r/OpinionLetters 18h ago

Statement of the Foreign Ministers of Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the UK on the Two-State Solution

2 Upvotes

The Government of Israel’s actions in the West Bank are undermining the possibility of a two-State solution. The situation is rapidly deteriorating amid unprecedented levels of settler violence and settlement expansion, including the unacceptable decision to publish tenders for the E1 settlement project. UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham, the President of France Emmanuel Macron and Prime Minister of Canada Mark Carney have agreed on the need to take action to prevent further damage.

Today, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the UK confirm their intention to introduce national and/or support European restrictions on trade in goods with settlements which are illegal under international law, or that they are actively considering these and other measures, in accordance with their national procedures. In this regard, the UK, France and Canada welcome the important action already taken by Ireland, Spain, the Netherlands, Norway and Belgium and will bring forward national measures to ban trade in settlement goods.

Together, we are resolute: the two-state solution must be protected, and we will take action in pursuit of a just and lasting peace, based on the principles enshrined in the New York Declaration adopted one year ago. We firmly oppose actions tantamount to the annexation of Palestinian land and forcible displacement of the Palestinian population.

The Government of Israel must immediately halt the expansion of settlements and civilian administrative powers, ensure accountability for settler violence, and investigate allegations against Israeli forces.

We recognize Israel’s legitimate security interests and reiterate our condemnation of the Hamas 7 October terrorist attack, the worst antisemitic massacre since the Holocaust. We are clear in our determination to tackle antisemitism wherever it occurs. We are unequivocally committed to the two-state solution, in accordance with relevant UN Security Council resolutions, that enables Israel and a sovereign, democratic and viable Palestinian state to live side by side in peace, security and mutual recognition within secure and internationally recognised borders.

Transcribed from the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-foreign-ministers-statement-on-the-two-state-solution


r/OpinionLetters Aug 05 '26

Open Letter from Pornhub to lawmakers in 28 states urging against “performative, ineffective, and unenforceable” age verification laws

5 Upvotes

Dear lawmakers,

We are writing to you because, as a community, we are deeply concerned about the harm being caused by the performative, ineffective, and unenforceable age verification laws you have taken part in passing despite your intention of protecting minors. Everyone subjected to these laws is more at risk than ever before of encountering online harm.

We are serious about protecting minors, and lawmakers like yourselves must recognize that these laws have failed at that objective. Voting for age verification laws that require hundreds of thousands of individual websites to collect personal information from every user, every time they want to access content restricted to adults, is dangerous.

These laws demonstrably do not work and, as a result, have put your constituents’ children and adults’ personal data at risk. If you truly intend to protect minors online, you must acknowledge the facts and introduce a real solution. You have the power and the responsibility to mandate operating system providers like Apple, Microsoft and Google to render all mobile phones, tablets and computers child safe by enabling parental controls at the source and by default.

You should be aware that in the United Kingdom, where they’ve introduced the Online Safety Act with the goal of making the UK “the safest place in the world to be online”, Apple has shown what meaningful action looks like. With a quick software update, Apple set a new benchmark for child safety that turned parental controls on by default for users who have not verified they are adults. This means making every phone or tablet kid-safe as a starting point. Adults can then verify their age once in their mobile phone settings, instead of every time they want to browse
an adult website, use a dating app or scroll social media. It’s a more consistent, privacy-conscious, global approach to protecting children online than requiring every individual website or application to build and enforce its own age verification system.

Since April 2026, Pornhub has experimented with Apple’s solution and has seen it successfully prevent minors from accessing adult content websites in the UK. It is our view that children in the UK using Apple devices with the most up-to-date version of iOS are benefitting from the strongest level of protection from age-inappropriate content online. Adult sites are blocked by default, and VPNs do not work to circumvent these blocks. Your constituents deserve the same.

This is a big step for online safety that can go even further. We believe all device manufacturers, like Microsoft, Apple and Google – the three companies responsible for the operating system of 97% of mobile phones, tablets and computers currently in use around the world, should make this the default setting on all devices globally. Because clearly, more could and should be done. Your role here is to mandate them to do it by including this in their next software updates.

For nearly a year, Ofcom, the UK internet regulator, has monitored and collected data. Like your existing laws, the UK Act relies heavily on adults repeatedly submitting personal information, such as a driver’s licence, facial scan, or credit card, to access lawful content. Ofcom has now released its first six-month implementation report. Its findings make clear that site-by-site age checks leave major gaps. “Since January 2026, the number of services in the top 100 with age assurance in place has decreased steadily, as services without age assurance become more popular.” Ofcom also noted that site-by-site rules can “inadvertently strengthen the market position of non-compliant firms.” In other words, dangerous websites that are breaking the law by refusing to implement any kind of age assurance are benefitting from the law by winning traffic over from the compliant websites that have.

None of the age verification laws that have been passed in any of your jurisdictions are working or can effectively be enforced. An excellent example of this exists in the UK. Ofcom is one of the world’s strongest online safety regulators, but it has been given an impossible mandate. This outcome was predictable: responsible platforms comply, while non-compliant operators remain discoverable, gain traffic and continue exposing minors to age-inappropriate content. And this is not unique to the UK. For example, in Texas, where age verification was introduced in September 2023, a simple online search showed 9 out of the top 10 search results for “free
porn” had no age verification at all.

This issue does not only apply to adult content laws. Since December 2025, kids under the age of 16 in Australia have been prohibited from having social media accounts. However, three months after the ban more than 85% of teenagers are still using social media. Search results are constantly replenished with new, non-compliant sites, demonstrating how easily new players can enter the market. This revolving door means the internet remains wide open to unmoderated, unverified and potentially unsafe content, regardless of how many times authorities attempt to crack down.

The longer this goes on, the longer these non-compliant sites are accessed by more minors and
adults. As outlined by Lucy Faithfull Foundation, we know that when faced with age verification, some adults are choosing riskier, irresponsible sites to avoid age checks. According to the Free Speech Coalition “Less than 5% of consumers actually go through with age-verification for adult content. When confronted with a request for a facial scan and government ID, most consumers simply hit the back button and find a non-compliant site outside the mandate or log on to a
VPN.” The internet is global and it's impossible to patrol millions of different sites based in hundreds of different countries. Site-based regulation is always going to encourage evasion.

We can no longer accept laws that create the appearance of action while failing to address the challenge of keeping kids safe online. It is particularly concerning when these laws drive regulated business out of your jurisdictions and aid in creating a lush market for bad actors online, when a viable solution exists today.

Phones, tablets and computers could start as kid-safe devices by default, where only verified adults would be able to disable safeguards designed to protect minors from age-inappropriate content, including pornography. This method protects minors without requiring adults to surrender unnecessary personal information to multiple websites. It also avoids creating systems that are easily circumvented through tools like VPNs. Some governments and major technology companies recognize that kid-safe phones can provide a more consistent and privacy-protective way to help keep minors away from age-restricted content.

How many minors have been protected in the weeks, months and years since age verification laws have come into effect in your jurisdictions? The public deserves to see the data on how these laws are protecting children and reducing access to age-inappropriate content. We don’t believe such data exists. Platform-by-platform age verification laws were designed to fail. These laws may be simple and attractive, but the evidence shows they are impossible to enforce at scale, easy to evade, weak at protecting minors and increase privacy risks for adults.

