I am wondering if the governor of Puerto Rico is for real when she said the people of Puerto Rico want to keep the Roosevelt Roads Naval Base open for the economic advantages, even though the Puerto Rican people fought so hard to have the valuable island of Vieques closed?

Roosevelt Roads exists only because of Vieques island. Maybe the good folks of Puerto Rico should’ve weighed that possibility when they fought so aggressively to have Vieques closed. Or maybe they thought they could have their cake and eat it, too?

The Puerto Rican people should ask how the citizens surrounding places such as Fort Ord, Calif. — and other bases that have been closed — now survive without the military community next door.

In a time when we’re crunching the numbers to finance this worldwide war on terrorism and facing possible action against Iraq, we should save as much money as possible. If Roosevelt Roads, which clearly now has no mission, must be closed, then so be it.

Sorry, Puerto Rico. Maybe you folks should’ve weighed all the options before being so aggressive.

Sgt. Christopher FanninSchweinfurt, Germany

Pressed for an explanation

America’s media has got to be the laughingstock of the entire world. Seriously. The newspapers, the tabloids, the anchormen on TV, everyone knew when Congress approved a “covert plan to assassinate Saddam Hussein.” That’s more than defeating the purpose, isn’t it? Do we honestly think that Saddam himself will not get hold of this piece of vital information? It’s like spelling out what a parent is getting her kids for their birthdays with them in earshot. Insert Homer Simpson here: “D’oh!”

If this is supposed to be some kind of scare tactic, then it isn’t working. I find it hard not to laugh or roll my eyes when this kind of information becomes public.

What is it with us Americans to become enthralled with TV coverage of the latest pretzel the president ate? Or how most troops found out they were getting deployed not through their commander or chain of command, but through the news? The press is a good thing. It keeps us informed, and I applaud Stars and Stripes for having some decency. Maybe it’s just me. Maybe I’d be happier if I could live my life through a child’s eyes, blissfully naive.

Maybe the press should stop looking at its stock figures and start caring more about national security — or the welfare of the public, for that matter. Perhaps no news is good news after all. Then again, maybe it’s just me.

Corinne P. NortonDarmstadt, Germany

February 4

Everything in its place

Major kudos to the Kadena Base Exchange for finally putting the massive influx of male-oriented magazines behind a guard that reads “Adult reading material” (although I do take exception to the words “adult” and “reading”). Thankfully, I will no longer be assaulted by demeaning images of women when I go to pick up a PC Magazine. (Computer magazines and scantily clad women … strategic placement?)

I have no idea who made the decision to shield our children from these graphic images, but that person is to be applauded. Color me grateful. Now we need to work on catching the “readers” who remove the shrink-wrap from the more-illicit magazines, take them down from the shelves, and proceed to sit on their haunches and rifle through them as young kids walk past. (I have witnessed this happening.) And what about the new rental section in the shoppette? That’s charming. Isn’t there supposed to be an enclosed section for those type of rentals?

Helen WhitesellKadena Air Base, Okinawa

No fun reading about Japan

I was just looking through the Korea Stripes Travel & Entertainment section of the Jan. 30 edition. Why is it that the “Festivals & Events” section on the last page only lists events and festivals on Okinawa and in Japan? I wish somebody would get on the ball and start including South Korea in this section. If that’s too much to ask, then Stripes should at least replace the word “Korea” with “Japan” in the banner.

Charles M. LacyPyongtaek City, South Korea

Waddle should blame himself

I was deeply upset by Scott Waddle’s comments in the Jan. 22 article “Sub commander describes life after Navy.” Despite his lack of situational awareness, which cost the lives of nine innocent civilians, Waddle still insists that the Navy did something wrong. He made several disparaging comments about the Navy, which, in his disrespectful opinion, “screwed this up in every manner possible.”

Waddle should have been proud to wear the same uniform as Adms. Chester W. Nimitz and William Halsey, and Sen. John McCain. Instead, he wiped his shoes on the victims and the Navy. Waddle acknowledged when he raised his right hand and swore his oath — with all of the benefits and privileges due an officer — that he would ultimately be accountable if something were to go wrong. Well, he looked out the periscope and said, “I don’t see anything.” And somehow he concludes that the Navy did something wrong.

Now Waddle writes a book and considers the possibility of a movie for his profit. Unlike the victims of his negligence, Waddle is lucky to be alive and, due in large part to the compassion of the Navy, out of jail. Still, he finds fault with the Navy’s decisions. In my opinion, the Navy made a good decision to drop this individual from its ranks.

