Bombing of U.S. Ship and Mideast Unrest

* The loss of 17 Americans in the Middle East as a result of the terrorist bomb should be unacceptable to the American public (“Death Toll From Blast Probably 17, Pentagon Says,” Oct. 14). The conflict in the Middle East is over 1,000 years old. It is so old, in fact, that many of the current participants cannot clearly identify the specific reason to hate an individual Israeli or Arab. The U.S. faces an impossible task as we attempt to mediate or bring peace to this region.

Better the U.S. attempt to bring peace to Los Angeles, Boston, New York and Detroit. Nothing in the Middle East is worth the loss of a single American soldier, sailor or Marine. My suggestion is that we pull out, allow the combatants to solve their own problems or, absent that, to kill each other.

MICHAEL MILLS

Long Beach

*

I hope the person or group that is found to have destroyed the ship gets the most severe punishment that the U.S. can give. Families have lost their loved ones due to terrorists, and the U.S. should show not only to the people involved in the bombings but to the rest of the world the consequences, by a show of retaliation that would get people to think twice about these terrorist acts.

EDWARD CADIZ

Northridge

*

Re “Skilled Terrorists, Financing Believed Behind Ship Blast,” Oct. 14: The Cole was a target of opportunity but need not have gone into “harm’s way.”

Why were there U.S. casualties in Somalia and Yemen but not in Yugoslavia? While not a tactical genius, the reasons seem obvious to me. Sadly, the Navy and Army fatalities were due to command authority decisions that led to a lack of logistic/armored support--no tanker and no tanks. But the major reason was that our destroyers and helicopters conduct operations below “angels’ fifteen” (15,000 feet), oft where even angels fear to tread. RIP shipmates.

LARRY M. COLLINS

Lt. Col., USMC (Ret.)

Laguna Woods

*

As a former U.S. Navy medical officer, to me this act of terrorism against the Cole exemplifies our new enemy for the 21st century. Not only do we need personnel detection devices for our troops against biological, chemical and now explosive warfare, but we need to have these devices for our other assets as well, including our ships, submarines, aircraft and installations. Our enemy is no longer “over there,” but they are now among us, and we must have the scientific community, civilian and military, work together to get these detection devices working for our military.

Our country needs to “look outside the box” regarding these terrorist acts, and it is certain that we need these alternative voices heard to protect our most precious military asset, our people.

CRAIG MICHAEL UHL MD

Monarch Beach

*

Thank you, Robin Wright (Opinion, Oct. 15), for giving the wider perspective and warning us of the possible consequences of the current Arab unrest, stoked by the long-standing U.S. policy of supporting the brutal Israeli occupation of Palestine. Our policy of identifying U.S. interests with Israel’s is unraveling, and it is frustrating to me as a U.S. voter that three weeks before a presidential election, our two major-party candidates offer me no option to reject our country’s disproportionate, unwise and unjust support of Israel. I am totally unwilling to sacrifice American lives and prosperity for the sake of a foreign country, Israel.

THOMAS MILO SOMERS

Loma Linda

*

Israeli apologist Howard Teicher (Opinion, Oct. 15) laments that American options in the Middle East conflict are limited, but he omits the one response that might be the most effective in terminating regional violence. Why not a truly balanced U.S. policy that recognizes the legitimate needs and aspirations of the Palestinians rather than only stressing the Israeli perspective and a policy that recognizes how American support for Israel is a contributing factor in the tragic violence infecting both sides?

BRICE HARRIS

Professor of Middle East

History, Occidental College

Eagle Rock

*

For those fond of “bottom line” and “in a nutshell” political statements, one only needs to zero in on the quote in Teicher’s article from Hassan Nasrallah, leader of Hezbollah: “The weak point of the Israelis is their love of life. . . . We love martyrdom.” This is a clear choice of religious fanaticism over any hope of peace. How can any sane person choose the Palestinian position in the long run?

GAIL SCHER

Encino

*

As much as I hate to say it, it’s time for the U.S. to say what may be to some politically incorrect. It’s time for Yasser Arafat to go. Not that we have a vote or anything. But a national consensus, even a sizable plurality, saying that we don’t have the life span of the galaxy to wait for peace is a good place to start.

When two Israeli soldiers were taken hostage in Lebanon, he said nothing. When the lost soldiers were butchered, he said nothing. This is not the type of man we can deal with any longer. So, Mr. Arafat, your 15 years of fame are up!

MICHAEL SADLER

Studio City

*

Those who condemn Israel so quickly for the treatment of the Palestinians should walk in the shoes of an Israeli. If the American Indians started an intifada, how would we respond? If they threw rocks and there was occasionally gunfire, what would our response be? If an American politician could not go to a public facility in our capital without causing a riot, what would you say? If our servicemen were kidnapped, killed and mutilated, would we just stand by? If they advocated throwing the American government and its “settlers” back into the sea, would our response be any different?

GENE SCHRIER

Rolling Hills Estates