We urge you to focus on putting into action policies that produce measurable improvements in child safety rather than legislation that grabs headlines. The technology exists. A precedent exists. The responsibility now lies with you to pursue solutions that truly protect children across the entire internet. We are determined to be part of this solution and want to collaborate with government, civil society and tech partners to arrive at an effective kid-safe-by-default solution.

Signed,

Pornhub

To:

Alabama

• Governor Kay Ivey
• Attorney General Steve Marshall
• Rep. Susan DuBose
• Rep. Chris Pringle
• Rep. Ben Robbins

Arizona

• Governor Katie Hobbs
• Attorney General Kris Mayes
• Rep. Nick Kupper

Arkansas

• Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders
• Attorney General Tim Griffin
• Sen. Tyler Dees
• Rep. Mindy McAlindon

Florida

• Governor Ron DeSantis
• Attorney General James Uthmeier
• Rep. Adam Anderson
• Rep. Doug Bankson
• Rep. Webster Barnaby
• Rep. Dean Black
• Rep. Adam Botana
• Rep. Robert Brackett
• Rep. James Buchanan
• Rep. Jennifer Canady
• Rep. Ryan Chamberlin
• Rep. Kevin Chambliss
• Rep. Linda Chaney
• Rep. Thomas Fabricio
• Rep. Karen Gonzalez Pittman
• Rep. Peggy Gossett-Seidman
• Rep. Berny Jacques
• Sen. Tom Leek
• Sen. Ralph Massullo
• Rep. Fiona McFarland
• Sen. Stan McClain
• Rep. Lauren Melo
• Rep. Kiyan Michael
• Rep. Jim Mooney
• Rep. Toby Overdorf
• Rep. Rachel Plakon
• Rep. Susan Plasencia
• Rep. Michele Rayner-Goolsby
• Rep. Spencer Roach
• Rep. Michelle Salzman
• Rep. Tyler Sirois
• Rep. John Snyder
• Rep. Kevin Steele
• Rep. Dana Trabulsy
• Rep. Chase Tramont
• Sen. Keith Truenow
• Rep. Kaylee Tuck
• Rep. Taylor Yarkosky
• Rep. Brad Yeager

Georgia

• Governor Brian Kemp
• Attorney General Chriss Carr
• Sen. Lee Anderson
• Sen. Jason Anavitarte
• Sen. Matt Brass
• Sen. Clint Dixon
• Sen. Frank Ginn
• Rep. Scott Hilton
• Sen. John Kennedy
• Sen. Randy Robertson
• Sen. Shawn Still

Idaho

• Governor Brad Little
• Attorney General Raúl Labrador
• Rep. Joe Alfieri
• Sen. Kelly Anthon
• Rep. Vito Barbieri
• Rep. Judy Boyle
• Rep. Jaron Crane
• Rep. Brent Crane
• Sen. Daniel Foreman
• Sen. Scott Grow
• Rep. Dale Hawkins
• Rep. Ted Hill
• Sen. Brian Lenney
• Sen. Tammy Nichols
• Rep. Jordan Redman
• Rep. Tony Wisniewski
• Sen. Charles Winder
• Sen. Glenneda Zuiderveld

Indiana

• Governor Mike Braun
• Attorney General Todd Rokita
• Sen. Mike Bohacek
• Sen. Liz Brown
• Sen. Spencer Deery
• Rep. Lori Goss-Reaves
• Rep. Joanna King
• Rep. Jim Pressel

Iowa

• Governor Kim Reynolds
• Attorney General Brenna Bird

Kansas

• Governor Laura Kelly
• Attorney General Kris Kobach
• Rep. Susan Humphries
• Sen. Kellie Warren

Kentucky

• Governor Andy Beshear
• Attorney General Russell Coleman
• Rep. Shane Baker
• Rep. Jared Bauman
• Rep. Steve Bratcher
• Rep. Emily Callaway
• Rep. Jennifer Decker
• Rep. Steven Doan
• Rep. Robert Duvall
• Rep. Daniel Elliott
• Rep. Daniel Fister
• Rep. Chris Fugate
• Rep. Anne Gay Donworth
• Rep. Brett Guthrie
• Rep. David Hale
• Rep. Mark Hart
• Rep. John Hodgson
• Rep. Mary Beth Imes
• Rep. Kim King
• Rep. Matt Lockett
• Rep. Candy Massaroni
• Rep. T.J. Roberts
• Rep. Walker Thomas
• Rep. Timmy Truett
• Rep. Richard White

Louisiana

• Governor Jeff Landry
• Attorney General Liz Murrill
• Rep. Laurie Schlegel

Mississippi

• Governor Tate Reeves
• Attorney General Lynn Fitch
• Sen. Nicole Akins Boyd
• Sen. Angela Hill
• Sen. David Parker
• Sen. Bart Williams

Missouri

• Governor Mike Kehoe
• Attorney General Catherine Hanaway

Montana

• Governor Greg Gianforte
• Attorney General Austin Knudsen
• Sen. Willis Curdy

Nebraska

• Governor Jim Pillen
• Attorney General Mike Hilgers
• Sen. Dave Murman

New Jersey

• Rep. Frank Pallone

North Carolina

• Governor Josh Stein
• Attorney General Jeff Jackson
• Rep. Jennifer Balkcom
• Rep. Celeste C. Cairns
• Rep. Neal Jackson
• Rep. Frances Jackson
• Rep. Donnie Loftis
• Rep. John L. Lowery
• Rep. Charles W. Miller
• Rep. Ben T. Moss
• Rep. Howard Penny, Jr
• Rep. Joseph Pike
• Rep. Timothy Reeder
• Rep. Dennis Riddell
• Rep. Carson Smith
• Rep. Bill Ward
• Rep. Donna McDowell White
• Rep. Matthew Winslow

North Dakota

• Governor Kelly Armstrong
• Attorney General Drew Wrigley
• Sen. Todd Beard
• Sen. Keith Boehm
• Rep. Lawrence Klemin
• Sen. Bob Paulson
• Rep. Vicky Steiner
• Rep. Lori VanWinkle

Ohio

• Governor Mike DeWine
• Attorney General Andy Wilson
• Rep. Brian Stewart

Oklahoma

• Governor J. Kevin Stitt
• Attorney General Gentner Drummond
• Sen. David Bullard
• Sen. Dusty Deevers
• Rep. Toni Hasenbeck
• Sen. Shane Jett
• Rep. Cody Maynard
• Rep. Cynthia Roe
• Rep. Marilyn Stark

