Madam, - In his opinion column of August 14th, Charles Krauthammer castigates the policies of the US Democratic Party since the 1960s and by contrast appears to regard any period of Republican reign as an unblemished success. This simplistic nonsense flies in the face of all reality, especially the regrettable record of the current Republican administration.
I believe history will judge the period from 2001 until the end of the Bush Presidency in 2008 as a dark time in American history, a time when, as a result of the so-called "war on terror", established legal precepts and conventions were jettisoned for short-term expediency. It may even prelude something even worse. Krauthammer, like many others, calls this a "war on Islamic radicalism", yet posits no reasons as to why these radicals are perpetrating such horrendous acts upon themselves and others. Predictably dismissing opponents of Republican hawkish, neo-conservative foreign policy as "anti-war types", he rejects the premise of Iraq as another Vietnam (he is partly correct) yet proceeds with his one-sided argument on the basis of the comparison which he has already rejected.
We have witnessed layers of hypocrisy and lies since a decision was made - itself on a tissue of lies and subterfuge - to invade Iraq in 2002. Krauthammer rounds on Democrat Ned Lamont for the "risible" view that it was time "to fix George Bush's failed foreign policy" and the idea of using negotiations as an alternative to the slaughter and continuing nightmare in the Middle East.
The answer, according to Krauthammer and his ilk, seems to be to continue trying to bomb people into submission, condemning them as enemies and terrorists, while dealing with the repercussions, when they come.This approach of crushing and dehumanising the enemy, thereby perpetuating an interminable cycle of violence and subsequent counter-violence (terrorism), is futile and non-productive.
The main problem with the so-called "war on terror" is that it seeks to destroy an ideology, admittedly a dangerously extreme one, by the bombing of people in their tens of thousands. Not only will this never work, but it will only further exacerbate the violence as Muslims around the world, stoked up by the indoctrination of radicals and extreme practitioners of their creed, become enraged at seeing their brothers and sisters slaughtered in Iraq and tortured in places like Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib.
Anyone with a scintilla of reason and impartiality can see that Bush is a busted flush and the coalition forces' manoeuvrings in Iraq have been a failure. In his recent book The End of Iraq: How American Incompetence Created a War Without End, academic, former American ambassador and senator Peter W. Galbraith outlines succinctly the nature of Bush's failure when he states: "The Iraq war has failed to serve a single major US foreign policy objective. It has not made the US safer; it has not advanced the war on terror; it has not made Iraq a stable state; it has not spread democracy to the Middle East; and it has not enhanced US access to oil."
History has shown that, in the end, conflicts can only be solved on a deep and lasting basis when dialogue recommences and mutual respect is manifest. Sadly, this seems far off at the moment as long as Krauthammer's favoured Republicans persist with their heavy handed, unilateral and arrogantly dictatorial tactics. - Yours, etc,
DAVID MARLBOROUGH, Kenilworth Park, Dublin 6W.