Letters to the Editors

WWII musings don't help in fight against terrorism

Professor Ira Chernus (The two attacks on American soil have become a shared myth, Dec. 9) sets out to debunk what he says are Pearl Harbor myths shared by many Americans, noting that such myths, having become intertwined in our minds with the events of Sept. 11, may cripple our efforts to deal with the terrorist threat.

One problem, says Chernus, is our ignorance of the historical background of Pearl Harbor. American actions, he says, were such as to provide the Japanese with a "rational motive" for the attack. All that Japan wanted, says Chernus, was to ". . . dominate its own region economically, just as the United States dominated Latin America." America had thwarted that Japanese desire, says Chernus, since 1890s.

That's nonsense. In the fall of 1941, there were serious differences between America and Japan. We demanded that the Japanese withdraw their forces from China, ending the war they began in 1937 in China proper and in 1931 in Manchuria. We had other demands, involving Japanese military actions in Indochina and elsewhere. To enforce our demands, we froze Japanese assets and cut off some of their sources of oil, scrap metal and other critical items. These were the major issues between the United States and Japan just before Pearl Harbor. To try to portray this as a quarrel over trade policy is grossly misleading. So is Chernus' effort to imply that what Japan was doing in China was the equivalent of what we were doing in Latin America.

Chernus alleges that, because we were so screwed up mentally about Pearl Harbor, we reached the mistaken conclusion that the Japanese were as bad as Nazi Germany. Certainly we were mad as hell about Pearl Harbor. But this was not the primary source of our views about Japanese evil. To cite only a few examples, we knew a lot about Japanese atrocities in China during the 1930s, including what is now called the Rape of Nanking. We learned of the horrible treatment of Allied prisoners taken in Southeast Asia. Early in 1944, the American public learned of the Death March on Bataan two years earlier. We learned a lot about the Japanese when we returned to the Philippines in 1944. In short, we had solid reasons for feeling as we did about the Japanese, and these feelings were not a matter of Pearl Harbor mythology. What Chernus calls "the Pearl Harbor myth" was really not a major factor in this part of American thinking.

Chernus alleges that "the Pearl Harbor myth tells of a final and complete victory over the enemy." The historical record shows, conclusively, that we did achieve a final and complete victory. This is not a myth, and I don't understand how this view of the war's outcome gets tangled up in Chernus' mind with alleged American mythmaking about Pearl Harbor.

As we deal with Islamic and Arabic nations today, we must do our best to understand the long and complex historical trends at play in that part of the world. We'll need all the help we can get. We won't get much help from professor Chernus, who offers a wildly inaccurate account of some of the major events of World War II.
-- Clifford J. Miller, Clearwater Beach

U.S. enemies not entitled to justice

Re: Keeping our hands clean in this war, by Robyn E. Blumner, Dec. 9.

Robyn E. Blumner's attempt at expressing knowledge and wisdom over the war against evil and terrorism is sadly unamusing and lacks any semblance of the realties of what a war is.

She says the key to victory is not just against Osama bin Laden, but in maintaining moral authority, in upholding blind and equal justice. What justice? In all the history of this country no one who would establish themselves as an enemy of this country is entitled to justice! We do not afford any element of constitutional justice to any of the evil noncitizen terrorists, at home or abroad.

She goes on to say that our fight against terrorism changes from a virtuous battle of individual liberty versus religious totalitarianism to one of technology-enhanced brute strength versus martyrdom. This is a clear display of her lack of understanding of war.

This is not a battle of individual liberty versus religious totalitarianism, it's good versus evil, right versus wrong; the evil of the Taliban has nothing to do with Islam, and Robyn Blumner and others like her need to understand this.

The Bush administration is doing just what is needed to stop this evil, and if we use our technology-enhanced brute strength to defeat it, then so be it!

In years to come, Robyn Blumner will be viewed as a fine columnist, and it is my hope she will add more understanding of American history and of our constitutional laws.
-- James W. Coakley, New Port Richey

Antiwar debate is part of democracy

Re: War doubters eat their words, by H.D.S. Greenway, Dec. 6.

This column was actually a lot less angry than the title seems to imply. A lot of us were surprised by the turn of events. As soon as the Taliban went on the run, I realized that my worst fears, of massive civilian casualties, were not happening. That was a turning point for me. I have seen a lot of discredit given to the antiwar opinion, but without it we would have no debate and no democracy.

As a veteran, I want the best for my country, of course, so I am continuing to have serious doubts about the idea of an expanded war into Iraq. Personally, I want us to engage in forceful rebuilding of the economic infrastructure in Afghanistan, and I believe that a more progressive political approach to this situation is needed, including diplomacy, financial means and coalition building.