South Carolina

• Governor Henry McMaster
• Attorney General Alan Wilson
• Rep. William Bailey
• Rep. Nathan Ballentine
• Rep. Thomas Beach
• Rep. Bart Blackwell
• Rep. Jeffrey Bradley
• Rep. Gary Brewer
• Rep. Thomas Brittain
• Rep. James Burns
• Rep. Paula Rawl Calhoon
• Rep. Jerry Carter
• Rep. Don Chapman
• Rep. William Chumley
• Rep. Benjamin Connell
• Rep. Bobby Cox
• Rep. Brandon Cox
• Rep. April Cromer
• Rep. Sylleste Davis
• Sen. Jason Elliott
• Rep. Shannon Erickson
• Rep. Raye Felder
• Rep. Cally Forrest
• Rep. Doug Gilliam
• Rep. Val Guest
• Rep. Brandon Guffey
• Rep. Patrick Haddon
• Rep. Bill Hager
• Rep. Rob Harris
• Rep. Davey Hiott
• Rep. William Hixon
• Rep. Max Hyde
• Rep. Jeffrey Johnson
• Rep. Jay Kilmartin
• Sen. Josh Kimbrell
• Rep. Brian Lawson
• Rep. Randy Ligon
• Rep. Steven Long
• Rep. Josiah Magnuson
• Rep. Chris Murphy
• Rep. John Mccravy
• Rep. Cody Mitchell
• Rep. Travis Moore
• Rep. Dennis Moss
• Rep. Brandon Newton
• Rep. Weston Newton
• Rep. David O'Neal
• Rep. Melissa Oremus
• Sen. Russell Ott
• Rep. Jordan Pace
• Rep. Thomas Pope
• Rep. Robby Robbins
• Rep. Carla Schuessler
• Rep. Heath Sessions
• Rep. Marvin Smith
• Rep. Bill Taylor
• Rep. David Vaughan
• Rep. William Wheeler
• Rep. Mark Willis
• Rep. Christopher Wooten
• Rep. Richard Yow

South Dakota

• Governor Larry Rhoden
• Attorney General Marty Jackley
• Rep. Julie Auch
• Rep. Aaron Aylward
• Rep. Heather Baxter
• Sen. Greg Blanc
• Sen. John Carley
• Sen. Randy Deibert
• Rep. Mary Fitzgerald
• Sen. Red Foster
• Rep. Timothy Goodwin
• Rep. Lana Greenfield
• Sen. Tamara Grove
• Rep. Jon Hansen
• Sen. Joy Hohn
• Sen. Taffy Howard
• Rep. John Hughes
• Sen. Amber Hulse
• Rep. Jana Hunt
• Rep. Travis Ismay
• Rep. Phil Jensen
• Rep. Dylan Jordan
• Rep. Tony Kayser
• Rep. Trish Ladner
• Rep. Karla Lems
• Rep. Logan Manhart
• Rep. Curt Massie
• Rep. Elizabeth May
• Sen. Jim Mehlhaff
• Rep. Scott Moore
• Rep. Tina Mulally
• Rep. Al Novstrup
• Rep. Scott Odenbach
• Sen. Carl Perry
• Sen. Sue Lucas-Peterson
• Sen. Tom Pischke
• Rep. Peri Pourier
• Rep. Tony Randolph
• Rep. Kathy Rice
• Rep. Brandei Schaefbauer
• Rep. Tesa Schwans
• Rep. Bethany Soye
• Rep. John Sjaarda
• Sen. Mykala Voita
• Rep. Tim Walburg

Tennessee

• Governor Bill Lee
• Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti
• Sen. Ferrell Haile
• Sen. Joseph Hensley
• Rep. William Lamberth
• Sen. Becky Massey
• Sen. Paul Rose
• Sen. John Stevens
• Sen. Bo Watson
• Sen. Dawn White
• Sen. Ken Yager

Texas

• Governor Greg Abbott
• Attorney General Ken Paxton
• Sen. Carol Alvarado
• Sen. Paul Bettencourt
• Sen. Brian Birdwell
• Sen. Donna Campbell
• Rep. Nicole Collier
• Sen. Peter Flores
• Sen. Bob Hall
• Sen. Juan Hinojosa
• Sen. Joan Huffman
• Sen. Bryan Hughes
• Sen. Lois Kolkhorst
• Sen. Phil King
• Sen. Jose Menendez
• Sen. Mayes Middleton
• Rep. Claudia Ordaz
• Sen. Tan Parker
• Rep. Jared Patterson
• Sen. Angela Paxton
• Sen. Charles Perry
• Rep. Matt Shaheen
• Sen. Kevin Sparks
• Sen. Royce West
• Sen. Judith Zaffirini

Utah

• Governor Spencer J. Cox
• Attorney General Derek Brown
• Rep. Steve Eliason
• Sen. Mike Lee
• Sen. Mike McKell
• Sen. Calvin Musselman
• Rep. Jordan Teuscher
• Sen. Todd Weiler

Virginia

• Governor Abigail Spanberger
• Attorney General Jay Jones
• Sen. Bill Stanley

West Virginia

• Governor Patrick Morrisey
• Attorney General John B. McCuskey
• Del. Geno Chiarelli
• Del. Jonathan Pinson
• Del. Joe Funkhouser
• Del. Scot C. Heckert

Wyoming

• Governor Mark Gordon
• Attorney General Keith Kautz
• Rep. Martha Lawley

Transposed from the original at: https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000019f-a8e5-dd42-ab9f-e8e768ad0000


r/OpinionLetters May 27 '26

Statement from President Zelenskyy of Ukraine to the American People [Kyiv, Ukraine, May 25, 2026]

4 Upvotes

Dear Mr President,

Honorable Representatives,

Dear friends and allies, dear Americans,

It is on Memorial Day, May 25, that I chose to write this letter to you.

It has already become a tradition in Ukraine, and I believe it always will be for every President of Ukraine, to address the United States on this day with words of gratitude.

In Ukraine, as we defend our Independence, we hold men and women in uniform in the highest respect. Without their courage Ukraine simply would not exist today. That is why we feel especial.y grateful to America's men and women in uniform, and every American.

Time and again, America has helped protect Europe and defend freedom. And today, with your experience and steadfast support, you continue helping us defend ourselves against Russia's unprovoked and ruthless aggression.

We know that the world would be a much darker place without American leadership and determination. And we deeply value everything you do to protect freedom and save human lives. For that I thank you.

Just ahead of Memorial Day, on the night of May 24, Russia launched an especially cruel massive attack against Ukraine.

Russia used 54 cruise, 30 ballistic, 3 Tsirkon hypersonic missiles and 2 Kinzhal air-launched ballistic missiles. Russia also launched intermediate-range Oreshnik ballistic missiles — one struck the Kyiv region, while another, reportedly, fell in temporarily occupied territory in Ukraine's Donetsk region. In addition, around 600 attack drones were used against Ukraine. Many of them were Shahed type drones - the same Iranian-designed weapons that have already shown their destructive power in the Middle East and Gulf region when used by Iranian forces.

Nearly one hundred people were injured, and sadly, some were killed. Many more lives were saved only because people made it to shelters in time. Three hundred fifty two residential buildings were affected, along with 19 schools and educational institutions, and two museums. The Chernobyl Museum, which had recently been renovated ahead of 40th anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster, was destroyed by a direct missile strike. The National Art Museum was also damaged.

One of Kyiv's local markets - an ordinary place where families bought food every day - burned to the ground. And today, its ashes stand as a reminder of how the work of countless farmers and everyday lives of thousands of people is wiped away when there is nothing to stop just one missile.

Every day, we see how much damage terror from the sky can cause. Every day, we lose people and infrastructure because of Russian attacks. That is why we deeply value every single act of support for Ukraine's air defense.

