Mail Call

Realities of a Regime's Deadly Ambitions
Readers commenting on our Oct. 23 cover story about how North Korea got its nuclear technology were disturbed on many levels. Several said President Bush's diplomatic strategy has been inept. "If only Bush and his team had made an effort to have bilateral talks with Kim Jong Il like Bill Clinton did, he would have discovered the North Koreans are crying for help," one wrote. Others were cynical about the administration's motives. "The irony is that Bush's suspicions of Iraqi WMD proved false whereas apparently North Korea has WMD. North Korea, though, has no oil reserves," one noted. But another said Bush shouldn't be faulted for this reluctance to deal with Pyongyang. "Of course Bush thinks poorly of Kim. After all, Kim has allowed great numbers of his people to starve to death, kidnapped citizens of other countries and pursued a policy of obtaining nuclear weapons no matter what the cost to his country."

North Korea Goes Nuclear
Kim Jong Il is a power-hungrydespot suffering from the worst kind of Napoleon complex ("'We Are a Nuclear Power'," Oct. 23). Although some reasons North Korea has for wanting to be a global or nuclear power are rooted in political aversion to the United States, it's simplistic to imagine that Kim's decisions are in response to President George W. Bush's calling him a "pygmy" and a "spoiled child." Kim is trying to prove to the world that his isolated country is not as lamentable as he has created it to be. Any nuclear capability is alarming in the hands of this unstable man who is lusting to prove himself.
Alejandra Gutierrez
Santa Ana, Calif.

Why doesn't the Bush Administration talk directly to North Korea? Kofi Annan, American commentators and important Republicans have called for these contacts at the highest level. It is understood that our Asian partners in the moribund Six-Party Talks on North Korea have urged us to use the direct-diplomacy option. Why do we resist this track? Diplomacy doesn't have to guarantee our winning in advance to be useful, given its chance to resolve or improve situations.
Al Edgell
Kent, Ohio

You make only a brief mention of the "breakdown of the [Clinton] Agreed Framework in 2002" followed by a statement that the "Bush administration discarded it as a flawed Clinton-era policy." No details are provided about how and why the naive Agreed Framework failed, nor of the ill-fated trust by the Clinton administration. And the authors of the article seem eager to bash Bush for the flawed Clinton-era policy rather than place the blame where it belongs.
Hugh Scott
Belvedere, Calif.

Kim Gye Gwan, North Korean Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs, is quoted as saying, "We are not boys. We are a nuclear power." Nuclear power does not earn you respect, and respect is exactly what North Korea seeks. Kim Jong Il is leading his country into a no-win situation.
Conor Mayers
Norwell, Mass.

Fareed Zakaria's "Let Them Eat Carrots" (Oct. 23) is a most sensible analysis of the situation in North Korea. I've taught university in Korea for 10 years, and I think Zakaria shows that the U.N. sanctions pressed for by the United States are not an end but only a temporary nuisance to North Korea. Britain and the United States will normalize relations with North Korea when it gives up its WMD, but Kim Jong Il will no doubt demand that U.S. troops be removed from the South and that the United States sign a peace treaty. He'll also ask for as much aid as he can get. The United States is dedicated to a six-party solution and must get the approval of the other four nations involved, but they won't object to peace on the peninsula or the removal of the U.S. military if they believe the peace is for real. To accomplish that, a formal end to the Korean War must be signed with the United Nations, as must a peace treaty between North and South Korea that is guaranteed by the other four nations. Most important, there must be substantial, verifiable disarmament of both countries. While certainly not easy, this is possible and necessary. Only then can North Korea be a friend to the world.
Wilson E. Strand
Centerville, S.D.

Gambling With Prohibition
I believe George Will missed the point in comparing the recent Internet-gambling ban with the repealed prohibition of alcohol ("Prohibition II: Good Grief," the last word, Oct. 23). This new bill never had anything to do with the morality of gambling. It does nothing about casino gambling and specifically exempts Internet gambling on horse races and state lotteries. To be analogous, the original prohibition would have had to exempt drinking in bars and restaurants but ban drinking at home. It would also have had to be sneakily tucked into another, "must pass" piece of legislation at the last minute so there could be no debate on the issue. Any time someone like Bill Frist can pass legislation that takes away a right of 12 million Americans with little debate, something is wrong with the system. As a Christian and an American, I find that the way this bill was passed is a greater outrage than gambling itself.
Ron Lavery
Orland Park, Ill.

George Will's column would be better titled "Prohibition III." The second is our nation's ongoing prohibition of drugs. Just as the prohibition of the 1920s failed to curb alcohol abuse but caused the growth of organized crime, so our ban on drugs has not resulted in a noticeable reduction in drug use but has filled our prisons with low-level dealers, corrupted our police and rendered our urban streets deadly as the drug-financed gangs fight for turf. And, ironically, our uncontrolled demand for heroin is financing the Taliban. We need to decriminalize drug use, except for sales to those under 21, which should be subject to draconian penalties.
David C. Harrison
Philadelphia, Pa.

