Letters to The Editor

by Inlander Readers


Worthless Covenants -- My wife and I had a new home built by Monogram Homes in 1999 on East 15th Street. One of the main reasons we decided to build a new home in a planned neighborhood in this location was because of covenants that would have to be followed by everyone in the neighborhood -- covenants that would protect our investment.


I believe Monogram Homes sold new homes knowing that an asphalt plant was going to be built in the neighborhood. The covenants aren't worth the paper they are written on. So much for protected investments.





Lonnie DeLeeum


Spokane, Wash





It's Not About Oil -- Let me take this point by typical point. "If we go to war with Iraq it will cause terrorism, not stop it." First of all, this argument is illogical. There is no way to know if it will create terrorism. Secondly, the argument flies in the face of 9/11. We were not at war when the terrorists flew our planes into our Trade Towers. The fact is there is evidence that terrorists will attack regardless of a war with Iraq. In Osama Bin Laden's own letter, he states, "If you fail to respond to all these conditions, then prepare for fight with the Islamic Nation."


Osama and Saddam may not be friends, but don't be fooled into thinking that they would not support each other in their cause. There is a saying in the Middle East: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."


"Attacking Iraq will drain our resources." You bet it will, but this is what these resources are for. We support our military so that it can protect our national interests.


"War with Iraq will harm civilians." Sanctions will hurt them even more. There is no doubt that innocents will be harmed. It is reasonable to assume that even more innocents will be harmed if the weapons Saddam has get into the wrong hands. Do you think someone like Osama bin Laden would think twice about nuking New York?


"We are going to war over oil." No, we are going to war to stop people from attacking our national interests. If people want to stop this war, then why don't they protest Saddam?


I understand disdain for war. I hate war myself, but I would fight to prevent more terrorism.





Tim Eberly


Coeur d'Alene, Idaho





Remember Osama -- After 9/11, our country engaged in a war on terrorism to bring Osama bin Laden and his network to justice. As a result, we sent a limited number of U.S. Special Forces into Afghanistan to capture Osama bin Laden dead or alive.


From reports that I have heard, Osama bin Laden escaped out of Afghanistan through the hills of the Tora Bora region. Fighting in this region is tough. What I do not understand is why the United States (President Bush) did not make a massive deployment of troops to Afghanistan like we are currently doing in Iraq? If we had sent 200,000 troops to Afghanistan, I cannot help but think Osama's chances for escape would have been far less likely.


I believe that President Bush really did not want to take the political risk of body bags coming home with some of our finest citizens in them. After all, there is no oil in Afghanistan and this made it not worth the risk of a real war. Iraq, on the other hand, could somehow be linked to terrorism as well as more favorable fighting conditions. A conflict would look like Bush was serious in fighting terrorism, but oil speculation and higher pump prices would line his political supporters' pockets and get him a large political war chest in 2004.


Saddam Hussein is a miserable tyrant who should be dealt with. However, it is the view of many people and obviously the U.N. that he is down on the priority list. I think President Bush is taking the easy way out and serving his own self-interest in Iraq.


I personally would support a real war on terrorism. But I have too much suspicion that this current action in Iraq is more to benefit corporate America than we everyday working Americans who always wind up paying the bill with our money and our blood.





Kolby E. Hanson


Otis Orchards, Wash.





Never Been Better -- Well, things sure aren't looking good! The economy is in the tank; the mounting federal budget deficit is going to saddle our kids with massive debt; our longtime allies, along with every other country on the planet, thinks we're warmongers; the corporations are running the country with political purchases of our leaders; the environmental laws are being trashed; CNN, CNBC and Fox think this war will be great for business and so title their 24-hour news programs "Countdown to Iraq" or "Target Iraq" to keep viewers in constant terror; and any money you had in a 401K plan will now only buy you a Big Mac (and that will only make you fatter). Other than that, things have never been better.


Of course, if you are in the upper two percent of the income range and can qualify for the riches offered by George W.'s economic plan (The Leave No Millionare Behind Program), then you don't need to be bothered by the state of the economy. That giant sucking sound you hear is the Social Security trust fund being drained.


I also wonder where the $100 billion to $1 trillion dollars for this war will come from. George fired the last guy who even tried to put a price tag on it. George W. sure does talk tough as he does his comic version of John Wayne and he wears that flight jacket with such definite pride.


He sure does want to go to war, but we need to buy a few more allies first. We'll give $26 billion to Turkey, but only a few billion to the states for Homeland Defense. Is this a great country or what?





David R. Canterbury


Spokane, Wash.





Publication date: 02/27/03