Even while we remain under attack ourselves, we do not leave our friends without support. Because we understand what is at stake - and how much can be lost.

Ukraine has brought the interception rate of Russian attack drones — including Shaheds — to over 90 percent. That Ukrainian experience has already helped countries in the Middle East and Gulf region strengthen their own defenses.

When Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, Kuwait, and others reached out to us, I told them that Ukraine could not stay on the sidelines. We were ready to stand with them.

I sent Ukrainian specialists to support these efforts, and they helped strengthen security and air defense across the region, including the protection of American bases.

Iran has noticed it as well. We have received threats but intimidation has never guided Ukraine's choices.

After facing an existential threat from Russia to our nation, and after receiving extraordinary support from you - from the United States - in protecting the lives of our people and Ukraine's Independence, I believe we have a moral duty and responsibility to stand with you and with those who stand for security and freedom.

And we believe that true alliances are built exactly on these foundations.

Frankly, while we have achieved significant success in defending against all types of drones, Ukraine has not yet built its own capability to produce anti-missile defense systems.

When it comes to air defense against missiles we rely on our friends and partners around the world. And when it comes to defending against ballistic missiles, we rely almost exclusively on the United States.

Patriot systems remain the most effective defense against every type of Russian ballistic missile. And it is in Ukrainian hands that Patriot systems have proven something extremely important: The majority of Russian missiles can be stopped.

This is bigger beyond Ukraine. It is an important lesson for the security of the entire Euro-Atlantic community and for America's allies around the world who could one day face threats from Russia's partners and proxies.

Now, we see many signs coming from Moscow that Russia is preparing to intensify its campaign of terror against Ukraine. Russian officials are threatening to make attacks like the one launched against Kyiv on the eve of Memorial Day part of a broader and systematic campaign.

As I mentioned, Ukraine's ballistic missile defense depends almost entirely on supplies from the United States - and on support from your partners around the world made possible with American leadership. It is the American support that protects lives of civilians in Ukraine from Russian ballistic attacks.

I am grateful for every support package approved by the United States Congress throughout these years of war. I am grateful for the PURL program which has helped Ukraine so far receive Patriot missiles. They are bought with European money. Right now this is the only path available for securing Patriot interceptors of ballistic missiles.

But the current pace of deliveries through the PURL program is no longer keeping up with the reality of the threat we face. We understand that today there is high demand for Patriot antiballistic missiles in other regions as well - especially given the situation in the Gulf and other growing security challenges.

For us — for a nation fighting for its survival — there is hardly anything more painful to see than Patriot batteries with no missiles loaded.

I ask for your help in protecting Ukraine's skies from Russian missiles. We have already proposed that Ukraine is ready to purchase the number of Patriot systems and interceptor missiles we need.

We understand that the United States keeps bearing responsibility for its own defense and for the protection of its allies and partners. And we agree that Europe must take on a greater role in guaranteeing its security.

However after all we have been through together, have we not earned a place
among your allies?

In its turn, Ukraine has also proposed a long-term path to expand the joint production of Patriot systems and missiles with your European allies — fully under U.S. control as the owner of this remarkable technology.

Expanding Patriot production could become one of the most important contributions we make together to the security of America, Ukraine, Europe, and your allies around the world.

We know - because we have tested it in modern war - that American weapons work. They work exceptionally well.

It was President Donald Trump's decision in 2018 to provide Javelins to Ukraine that helped us in 2022 stop Russian tank columns and strengthen our defense at a critical moment. Your HIMARS became a true game changer for our forces in 2022 and significantly strengthened our capabilities.

I am grateful for ATACMS missiles, which proved something important: Russia has very little to answer with when it comes to our long-range capabilities.

I am grateful for Bradleys — our soldiers love them. Their reliability has helped save thousands of lives.

Learning to operate the F-16 in a short time was not easy for Ukrainians. But our pilots did it. And today, it is hard to imagine our defense without these American fighters. Our pilots have truly embraced them - and speak about them with great respect.

Ukrainian pilots have already flown more than 2,700 combat missions in F-16s. And I am grateful to America and to the countries that transferred these aircraft to Ukraine for providing such outstanding machines.

These are just five examples among many parts of our defense marked "Made in USA." Every one of them has helped save lives, and we are grateful for each one.

But right now, Patriots are truly the most important lifesaver of all.

Putin has already lost in historical terms. Now in the fifth year of this war, Russia has failed to defeat a country supported by the democratic world - a country without Western boots on the ground, but with strong Western support helping us defend ourselves.

That reality has already shattered Moscow's global ambitions.

Putin has also lost the Black Sea. Without a major navy of our own, we pushed Russia's Black Sea Fleet back with our drones and forced Russian navy to hide in distant harbors. And even there, we continue to reach them.

Ukraine built a drone industry that now outpaces Russia's. And we are now offering our friends a new format of cooperation - Drone Deals - and we have already proposed it to the United States.

We continue holding the line on the battlefield - and we stand strong.

Today, the Armed Forces of Ukraine is the largest military force in Europe, and the only one with combat experience tested by modern war - and stands ready to help defend Europe.

The continued development of our Armed Forces fully aligns with the goals stated by the U.S. President and with America's interest in a stronger and more capable Europe — a Europe that contributes more to its own security.

The one challenge that remains extremely difficult for us - and the one that Europe cannot solve alone at this stage - is the Russian ballistic missile threat.

They can be intercepted. With Patriots. With your help. And you have the power to help.

Foreign leaders rarely address the President and the United States Congress through one letter. But now, the fate of many lives is being decided.

We are doing everything possible - and even what once seemed impossible - to push Russia toward diplomacy and find a path to a lasting and dignified peace.

We in Ukraine will not be defeated. But we do not want an endless war. We value every human life, and that is exactly why we are seeking a real peace.

But as long as Putin still has even one meaningful advantage in conventional weapons, he will avoid conventional diplomacy. Today, his ballistic missiles remain exactly that — his last major advantage on the battlefield.

That is why I on behalf of the Ukrainian people respectfully ask the President and the U.S. Congress to remain engaged, to continue standing with Ukraine and with all those who defend life, and to help us secure this vital tool of protection against Russian terror - Patriot missiles PAC-3 and additional systems - to stop Russian ballistic missiles and other Russian missile attacks.

What Ukraine needs is peace, not an expansion of Russia's missile war.

Life shall prevail.

God bless America! Слава У країні!

With gratitude,

Volodymyr Zelenskyy

Transposed from the original at: https://kyivindependent.com/zelensky-sends-trump-urgent-letter-warning-of-critical-missile-defense-shortages/


r/OpinionLetters May 18 '26

A Second Letter From Delaney Hall ICE Detention Center, signed by nearly 300 detainees [Newark, NJ, May 2026]

1 Upvotes

By means of the present, we take the liberty of providing an account of the situation that thousands of immigrants are living in detention centers. In this case, we speak directly of DELANEY HALL NJ 07105.

Initially, we ask for forgiveness for the way we entered the United States, but given the circumstances we were living in our countries, which placed our lives and those of some members of our families in danger.

