To:         The Dallas Morning News
Date:      November 15, 1998
Subject: Iraq and sanctions against countries
Result:   not printed

Dear Editor,

Okay, so Saddam Hussein has backed down again. We've spent a billion dollars or so, again, mobilizing to bomb him and his country, and for anybody on our side or theirs who gets hurt or killed to fulfill our mission, sorry about that.

I think it's time for us to leave Saddam alone and let him do his job, and let his people who have nothing to do with anything have their lives back. We had our chance to get rid of Saddam, back there under President Bush. We had him right where we wanted him and one more step and he would have been gone, but then President Bush said no. This situation is like when you have somebody who is trying to do their job at work, but they finally have to say to their boss, "Fire me or get off of my back!" We didn't fire Saddam. We should get off his back.

Something I really don't understand is the whole inspection process. I mean, why isn't it done already? We've been over there for months. They have however many facilities that we have questions about, so you go there and see if there are any visible and conspicuous signs of outlawed activities. I imagine that the process of making chemical weapons and such must be fairly messy business, and it would be hard to hide any ongoing production. If there are no visible signs of weapons being produced - if what it appears to be is a prescription drug manufacturer or something - but you're worried that maybe they could begin or resume weapons production there, then you set up security cameras or you station somebody out there to keep an eye on things. That would sure be a lot cheaper than bombing people.

If a big part of our concern about chemical and biological weapons are ones that may have been produced in the past and are now stockpiled, Saddam had plenty of time to hide them before any inspectors ever got there. There's no way we're ever going to find any of that now without tearing up the whole country, down to the last desert-dweller's tent (no offence intended).

One concept I am really tired of with everybody is sanctions against countries that cause nobody to suffer but the innocent people of those countries. Then there's the additional problem of all the bad feelings that are caused between us and other countries who want and need to do business with the countries that we impose sanctions on. I just don't see how it is to our advantage for us to behave in such a way that most of the rest of the world perceives us as aggressive, self-serving bullies.

I don't care if it's Saddam or Fidel or who, if we initiate civil relations with them - which would take place under the watchful eyes of the whole world - it would force them to be civil to us and to be nice to everybody, and it would also be a lot easier to monitor their behavior.

Thank you, John Vehon