Letters to the Editor
-
we would like -
to join this conversation but it is so damn confusing.
We try to learn from history and don't believe it is possible to throw WW1 or WW2 or the Irak war in the same pot. We don't know what to make of America as the "World Police". Some members of our family wouldn't have survived, if America wouldn't have fought the Nazis but we never thought that this
"part of history" could be used as reverence to start the
Irak war. We were in Italy at "shock and awe" and the Italian people took to the streets, while their government supported Bush. We supported America but not Bush and had to take the consequences in America for our stand at a time when it was not very popular. We think it's only fair if Mrs. Slaughter now takes the consequences too.
We think you should not called being "progressive" or "liberal" if you promote reactionary ideas -
You should not think, talking about war is talking about peace - you should not compare "Obamahope" to "Bushhope" -
and we prefer Mahler to Wagner but don't like it when music
is used as a propaganda tool.
We understand that the true reason for the Irak war might be, that America wants to secure the oil resources for America but that would imply that Bush is some kind of strategic thinker. But we sudpect he is a very confused man and he does what a lot of Americans do: He only thinks about the immediate - and not the ultimate consequences. He might be even more confused as we are -and as Joan - and as a lot of the writers over there at "war room". And that's why we really would like to join the party here - If there is room for some more simple and not quite so "poetic" thoughts?