Bridges to Iran

Re "Does Obama understand Iran?" (Letters, Nov. 25): I disagree with the letter writer, Tiffany Cantillo, on several grounds. Comparing President-elect Barack Obama's name to the Muslim world is irrelevant. He is a Christian, not a Muslim. The Iranians are not setting out to destroy the United States. In fact, a meeting with Obama and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad should take place in order for the United States and Iran to mutually communicate.

Cantillo asks, "Does Obama remember what happened when appeasement was tried on Hitler?" Cantillo is making an illogical connection with Hitler and the president of Iran. This is the 21st century; times have changed. With what has occurred during the Bush administration, we should not be hypercritical in regard to the Obama presidency. Instead, we should be hopeful. Let's not forget that after the 9/11 attack, Bush did not talk with the president of Iraq, he declared war. The war on Iraq is unnecessary and Obama plans on withdrawing troops from Iraq to seek peace.

I believe a meeting between Obama and Ahmadinejad could potentially build bridges between the United States and Iran.

– Rahul Kumar, Sacramento

Peace with Palestinians has limits

Re "Middle East priorities" (Daily Debate, Nov. 24): I applaud Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski's call for attention to the Arab-Israeli peace process in the article. It is true that the peace process is monumentally important; it is true that a successful, lasting accord would go a long way toward permanent peace in the region. However, the article gives too much credit to the importance of the Palestinian problem. An accord with the Palestinians would – hopefully – be the easiest to achieve, given previous successes in the arena, and should certainly be a priority in President-elect Barack Obama's Middle East policy. It would not be a panacea, though, nor would it solve as many problems as the article's authors believe. It is a false assertion that the militant group Hezbollah would be weakened by an accord between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Hezbollah does not rely on the plight of the Palestinians to justify its positions, but rather on the assertion that Israel's occupation of the Golan Heights constitutes an occupation of Lebanese territory. Neither would Iran lose any position from such an accord. The Middle East has fostered anti-Israeli sentiments for 60 years. No sort of diplomacy will change that anytime soon.

– William Sim, Davis

It's the owners, not the guns

Re "Revive discussion of gun control" (Letters, Dec. 7): What good do gun laws do when a millionaire ball player wants to carry a loaded gun in his waistband? We need to find out why young males think a gun is the answer to their insecurities.

There are millions of guns and gun owners in this country and 99 percent of them never commit a crime or harm a human being.

The solution will be tough and expensive and involves sociological changes to our society. A "war on guns" will be as fruitless as our "war on drugs."

– Carl Di Stefano, Sacramento

Volunteers need encouragement

Re "Step Up" (Forum, Nov. 30): Rather than writing an ode of appreciation for the significant contributions of volunteer workers, this article stands as a testament to present-day cultural entitlement by stating that volunteering is necessary rather than elective. While the article clearly serves to heighten the awareness of the impact volunteering makes, Sue Carter would be much more successful by recognizing that volunteerism is exactly that – voluntary. To proclaim that it is necessary pays a disservice to the many people who volunteer and transforms their good will into a mere requirement. If increased participation is the goal, then instead of burdening people with additional responsibilities to the state, one should encourage future volunteers through appreciating the compassion and resourcefulness of present-day volunteers. Those people didn't act out of duty to the state but passion for a cause, and that's what needs to be encouraged.