If Waddle truly wants to put this tragedy behind him, then he can take responsibility and stop blaming the Navy.

1st Lt. Sean O’BrienTuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Brass, lend me your ears

I’m writing about the big controversy over servicemembers wearing earrings. I’m an active-duty member of the Army. I also wear earrings and will continue to wear them. I’ve been wearing earrings for almost 18 years. That’s three times as long as I’ve been in the military.

The Army preaches that everyone should be his or her own person, but you can’t do this, you can’t do that. You need permission to go here or there. You can’t wear this or you can’t wear that.

I’m a grown man. When I’m on my own time, I do what I want and wear what I want. I’ve been stopped numerous times on my own time and told to take my earrings out, which I don’t. I don’t need someone to tell me what I can or cannot wear.

All the higher-ups obviously think that wearing earrings is wrong or bad. They’re out of touch with reality, because more than 80 percent of U.S. men wear earrings or have a body piercing of some sort. It’s common in this day and age.

And what is this double standard? Women can wear earrings, but men can’t. That sounds like discrimination toward men. If one looks at the past, one sees that men have been wearing earrings or body piercing for hundreds of years, a lot longer than women have been wearing them.

The higher-ups need to either abolish this regulation or change it so that it’s equal. That would mean that no one in the military, man or woman, would be able to wear earrings or body piercings at all, on or off duty.

Benjamin L. AndersonKaiserslautern, Germany

We need a united States

This is in response to the Jan. 18 letter “Roll with the changes.” A spouse in Pennsylvania wrote about how we can make a choice in how we handle our soldiers’ deployment. The writer’s husband is in Germany for force protection with the Pennsylvania National Guard. The day I read that letter was about the third day after my husband deployed to Kuwait. I had the usual feelings of sadness and was already tired from being the sole parent of three children.

Then I read her letter, and I knew what I should be doing. At that moment I, too, decided to make a choice. I was already proud. But instead of pouting and being sad, I’ve decided to just deal with it, stand tall and be there to support other spouses going through or getting ready to go through the same thing.

I’m a Family Readiness Group leader. Even though at times it’s rough for me, I’m very glad to say our FRG is supportive and will continue to provide support when more of our soldiers deploy. I hope that more spouses can glean from that support.

That brings me to my second reason for writing — support. On numerous news channels recently we’ve heard about anti-war demonstrations. I’m completely for freedom of speech, which is why I’m able to express my opinion as well.

But I’m very tired of hearing our fellow Americans having anti-war marches and demonstrations. Do they not realize that any sane human being would love that there not be a war? Do they also not realize that we cannot let an insane dictator do whatever he pleases, no matter how destructive it is to his own country, let alone any other country?

Moreover, do they not realize how destructive these anti-war demonstrations are to their own American soldiers? The soldiers are the very ones fighting for these demonstrators’ freedoms, risking their own lives to do so. It makes my stomach churn to picture my husband in Kuwait, preparing his soldiers and himself to fight Saddam Hussein, and knowing that there are thousands of demonstrators in Washington, D.C., saying that what these soldiers are doing is wrong.

What happened to America’s patriotism after Sept. 11, 2001? We have another terrorist to deal with now. We need to do so with the support of the American people, standing firm and proud with our soldiers in Kuwait and in other regions.

Erin L. SteeleVilseck, Germany

Turkish delight?

It’s interesting that the United States is considering a $15 billion aid package for Turkey. During a recent trip to Istanbul, my son and I were the only passengers on our aircraft who had to pay $100 each in cash for visas before going through customs. Perhaps the Turkish government considers this a down payment or simply a prelude to the euphemistic Turkish bath.

Beth WagenaarHeidelberg, Germany

February 5

France, Germany ignore past

I was disturbed by the statements made by German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and French President Jacques Chirac during the 40th anniversary commemorating the signing of the Elysee Treaty. Chirac reportedly said, “Everything must be done to avoid war. Every decision belongs to the Security Council of the United Nations and to it alone.”

The impression I got is that in the future, nations shouldn’t make decisions concerning war, but rather submit to the decisions of the U.N. Security Council. Perhaps Chirac and Schroeder are willing to unquestionably submit their governments to the decisions of another governing body and begin integrating their institutions into a conforming unit. But history has shown that political submission to other powers (as at Munich in 1938) is often detrimental to the security of one’s nation.