The U.S. military is commanded by a civilian government, for restraint and democracy. Ironically, the politicians in recent history with the least hawkish appetites have been combat military veterans. Maybe we learned that the taste of war without discretion is no victory.

The better part of valor is to have come back later, eating words of dissent while celebrating a great victory. Many of us on the liberal wing are military veterans and want nothing less than the best outcome of events for the country. We may differ in our opinions on priorities, but we have to be impressed by the quality of the troops we have seen in service over there. The morale and the steadiness are gratifying.
-- James Willingham, St. Petersburg

Justice leads to peace

Hold fast sisters and brothers, hold fast.

We who are antiwar types are accused by many people, including Debra J. Saunders in her recent column Depraved minds think alike (Nov. 26), as "willing to paper over the bloody plans of bin Laden, so hungry are (we) to make America the world's villain."

I don't think I have a depraved mind because I hold to the following truths:

War is against the poor and creates major problems, not solutions.

War fosters racism and classism.

War is about punishment, not justice.

War impoverishes everyone, if not economically, then mentally and spiritually.

War only advances the interests of corporations and the wealthy and keeps us divided by focusing on scapegoats.

War stifles the real democracy of the people who should hold the ruling power with equality of rights, opportunity and treatment of all people in the same way.

Without justice there will be no peace.
-- Dwight Lawton, St. Petersburg

Bush can't hide behind this war

The George W. Bush tax cuts and his potshots at Social Security are coming home to roost. They are both bad ideas, and let it be known that there were many voices telling him so during his heady days as dubious victor in the presidential campaign of 2000.

The huge budget surpluses the president inherited on Jan. 20 are gone. It is dangerous to make government forecasts based on a rosy view of the future. Bush, of course, covered his rear by declaring that the economic slowdown was instituted by the previous administration. Even before Osama bin Laden came along to divert our attention away from domestic problems, the Bush tax cuts were pinching national, state and local budgets. Among other things, the cuts favored the wealthy but did rather little for the other 98 percent of us.

We now know that we will all be a bit poorer. There is a bad mix out there of bad fiscal (tax) management and extraordinary wartime spending. The president cannot hide behind the Afghanistan debacle to cover his flank over the national deficit.
Edward Rapp, Inverness

A new perspective

Re: The Veil, Dec. 9.

I found the article by Gelareh Asayesh very timely, enlightening and even fascinating from a cultural standpoint. It opened up a whole new perspective on Muslim culture for me, while providing an absorbing, thoughtful, human and personal dimension as well.

The remarkable content and elegance of the writing itself combined to provide an extraordinary reading experience for me as a retired professor of literature and rhetoric (or writing), and I thank the writer.
-- Robert Coffeen, St. Petersburg

An insult to Afghanistan

Re: Tampa Bayistan.

When I saw the front page of the Dec. 17 Floridian, I couldn't finish my breakfast.

So the New Yorker did it . . . you had to do it?

Don't you realize that you are insulting a sovereign nation -- Afghanistan? Take off on Osama bin Laden if you will, but not a nation. We have enough enemies in that part of the world.

Every nation deserves respect, regardless of what individuals may do. Would you want another country to ridicule America just because some of our citizens are criminals?

That action was boorish. Shame!
-- Bill Devlin, Spring Hill

A sideshow in poor taste

Re: Tampa Bayistan.

Adding the endings or beginnings to words -- istan, abar, awar, abad, pushtan and the like -- to places in the Tampa Bay area wasn't funny. It wasn't any funnier in New York, and I liken it to the problem St. Petersburg's Mack Vines has with his "orangutan."

I plain found it in very poor taste for a newspaper of your quality to even consider such a sideshow.
-- A. H. Williams, St. Petersburg

Thanks for the mapistan

Re: Tampa Bayistan.

In a world full of woe, what a delightful piece. Thank you Sarah Boxer, Maria Kalman and Rick Meyerowitz. And as soon as the tears of laugher subside, I'll try to figure out all the meanings.
-- Nina Flanders, Clearwater

Something missing

Re: Tampa Bayistan.

Certainly you didn't intentionally leave out the largest, most important neighborhood of all, did you? I'm referring, of course, to TrailerParkistan.
-- Bob Austin, Palm Harbor

Share your opinions

We invite readers to write to us. Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731.

They can be sent by e-mail to letters@sptimes.com or by fax to 893-8675.

They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Please include a handwritten signature when possible.

Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length.

© 2006 • All Rights Reserved • Tampa Bay Times
490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright