To the Editor:
Re “Trump Lashes Out at Critics of Deal as Details Emerge” (front page, June 18):
In the course of his failed “excursion,” President Trump has harmed the global economy, elevated Iran’s power and standing and looked like nothing so much as the big bad wolf who huffed and puffed until he was out of hot air.
With his statement upon signing the memorandum of understanding that essentially admitted that he was capitulating because of unrelenting pressure resulting from the closing of the Strait of Hormuz, Mr. Trump has left us much poorer and weaker, the victim of his hubris and monumental lack of comprehension of this region.
Mission definitely not accomplished.
Robert S. Nussbaum Fort Lee, N.J.
To the Editor:
Re “Trump Got Spooked and Iran Stood Firm,” by Bret Stephens (column, June 17):
Mr. Stephens’s excellent column gets to the heart of the matter. The danger is not simply that Iran survived — it is that Iran has learned that it can absorb attacks, wait it out and still come away claiming victory.
For decades, Iran has attacked America, terrorized Israel and used its proxies to destabilize the region. This was never just a military fight; it was a test of resolve.
When our president’s strong words are followed by stepping back, our enemies see retreat and weakness, while our allies are left wondering whether America will stand with them.
The world is watching — and our adversaries are taking notes. They will remember whether America’s promises mean anything.
(Rabbi) Reuven H. Taff Jerusalem
To the Editor:
Re “‘Mistakes Are Made,’ Trump Says About Deadly U.S. Strikes on Iranian School” (news article, nytimes.com, June 17):
No reasonable observer would conclude that the U.S. bombing of an Iranian girls’ school was deliberate. But “mistakes” may still entail culpability.
The law of armed conflict prohibits not only intentional attacks on civilians but also attacks on military objectives when they are expected to cause disproportionate civilian harm.
It further requires that all feasible precautions be taken to minimize civilian casualties. The principle of precaution is not merely a rule of international law; its violation may also be an offense under the War Crimes Act of 1996, a U.S. law.
Although all the facts are not yet established, there are strong reasons to believe that the deaths of at least 175 people, most of them children, according to Iranian officials, may reflect a war crime rather than a regrettable but excusable instance of the fog of war.
Gabor Rona New York The writer is a professor of practice at Cardozo Law School.
New Fears Over Gene Editing
To the Editor:
Re “Breakthrough in Embryonic Editing Stirs Debate” (front page, June 6):
This article rightly raises one bioethical concern with embryonic gene editing: eugenics. However, it fails to mention the much broader, perhaps more perilous concern of many scientists: the potential to permanently alter human genes for generations.
There’s a reason scientists have agreed not to open what some call a Pandora’s box and why at least one scientist in China was jailed for doing so.
When scientists alter embryos at the germline level (reproductive cells), all changes are heritable, meaning they can be passed on to future generations. While germline gene editing could enable therapeutic interventions to persist for future unborn children, it could also permit devastating, irreversible, off-target mutations to persist generationally, too.
Can you imagine, say, being blind because a doctor in a lab altered your great-grandmother’s genes 100 years ago? Or errors in gene editing causing untreatable diseases, childhood cancers or vulnerabilities to new infections in all descendants? The international moratorium on this type of research was the fruit of scientific humility and prudence. Pandora’s box needn’t be inevitable.
Katelyn Walls Shelton Cheverly, Md. The writer is a visiting fellow in bioethics at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington.
The Threat to U.S. Science
To the Editor:
Re “The Assault on Science Just Got Worse,” by Melissa L. Finucane (Opinion guest essay, June 11):
We all need to be alarmed by the proposed changes to federal grant management. As a physician-scientist, I’m terrified.
Biomedical research in the United States is one of our greatest successes. Funding from the National Institutes of Health contributed to 99 percent of the drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration from 2010 to 2019.
One of the reasons for the success of N.I.H.-supported research is the emphasis on investigator-initiated studies — support for ideas that are vetted and improved by peer review to make sure the most promising research is supported.
The Office of Management and Budget proposal would change this approach and give political appointees the power to decide which grant applications would be funded. Can you imagine a MAGA appointee funding grants from a blue state or a “woke” university?
Based on our work studying inherited eye diseases, we recently reported a finding that challenges one of the main paradigms of human genetics and opens pathways for finding new treatments for all genetic diseases.
But would a grant application to support our work be rejected by an uninformed political appointee because it challenges existing dogma, or more likely because I wrote this letter? And do we even want to take that risk?
Eric Pierce Belmont, Mass. The writer is a professor of ophthalmology at Harvard Medical School.
A Call to Black Voters
To the Editor:
Re “How the Supreme Court Betrayed Black Voters,” by Mara Gay (Opinion, June 7):
I agree with Ms. Gay’s assertion that Black American political power has been dismantled with stunning speed. Republican moves to gerrymander voting districts across the South are a frightening throwback to a Reconstruction era that gave our nation birth to Jim Crow.
It’s for that very reason that Black Americans must turn out to vote. One election is not enough. Black Americans must consistently vote in off-cycle elections as well as in state and local elections.
Now is the time for Black Americans to lead the path forward like never before. Show America that your voice will be heard at every election and at every town hall.
Andrew L. Norton Dallas
I Read Books My Way
To the Editor:
“A Summer Reading Bucket List? Plan on It,” by Melissa Kirsch (Inside The Times, June 8), misses the point of reading.
Why fixate on the number of books you’ve finished? No one cares, and least of all should you care.
Here’s a reading plan I adhere to not only during warm weather, but year round as well: I pick a book to read and begin doing so, getting as much out of it as I can, and ignoring as best as I can the siren call emanating from the countless unread books sitting on my shelves.
After I finish it — or give up on it partway through, which as a grown-up I’m entitled to do — I decide which book I want to read next. Completion compulsion is kind of foolish.
David English Acton, Mass.
The post Trump and Iran: Mission Not Accomplished appeared first on New York Times.