Paradoxically, Chirac also sees Germany and France as the “center of gravity” for the future European Union. Does this mean that both countries will dictate to other Union countries to swallow the programs of the big two? Will smaller nations have to submit to the decisions made by Berlin and Paris?

How can one build a European Union without Judeo-Christian moral values? Shall only the will of the state dictate morality according to its own whim? What is disturbing is the exclusion of the American reality. Americans have been accused of “going it alone” in international decisions. Yet are European leaders guilty of some of the same faults they see in Americans?

European socialist leaders in the 1930s failed to stop Hitler at the Rhine, in Austria, in Czechoslovakia and in the rest of Europe because of their “old Europe” policy of appeasement. The result was World War II.

Former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl criticized Schroeder for “thinking and acting in nonhistoric terms” and for not taking into account the “needs of the little member nations of the European Union.” Is the German-French entente a response to the Anglo-American alliance, which appears to want to take action in order to avoid a far bigger war, perhaps nuclear, in the future?

German-French friendship is praiseworthy. Yet wasn’t the recent gala at Versailles more a political affront than a sincere gesture of two nations? Are the leaders of France and Germany sending the United States a message? Are they saying, “We have our own agenda. Namely, we are peacemakers. You are warmongers. But we’ll call you when we need you.”

But the coin may turn over one day when France or Germany are attacked by terrorists and need U.S. and British military assistance for a third time — after World War I and World War II — to help them fight their battles.

Jean-Paul PoninskiChievres, Belgium

Respect servicemembers' role

This is in response to all the people who disagree with the possible war in Iraq. My father is in the U.S. Army. Soldiers fight for the people who are against the possible war and for the freedom that they and their towns and I have. On Jan. 6 my father found out he was leaving for deployment for seven months to a year, and that he was leaving in six days.

I’d like to ask everyone, even if they don’t believe in the possible war, to support our military. These people should support the families the soldiers leave behind, the anniversaries they never spend together and the births of children they don’t witness. These soldiers fight because they believe in our country and the freedoms we have. Even those who don’t support a possible war should please support the men and women who are fighting. I think America owes it to its soldiers.

Ariel AikenWürzburg, Germany

Approach to Iraq hypocritical

This is concerning the Jan. 21 letter “No support for war” about the possible war in Iraq. All I’ve seen is negative feedback. I didn’t get to read the original letter, but all the responses upset me a great deal. I fully support the writer of “No support for war.” I agree.

As for the writer of the Jan. 29 letter “The lesson in Sept. 11,” not all of us care about Sept. 11, 2001. I lost a friend that day, but it doesn’t bother me anymore. I was lying in a hospital bed when I got the news. And even after I found out about my friend, I was still indifferent about America going to war in revenge. I don’t care about revenge.

President Bush is nothing more than a war-hungry Republican who needs to get out of office as soon as possible. Leave Iraq alone. There’s no reason to try to do what we’re doing. Darn near every country on this planet has nuclear weaponry and chemical and biological weapons. All we are doing is being hypocrites. We don’t see anything wrong with us having all this knowledge and weaponry. Why prevent anyone else? Our president cares more about other countries than he does about his own.

Melissa SabolHeidelberg, Germany

Healed, then back on the field

What a shame that people with mental illness are stigmatized rather than receiving the sympathy given when suffering from physical illnesses. Barret Robbins, an All-Pro center for the Oakland Raiders, became incapacitated the day before the recent Super Bowl. There’s been harsh and cruel treatment directed at him. Players who would rally around a teammate with other medical conditions have treated Robbins like a leper. They’ve said Robbins let them down. They want no part of him in the future, and they hope he doesn’t return to the Raiders next year.

This is a step backward. Such derogatory comments only further stigmatize mental illness. There have been reports that Robbins suffers from bipolar/manic-depressive disorder. But they’re being disregarded, and Robbins is being treated as if he were able to control what happened to him in Tijuana, Mexico, and San Diego.

I once worked with psychiatric patients at a Veterans Affairs medical center. I saw how stress and pressure can affect people with mental illness and how it can trigger symptoms of bipolar disorder. Sufferers often become disoriented, delusional and irrational. They’re unable to control their actions and become completely incapacitated or exhibit bizarre behavior.

Mental illness can be treated with medication and therapy. It’s no different than any other illness that attacks the body — or, in this case, the mind. But many people continue to have little or no sympathy for those suffering from mental illness.

Sadly, because of the lack of knowledge and understanding of mental illnesses and the stigmas associated with them, victims suffer from more than the illness. They’re also often shunned by family, co-workers, employers, friends and neighbors. They’re expected to “suck it up” and “be tough” when they’re suffering from its debilitating effects. This only makes matters worse and can inhibit recovery.

