Re "Iraq Studies 'Bad and Unjust' U.N. Resolution," Nov. 10: Why was Saddam Hussein given seven days to decide if he intends to comply with the U.N. resolution? As I have come to understand such matters, varmints are given 24-hour ultimatums. Sometimes, come to think of it, they only have until sundown to do the right thing. Seven days? In case it has slipped everyone's mind, the man is a ruthless tyrant. So, who's he going to discuss things with for an entire week? His mirror?
When "Bush turned to shove," the United States' resolution on Iraq got unanimous U.N. approval (Nov. 9).
Syria's vote against Iraq and for the U.S. tells me that you don't have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Syria, which did not even abstain, has consulted with other Arab states, which want to not offend America -- they want to be on the winning side.
Is it not obvious that all Arab states are dictatorships? They fear democratic winds from America may blow their way; they fear the Arab street may rise up against them. So, pretend to be in the Bush camp.
Re "A Landslide Loss for Hussein," Commentary, Nov. 7: Contrary to James Pinkerton's belief that the election guarantees an attack on Iraq, I suspect the reverse is true. I'm betting the whole issue will fade away during the next few months because it has served its purpose. Hussein won't be taken off the shelf again until the election of 2004, if, as I suspect, the abysmal Bush failures continue to mount.