Omar Kusturica wrote: "I can see though how the US might want to waive any responsibility for the security of ordinary Iraqis, while continuing and even escalating military operations in the country." The US has a duty to contribute to the security of ordinary Iraqis. However, the US is an outside power and therefore cannot be responsible for Iraqis. That responsibility can only belong to the Iraqis themselves. To insist that the US is responsible is, of course, to do exactly that which so many people are opposed to, namely, to involve the US in the governing of Iraq. Those who object to the US presence in Iraq should be arguing that the US can't be responsible for ordinary Iraqis, that the US can't bring security and that the sooner the US reduces its presence in the country, the better for ordinary Iraqis. It is probably a good thing that the US is putting more boots on the ground for the election but it will be a bad thing if those troops are seen as providing the security for the elections. The Iraqis are a proud people and don't want nor need the US to be responsible for them. I have a great deal of admiration for those Iraqis who are willing to join the police even though the terrorists are ruthlessly targeting them. The US should remove itself from urban areas and operate only in support of Iraqi security forces. This will be particularly important for the election. The US must not be too closely identified with any particular outcome. Sincerely, Phil Enns Toronto, ON ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html