U.S. Intervention in Haiti and Somalia

* In response to your editorial on “How to Deal With Haiti’s Thugs,” Oct. 16:

I read with interest and bemusement The Times’ sudden, uncharacteristic enthusiasm for foreign military intervention. Using your reasoning we should be dramatically increasing our military budget, not slashing it (as you have so long advocated); for to be consistent we will need to send thousands, or hundreds of thousands, of troops around the globe in order to put a stop to the madness which is to be found in even greater proportion in hundreds more places, and to a much greater degree than in Haiti.

While I am as disgusted as you are by the cowardly murders in Haiti (and Moscow, Angola, Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Syria, Iraq, Bosnia and ad nauseam), I am reminded of Lord Byron’s admonition, “Who would be free themselves, must strike the blow.” This is not to say that we should do nothing while these injustices rampage around us, but to advocate the sending of America’s young sons (and daughters) to bleed and die in their stead is not, I think, what the American people are prepared to do.

ROGER MARKLEY

Huntington Beach

* I am utterly frustrated with the editorial descriptions of oppositionists to whatever cause as “thugs,” “hooligans,” “animals,” “scum,” “terrorists” and the like, particularly in news items. It is time for the press to stop with these inflammatory adjectives.

For example, on the Haitians’ resistance to U.S. military deployment, isn’t it just as likely that the resistance stems not so much from any personal position on Jean-Bertrand Aristide as perceptions that the described humanitarian effort could ultimately culminate in a military mission much like Somalia, with U.S. military personnel killing innocent civilians in the name of restoring democracy? Or could the resistance stem from anger at the United States’ turning away of Haitian refugees? Whatever the cause of the resistance, there is definitely a need for more objective factual investigation and reporting and time to end the inflammatory name-calling.

PATRICIA A. RUSH

Inglewood

* There is a standard definition for chutzpah , but Presidents Reagan and Bush have added a new one by their joint attack on President Clinton’s policy in Somalia and Haiti.

While Reagan supported “Baby Doc” Duvalier’s murderous regime, he certified that Haiti had made progress in democracy.

When Bush sent American troops to Somalia, the U.N. begged him to disarm the sarlords--which would have been relatively easy then. He refused. The warlords were told to move their weapons out of sight; that was all. Every American life lost in Somalia since then must be charged to Bush’s account.

THEODORE FRONT

Los Angeles

* Re Haiti: Has there ever been a Republican consensus backing a democracy over dictatorial rule for any of our neighbors in the Western Hemisphere?

BOB STROH

Fillmore

* Let’s call Haiti a victory and get out before they let us dock. Clinton and the rest of his “Keystone Cops” crowd don’t need a new front!

BRYAN BRIDGES

Huntington Beach