This refers to the article, “ >Obama, the serial interventionist ,” (Sept. 30). What is the difference between U.S. President Barack Obama and jihadists , if he too makes a mockery of international law every time he enables U.S. troops to “invade” foreign soil on the excuse of making the world terror-free? Prime Minister Narendra Modi rightly said that there is no good or bad terrorism. Rather than being an interventionist, Mr. Obama should push for a collective global effort in curbing terror. It should not be difficult to enable a dialogue between all Islamic nations and the various extremist factions.
Yogesh Devgun,
Patiala
The Obama administration should understand and realise the fact that unbridled intervention in the Middle East will only act as oxygen to groups like the IS. Just as extremist forces have been brutal, one can say that U.S.-led forces have also committed numerous human rights violations.
Arshid J.S.,
New Delhi
The article reminded me of what Derrick Jensen says in the first volume titled “The Problem of Civilization” of his book, Endgame : “There are many causes of the culture’s violence. There is the fact that those who make political decisions that guide this culture are more interested in increasing their own personal power and the power of the state than they are in human and non-human well-being. …[I]magine if an American president decided tomorrow that the U.S. would no longer allow corporations to take oil from any region where the people themselves (not the government) did not want to relinquish it. The same would hold for metals, fish, meat, wood. Everything … The point is that the only people fit to be President are those who can institute policies that value economic production over life. A sane and humane person would not and could not last in that position.”
Sukumaran C.V.,
Palakkad
The U.S.’s declaration to take on IS is half-baked and will only result in the mushrooming of more terror groups. Be it Afghanistan, Libya, Syria or Iraq, former U.S.-trained rebels are now turning out to be its own hydra-headed foes. The need of the hour is to push for “comprehensive international action” backed by the U.N. Security Council. There should be no U.S.-led proxy plan.
P. Venkatesh,
Hyderabad
