Sound advice on spinal care
Just finished reading Dr. Jerry Saliman’s piece, “My aching back: What’s a person to do?” (Aug. 7) This is an excellent summary with several health red flags to look for and good, basic prevention strategies. Thank you for taking a very common physical problem that afflicts so many and making it understandable for your audience.
Kathy Baxter Stern | San Francisco
A question of Jewish content
Thanks to Howard Freedman, director of the Jewish Community Library, for recommending “Suite Française” (Off the Shelf, Aug. 7). I believe that if Irene Nemirovsky had been able to finish it, “Suite Française” would have been a greater classic.
However, I’m not sure what Freedman meant when he said it had little Jewish content. Perhaps he was referring to the film, which I haven’t yet seen. I can’t imagine he meant that the tragedy of a Jewish author who converted to save her children and died in Auschwitz didn’t have much Jewish content.
Celia Menczel | Walnut Creek
Learn from lessons of the past
President Barack Obama concedes that the Iranian leadership hates Jews. He states that if they could, they would do terrible things to Israel. He affirms that they deny the Holocaust. He affirms that they continually call for the death of America and Israel. Despite his understanding of all of these facts, Obama is determined to go ahead with the proposed nuclear deal with Iran.
If the positions so clearly stated by the Iranian government were to come true within the next 15 years, with the reality of Iranian nuclear weapons, one is left to wonder what the former president would say. Might he say, “I am so sorry,” “I misjudged,” “I made a terrible mistake?” I cannot escape the terrible feeling that if this proposed agreement is passed, with the best of intentions, and Obama signs it, it will be a warrant for genocide.
I believe that if there is a lesson to be learned from Jewish history it is that if people say they are coming to kill you, you should believe them. With all my heart I hope I am wrong, but with a deep sense of reality and foreboding, I believe I am right.
John F. Rothmann | San Francisco
Pretend diplomacy, pretend results
Back in the former Soviet Union there was a joke: “Here people pretend that they work, and the government pretends that it pays them salaries.” This joke came to my mind when I read the Iran deal. There, Iran affirms that “under no circumstances will Iran ever seek, develop or acquire any nuclear weapons,” while Iran’s negotiating counterparts want the world to believe they found a way to bring to light whatever the Iranians are not seeking.
Actually, the deal consists of two parts. In the first part, stretching up to six months into mid-December 2015, Iran will cut its nuclear material pile to 300 kg. and be allowed to use only 30 percent of its centrifuges. In exchange, all sanctions will be lifted (and subsequently Iran will receive about $150 billion of its frozen assets).
In the second part, constituting at least 95 percent of the time covered by the deal, Iran’s expansive nuclear activities will be subject to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. But the inspections are at the mercy of the mullahs, who may delay them by 24 days. If the suspecting party is not satisfied, it may trigger a sanctions’ snap-back. At this point the United Nations will spring into action, and one can only imagine the efficiency of this organization.
So here we are, giving up right away all our bargaining chips, relying on Iran’s goodwill with inspections and the U.N. bureaucracy with the snap-back sanctions. If this is a “diplomatic masterpiece,” then what is a diplomatic failure? We have already “integrated” North Korea into the world community. Now we intend to integrate Iran. I am not talking here about survival of Israel. I am talking about the standing in the world of the United States.
Vladimir Kaplan | San Mateo
Real threat to Israel is ISIS, not Iran
“The letter to the community” advertisement in the Aug. 7 issue represents remarkable short-sightedness regarding Israel’s real most dangerous enemy in the Middle East. As so insightfully written by the Israeli writer and journalist Uri Avnery in his weekly column on July 18: “Daesh (ISIS) is the real enemy of Iran (and of Israel). President Barack Obama and his advisors realized this some time ago. Their new alliance with Iran is partly based on this reality. …
“With the advent of Daesh, realities on the ground have changed completely. … Far from being naive, Obama is building an alliance against the new and very dangerous enemy.
… Unfortunately, unlike Obama, Netanyahu is stuck in the past. He continues demonizing Iran, instead of joining it in the fight against Daesh, which is far, far more dangerous to Israel.”
Amos Nur | Stanford
Iran deal is existential threat to Israel
I would generally agree with Sue Fishkoff’s editorial that the Jewish federations should provide their vital services and stay out of politics (“Bay Area federations pick the right side on Iran deal: neither,” July 31). Nor do I feel that American Jewish organizations are bound to blindly support the policies of the current Israeli government, or to be at Netanyahu’s beck and call.
However, the agreement with Iran does pose an existential threat to Israel for two reasons. One is that despite President Barack Obama’s assurances to Israel and to our friends in the Middle East and Turkey, it will almost certainly lead to a nuclear arms race as three or more Sunni nations defensively begin their nuclear programs. The Saudis have already considered this, and it’s not unlikely that Egypt and Turkey will follow. The Emirates also have the resources to join the nuclear club.
In addition, the Supreme Leader has clearly stated that Iran intends to destroy Israel by the death of a thousand cuts. By supplying terrorists with weapons and encouraging constant attacks, he expects that eventually large numbers of Israelis will emigrate. Iran has been doing this for years, but with the end of sanctions, oil wealth will flow again, and Iran will be able to fund more missiles and train more terrorists.
Before World War II, Chamberlain believed that he had averted another world war by an agreement with the Nazi government. Stalin also believed that he had averted, or at least postponed, a war with Germany by Russia’s pact with the Nazis. They were both disastrously wrong about the Nazis’ willingness to honor agreements. If they had simply listened to Hitler, and read his speeches and autobiography they might have concluded otherwise and millions of lives could have been saved.
Khamenei and his supporters have openly stated their imperial and genocidal intentions toward Israel, the Sunni nations and even the part of Europe that was once ruled by Muslims. Can you blame the Israelis or the Egyptians or the Saudis for taking them at their word?
I can see why some Jewish organizations and synagogues are reluctant to get involved with issues about Israel, such as settlements, that are so divisive to our community. But the Iran agreement represents such a departure from our government’s previous support for Israel that I do not see why any Jewish organizations, including our local federations, should take a pass on opposing it.
Michael Lipsey | San Rafael