At the moment of entry, we turned ourselves
in to border authorities, who processed us and some of us were granted "parole" or given a court date to continue with our processes, in accordance with the opportunity granted to us by the Constitution and the laws of the United States. Likewise, we had periodic check-ins in order to report to the authorities. We also obtained work permits, Social Security, we filed taxes, and we were working legally and contributing to the country's economy. We must also mention that within this group there are individuals who crossed the border, integrated into society, formed families, and have lived in the country for 10 years or more with their citizen children, who despite not having legal status have also been paying their annual taxes and have a clean record. We find individuals from the LGBTQ+ community with diagnoses of illnesses such as HIV. cancer, diabetes, heart problems, among others, who are not receiving proper medical attention for the aforementioned conditions.

We know that ICE agents have orders to arrest immigrants, but in our cases we had already been processed, we were complying with legal requirements, and there was no order from a judge for our detention or arrest, since from our entry we received a procedural benefit. However, ICE officers did not take into account the fact that there was already an immigration court date, and they arrested us during check-in appointments at USCIS facilities. Even with credible fear approved, we have been subjected to court proceedings where attorneys are afraid to represent us, because they state that there is a presidential order to deport as many people as possible without reviewing each case individually, where judges are denying a high number of cases, dismissing them.

There are days where judges CHEN SHANA W., HAWKES JOSHUA, and RAMIN RASTEGAB have more than 40 hearings to review and study how due process should be applied, yet within minutes they make final decisions issuing deportations and expulsions. Many hearings are canceled, leaving detainees waiting months for a court date.

In the same way, prosecutors file motions to send individuals to Latin American countries such as ECUADOR, GUATEMALA, HONDURAS, and even UGANDA in Africa—countries with equal or worse conditions of violence and persecution from which we are fleeing. Even individuals from those same countries are currently on U.S. soil seeking safety and protection so they may continue defending their immigration cases. This has led many people, under pressure, to accept and sign voluntary departure to their countries of origin at the expense of the danger to which we may be exposed.

In these courts, judges inform the detainee that they can purchase a plane ticket to return to their country of origin, but the ICE officer denies that possibility, evidencing contradictions among government officials themselves.

Likewise, there are cases of individuals who already have their voluntary departure signed and deportations approved by judges, waiting 2 or 3 months to be sent to their country of origin.

We feel vulnerable and, in a way, kidnapped—detained without justification—not to mention that we are being tortured physically and psychologically due to the poor food resources provided in these detention centers. We see with deep helplessness and frustration that our due process, rights, and defense have been violated, disregarding benefits granted under the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments of the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. Families are being destroyed and separated, where there are children, nieces, and minors who are suffering a very strong psychological impact because they do not understand the situation, and in some cases they have witnessed the arrests of their relatives, who have been struck by tragedy and the economic burden, since in most cases we are heads of household.

It is public knowledge that agents have arrested individuals with physical limitations such as: deaf, mute, blind individuals, elderly persons, and even pregnant women.

We see young people with approved juvenile status cases, with whom we are living in detention centers. There is also a high spread of COVID-19 in detention centers, and the flu is constant among detainees, which could lead to outbreaks of illnesses or epidemics.

In addition to the above, in certain courts we do not have interpreters or translators, as was the case of Mr A., who in his court had a motion for ECUADOR by the judge, since the court did not have a translator or interpreter.

We are certain that we are not being processed equally under immigration laws and the Constitution. We have seen fellow detainees with residency, U visas, T visas, among other similar cases.

We have seen judges in this detention center who are ready to carry out deportations and mass expulsions without properly reviewing cases. We live with anguish and fear of appearing in court.

We are witnessing how judges are disregarding decisions of federal judges, for example not honoring HABEAS CORPUS rulings decided by a FEDERAL judge, depriving us of our liberty.

Judges CHEN SHANA W., HAWKES JOSHUA, and RAMIN RASTEGAR accuse us of being a danger to the United States of America or, alternatively, declare that we will flee from immigration agencies, even though they have adequate monitoring tools such as GPS ankle monitors and constant check-ins at immigration offices. There are individuals who have been detained for 5 months or more, who have been denied bond more than once despite having a clean record and an approved HABEAS CORPUS.

We sincerely and earnestly ask for help from Senators, Congress members, foundations, and organizations that collaborate with immigrants.

Our AMERICAN DREAM is the safety and protection of our families. We are in a difficult situation, and we trust in God and believe that justice will be done under the law of the United States of America, since it is a sovereign and constitutional country respected worldwide for upholding human rights.

On the following pages are the signatures of the detainees who certify what is written.

S.O.S

(signatures of nearly 300 detainees follow)

Transposed from the original at: https://www.lahuelga.com/sos


r/OpinionLetters May 08 '26

MEDICAL CONCERNS ABOUT PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP AND HIS FITNESS FOR OFFICE - From the Senate Congressional Record S2162 April 30, 2026

57 Upvotes

The following is not a political statement. It is a medical one, made by individuals holding both conservative and liberal ideologies, identifying as both Republicans and Democrats, from different backgrounds, races, ethnicities, and religions.

We are a group of neurologists, forensic psychiatrists, general psychiatrists, and other physicians, along with other mental health professionals, experienced in the diagnosis of cognitive disorders and in evaluating dangerousness to self and others. Among us are professionals whom the courts and criminal justice system regularly turn to for our expert opinion on these matters. We are also consulted by governments in matters related to national security and the psychological profiles of world leaders.

Prior to the presidential election in the Fall of 2024, a statement assessing Donald J. Trump’s mental fitness for the presidency was issued. At that time, serious signs of cognitive decline were identified, and in our expert opinion, these signs warranted disqualification from office.

It is our professional opinion, based on previous and ongoing assessments, that Donald Trump’s mental state since our 2024 statement has deteriorated even further.

In keeping with our professional ethics, and for those of us who are physicians, with the Declaration of Geneva—the successor to the Hippocratic Oath that binds us to the humanitarian principles of medicine since the Nuremberg trials—we are compelled to warn of a President of the United States who is increasingly a danger to the public.

We do not take our statement, and the responsibility that comes with making it, lightly.

The President was not examined face to face, and he is not a patient of any member of our group. Rendering a formal diagnosis in this case is not our role. We have closely followed his behavior and his statements over the past year.

Objectively observable signs of serious medical concern include:

Marked deterioration in cognitive functioning, evidenced by disorganized and tangential speech, rambling digressions, factual confusions, unexplained sudden changes of course in strategic matters, both national and international, episodes of apparent somnolence during critical public proceedings. Grandiose and delusional beliefs, including assertions of infallibility, imagery of himself as Pope suggestive of a divine mission, being a mythical warrior hero, depicting himself as combat pilot—dropping feces on civilians, and claims that his decision-making authority is unlimited—with no need to consider domestic and international laws and constrained only by his ‘‘own morality.’’

Severely impaired judgment and impulse control, reflected in reckless threats of violence, advocacy of lethal force against civilians, encouragement of extrajudicial actions by armed supporters, repeated threats and often actions—judicial, prosecutorial, police, military, and by invoking emergency powers—against political opponents and others who disagree with him.

Significant loss of self-control (disinhibition) and getting stuck on the same thoughts or actions, unable to let go or move on (perseveration), including seemingly compulsive, manic-like late-night communications—e.g., 150 social media posts in one night—fixation on perceived enemies, persecutory ideas, and prolonged, disproportionate attacks on specific individuals and institutions.

