United States of America? They can’t be under Trump
PICTURE the scene: hardline supporters of extremist views clash with moderates, a car is driven into the crowd, a woman dies and 19 others are left injured. Then the leader of the nation issues an ambivalent statement that fails to fully condemn the extremists.
It sounds like the kind of protest – and official response – you would expect in, say, Russia or Zimbabwe. But, no, this actually happened in the United States of America at the weekend.
That US president Donald Trump has managed to annoy even his own Republican party over his response to the incident in Charlottesville, Virginia, speaks volumes.
He merely said he condemned violence on both sides – exactly the kind of prevarication we used to hear (and continue to do so) from those involved in atrocities on both sides in the North of our island.
In failing to speak out, he loses any moral authority he has to lecture the Russians or North Koreans on their bad behaviour.
To his credit, however, Donald Trump has managed to unite the world in one way: now no-one respects him.
AOIFE KELLY, Cork.
...TRUMP is now threatening Venezuela with military attack for absolutely no reason. His continuing appalling language launched at the people of North Korea is a horrendous development.
My early view of his election was that he might introduce some new innocuous thinking into his reign but now we see he uses the most virulent threats.
He’s a becoming a very dangerous world leader and there is a huge difference when that country is feared rather than simply being seen as the most powerful. ROBERT SULLIVAN,
Bantry, Co. Cork.
...I HAVE just read that Donald Trump has moved on from promising ‘Fire and Fury’ on North Korea to warning Venezuela that military strikes are an option against them. Someone should take his copy of The World Atlas away from him unless he gets up to the letter ‘i’ and then Ireland is for it. Is there no start to this man’s talent? MARTIN STRINGER, Swinford, Co. Mayo. World of confusion PHILIP Nolan (Irish Daily Mail, Friday) seems puzzled as to why the 9/11 hijackers countries of origin (Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, United Arab Emirates and Egypt) were never invaded.
It could have something to do with the fact that none of their governments had a hand in the 9/11 attacks or had been backing Al Qaeda.
He also seems to be under the impression that Iraq was invaded in retaliation for 9/11 even though no-one in the Bush administration ever claimed that Saddam Hussein had a hand in the 9/11 attacks.
And as there being no justification for Saddam’s removal from power, the fact that he was in breach of the 17 UN Security Council resolutions to enforce the ceasefire that came of the Gulf War which he had previously provoked by invading and annexing Kuwait says otherwise.
JOHN CAREY, via email. Whose choice? BUNREACHT na hÉireann (The Constitution of Ireland) states: The President shall be elected by direct vote of the people.
This is what happens but the people have no hand in the selection of candidate or candidates. It is left to councillors and member of the Oireachtas including in the case of the Seanad’s unelected members.
In those circumstances the selection is made under instruction from party headquarters and is not by individual choice. It is time that the voters of Ireland took a hand in the selection process to make it clear who they judge to be worthy. HARRY MULHERN, Dublin.