Iraq Bombing

Re “Civilians Bore Brunt of Attacks, Senior Iraqi Says,” Dec. 22: If I have it right, in order to make the world a safer place and keep Saddam Hussein from using “weapons of mass destruction,” President Clinton launched hundreds of our weapons of mass destruction (cruise missiles), killing mostly Iraqi civilians. Am I missing something?

CHUCK RAMSEY

Burbank

*

“Officials Say Future Strategy Relies on Force, Not Inspections” (Dec. 18) and other pieces in your paper suggest that the U.S. Iraq strategy now is to abandon inspections in favor of harassing Iraq by varying military and economic methods to cause the downfall of Hussein. The ultimate success of this new approach is problematical.

Like the president, despite the havoc that his actions may wreak on his nation, Hussein will never resign. We can solve our problem by impeachment, but probably only life termination will rid the world of the Iraqi menace.

WILLIAM H. RUDDY

Rancho Palos Verdes

*

Questionable timing aside, I was appalled to see the U.S. resorting again to bombing a populous city where many more civilians will die than anyone associated with Hussein. The people of Iraq already suffer under Hussein’s rule of terror, compounded by international sanctions, which together destroy civilian life. U.S. policy should focus on depriving Hussein of the ability to deliver chemical weapons and take a lead role in international efforts to stop the production and trade of chemical weapons.

Bombing the capital will not destroy Hussein, but will mobilize Arab publics against America. They rightfully see an injustice in bombing civilians when Hussein and his cronies are most likely safely underground.

JEANNIE SOWERS

Los Angeles