I appreciated George Will's commentary about the recent ban on Internet gambling. However, this is not Prohibition II but Prohibition III. The second is the continuing prohibition on marijuana in the United States. Truly, for more than the first half of U.S. history, marijuana was as American as apple pie. Some of our Founding Fathers grew hemp, and the hemp plant also served as a bedrock of the U.S. economy, was considered legal tender in many states, was subsidized by the federal government and could be used to pay taxes. But unlike that of alcohol, the prohibition of marijuana still hasn't been repealed.
Jonathan Mermis-Cava
Davis, Calif.

Tough on the Home Front, Too
One of the contrasts between military families now and those during WWII is that we had no e-mail, no telephone messages, no two-week R&R. We didn't know where our husbands, brothers or fathers were, nor how long their tours would last. We lived with gasoline, meat and sugar rationing. But we were proud--we knew the danger to the world if the enemy was victorious. I know this war is different. I currently have a son and grandson in Afghanistan. My husband was in WWII and Korea. The son who is now in Afghanistan was also in Vietnam. I know what military life is like, and I am troubled by what I see as whining by the families of troops overseas. It certainly doesn't help morale.
Dorothy Dodson
Edwardsville, Ill.

Mistakes and a Student's Murder
As the mother of a 2003 University of Vermont graduate, I was troubled by parts of your Oct. 23 article "Remembering Michelle." You wrote that Michelle Gardner-Quinn's "only mistake, it seems, was being in the wrong place at the wrong time." She was doing what thousands of students before her have done and continue to do--socializing with friends. The criminal was the one in the "wrong place at the wrong time," doing wrong. Let's put the blame where it belongs, on the criminal, not on the victim.
Shirlee L. Smith
Hampden, Maine

Your story about the murder of Vermont college student Michelle Gardner-Quinn states that her "only mistake, it seems, was being in the wrong place at the wrong time." Well, no. She made several mistakes. She was on the street at 2:30 a.m. with an older man she'd probably just met. She used his cell phone. Bad move. Her biggest mistake was being alone and intoxicated in the bar district. It may not be politically correct to remind young women of this, but alcohol impairs your judgment. And there's also a lesson here for young men. I am sure the two "pals" mentioned in your story regret leaving her at 2 a.m. It isn't necessary to go back to the days of chivalry or male chauvinism, but friends shouldn't let friends walk around drunk, either.
Bruce S. Schwartz
Cherry Hill, N.J.

What Voters Value
I want to thank Jonathan Alter for his take on the "values" voter ("The Myth of the 'Values' Voter," Oct. 23). I find it disturbing that the mainstream media have adopted this term to refer to conservative evangelical-Christian voters. The subtext of the term suggests that liberals like me have no values, and definitely have none in common with someone who attends a megachurch and votes Republican. For the record, I value peace, security, minimal interference from government, a thoughtful foreign policy that keeps me safe, a healthy natural environment and the Constitution with the freedoms and protections it grants me. Wow, how out of the mainstream am I? I hope our common American craving for community will reignite a genuine conversation across the political spectrum. Perhaps America needs to go through this era of divisiveness in order to appreciate open dialogue.
Carl Coates
Chicago, Ill.

After reading Jonathan Alter's essay, I get the feeling that he would love nothing more than for religious conservatives to sit out the 2006 elections and hand the reins over to secular progressives like him. He states that, with the exception of defeating federal embryonic-stem-cell funding, the "traditional values agenda ... remains unfulfilled." I will concede that it is partially unfulfilled, but under a Nancy Pelosi-led House, it would be totally unfulfilled. Alter also forgets two of the most important advances in the traditional-values agenda--the seating of Supreme Court Justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito. They are inclined to let traditionalists and secularists do political battle on the social agenda (e.g., abortion, marriage policy) where they should--at the ballot box, not the courthouse.
Robert J. Kubick Jr.
Stow, Ohio

Corrections
We erred in "A Secret Life" (Oct. 16) by reporting that a St. Petersburg Times editor said that the newspaper received inappropriate e-mails sent by Mark Foley from a source in Congressman Rodney Alexander's office. In fact, the newspaper confirmed the e-mails with Alexander's office, but received the messages from elsewhere.

In "Inside the Hero Factory" (Oct. 23), we said the flag raising at Iwo Jima was conducted by six soldiers, when in fact the flag was hoisted by five Marines and a Navy corpsman. Furthermore, President Bush's " 'Mission Accomplished' strut" was on an aircraft carrier, not a battleship. NEWSWEEK regrets the errors.