Boot’s idea of a Dept. of Peace

Re “Toward no more Iraqs,” Opinion, Jan. 31

Max Boot’s suggestion that the president needs to create a Department of Peace deserves all the support we can give it.

Bush’s grand strategic error from the start has been to interpret the word “war” in the phrase “war on terror” too literally, thus making it seem logical for the Department of Defense to be in charge. It has, to be sure, been necessary to use military force, if not in Iraq, at least in Afghanistan; but our main goal should always have been to neutralize or win over the hearts and minds of our present or potential enemies.

This can be done only by, first, a truly effective “war” of words and ideas, in contrast to the wholly clumsy and inadequate one Bush has waged so far; second, a continuing international police action; and third, actual home-front reforms aimed at making our country into one that all other people will respect and wish to emulate. Hence, the need for a new and truly powerful Department of Peace.

PHILIP WALKER

Santa Barbara

*

I very much enjoyed the clever allusions to George Orwell’s “1984” in Boot’s column. Boot advocates the establishment of U.S. equivalents of Minipax (a Department of Peace), Minitrue (“to wage the battle of ideas”), Miniplenty (a new mission for the Department of Agriculture), and Miniluv (a federal police force, presumably to deal with dissidents).

However, the question I’m left with is this: How can I distinguish these satirical suggestions from the remainder of Boot’s column?

ROB ST. AMANT

Raleigh, N.C.

*

Boot’s idea is sheer brilliance. Let’s “open the ranks of the armed forces to recruits who are not citizens or green card holders.” An American Foreign Legion! It would both increase our force size as well as our knowledge of other languages and cultures. But any good idea can be made better.

First, we should set up recruiting stations all along the wall to be built on the U.S.-Mexico border. Maybe they could even build the wall as part of basic training. Then we need a snappy name -- especially for the movie (starring Leonardo DiCaprio) to be made later about their bravery against impossible odds. “Hessians” would have a nice symmetry -- since that’s who we fought to shed colonial rule. But I like “breakeros,” an obvious play on “braceros,” who we used in the past to do our dirty work -- but a tad more violent.

Just one question: If this works, who will pick our food?

AL MEYERHOFF

Studio City

*

Boot’s article was extraordinary. Here’s a supposed conservative calling for a rather large increase in government (by creating a Department of Peace). He then goes on to advocate nation building around the world, something that is anathema to true conservatives. I’d like to suggest that it’s not our responsibility to take on these tasks and, as Iraq should have shown, it doesn’t work anyway. We need a smaller footprint around this world, not a larger one.

GREG DANIELS

Canyon Country