Iraq-U.S. confrontation

I express my disappointment with your commentary in the Sept. 5 editorial. You failed to maintain the impartial posture and penetrating consideration which most often formulate your opinions. Not to mention the fact that your reasons to "deplore Washington's military actions against Iraq" were, for the most part, based on misrepresented "opinions" of other nations (fence- sitters). You can rest assured that if Washington's actions were indeed "deplorable", the whole world would be shouting .. loud and clear.

You say that the events in Iraq are an "internal affair" as it actually happened on their own soil. Yet later in your commentary you justify your anti-American position by saying that Washington did not act quickly enough in helping the Moslems in Bosnia. Those heinous crimes actually took place on Bosnian soil, no? Was that too an "internal affair"? Where does one draw the line? We certainly cannot have it both ways.

You comment on the "pride of the Iraqi people". I imagine that the Iraqi people feel many things from enduring the wrath of their insane leader, but "pride" is not among them. They are indeed victims, suffering needlessly, at the whims of a madman.

You also stated that Clinton is looking to win votes by this military action. Considering the substantial lead he presently holds in the polls and the domestic problems which America now faces, even if he declares war on the devil himself (and I suppose Saddam Hussein is about as close as one gets to being the "devil"), Clinton obviously has more to lose than to gain.

I am reminded of a quote from Thomas Jefferson. He said, "In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." To all the "fence-sitters" of the world, James B. Conant said, "Behold the turtle. He makes progress only when he sticks his neck out." And last but not least, to the editor, "If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything." I look forward to your return to true objectivity.

PIA KALLMAN

Jakarta