Letters: October 5, 2009

The Taliban don't come across as religious fanatics, but more as a people who just want us out of there.
Geoff Baldwin, Portola Valley, California

The Taliban do not believe we can win; the Afghan people do not believe in their leader, Hamid Karzai, or in the police or Army. If a country's populace has no faith in the leadership, do we outsiders have a chance to influence the outcome?
Gene Ortman, Waterford, Michigan

Our presence in Afghanistan is a recruiting theme for insurgents. In light of this, the United States should pull out its troops other than those required to hunt down the remainder of Al Qaeda. We must warn the Afghans that if they want peace, they must elect a government that will not provide a sanctuary for terrorists or illegal drug crops.
Lt. Col. Jim Schmidt, U.S. Army Special Forces (ret.), Fort Collins, Colorado

What about the Taliban women? Were they not permitted to speak, or are they not part of the enemy? The Taliban men could have been coaxed into relating anecdotes about the beating of their women in public stadiums, destroying girls' schools with time bombs, blinding and disfiguring young girls with acid for seeking an education, or the amputations and executions for women engaging in simple recreational activities.
Tony Asch, Warren, New Jersey

We cannot defeat the Taliban because it is impossible for 21st-century Americans to know a people frozen in ancient times.
Lucille Gallman, Houston, Texas

Yes, the Taliban must be beaten, and I'm all for a troop buildup in Afghanistan to achieve the goal. However, I'd like for America's allies to shoulder more of the burden. Terrorism isn't strictly an American problem.
Hosea L. Martin, Chicago, Illinois

Our policy of not calling in firepower when Taliban forces are in civilian areas is a prescription for granting them permanent safe havens virtually everywhere in Afghanistan. We should accept that it is not a unified country but a collection of rival tribes, and maintain enough firepower to exert pressure to prevent things from deteriorating even further. This is not a plan for "victory"—just one for not doing foolish social work, with American blood and treasure recklessly lost.
Jeanette Roxas, Greenwood Lake, New York

'Sarkozy's Obama Complex'
French President Nicolas Sarkozy is described by Christopher Dickey as having an "Obama complex." Nothing could be further from the truth. While it is a fact that Sarkozy has a gigantic ego, and likes to be a hyperpresident who craves rewards for his multitude of coincidental policy initiatives, U.S. President Barack Obama has a similar style and ambitions. It is not surprising that on occasion the two egos clash. But Sarkozy is a visionary and populist leader and, as such, a potentially more important partner for Obama than newly reelected German Chancellor Angela Merkel or British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. One ought not to forget the ideological difference between Obama (center-left) and Sarkozy (center-right). An Obama-Sarkozy partnership is essential for an effective transatlantic alliance.
Karl H. Pagac, Villeneuve-Loubet, France

Why would any world leader nurse an "Obama complex"? How counter- productive. Are the G20 and similar get-togethers a forum for participants to flex the muscles of overinflated egos? Some heads of state still favor pompous bravado over genuine substance in tackling and addressing the issues at stake. It is, I'm afraid, a sign of the times we live in.
Werner Radtke, Paderborn, Germany

'Darwin's Rottweiler'
Here's a proposal for people of faith and people of science alike: if one side concedes that evolution is a scientific fact, will the other side stop trying to suggest that it is somehow proof that a higher being can't possibly exist? Just asking.
Shannon T. Nutt, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

When I read Richard Dawkins, I see words of zeal and devotion that remind me more of religion than science. It makes one wonder if evolutionary biology has become a type of religion for some teachers and students: fundamentalism rising up against fundamentalism. With being smart or right mattering most, the evolutionists and creationists will carry on this winless war and keep overlooking something less unholy to ponder in the fascinating exploration of life's origin and meaning.
Dan Sager, Hood River, Oregon

I am always amused at how the high priests of atheism proudly preach to the intellectually unwashed about how oblivious we are to the subtlety and complexity of the natural world even as they refuse to even consider that the Torah (Richard Dawkins's "Old Testament") may contain subtleties and complexities of its own. Dawkins may be surprised to know that, yes, there are many intelligent Jewish people who unabashedly affirm the divine nature of Jewish Scripture, knowing that there are more things in it—not to mention in heaven and earth—than are dreamt of in his philosophy.
Rabbi Avi Shafran, Agudath Israel of America, New York, New York

'Egypt's Water Games'
Ethiopia needs no one's permission to use water it needs from the rivers that flow from its territory. Referring to Egypt, your Sept. 28 article curiously uses the phrase "holds … veto power over upstream projects." In the 21st century—the age of globalization and interdependence—even the U.N. Security Council is challenged in its use of veto power. The solution for the plight of the 18 million East Africans at risk of starvation may be along the lines proposed by the U.N. Convention on International Water Courses (1997), which provides for the equitable and reasonable utilization of such rivers. This is the only guarantee that Egypt's as well as its neighbors' thirst will be quenched permanently. Any other attempt would be extremely counterproductive.
M.W.G. Ayele, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

How appalling that Egypt is essentially starving 14 million Ethiopians by barring them access to the Nile River, with 60 to 80 percent of the water having its source in Ethiopia. Egypt is the same nation that receives more than $2 billion annually from the American taxpayer, opposes many of our actions, and is an intolerant dictatorship. Better to give the money to Ethiopia to recover some of the waters of the Nile (now less than 1 percent), and feed its starving population.
Nelson Marans, Silver Spring, Maryland

Correction: In "A Return to Reality" (Sept. 28), we said that the timing of President Obama's Sept. 1 announcement on scrapping missile plans in Poland and the Czech Republic coincided with the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland. In fact, Germany invaded Poland on Sept. 1, 1939, and the Soviets invaded on Sept. 17. NEWSWEEK regrets the error.

© 2009