![]() Saturday, Feb 01, 2003 |
| Opinion | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Opinion
-
Letters to the Editor
Sir, The U.S. President, George Bush, must be disappointed that he did not get the `evidence' to start a war campaign against Iraq. The U.N. arms inspectors, despite their painstaking search, have come out with less than any incriminating evidence of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. The U.S. and the U.K. stand isolated and even their European allies such as France and Germany have come out strongly against any armed intervention. Ours has been a muted opposition to the designs of the U.S. against Iraq. It is time we mobilised world opinion against any unilateral intervention by the U.S. without the U.N.'s sanction. The only superpower is acting like a super bully and dictating terms to those who do not toe its line.
D.B.N. Murthy,
Sir, Is the United States the only nation to decide on a regime change in Iraq? Should not the views of the other nations, as represented through the U.N., as also the people of Iraq, have any place in it? The U.S. has already taken the stand that it will attack Iraq, come hell or high water. Such arrogance on its part will have a devastating effect on West Asia and the rest of the world. Needless to say, the economic consequences will ruin the global economy.
V.B.N. Ram,
Sir, The U.S.' hypocricy and arrogance, in the face of overwhelming global opinion against invading Iraq, needs condemnation irrespective of the political/geographic axes that are emerging. Washington always talks as if it is the sole arbiter of human welfare. It reminds one of the parable where the lamb had to be eaten by the wolf anyway, whether it was drinking downstream or upstream. While the U.S. advises India and Pakistan to settle the Kashmir issue through negotiations, it settles its own conflicts through brutal force.
Priya Rao,
Sir, Lord Robertson's resignation from NATO has gone largely unremarked. Yet, it should evoke interest given the context and timing. If it was, indeed, an act of contrition for NATO's atrocities in Yugoslavia, particularly the manner of its promised rebuilding, he is to be congratulated for rediscovering his conscience.
S. Suchindranath Aiyer,
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|