It’s a shame that Barret Robbins and others are treated this way. My heart goes out to him and his family. I hope that with rest, medication and support, he’ll be able to get healthy and return to a happy and normal life.

Unfortunately, he’ll probably never get over the disappointment he experienced by missing the most important game of his life, and his disappointment that his coach and teammates didn’t stand by him in his time of need.

The Super Bowl means a lot to many people, but it means nothing compared to a man’s life and health. Shame on the Oakland Raiders for how they’ve treated Barret Robbins. Their reaction to mental illness shows they are bigger losers than just in the Super Bowl.

Berry PatrickHeidelberg, Germany

February 6

Put security in the front seat

I’d like to respond to the Feb. 2 letter “Pressed for an explanation.” It’s not only the writer who feels this way. The writer has outlined a situation that is gravely dangerous to our military members and our entire nation. Our nation’s media appears to be interested only in getting stories published and making the almighty dollar. The security of our country and safety of our citizens is not on their list of things to do.

I congratulate the writer for having the backbone to state her position and I encourage her to keep doing so. If we could rally enough people to exercise their right to free speech and stand up for what’s right, maybe we could make some changes.

Freedom of speech and the press is a wonderful thing. But simply having that right doesn’t mean we must tell everything we know. The media have a responsibility to refrain from making public those items that would place our nation and its citizens in harm’s way. But the media simply haven’t learned how to exercise that responsibility; or worse, they choose not to care.

Nate JohnsonKaiserslautern, Germany

Child-care woes difficult to fix

In my battalion, there’s been a recent increase in pregnancies and child births. Child-care issues have complemented this as well. I’m pregnant and currently trying to find child care. Finding child care for regular hours (6 a.m. to 6 p.m.) isn’t a problem. But finding extended care for an infant is impossible. Family Child Care has no positions available for infants, and the waiting list for an opening is atrocious. A lot of single parents and dual military couples like me who have elected to remain in the military now may be forced to get out due to the lack of child care in Germany.

I realize that the decision to stay in the military was mine. I also realize that the responsibility to get child care is also mine. But I really didn’t think I’d have a problem because I was supposed to PCS to the States as soon as my baby is born. But of course now stop loss has come into effect, and child care is quite clearly an issue.

I’ve seen co-workers try every means possible and fail to find child care for extended hours. This situation is especially affecting parents of newborns and infants. These are good, hard-working soldiers who want to be in the military. If these same people were in the States, they would not have nearly as much trouble finding providers. Therefore, they wouldn’t be facing possible discharge due to a lack of resources overseas. These situations are beyond their control.

Spc. Mary MendozaDarmstadt, Germany

Learning from their dedication

At a time when our nation is calling upon its armed forces to be ready for a possible war, and when the men and women who wear the uniform are putting in extra effort and long hours, it’s remarkable to see how many of those troops are somehow finding the time and energy to pursue a college degree.

I’ve had the good fortune to teach at some of America’s best universities, but never before have I had the privilege of teaching so many dedicated soldier-students who, under the pressure of defending their country, remain committed to their individual education goals and the pursuit of academic excellence.

On many of our forward bases in the Balkans and in the Middle East, as well as at many U.S. facilities in Europe, I’ve seen these soldier-students coming off long shifts and from great distances just to take part in a college class. These are Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine forces who are proud to serve their country, who hold the highest of ideals and who are ready to meet any challenge in the field or in the classroom.

In the midst of these trying times, these men and women find ways to continue their educations in order to better themselves and their nation, either in or out of uniform. It’s such men and women, taking pride in what they do, who will keep America strong and its future secure.

Donald E. LeonUniversity of MarylandHeidelberg, Germany

Correction

I erred in my Feb. 1 letter “Others could back up Iraq.” I incorrectly stated that Gen. Tommy Franks was almost relieved of his command in the Persian Gulf War. It was Gen. Fred Franks. I apologize to Gen. Tommy Franks and Stars and Stripes readers.

James CarrethersHeidelberg, Germany

February 7

At a loss for shuttle families

My feelings about the recent event of the space shuttle are extreme sorrow. The people who died could truly be called heroes. I was reading an article from the Wall Street Journal’s Opinion Journal (www.opinionjournal.com) that my teacher printed out for us to read, and as I was reading the article, headlined “ ‘The Days of Miracle and Wonder,’” it really caught my attention.

