In response to David Johnson’s “Making it acceptable,” I feel that I must point out certain things that will help you see things in a different perspective.

First, there is a major distinction between President Roosevelt’s decision to retaliate against Japan and those of President Bush’s. We were attacked at Pearl Harbor by a sovereign nation, which is an act of war. On Sept. 11, 2001, we were attacked by a non-governmental organization, which has no tangible national identity. Plus our invasion of Iraq was based on the theory of pre-emption, not retaliation.

Second, France was not the only nation to have close relations with Iraq during the Saddam Hussein era. In fact, Hussein’s rise to power was in part, due to our friends in the CIA, who provided both monetary assistance and training for our beloved dictator.

Now, if you remember, we were the ones who sold the chemical and biological weapons to Iraq in the first place, and during the Iraq-Iran war, Washington basically turned a blind eye when Iraq used the very chemical weapons we provided against the Iranians and Kurdish rebels.

Our defense secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, arrived in Baghdad and shook hands with Hussein with full knowledge of their use (www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/

NSAEBB82/).

In the next to last point, when you condemn “the United Nations as a useless forum for representatives of dictatorship,” I agree. But do you condemn the tyrants who we support or have supported?

I suggest you do some research into how General Pinochet rose to power on Sept. 11th, 1973 – how the White House approved measures to send suspected terrorists to foreign states who condone torture as a form of interrogation.

I do agree with you on one thing: We should be steadfast in our beliefs. I like the idea of moral high ground, but perhaps we should practice what we preach?

Xin “Ted” Tian

senior in FAA