Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

NUKES: ‘Big stick’ just increasing tension

Letter by Helen L. Accra, Ruston on Jan. 3, 2011 at 10:17 am with 6 Comments »
January 5, 2011 2:15 pm

Re: “We’re safer carrying a big stick” (letter, 12-31).

Miraculously, and perhaps in answer to many of our prayers, North Korea has called for peace, acknowledging that war on the Korean Peninsula would “bring nothing but a nuclear holocaust” (TNT, 1-1). South Korea’s president sent a similar New Year’s message.

Perhaps this can be an example to all combatants and political leaders to consider the consequences of hostilities to the people on both sides. Is this too much to hope for?

Carrying bigger sticks (meaning nuclear power) will not result in more safety. Instead, nuclear buildup has resulted in increased tensions in the world.

Ill-advised wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have not made us safer. Osama bin Laden is still alive, and al-Qaida continues to flourish in Europe and the Middle East, plotting ways to attack the United States using our transportation systems. On the other hand, withdrawing from those countries may help defuse terrorist claims that the United States is at war with Islam.

Are we safer with more nuclear power? The evidence is to the contrary. Peace is essential to the health and existence of human civilization. As quoted by a member of the peace group, Fellowship of Reconciliation: “There is no way to peace. Peace is the way.”

Leave a comment Comments → 6
  1. Roncella says:

    Helen, alot of wishful thinking in your letter.

    Helen the North Koreans have been playing this game of agressive behavior, then Peaceful behavior, back and forth with the last four presidents. They return to peace talks then go right on building towards a Nuclear capability.

  2. BlaineCGarver says:

    The United State’s soil and interests have been attacked many times since WWII….why would you wish to drop your guard? Ghandi advocated that Jews not resist, and peacefully submit to Nazis…that worked out real well for them, didn’t it?

  3. northsc says:

    Helen,

    I believe the writer of the letter you wrote in response to was very clear in his position that peace is desirable and that a world without nukes would be a better world. He was merely pointing out that nukes still serve a purpose given the realities of the world at large.

    Given your attitude one must wonder if you lock your home/car doors and advocate dissolving police forces because of your absolute faith in the goodness of all mankind.

  4. whatIdo says:

    “Don’t ever think that quiescence is amenable to peace”
    Ronald M. Reierson

  5. larsman says:

    Bully at the bus stop continues to demand and take victim’s lunch money.

    My choice-learn some good self defense moves, demonstrate in a one-time harsh fashion upon said bully in the sight of other kids at the bus stop.
    Result-bully loses current income stream and chooses not to engage any other victims in the future.

    Helen’s choice-continue giving lunch money to the bully, maybe even a raise.
    Result- bully expects monthly raise and expands business model to new clients (victims).

    Kum-Bya Helen…

  6. larsman says:

    Helen- We will, in this present dispensation, continue to have war.
    Unilateral disarmament is not the answer.
    You might like to browse James 4: 1-3 (or even through v 10 for that matter)…

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0