Do right by Iraq

Re “Iraq not under ‘occupation,’ U.S. says,” March 30

After three years of trying without success to train hundreds of thousands of Iraqis to defend their country, I can only conclude that theocracy trumps democracy. The trainees’ commitment to their particular Islamic sect is stronger than their commitment to democracy. And with the king of Saudi Arabia now accusing us of being “illegitimate” foreign occupiers of Iraq, shouldn’t President Bush get the message and let them solve this on their own?

SAUL GOLDFARB

Oak Park, Calif.

*

Re “Endgame on Iraq,” editorial, March 29

In your argument against the congressional timelines being set for a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, you agree with Bush when he states: “It makes no sense for politicians in Washington, D.C., to be dictating arbitrary timelines for our military commanders in a war zone 6,000 miles away.”

If you consider that statement valid because of the distance between the war zone and Washington, what account do you take of the distance between this administration and reality? One could well argue that distance is an expanse that exceeds mere miles.

STEVE KANG

Pasadena

*

We must have the courage to do what is right. And the right thing is to get out of Iraq in the time specified by Congress. The president is incapable of getting this done. Through Congress, the American people finally have a voice.

JOSEPH R. MORENO

Santa Monica

*

I fail to see the difference between “a meaningful threat to cut off funding for combat by a specific date” and withdrawal of troops by a specific date. It is, if anything, a difference without a distinction or a distinction without a difference. Indeed, you fail to define “a meaningful threat.”

Furthermore, our moral obligation may have existed for a period of time after our ill-started invasion of Iraq, but surely it is disingenuous to persist in such a claim when it is Iraqis versus themselves and no longer us against them.

MERLE H. HORWITZ

Los Angeles

*

It is hypocritical for Bush to accuse Congress of trying to “restrict commanders on the ground” by establishing a timeline for troop withdrawal, when a central reason for the war’s failure has always been the administration’s initial restriction on the number of troops it allotted to the 2003 invasion.

WILLIAM LORTON

Los Angeles

*

When the commander in chief is leading this country over a cliff, Congress is the only legal institution that can divert us from this catastrophe. Refusing to provide the fuel to drive our nation over that cliff is precisely what this Congress is and should be doing.

GEORGE MAGIT

Northridge