Waging a war of words on Iraq

Time to duck and cover. Tom Williams has detonated yet another toxic

mushroom cloud. A creature of habit, his perennial target is Pilot

columnist Joseph Bell.

Bell is a notorious recidivist, whose columns routinely get up

Williams’s nose. On April 22, Bell had the temerity to discuss Iraq

and a local talk by Gen. Anthony Zinni. To which Williams responded

in no fewer than 1,240 words and a paid advertisement. The snarky

rustic surpassed himself.

Bell, said his nemesis, suffered from confusion and indulged in

lamentations over Zinni’s “musings.” Strange, but I scoured Bell’s

column in vain for any sign of either.

Williams also reminds us that Zinni is now retired; then he quotes

George Shultz (also retired) at length -- from which he concludes

that rogue states are fair game. Ample justification, verily, to

trash the Baghdad Pottery Barn.

“Now, on to the explanation of why we have an absolute, legitimate

right to be in Iraq,” Williams continues. First he cites Saddam

Hussein’s violations of some 12 resolutions adopted by the United

Nations. This is a hoot, given that Williams had previously dismissed

it as “the most impotent and useless organization ever devised by man

or beast.” Holy Halliburton! I hope President George Bush knows this,

since he’s leaving the June 30 transition planning to the United

Nations’ Lakhdar Brahimi.

Finally, Williams rolls out the weapons of mass destruction

nostalgia. “Those weapons still exist today and will someday be found

. . . I will bet Bell my Social Security retirement account on that.”

Mirabile dictu.

Williams must have taken his weapons of mass destruction cues from

Ahmad Chalabi and his jocular band of Iraqi exile fabulists,

including one known as “Curveball.” (Chalabi, by the way, is still on

the Department of Defense payroll -- or at least his organization is,

according to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.)

As for Williams’s parting shot at “professor” Bell (“what about

the foregoing don’t you understand”): I would ask Williams; what it

is about quagmires that he doesn’t understand?

DICK LEWIS

Balboa

I can’t understand why almost half the entire page is devoted to

this guy, Tom Williams. I’m a World War II veteran. I come from a

family of four World War II veterans, one of whom was killed. I’m

very much for this country, in what we do, but this idea of Iraq and

the war in Iraq is definitely wrong.

We have done a very grievous error in going there. And this

commentary by this individual is definitely one-sided. Why didn’t you

do something on the other side of the scale or is this paper turned

to nothing but a complete right-wing? I’m really disturbed at what

the Daily Pilot has done in giving this commentary this much space.

LEO ARRANAGA

Newport Beach

Tom Williams’ impressive command of facts; his liberal (pun

certainly intended) use of former Secretary of State George Shultz’s

opinion and speech reprint; his alternate disparagement of the United

Nations and use of its resolutions to further his argument or

justification of invasion notwithstanding; I would like to know if he

thinks the world is a safer place for our acting on this “right.”

SALLY MARSHALL

CORNGOLD

Newport Beach