War in Iraq, past and future

Re “Iraq conflict is a battle for identity,” April 16

The Times’ piece shines a clear light on key underpinnings of the Iraqi civil conflict -- including the British involvement in the original installment of minority Sunni governance. However, most Americans’ understanding of world events is packaged by Bush administration war horses. With great journalism like this, we can better understand the basis of the blooming Shiite/Persian Iraqi culture. Knowledge like this can help us resist President Bush’s calculated generalizations of Iranian “interference” in Iraq.

GEOFF SHAWCROSS

Long Beach

*

Re “Troop buildup timing uncertain,” April 14

Bush’s surge in Iraq is hardly more than a stumbling lurch sideways. Why are we not getting serious about Iraq? We need to institute the draft, build a military force of 100,000, 500,000, as many as it takes to win. Right now we cannot recruit enough qualified people, even though the military has admittedly lowered its standards. Stripping many National Guard units from their respective states may prove to be a very unwise policy in the event of a significant natural disaster in those states. Continuing to extend their service in Iraq is cruel. We need to either get serious or get out. Or are the Republicans waiting for the Democrats to win the next election so they can accuse the Democrats of causing the war and not pursuing it effectively?

R.C. RICHARDS

Corona

*

Re “No takers yet for war czar duty,” April 11

The current administration doesn’t need a war czar. It needs a peace czar.

JEANNE S. EDWARDS

La Canada-Flintridge