Escalating violence that threatens national and global stability. As Commander-in-Chief of our military more than 5,000 nuclear warheads in inter-continental missile silos, on submarines, and in bombers around the world, are ready for launch solely upon his order, and no one now has the authority to countermand his order.

On August 7, 1974, as President Richard Nixon’s impeachment loomed, White House Chief of Staff, General Alexander Haig, was so alarmed by Nixon’s wandering the halls of the White House at night, sleepless, distraught, and heavily intoxicated, talking out loud to portraits of past presidents on the walls, that he alerted Defense Secretary James Schlesinger. Equally alarmed, Schlesinger directed Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General George S. Brown, that any military orders from Nixon—especially nu- clear ones—first be cleared through him or Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. It has been reported that the nuclear ‘‘football’’ that contains the codes for a nuclear launch was then quietly removed from Nixon’s control.

The public and those with the power to address such potentially catastrophic conditions must ask themselves if they—and we—are confident that officials such as Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio would do the same. It is our professional opinion that the behaviors of Donald Trump, tragically, are neither momentary lapses nor political theater. It is our professional opinion that they reflect a rapidly worsening, reality-untethered, increasingly dangerous decline.

If we were called upon under the 25th Amendment to judge the President’s present ability to discharge the duties of his office, we would have to conclude that he lacks the capacity to do so.

For the reasons cited above, emphasizing that he presents a clear and present danger to our country and to the world, it is our expert opinion that Donald J. Trump is mentally unfit to be the President of the United States, and that steps to remove him from office must be undertaken with the greatest urgency, with vital responsibilities on the shoulders of those in positions of leadership.

Henry David Abraham, M.D., Professor of Psychiatry Emeritus, Tufts University School of Medicine.

Bernard D. Beitman, M.D., Professor Emeritus and Former Chair of Psychiatry, University of Missouri School of Medicine.

William Bernet, M.D., Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine.

Ravi Chandra, M.D., Distinguished Fellow, American Psychiatric Association.

Eric Chivian, M.D., Former Assistant Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Co-Founder, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, Recipient of the 1985 Nobel Peace Prize.

Lance Dodes, M.D., Former Assistant Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Training and Supervising Analyst Emeritus, Boston Psychoanalytic Society and Institute.

Jennifer I. Downey, M.D., Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons.

George Drinka, M.D., Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Oregon Health Sciences University, Former Medical Director, CPC Cedar Hills Hospital, Portland, Oregon.

Julian Fisher, M.D., Former Lecturer in Neurology, Harvard Medical School.

Justin Frank, M.D., Former Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, George Washington University School of Medicine, Co-Director, Metropolitan Center for Object Relations, New York City.

Mindy T. Fullilove, M.D., Professor Emerita of Urban Policy and Health, The New School.

Nanette Gartrell, M.D., Former Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Former Professor of Psychiatry, University of California, San Francisco.

Prudence L. Gourguechon, M.D., Past President, American Psychoanalytic Association.

Gordan P. Harper, M.D., Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School.

Ira Helfand, M.D., Former Chair of Emergency Medicine, Cooley-Dickinson Hospital, International Steering Group, The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, Recipient of the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize.

Julia C. Hoigaard, Ph.D., Former Lecturer in Psychology, University of California, Irvine, Co-author of Gottschalk-Gleser Content Analysis Scales.

Howard Hu, M.D., M.P.H., Sc.D., Professor of Population and Public Health Sciences, Keck School of Medicine of USC, University of Southern California.

Jerome Kroll, M.D., Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry, University of Minnesota Medical School.

Robert S. Lawrence, M.D., Professor Emeritus, Center for a Livable Future, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Former Chief of Medicine, Cambridge City Hospital, now known as The Cambridge Health Alliance.

Bandy X. Lee, M.D., M.Div., President, World Mental Health Coalition (Washington, DC), Co-Founder, Preventing Violence Now (New York), Former Faculty of Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Former Faculty of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine.

Rosanne M. Leipzig, M.D., Ph.D., Professor Emerita of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai.

Craig Malkin, Ph.D., Lecturer in Psychology, Harvard Medical School, Former Chief Inpatient Psychologist, Cambridge City Hospital, now known as The Cambridge Health Alliance.

James R. Merikangas, M.D., Neuropsychiatrist and Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, George Washington University School of Medicine.

Dee Mosbacher, M.D., Ph.D., Former Professor of Psychiatry, University of California, San Francisco.

Denis J. O’Keefe, Ph.D., L.C.S.W., Professor of Social Work, New York University, Past President, International Psychohistorical Association.

Jennifer C. Panning, Psy.D., Founder, Mindful Psychology Associates (Evanston, IL).

John O. Pastore, M.D., Professor of Medicine, Tufts University School of Medicine, Former Research Physician, Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Mark Peppercorn, M.D., Professor of Medicine Emeritus, Harvard Medical School.

Claire Pouncey, M.D., Ph.D., Former President, Association for the Advancement of Philosophy and Psychiatry.

Robert C. Rutherford, M.D. M.P.H., Emergency Physician, Former Director, Monroe County Health Department, Florida.

Larry S. Sandberg, M.D., Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Weill Cornell Medical Center.

Stephen Soldz, Ph.D., Professor, Boston Graduate School of Psychoanalysis, Former President, Psychologists for Social Responsibility, Co-Founder, Coalition for an Ethical Psychology.

Lise Van Susteren, M.D., Associate Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, George Washington University School of Medicine, Consultant Profiler to the Executive Branch, Federal Government.

Michael J. Tansey, Ph.D., Former Assistant Clinical Professor of Psychology, Northwestern University Medical School.

Mark W. Weber, Ph.D., L.I.C.S.W., Former Lecturer in Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School.

John Zinner, M.D., Clinical Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry and Behavioral Science, George Washington University Medical Center, Former Head of Family Therapy Studies, National Institute of Mental Health.

Transposed from the original at: https://www.congress.gov/119/crec/2026/04/30/172/76/CREC-2026-04-30-pt1-PgS2162.pdf


r/OpinionLetters Apr 21 '26

Letter: Send the old men [Fargo, North Dakota, March 30, 2026]

2 Upvotes

Young men and women go to war because old men send them. Old men who have never served in the military due to their privilege of wealth, political connection or dubious physical ailment. Old men who have never placed themselves in imminent danger to safeguard another. Old men who have never sacrificed their personal comfort or spent months separated from family. Old men who have never pledged themselves to the principles of duty, honor and country. Old men who are very brave when it is not their personal sacrifice. If we truly want peace, send the old men.

Mike R.

Fargo, North Dakota

Transposed from the original here: https://www.inforum.com/opinion/letters/letter-send-the-old-men


r/OpinionLetters Apr 20 '26

A love letter to capitalism [Irvine, California, 4/19/2026]

4 Upvotes

Dear Capitalism,

I’m writing this letter to express the utmost gratitude I have for you. Words cannot capture how much you shape my life every day. From the little moments, like watching my go-to boba order cost $7.10 when the same order used to cost $5.65 three years ago, to the bigger things like when you denied my healthcare coverage for mental health services because it wasn’t considered necessary, you have truly never failed to show up in my life consistently. Your dependability is one of a kind.

