Elizabeth Shackelford’s column, “The Trump administration’s aggression abroad is both ruthless and ineffective” (July 24), presents an exclusively anti-Trump and anti-American narrative that obfuscates the reality of current global conflicts.
Shackelford claims that the United States is scaling up aggression with little to show for it. In reality, these actions are matters of self-defense, resulting in the destruction of three nuclear sites along with Iran’s missiles, air force and navy.
Iran has declared war against the U.S. and the West for decades, firing on ships in the Strait of Hormuz soon after signing the memorandum of understanding. And, now the Houthis in Yemen, with direct support from Iran, are attacking ships in the Red Sea area.
The theocratic Iran Revolutionary Guard and Iran’s mullahs violated the memorandum and continue to execute their own citizens and provide munitions to Houthi and other proxies. Furthermore, contrary to Shackelford’s allegation, the U.S. did not intentionally target a girls’ school in Iran; U.S. intelligence indicated a military installation there adjacent to others; however, Iran chose to build a school there.
The column also faults the U.S. for neutralizing suspected drug cartel boats in the Caribbean and Pacific and blames the U.S. rather than the communist regime for Cuba’s destitute economy. This narrative ignores that Cuba rejected diplomatic solutions while accepting humanitarian aid, all while providing a haven for Russian and Chinese operatives.
Finally, Shackelford objects to routine testosterone blood testing and deficiency treatments for our male military personnel.
Shackelford’s perspectives undermine the credibility of the organizations associated with her.
— David N. Simon, Chicago
War’s impact
As usual, Shackelford’s piece, “The Trump administration’s aggression abroad is both ruthless and ineffective,” hits the nail on the head.
Polling shows that most Americans disapprove of the Iran War and that they don’t accept the ever-changing justifications offered to explain why we launched hostilities in the first place. Besides, it is abundantly clear to us that the negative fallout from this war is far-reaching. That is, we recognize the huge economic impact here at home and the disruptions to the global economy at large, the damage to our image abroad threatening our decades-long leadership role, and the reduction of our weapons arsenal to the point that we lessen our ability to respond to other legitimate threats.
And, of course, the human toll of our aggression — civilian lives lost in Iran and elsewhere, the killing of and injury to American troops — rightly makes us question the morality of our government’s actions.
Now, seeing how U.S. diplomacy — if you can call it that — is failing to bring an end to the war, many of us have come to the same conclusion as Shackelford in trying to explain the “why” — the reasons the Trump administration, she says, continues to act “so aggressively and illegally, if its actions are not only failing to achieve their stated goals but also don’t seem designed to accomplish them?”
More Top Picks Corsi Rosenthal Box
And she references not just what our government is doing in Iran, but also talks about our economic stranglehold on Cuba (which is producing an acute humanitarian crisis) as well as the administration’s continued campaign to attack alleged drug-running boats in the Caribbean. All of the above, Shackelford accurately says, points to the fact that “this administration, and specifically the U.S. military under its leadership, pursues aggression and violence for its own sake.”
There is so much being thrown at us every day to be upset about that I know many people get overwhelmed with the enormity of the problems and, to preserve their own mental health, opt to just continue to keep their focus on their mounting number of everyday personal challenges. To jump into the fray, to protest publicly, rather than just air our gripes about the political situation to friends and like-thinking relatives, seems too onerous an ask.
Thank you, Ms. Shackelford, for having the courage to tell it like it is. Hopefully, the rest of us will join our voices to yours and work to deflect our government from continuing on this catastrophic and morally repugnant path of aggression.
— Janet Garcia, Highland Park
Netanyahu’s role
Ms. Shackelford’s commentary is to be commended for its thought-provoking clarity and conscientious condemnation of both Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s policies regarding not only the war in Iran but also the Caribbean, and to include the immoral and duplicitous and aggressive policy toward Cuba. This cogent article, I believe, could have been even more scrupulous had it included the nefarious role Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israeli government played in provoking an already incompetent president of the United States as well as his incoherent secretary of defense into the unwarranted attack on Iran.
— Leonard Costopoulos, Dallas, Georgia
An eye for an eye
The law of Moses long ago established “an eye for an eye,” and a murderer’s life for a murdered life as the proportionate measures for punishing evil action in the world.
Our esteemed Secretary of State Marco Rubio proudly announced that his boss, President Donald Trump, has declared a new policy of “a head for an eye,” or in other words, a death for an injury, as his policy for punishment of Iran’s actions. This is the same as saying a Muslim life is worth much less than a Christian life.
President Trump often claims to be a true Christian. However, Jesus asked his followers to love their enemies. Trump’s policy of a death for an injury and many deaths for a single death has also been Netanyahu’s policy for Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon. Judeo-Christian values today don’t resemble Moses’ or Jesus’ standards very closely, do they?
— Kimball Shinkoskey, Woods Cross, Utah
Reexamine the rules
Regardless of anyone’s personal political views, everybody who lives in Chicago and the state of Illinois — not just those in Illinois’ 4th Congressional District — should be disgusted by what has played out in that particular November race.
Clearly the state Board of Elections, which recently disqualified two capable independent candidates who collected literally thousands of verified signatures from their supporters, needs to seriously reexamine its qualifying process and electoral rules.
I can’t speak for Mayra Macías, but I do know two-term 25th Ward Alderman Byron Sigcho-Lopez well, having worked closely with him in the community for years. Simply, he’s a high-integrity, tireless fighter for his constituents. What any citizen wants and should get from their public servant. Period.
We talk a lot about democracy here in Chicago. I’ve been listening closely for nearly 50 years. The age-old political machine still shows very few signs of slowing. Without major reform, little change for good can happen.
— Rick Gray, president, West Loop Homeowners Association
Stamp prices
Once again, the U.S. Postal Service has raised the price of a forever stamp. It now costs 82 cents to send a birthday card. In my mail recently came a fat envelope, 1 1/2 ounces, from Judicial Watch asking for money. As a nonprofit, it paid 8 cents in postage. Most of the “want money” mail I get pays 14 cents.
The Postal Service whines it is running out of money, threatening to curb service, but doesn’t common sense tell the agency to charge more for nonprofit mail? Evidently, nonprofit voices are louder than mine. The president of Judicial Watch makes over $1 million a year, which brings up the issue of the exorbitant salaries of CEO and presidents of nonprofits.
Postmaster General and CEO David Steiner was paid more than $520,000 his first year.
— Jean Smoots, Oak Lawn
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected].