U.S. and Israel’s relationship at fault
Charles Krauthammer faults President Obama for seeking an end to hostilities in our war with Islamic jihadists [“Yes, Mr. President, we’re at war,” Opinion, Jan. 2].
Since they “are openly pledged to war on America,” Krauthammer sees no possibility for peace. Nor does he see that the U.S. and Israel have openly pledged war against those in the Middle East who choose to resist their aggression. The truth is that Islamic jihadists kill us because we help Israel kill Muslims and we kill them ourselves. Neither side holds any moral high ground here. In fact, the U.S. and Israel have done most of the killing in the last decade. Both sides have been guilty of war crimes and terrorism. That is the reason for the standoff.
Krauthammer and others — mainly supporters of Israel — see this simply as a war against evil Islamic jihadists. This is not true. There are legitimate political issues on both sides that must be resolved to promote the peace. President Obama must find a way to rescue America from this downward spiral of death and destruction. This is especially the case since America is paying a very high price in lives, wealth and reputation. The real pity is that Israel is no more secure today than it was before the escalation of hostilities.
Unfortunately, Krauthammer’s views are also those of powerful domestic and foreign lobbyists in the U.S. They will try to destroy our president if he works for a peace they reject. We had better be ready to support him against such an onslaught.
— Malcolm D. McPhee, Sequim
Palestinian issue breeds terrorism
Charles Krauthammer wants a wider war with Islam so that Israel will be brought even closer to America. The terrorists have the Palestinian issue on their side. Had it not been for this issue, there would not be any terrorists.
We do not need a war with Islam. The president is doing the right thing when he attempts to criminalize terrorism. Terrorists should not be given the glory of war. The language of crime and punishment should be used in dealing with them. Their stature rises every time we call it a war.
— Dale McCracken, Renton
Ideology affronts Constitution, legal system
The opinion column by Charles Krauthammer pushes a very dangerous ideology. In his column, Krauthammer ridicules President Obama’s efforts to close the Guantánamo prison and suggests that terrorists should not be prosecuted under our legal system.
The Constitution of the United States has long been a model for how a country should be ruled. We are a nation based on the rule of law and the Constitution defines the foundation of our legal system. To ignore our laws because we are afraid of a small number of terrorists threatens the very basis of our culture.
Terrorists can attack us but they cannot destroy us. But people like Krauthammer can destroy what our Founding Fathers gave us. We are not “at war” with terrorism because terrorists are not a country that we can declare war on. They are international criminals who can be stopped only by good police work.
Our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are not making us safer, rather they are drawing resources away from the only effective way of stopping terrorists. This most recent column is just another example of how clueless Krauthammer is. The Times should stop publishing this un-American trash.
— Gary Maxwell, Lynnwood
Different rules of engagement are required
No, Mr. Krauthammer, we are not at war with terrorism. To call it war invokes international laws on war and rules of engagement that do not apply to anti-terrorist actions. Misapplication of these laws and rules is what has been wrongly used to justify actions such as imprisonment of suspected terrorists essentially forever — without judiciary benefits — because we classify them as prisoners of war.
The term “war” should be reserved for its specific applications in international law, namely, armed conflict between nations using conventional armies, or internal civil actions aimed at governmental overthrow. Our struggle against terrorism is a new form of activity, which combines police and intelligence activities with targeted covert action not aimed at government overthrow, and different rules of engagement are required.
— James Maynard, Sammamish
The term ‘jihadist’ should be avoided
Although the choice of a word can be extremely important, especially in a country with the rule of law, there are many who feel that the term “jihadist” should be avoided. This word is exactly the one that these disturbed killers desire. It reinforces and justifies their ways.
Maybe President Obama has made a good decision in banishing the word from his lexicon.
— Steven Short, Mercer Island
Good news for the new year from Touch Arcade: Hironobu Sakaguchi is 
Lenovo’s IdeaPad U1 is quite the clever combination of multi-touch tablet and laptop. When you ditch everything but the screen for the slate-like tablet section, the device is to switch processors and operating systems. Oh, and it’s gorgeous, too.
