The first sentence of "Immorality on the March" by Michael Kelly [op-ed, Feb. 19] said, "Last weekend, across Europe and America, somewhere between 1 million and 2 million people marched against a war with Saddam Hussein's Iraq." This statement is dramatically false. Detailed analyses of the number of people who marched against war last weekend placed the number of marchers worldwide at 8 million to 11 million. Indeed, the number of marchers in London, Rome and New York alone (a mere three cities out of the 500 cities in which protests took place) easily exceeded the upper end of Kelly's estimate.
-- Charles Seavey
Michael Kelly's vitriolic attack on "immorality" in the guise of peacemongering is unusually pejorative in comparison with Zbigniew Brzezinski's calm and carefully reasoned op-ed column the same day ["Why Unity Is Essential"]. Surprisingly, Kelly states that pacifists and people who are concerned about the "terrible suffering" that may be caused by a "just war" are essentially immoral. On the other hand, Brzezinski reminds us that the millions who marched in opposition to the war had a number of good reasons for doing so, some of which were caused by the bizarre machinations and ill-conceived diplomacy of the Bush administration.
What should be of even more concern to all Americans is Kelly's idea that the "perpetuation of tyranny over rescue from tyranny, where rescue may be achieved, is immoral." It seems to me that this frightening statement is designed to be a powerful argument for going to war with any number of nations, including, but not limited to, Iran, North Korea, Libya and Sudan, and even countries such as Saudi Arabia and Syria.
Could it be that the concept of morality is not always something that can be easily defined?
-- Ray L. Hanna