THE ISSUE: Sen. Clinton’s resentment of the war President Bush may leave behind.
I really resent Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton for her phoniness, arrogance political partisanship and for putting her ambition and party above her country (“I Really Resent,” John Podhoretz, PostOpinion, Jan 30).
Speaking of her Democratic Party, isn’t that the party that has not stopped damning President Bush for six years while offering nothing constructive to fight the War on Terror?
Could it be that Clinton & Co. do not really believe there is a need for a War on Terror? Robert Semel
Brooklyn
Clinton’s latest irresponsible edict about the unfairness of the president in passing on the Iraq war to his successor shows her lack of history. Perhaps her husband can enlighten her.
What is scarier is that she obviously is lacking the leadership ability to hold this office. When tough challenges come along, does she plan on wishing them away?
Frank Nostramo
Calverton
****
Podhoretz writes that it is “strange” that Clinton would not want to inherit a war that she could quickly bring to a close to the accolades of all.
Forget that the struggle between Islamo-fascism and the West dates back centuries, or that, four years into the current War on Terror, some have pronounced it too late to add troops to win. Clinton’s truth lies elsewhere.
She is deathly afraid that voters would do to her, if elected president, what she helped do to Richard Nixon as he tried to negotiate an honorable peace to end Johnson’s war in Vietnam.
But, clearly, there is no match for the audacity of Clinton and her fellow travelers who demand results from our president, even as they deny the necessary resources to make Army Lt. Gen. David Petraeus’ plan for winning in Baghdad a success. What unmitigated gall.
D. Oesy
Manhattan
****
Podhoretz could have extended his comparisons all the way back to 1968, when Lyndon Johnson sent approximately 600,000 draftees to Vietnam and then decided not to run for a second term.
The presidential candidates of that day likely did not appreciate Johnson walking away from a war he had escalated, but could any of them have said so publicly and still be considered qualified for commander-in-chief?
Once again, Clinton shows herself to be in the vanguard of her generation, in all its self-actualized glory and lust for power without consequence.
What Clinton really resents is that she may have to make a decision about Iraq and be held accountable for it.
Joan Tinto
Toronto