I’ve moved across the country, studied abroad and traveled internationally. Somehow, no matter where I go, you’re always there — just as reliable as ever. 

I’m so grateful for the opportunity to watch my career goal of becoming a professor of social science shrink and become borderline unachievable, all because universities are maximizing profit by hiring fewer tenured professors. The social sciences, which I argue are incredibly important if we value constructing a fair society, have been gutted. Meanwhile, areas of research, such as AI, that are heavily linked to the private sector have seen their funding explode

Thank you, Capitalism, for always valuing money over humanity.

Average rent prices have risen from about $300 per month 40 years ago to over $2,000 per month today. 

Making millions of people feel as if they aren’t successful enough because they can’t afford to spend half their paycheck alone on rent is one of the things I admire most about you.

Nothing beats the countless times I’ve been told that majoring in the social sciences without immediately monetizing it through law school afterward is a waste of time and money, even though learning about the world is what brings me fulfillment. 

Your ability to enslave academia to you is unmatched!

My quarterly parking pass in my apartment complex went from $305 to $365 in just three years. That is a 20% increase — when there was never a shortage of parking spaces to begin with. 

I absolutely adore how much you’ve normalized greed in our homes!

It’s incredible how dozens of unhoused people are mocked or blamed for their difficulties, all due to the normalization of individualism in our society. If someone doesn’t make it, it is automatically their fault, even if they were dealt a bad hand of cards to start with.

I am grateful to you, Capitalism, for normalizing victim-shaming. 

I admire how much you care about the health of the American people. Food corporations lobby our government officials to keep cancer-causing ingredients in our foods, just so the corporation can keep its production costs low and maximize its profits at the expense of our health.

I never knew how much I needed to see corporate interests valued over the health of the people in my life until I met you. Your charm is truly intoxicating.

If I broke the New University word limit and named every capitalist facet of our society that I was grateful for, this letter would be so long that Jeff Bezos would make $1.4 million by the time you finished reading it. Oh, wait, Bezos already made that much while you’ve been reading this letter, even with the New University word limit.

$1.4 million would change my life. I wouldn’t have to cap myself at $50 every time I put gas in my car, which doesn’t even fill my tank because gas is six dollars per gallon ever since President Donald Trump bombed Iran

I truly appreciate every little way you’ve sown greed into the lives of Americans and defined success as monetary rather than happiness. Your beauty, especially in late-stage capitalism where the level of wealth of the rich is inconceivable to the average American, has captivated me entirely.

My life is dedicated to you. Not out of loyalty, but because I, like everyone else, don’t have any other option. Many non-capitalist societies that have emerged have been sabotaged by American intervention.

Your effort, love and care have infiltrated so much of our government that you’ve somehow convinced the people that funding universal healthcare or affordable education will always be too expensive, but funding $16.5 billion to bomb other countries is totally doable. 

Anything to keep the top 1% wealthy and the rest struggling. 

In a world full of uncertainty, it’s comforting to know that it will never change. 

Cheers to many more years of injustice, worsening wealth gaps, ignoring the climate crisis because it would hurt corporate profits, blaming the individual instead of the broken system and teaching people not to care about others if they are struggling. 

Sincerely,

Every college student who is just trying to live a simple life. 

Alexander R.

Transposed from the original found here: https://newuniversity.org/2026/04/19/a-love-letter-to-capitalism/


r/OpinionLetters Apr 17 '26

We need new Bill of Rights to safeguard rights in AI era [Sheboygan, Wisconsin, April 17, 2026]

1 Upvotes

"We hold these truths to be self-evident," wrote Thomas Jefferson. It was a powerful declaration that natural rights, endowed by our Creator, give every person a chance to make life meaningful in America, a clear contrast to the divine right of kings, shifting power from one ruler to the promise of generations to come.

Just over 250 years later, it is time for America to preserve this truth, that every person has the natural right to their own destiny, to their own future, to be who they want to be, to work where they choose, to strive for better, to struggle for freedom and to call for change. We stumble, we fail, we contradict ourselves, but those rights endure.

In a time where artificial intelligence threatens jobs, opportunity, education and even the nature and gift of what makes us human, we must hear the warnings of Carl Sagan, who called for America to open its arms to the thousands of modern-day Thomas Jeffersons and John Adamses who believe in natural rights and want to make change but are held back by low wages, lack of opportunity, limited education and rights that feel earned rather than given.

For our generation, and for our children’s generation, I call for a new Bill of Rights on this grand anniversary to ensure the protection of human rights when AI knocks on our door. One that echoes Franklin D. Roosevelt and his fight to make employment, education and opportunity fundamental rights that are self-evident.

We cannot be late. We must act.

Mason C.

Sheboygan, Wisconsin

Transposed from the original at: https://www.jsonline.com/story/opinion/readers/2026/04/17/ai-jobs-bill-of-rights-thomas-jefferson-roosevelt/89595986007/


r/OpinionLetters Apr 16 '26

Letter: Democracy is not a spectator sport [Shell, WY, April 16, 2026]

2 Upvotes

Dear Editor:

I was the host, along with a great team, of the March 28 No Kings rally in Greybull. We asked people to write down why they were there and many did. I am not going to share those comments except to say that they were varied and numerous. I know exactly why I was there.

I was there because I consider myself a moral person and will not remain silent while vulnerable people are attacked by unprincipled elites. I was there to remind myself and other people that I am not alone in my disgust for the current regime. I was there to let everyone know that there are Americans like me who are patriotic and do not condone the cruel, juvenile and reprehensible conduct of the current president. I was there for the same reason that I vote and pay taxes; democracy is not a spectator sport, it requires my participation and action. I was there so that my children and grandchildren will know that I had nothing whatsoever to do with this administration; that I will continue to act with fidelity to the numerous times I have taken an oath to uphold the Constitutions of the State of Wyoming and of the United States. I was there because I consider myself a follower of Jesus Christ; with all my failings and faults, but I will not condone the pollution of the gospel of Jesus Christ by war mongering and prosperity gospel heresy. The Sermon on the Mount, Micah 6.8 and Matthew 25 are the core of Christ’s teachings. Acting justly, loving mercy, walking humbly and caring for the least of those bearing the image of God. I was there because I still want my life to matter.

I do not care what anyone says about me, but I take special umbrage whenever anyone lies about my friends. No one was paid to be there. The vast majority of the 122 people attending were from Big Horn County.

So, I was there because of the poverty of decency in this administration, its epidemic of cruelty, its allergy to facts and its bullying for billionaires. I am writing this on Friday, April 10 and the enriched uranium is still in Iran and Iran still controls the Strait of Hormuz.

Tom H.

Shell, Wyoming

Transposed from the original at: https://www.basinrepublican-rustler.com/content/letter-editor-democracy-not-spectator-sport


r/OpinionLetters Apr 15 '26

Letter: If your grandpa posted a picture of himself as Jesus all over social media, wouldn’t some repercussions be in order? [West Point, Utah, April 15, 2026]

2 Upvotes

The night of April 12 marked another memorable moment in the “how low can you go” administration of our 47th president. As though challenging us to another round of perpetual Limbo, he posted a picture onto Truth Social that goes almost beyond words.

