Ending war on drugs would reduce terrorism
Now, perhaps more than ever, there is an even stronger case for changing our government’s positioning in the War on Drugs. In addition to disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of non-violent citizens, wasting our tax dollars on programs that get larger and deliver fewer results each year, and helping the spread of corruption among our police officers, prohibition of marijuana and other substances creates a black market, which is an easy source of funding for terrorists.
Yes, that’s right. Terrorists profit directly from America’s War on Drugs. They grow crops and sell them at the black market’s outrageously inflated prices.
That’s exactly what the Taliban was doing until this year, when George Dubbya handed over 40 million dollars to coax them to stop. They destroyed the crops, but how much do you want to bet they will start right up after Bush pulls any future funding?
Ending the War on Drugs would remove the threat of prison from people who don’t belong there, generate tax dollars that aren’t there now and pull money right out of the terrorists’ pockets.

Christopher Palkow

Norfolk, Virginia

Airdrops are appeasement
Resources spent on humanitarian airdrops are resources diverted for self-defense. It shows our leaders putting the lives of Americans below those of citizens in enemy countries. It is also appeasement. Some fear Muslims will think we’re warring against Islam. The airdrops are an attempt to show this isn’t true. If we fear these people will turn against us, best we not help them?
We’ve been appeasing by trying to form a coalition with Communists, in refraining from attacking other terrorist countries, in failing to declare war and now in these airdrops. Fifty years of appeasement led to Sept. 11th.
More will mean worse.

Christopher J Grace

Aurora, Colo.