One of the astronauts who went up in the Challenger space shuttle in 1986 was a teacher named Christa McAuliffe. It reported in the article that a little girl went up to the writer of the article, Peggy Noonan, and asked her if the teacher was OK. It really made me think about the tragedy of the recent space shuttle because those astronauts were also teachers in many ways to many people; they were also their friends, fathers, mothers and husbands.

It made me think that, after months of only being able to keep in contact through transmissions, they were finally able to come home. The excitement their families must have felt that they were on their way home, only to be faced with this tragedy, is very painful to me. I think: “That could have been someone I knew.”

It also made me think of all the families that have moms and dads in the military who give (and will give) their lives — and what others will learn from their deaths. It made me cherish time and life even more and want to let my family and teachers know how much I love and appreciate them.

The astronauts of this most recent shuttle tragedy will never be able to see their families again. Both the astronauts and their families are heroes. The shuttle astronauts and their families because both had to endure in the same death. Not all died, but a little piece of them died watching their friends and families disintegrate in the air after accomplishing a wonderful achievement. I will never forget them.

Lauren M. TaylorPupil, Yokota Middle School, Japan

Professional look paramount

This is concerning the Jan. 4 letter “Brass, lend me your ears” about men not being able to wear earrings in the Army. I’m also an active-duty male servicemember in the Army.

By enlisting in the Army, the writer accepted that he’d have rules and regulations to follow. No one forced him to sign on the dotted line. Anywhere one goes in this world there are rules or policies that may not be agreeable with everyone, but they’re put there to maintain order and discipline. As far as off-time in the military is concerned, there isn’t any. We’re soldiers 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

The writer also flagrantly admitted that he defies authority and doesn’t adhere to the regulations he agreed to follow. This may be a common thing with civilians in this day and age, but being in the Army makes us professionals. That means we need to look and act like professionals.

Women in the military have strict rules and guidelines to follow concerning earrings. They’re only allowed to wear stud earrings for formal functions. They can’t wear them with their battle dress uniforms because it takes away from the professional look. I think the writer needs to check his statistics again, because on average 1 of every 10 males and about 80 percent of women have their ears pierced.

The writer needs to follow the oath he took when he signed up with the military. He should start following the rules and regulations and help enforce them instead of going against them.

Sgt. Christopher MallardWiesbaden, Germany

Demonstrators an asset

This is in response to all the letter writers complaining about anti-war demonstrators back in the States. The writers want Stars and Stripes to stop printing letters and news items about the protesters. I say the opposite is true.

These anti-war demonstrators are a valuable asset. Our country needs these people and their demonstrations. By speaking out strongly about their ideas, these people are reminding those of us in uniform that we’re defending freedom. That includes the freedom to dissent without getting jailed for political expression. They’re showing the world that the United States is not a homogeneous juggernaut, but an amalgam of different political views, religions and races that is tolerant of others. This is exactly what we want other countries to become.

So rather than trying to stifle these demonstrations of democracy, even if they find them personally distasteful, the letter writers should hold up the pictures, articles and letters opposing military action in Iraq as excellent examples of our freedom. They should celebrate that freedom. If they don’t, they may eventually lose it. Then the fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq will have been a waste.

Capt. Bruce K. SkillinKaiserslautern, Germany

Military's commercial appeal

I’ve been hearing about commercials airing in the States that use celebrities to sway public opinion against war. I saw a small part of one with Susan Sarandon, and my mind slowly superimposed the face of Jane Fonda over hers. Then a thought occurred to me: The U.S. government could air its own public service message.

Picture an abandoned Wall Street, Middle America, rural crops, Paris and Red Square, with misty clouds rolling across the sky. A phone continually rings. A shot of the Oval Office. Nobody there. A shot of aircraft carriers moored in port. Nobody there. A shot of soldiers playing cards in their barracks. One looks over his shoulder at the ringing phone with a tear rolling down his cheek, then goes back to playing cards. Then the words come on the screen: “You told me not to answer the call to war. What are you calling for now? Make up your mind while you still can.”

Chief Warrant Officer 3 Scott CurtisGiebelstadt, Germany

Trying times with Tricare bills

While enrolled in the Tricare dental program in the States, I received great care and service. My local dentist accepted the program, and payment from United Concordia was always prompt. But since June, I’ve been stationed outside the States and have been unable to stop United Concordia from billing my pay.

