Militant extremists seized several major cities in Iraq; the government appeared near collapse. President Obama said these terrorists may also pose a threat to U.S. interests, but he will not put boots on the ground. The ongoing situation risks re-entangling the U.S. in a conflict that cost 4,486 lives and trillions of dollars, according to some reports. Does the U.S. have an obligation to those who served to keep Iraq from falling to terrorists? Does it have an obligation to the Iraqi people and the region to stabilize the country? Or should we focus elsewhere, including the home front?Even though life was brutal for some in Iraq during Saddam’s rule, it was livable for most, I assume. I know nothing about the deep culture of the Middle East, but it seems they do better with dictators. Greed can be controlled when one does not have the power to make decisions to feed the greed. So now, the country is in turmoil because we thought we could install our way of life, which is greed. — Gary B. Hicks, Fort Worth Barack Obama never considered the Iraq war to be his war. He didn’t care about a “status of forces” agreement because apparently he felt that if things went south after he pulled all our troops out, the “main-stream” media would “blame Bush” as they have many times before.We have troops in many countries that remain our peaceful, stable and productive allies. As ISIS advances throughout Iraq, slaughtering Iraqis as they go, our nation’s ability to prevent another 9/11 has become seriously compromised. — Hugh Lefler, Fort WorthThe Lord Jesus Christ taught us that peace is not won by war but by love.Love does no injury to another human being. I hope we listen to God and do what he says. — Deborah Fleischmann, Fort WorthThe situation in Iraq was predictable. To get up and leave after two wars with all the sacrifice was stupid.People say we aren’t nation-builders. We were in Germany and Japan after World War II. We are still there 70 years later. Same with South Korea.You may argue the vast cultural differences in the Middle East would make our staying not feasible. Japan and Korea had a culture and belief system very different from ours. Blame all this on the British who in 1918 after running the Turks out of the area simply got out a pencil and straight edge and created Iraq without considering the various tribes and factions. — Ron Criswell, GrapevineThe U.S. must come to the understanding that this is Shia vs. Sunni, and it is a fight to the finish. The “insurgents” in Iraq do not see themselves as terrorists but rather as rightful protectors of their faith. Only time will tell who will win this conflict, but make no mistake, the U.S. will get hurt if we stick our noses back into it. — Bruce W. Lockwood, GranburySunnis and Shiites have been killing each for centuries. Despite the lack of media coverage, we should know that many Muslims, all over the world, celebrated and danced in the streets after the news of 9-11 reached them.With that in mind, it’s probably to our advantage to let them wage war on each other. We shouldn’t go back there. — Curt Lampkin, Azle The U.S. does not have an obligation in Iraq. My deepest sympathy goes out to the families of the 4,486 killed, but I am sorry, two wrongs don’t make a right. — Jim Rice, North Richland HillsMiddle Eastern nations have arisen and fallen often driven by religious confrontation and compelling economic interests. Further direct involvement in Iraq will only lead to more American deaths or injuries. I believe that it is time to see if the Middle East nations believe that beneficial interdependence is worth fighting for. If not, nothing that we can do will change things. — Marty Goldsmith, Fort Worth It is a good plan to consider bombing the ISIS group in Iraq into defeat. Then the U.S. Congress should consider ending the 1953 Armistice agreement with North Korea a nation known for mass starvation and intimidation of the U.S. for free fuel and free food for far too long. Time we get tough on our enemies, even those for over 64 years, and end North Korea once and for all and defeat the ISIS. — John M. Davis, Arlington Whether or not we needed to take out Saddam Hussein, the mission was changed from the possible-depose a dictator who was a threat to the USA, to the impossible-create a friendly, democratic government in the Middle East. To reinvade at this point would be beyond stupid. There is no definable mission here. Our goal should remain the defense of the U.S. And make no mistake, when the ISIS/Al Qaeda gang feels strong enough, they will come at us. We had best be prepared. — Michael D. Korenman, Fort Worth
All Points each Monday features reader responses to a question posed by the Editorial Board. With each week’s responses comes the next week’s question. All Points responses are not counted toward the monthly limit of one letter to the editor from each writer. Readers are welcome to send their own ideas for All Points topics to Editorial Director Mike Norman, firstname.lastname@example.org.