Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1958-07-21
Our Readers React to Mideost Move

NS01Sh - NGdN
I'm amazed that a coun-
try such as ours, which was
founded on the democratic
principle that the people
have the right to determine
their own government. has
so many jingoists who APP
plaud the fragrant interven-
ton Of United States troops
in the internal affairs Of
Lebanon. This action is de-
finitely wrong on both moral
and practical grounds and
without a doubt is the most
infamous in the realm Of
an overall abortive foreign
policy since the Korean in
tervention. 1t can only lead
to the loss Of more friends
If not to another world war.
The need for peace by the
American people and the
peoples Of the world must
have priority over the inter-
ests Of certain oil companies
investments in the Middle
East. I cannot buy the ad-
ministration's double-think
policy that "risking war is
in the interest of peace"
This should be an insult to
the intelligence of the Amer
lean people and it remains to
be seen as to whether it is.
Every thinking. responsible
citizen should use every cham
mel available to demand the
immediate withdrawal of
troops from Lebanon. What's
all this talk about losing the
Middle East anyway? 1
didn't know 1t was ours to
lose!
Neither war nor oil ever
was or ever will be the an
Swer to the economic needs
of the people of the world.
Harry Nelson.
4 = X
1t appears that oil is valued
more highly than blood. If
We are fortunate enough TO
escape a third world war, we
will yet be faced with the
hatred of Arab nations when
a sound foreign policy could
have afforded us their friend
ship and assurance of the oil
rights we value so highly.
Why did We withdraw our
promise of a loan to the
Egyptians for construction of
the Aswan Dam? Surely we
could have afforded this VEN
ture for the sake of their
friendship even if Great Brit
ain felt our loan could not
be repaid. We have not the
right to deter the growing
wave of Arab nationalism
even if Russia is one of the
forces goading them on. She
has won their confidence and
We have lost it. Why do We
speak so disparagingly of
Nasser as a dictator? Have
We not earned the hatred of
our South American neigh
bors for protecting their die
tators? Have we not been
friendly for many years with
SPANS dictator?
Is it only that we are
friendly with a foreign gov
eminent when that govern
ment permits us to exploit its
country's natural resources
and retain bases on their
land? The rise of Arab
nationalism and rebellion
against their legal govern
ments" is not without cause.
They have in common their
age-old resentment against
the people of Israel (recently
aggravated) and they are a
hungry race whose rulers are
fabulously wealthy - grown
fat on their countries oil and
other resources. They are not
content to be a starving race
when their countries are en-
dowed with natures riches.
We are a fair and democratic
nation. Can we not sympa-
thize with their just desires?
Do We truthfully believe that
Farouk had more of the in
terest Of his people at heart
than Nasser? We are afraid
land rightly so) for the safety
of the people Of Israel faced
with the threat Of Arab unity.
II we were to gain the friend
ship and respect Of the peo-
pie and governments of both
races, could We not be Of
some help acting as media
tors to help them solve their
differences reasonably and
peacefully? Why do we con-
sistently and vaguely refer
to the hope Of a peaceful
solution to these problems
when we cannot. in truth.
be diligently seeking this end.
Please, oh please, don't let us
intervene in Irao though We
lose all our oil interests there.
A. ID. L.
=
The Middle East situation
has raised interesting COM
ments, many Of which are
conferred around the So
--M-A --.sA n A.