Apparently, some of his inner-circle advisors are war hawks and, aided by guidance from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he quickly decided on the bombing option.
We await with dread the ongoing consequences of his actions.
Ian MacGregor, Greenhithe.
Is religion to blame?
It may be uncomfortable to confront, but the question must be asked: has religion done more to divide humanity than unite it?
Across centuries, countless wars have been fought, not over land or power alone, but over whose god is right, whose beliefs are superior and who deserves to rule in the name of faith.
From the Crusades and the Thirty Years’ War to the English Civil War, the Taiping Rebellion in China, the Lebanese and Yemeni conflicts, the Arab-Israeli wars and even missionary-fuelled clashes in places like Fiji and Papua New Guinea – religion has too often been the spark, or the excuse, for unspeakable violence.
If peace is the goal of most faiths, why has belief so often led to bloodshed?
It’s worth seriously considering whether the world might be a safer, more unified place if we could all somehow agree on a single belief system, or even on none at all.
Alan Walker, St Heliers.
Treaty challenge
As we draw closer to the bicentenary of the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, we seem to be little further ahead in solving the intractable problems that beset our founding document.
Treaty settlement deals have been negotiated and implemented with many iwi or tribal groups. More are yet to be settled.
There is no question that Māori suffered historical injustices since colonisation began and it is appropriate that the Government acknowledges that fact and offers some meaningful redress. There have been successful settlements where iwi have since prospered through astute investment of their capital. Tainui and Ngāi Tahu have grown their wealth to impressive proportions and have given the Māori economy real impetus.
However, recent articles have highlighted a new development in settlement negotiations. Iwi are now insistent on including a clause that questions the sovereignty of the Crown. It is difficult to understand how two parties can negotiate a settlement when one questions the existence of the other.
It would seem iwi are pursuing the same questionable ambitions of Te Pāti Māori in seeking a separate Government for Māori. Intransigence on this development from either side could derail future settlements.
George Williams, Whangamatā.
Time to move on
Wouldn’t it be nice if David Seymour and his fellow critics could get over Covid, the effectiveness or otherwise of Dame Jacinda Ardern, and her party’s efforts in coping with it.
No matter what the political leadership at the time, the need for prompt action on a national scale could only ever result in some things being done well, along with some poor choices.
Seymour’s energies might be more usefully employed in explaining how the coalition is ensuring that recommendations for the future protection of our country under like circumstances are being effected.
Leonie Parker, Tuakau.
Not-so-Super final
What an unabsorbing Super Rugby Pacific final between the Chiefs and Crusaders.
The only thing that created interest was when the Chiefs marched into town without their cowbells. Bereft of their most iconic talisman, they succumbed to the Crusaders’ onslaught.
The Crusaders are no fools. They saw cowbells as their greatest threat to lifting the trophy – rather than the tactics, skill, strength and speed of the Chiefs.
Apparently, Crusaders officials cited safety concerns as a swinging cowbell might brain-damage a spectator. That might be the case but what about the safety of the players? Shouldn’t they be considered as well? Two teams of fifteen, largely oversized men barging into each other for 80 minutes sounds a little more dangerous than spectators swinging cowbells.
Still, it was the Crusaders whose tactics prevailed as they sent the Chiefs packing with the solemn bell of defeat like a dirge at a funeral. Much like the game itself.
Bernard Walker, Mount Maunganui.
