The fact that the first response to “John Locke” was Lost and not Second Treatise on Civil Government or An Essay Concerning Human Understanding really shouldn’t surprise me nearly as much as it does. Minwee

Unfortunately, sir, the Bush regime does not recognize the proper definition of the term terrorist. If you will examine the list of known “terrorist” organizations they released, you will see quite a few political groups that have never been involved in acts of terror, nor advocated them.

Furthermore, your suggestion that America is right to attack Iraq is ludicrous. There are only two types of people dying in Iraq: children who die because we have imposed harsh restrictions on the nation of Iraq, and criminals who die for violating the laws of Iraq. How is this any different from America? Where, in the month of March, nearly 300 men have been put to death in Texas alone. The primary difference, you might say, is that some of those criminals in Iraq are merely political dissidents who oppose the Iraqi regime.

This thinking is flawed in two regards. First, America itself has begun to jail political dissidents as part of their war on terrorism. I can think of no better example than of the three men who were arrested for donating money to help Iraqi citizens. Members of our government have repeatedly claimed that financial contributions are protected as political speech, and yet the same rights have been denied to critics of our government. We jail dissidents while Iraq kills them. Obviously, we are morally superior to Iraq, no? Obviously he’s a horrible despot who slaughters his citizens by the hundreds. Yet, from the perspective of nations like France or Britain, we are the morally depraved for we kill our common criminals. By the hundreds, we kill them. Should we expect the British or French to wage war against America to stop us from immorally killing our own citizens?

Of course, you may counter by reminding us of the Kurds, whom Saddam willfully exterminated. However, America has comitted a similar atrocity against its own people. You may suggest that that was long ago, and that it no longer matters; that we no longer butcher our citizens. This is true, but only because we instead murder the citizens of other nations. How can we claim, then, to be any better?

Despite your concerns about the loss of our civil liberties, you nonetheless advocate war with Iraq. I promise you that, once Iraq has been bombed and Saddam killed/deposed, that the loss of our liberties will continue, but at an increased rate, for the invasion of Iraq would further strengthen the resolve of the many anti-American rebels who remain in this world.

Another interesting thought: what would Uncle Sam say if Saddam is defenestrated and a democratically elected Iraqui government starts a nuclear program?