Dear Editor,

I supported our troops in Vietnam even though I felt strongly that we shouldn’t have been there. It was such a terrible waste of lives.

I will support our troops if they go to Iraq. However, at the risk of being accused of a litany of anti-whatevers, I feel compelled to mention some thoughts of my own as well as those of many I talk with.

We seem able to point our finger with ease at others as being dictators of their people. A dictator is clearly defined as “a person exercising absolute power, esp. a ruler who has absolute, unrestricted control in a government without hereditary succession.” (Not following the will of the people).

With President Bush and his puppet regime heading down a road that is obviously contrary to what the people of America desire and contrary to most of the rest of the world governments and their peoples, what is the difference between President Bush and a dictator?

The only difference I can see right now is that he gained power through an accepted democratic (?) process; however, the end result seems to be the same. Don’t misunderstand and think I approve of Saddam Hussein. Something certainly needs to be done to protect America and the peoples of the world from this man. But whatever it is, it must be the will of the people.

Garland Anderson

Rifle