To:         The Dallas Morning News
Date:      December 13, 1987
Subject: We shouldn't support the rebels against the USSR in Afghanistan
Result:   not printed due to limited space

Dear Editor,

When you think about it, speaking of Afghanistan, do we really need another Moslem state predicated on violence with people who would probably hate us if we weren't giving them money and sophisticated weaponry? It seems it would be feasible just to keep the present government and guarantee the complete freedom to practice their religion to the rebels.

I'm sure the Russians wouldn't object to this solution to close a "bleeding wound", particularly when their own leader Gorbachev himself regularly calls upon God.

Of course the militant Moslems might not like it, but that would only be on the principle that a Moslem state should not be governed by "atheists", who are actually their own countrymen with the same cultural heritage, and probably aren't atheists at all. Anyway, I don't much care to pay for the rebels' principles, as long as they are allowed to live their lives in peace, and everybody else gets to.

As for "atheistic communism" in general, I don't think it will be long before communist philosophy recognizes that there is no practical benefit to outlawing basic human needs. It only causes dissension and problems and unhappiness. I think the Soviet Union is becoming demonstrably aware of this.

It all goes to show, principles that have no logical basis or usefulness, whether religious principles or the principles of communism, can be very costly.

Thank you, John Vehon