To date I’ve paid more than $140 into an insurance program that I’m not using. I have twice mailed in a cancellation and once faxed it in. There’s still no record of my cancellation on file with United Concordia. The company has asked me to again submit my cancellation request in writing, and said that past payments are nonrefundable, no matter whose fault it is that my cancellation request isn’t on file.

I’ve contacted my disbursing clerk to cancel the allotment, but he is having trouble canceling his own coverage. An officer in my office has been trying for a year to cancel his to no avail.

While $140 isn’t going to break me, it’s a lot of money to our junior personnel. No one should have to pay for a service he or she doesn’t receive. I fail to understand why the military doesn’t control the starting and stopping of allotments for Tricare during inprocessing and outprocessing from overseas duty stations instead of leaving it to an outside source that is rewarded for its inefficiency. This certainly warrants involvement by the powers that be.

Kenneth O’BrienVicenza, Italy

February 8

Yet we still buy oil from Iraq

Iraqi oil exports were approved by the United Nations under the oil-for-food program for Iraq, established by Security Council Resolution 986 in April 1995, and in subsequent resolutions. According to the Energy Information Administration’s Web site (www.eia.doe.gov), Iraq contains 112 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, the second largest in the world behind Saudi Arabia, along with roughly 220 billion barrels of probable and possible resources. Iraq’s true resource potential may be far greater than this, as the country is relatively unexplored due to years of war and sanctions.

During 2001, nearly 80 percent of Basra Light liftings and more than 30 percent of Kirkuk oil went to large U.S. importers including ExxonMobil, Chevron, Citgo, BP, Marathon, Coastal, Valero, Koch and Premcor. During the first seven months of last year, the United States imported an average of 566,000 barrels per day from Iraq.

The U.S. buys more than 30 percent of the oil produced by Iraq. Iraq provides us with more than 4 percent of our total oil imports. Why do we buy oil from terrorists?

Tim EdwardsLivorno, Italy

No praise for patrol's pitch

I recently saw an American Forces Network TV commercial by the Praise Patrol, a husband-and-wife pastoral team. The wife said, “This weekend is Groundhog Day!” The husband replied that on the following Sunday he’d discuss that legend as well as another legend in the Bible about a disciple who never died.

Excuse me, but the Bible doesn’t contain legends. I’m not sure where this man studied, but he seems to be missing that the Bible is the holy word of God. Period.

There are other instances of people not dying in the Bible: Enoch in Genesis 5:21-24, and Elijah in 2 Kings 2:11-13. That people may think these are unbelievable doesn’t change that they happened. As a Christian, the pastor sets a bad example by appearing to waver on core beliefs. If he’s going to say that some things in the Bible are legends, then what things in the Bible does he believe actually happened and what things are mere legends? Maybe he doesn’t want to ruffle any feathers by saying on AFN that the Bible is fact.

Chief Warrant Officer 2 Robert WillSarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Don't ignore 'Beyond Vietnam'

Most of us know about Martin Luther King Jr.’s role as a civil rights activist and proponent of nonviolent activism. Most of us have heard or read at least parts of his “I Have a Dream” speech. But few know about Martin Luther King Jr. the radical. Nowhere is this more evident than in what is commonly referred to as his “Beyond Vietnam” speech, given April 4, 1967, at Riverside Church in New York City; King died exactly one year later by an assassin’s bullet at the Lorraine Hotel in Memphis, Tenn.

Regardless of the circumstances of King’s death, which are still a matter of some debate, there’s no doubt that King put himself in mortal danger by his open criticism of the United States, specifically for its involvement in Vietnam and in general for what he characterized as his country’s “giant triplets of racism, extreme materialism and militarism.” While terrorism today is in many ways different than the communism to which King was referring in his “Beyond Vietnam” speech, and while most would agree we have made progress as a nation in the area of civil rights, one wonders what King would say today about the United States’ “war on terrorism” and the current situation with Iraq.

We shouldn’t be surprised that Time magazine in 1967 called King’s remarks “demagogic slander,” nor should we be surprised today that Time and other major media outlets ignore what Martin Luther King Jr. really stood for. It’s also not surprising that George W. Bush’s remarks given recently at the First Baptist Church in Glenarden, Md., discuss civil rights but totally ignore King’s brave words about U.S. foreign policy.

The entire text of the “Beyond Vietnam” speech can be found at: www.stanford.edu/group/King/publications/speeches/Beyond_Vietnam.pdf. The text of George W. Bush’s remarks in Glenarden can be found at: www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030120-4.html.

Tom Van der BloemenNaples, Italy

Migrated