Why Turkey doesn't yet merit EU entry In their article entitled "Political Doors Open for Turks" (Aug. 31), the authors conclude that the recent earthquake in Turkey should cause the European Union to place Turkey on the fast track for EU membership.
While I sympathize with the victims of the tragedy, I fail to understand why a natural disaster should influence the European Union's decision.
Turkey has been denied EU membership for a variety of substantive reasons: its illegal occupation of the northern part of Cyprus; the brutal repression of its Kurdish people; its appalling human-rights record; and the general antidemocratic climate that prevails there.
Membership in the European Union is, and should be, reserved for democratic nations that have certain Western values in common. As long as Turkey continues to deny basic human rights to its Kurdish population, to occupy the ethnically cleansed northern part of Cyprus, to outlaw political parties and religious groups, and to be ruled by a de facto military junta, it has no place in the European Union. Boyd Anderson, Florissant, Mo.
The military's role in peacekeeping Regarding the editorial "Boot Camp in Hollywood" (Sept. 1), lauding the concept of "helping shape a force that can double as peacekeepers."
Peacekeeping is not a proper use of the US military which has the mission of closing with and destroying an enemy. Peacekeeping is for a domestic police force.
To use the military in a domestic policing roll dilutes its effectiveness and coarsens peacekeeping efforts. No amount of "high tech simulation" can ameliorate the misuse of our military forces. John C. Dowel, Oceanside, Calif.
How war has changed I was pleased to read the article "How war has evolved since World War II" (Sept. 2). It is a subject that desperately needs attention, and no other media outlet wants to bother with it. I did agree with the major points of the article, but it still left out some pressing ethical issues we have to confront.
No one can honestly say that intervention in Kosovo was primarily motivated by human-rights concerns, since the US and Europe have passed up the opportunity to intervene in massacres in sub-Saharan Africa and other parts of the world. In addition, the intervention, in the form of bombing, could not stem the human rights abuses that occurred. These are still occurring in the midst of the occupation of Kosovo. At best, it was used as an excuse to justify geopolitical aims.
The real ethical and moral question we face today is that if the military intervenes to punish a country for behaving badly, who are we hurting? In every case, we don't hurt anybody in the leadership positions in those countries, only the citizens who are already being victimized by those in power. In the case of Iraq, years of war, bombings, and sanctions have not hurt Saddam Hussein or any of his supporters, but have only hurt the people of Iraq who are already at Hussein's mercy. Jim Nordgaard, St. Louis Park, Minn.
Creationism vs. evolution The article titled "Between God and Darwin" (Sept. 1) was very good and much needed.
The media should, in my opinion, publish the views set forth in that article more often to help convince additional people that evolution and creationism are not mutual exclusive but complementary. Dave Yeaton, Deerfield, N.Y.
The Monitor welcomes your letters and opinion articles. Due to the volume of mail, only a selection can be published, and we can neither acknowledge nor return unpublished submissions. All submissions are subject to editing. Letters must be signed and include your mailing address and telephone number.
Mail letters to 'Readers Write,' and opinion articles to Opinion Page, One Norway St., Boston, MA 02115, or fax to 617-450-2317, or e-mail to email@example.com
(c) Copyright 1999. The Christian Science Publishing Society