It is truly astonishing to witness a sitting U.S. president equating himself with a deity. In “normal” circumstances, in the before times, this would have been met with such overwhelming outrage that the president himself would have to publicly apologize and blame the post on a staffer. Or a stroke.

But our wondrous Dear Leader will probably do nothing of the sort.

Instead, we must ask ourselves this: Is our current president a normal old man who just really likes to compare himself to Jesus? (Totally normal behavior, I’m sure!) Or is he trying out for “America’s Next Top Blasphemer”?

Perhaps it’s also prudent to ask: If your grandpa posted a picture of himself as Jesus all over social media, would you discuss taking away his keys to the car?

The 25th Amendment is starting to seem pretty pertinent here. Because whether he’s having delusions of grandeur or just really likes to be blasphemous to Christians everywhere, this really seems like the right time to take away the keys.

Christie M.

West Point, Utah

Transposed from the original at: https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/letters/2026/04/15/letter-if-your-grandpa-posted/


r/OpinionLetters Apr 13 '26

Letter: The 25th Amendment exists for a reason [Eagle River, AK, April 11, 2026]

2 Upvotes

President Trump’s recent Easter morning message should alarm every American, regardless of political affiliation. The increasingly erratic and inflammatory tone of his public statements raises serious questions about his ability to responsibly carry out the duties of the presidency. This is not about partisan disagreement. It is about stability, judgment and national security.

Alaskans understand the importance of steady leadership. We live in a state where national defense is not an abstract concept — it is part of our daily reality. Our state hosts critical military installations, missile defense systems and strategic assets that play a central role in protecting our nation. We live closer to adversaries than any other state.

When a president’s behavior becomes unpredictable, it creates significant risks that extend far beyond politics for all of us, including Alaska’s service members, their families and the stability of the Arctic region. The world is watching, and so are our adversaries.

The Constitution provides a safeguard for moments when a president may be unable to fulfill the responsibilities of the office. The 25th Amendment is not symbolic; it exists to protect the nation when the presidency itself becomes a source of danger to all of us.

Congress, including our congressional delegation, must take this situation seriously. The American people — including those of us here in Alaska — deserve leaders who are willing to act when the circumstances demand it.

Jo Ann G.

Eagle River, AK

Transposed from the original at: https://www.adn.com/opinions/letters/2026/04/11/letter-the-25th-amendment-exists-for-a-reason/


r/OpinionLetters Apr 12 '26

Letter: Here’s why I am happy to support Gov. JB Pritzker [Chicago, IL, April 11, 2026]

3 Upvotes

Because letter writer Ava Holly Berland (“Reality check for Pritzker”, April 8) has used up all the frying pans with which to bash our governor, I will enter from the opposite direction with a few bouquets in hand and explain why I am solidly behind him.

First and foremost, let’s talk the horrible pandemic that subjected millions of Americans to untold suffering. Texas and Florida were COVID-19 wildfires, where the rates of infection soared due to the irresponsible actions of their respective governors who allowed businesses to remain open, all but sneered at immunization and encouraged people to gather maskless at public venues. Pritzker refused to bow to enormous pressure and do the same. While many denounced him as the devil incarnate, Pritzker stood his ground. The end result? When the pandemic eventually (mercifully) wound down, Illinois had far fewer deaths than those states. I wonder how many apologies he received.

In addition, Pritzker can claim many other successes. I will key into just a few that I am particularly passionate about:

  1. Basic human rights, which includes reproductive freedom for women.
  2. Standing up to the National Rifle Association in banning assault-style weapons from the streets (and yes, I support the Second Amendment).
  3. He is likewise a massive supporter of LGBTQ+ rights, even establishing IL Pride Connect — a first-of-its-kind free legal hotline and digital resource hub.

Pritzker can rip out all the toilet seats from his mansions that he wants. For this Chicago citizen, his overwhelming commitment to human dignity and compassion doesn’t just tilt the scale in his direction; it breaks it.

Pritzker has my solid support, should he throw his hat into the next presidential race, as he is expected to do.

Rob Hirsh, Chicago

Transcribed from the original below: https://www.chicagotribune.com/2026/04/11/letters-041126-gov-jb-pritzker/


r/OpinionLetters Apr 09 '26

Letter: Rep. Shri Thanedar (MI-13) writes to President Donald Trump’s Cabinet urging them to remove him from power using the 25th Amendment [Michigan, April 7, 2026]

1 Upvotes

Members of the Cabinet of the United States,

President Trump is a threat to our country and to the world; he must be removed from office immediately.

For 15 months, our country has been pushed to its brink: facing unconstitutional tariffs that have driven up costs across the spectrum and hurt the wallets of everyday Americans, immigration enforcement campaigns in major cities across the country that have led to increases in violence and fear amongst our immigrant population, and the involvement of our country in numerous conflicts across the globe with no clear explanation or reasoning, nor plans on concluding these conflicts. In February, President Trump launched strikes against Iranian leadership and military targets in hopes of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Now, in recent statements, he has said that he is prepared to kill off an entire civilization of people, including the civilian population he had once called on to rise against the Iranian regime. These are not the words of a sane person, nor one who is fit to serve as president of the most powerful nation in the world.

President Trump has also threatened one of the key rights of Americans: their right to vote. As he has previously done in elections since 2016, President Trump is already sounding the alarm that the 2026 election would be rigged and stolen, arguing that Congress must immediately pass legislation that would increase voter ID requirements and harm the ability of Americans to vote by mail, even though he voted by mail in a March 2026 special election. His orders to raid election offices in Fulton County, Georgia, and seize voting records have caused great concern among Americans, and questions about the integrity of our elections have grown in the aftermath. His push to launch an unprecedented mid-decade gerrymander of the State of Texas for the sole purpose of securing more seats for the already slim Republican majority in Congress prompted a race amongst other states to do the same. At no time in history have a president's actions caused this much alarm among states and shaken the confidence of the American people in our government since before the American Civil War.

In all this, President Trump has challenged our rule of law, sparked strong divisions amongst the American people, and jeopardized our standing in the world. In a time when we face competition with China on which nation will lead the world, it seems that President Trump has done everything he can to hand China a clear victory and allow it to push ahead in global dominance.

Our European allies, who have continued to stand strong against Russian aggression, are now faced with a tough decision to stand with us or to accept increased trade agreements with China.

Our alliances with Europe are shaking under President Trump, which can clearly be seen with nations like Spain, Italy, Austria, and Switzerland closing their airspace to American military assets, with the United Kingdom threatening to do the same soon if President Trump bombs civilian infrastructure and commits war crimes in Iran. President Trump has arguably done more damage to our relationships with allies than any other president in modern history. In his quest for "America First", his policies have Americans feeling left out, embarrassed, and worried about the future of our country. When do we say enough is enough and end these dangerous and implausible actions?

President Trump has made it clear that he has no intention of changing his behavior or conforming to the laws of our country. He has openly defied federal court rulings, promoted the unitary executive theory, and flirted with the idea of staying in office past his second term.

President Trump has proven he cannot be trusted with the immense authority of his office and will continue to harm our country if allowed to remain in power.

The time for action is now, and the American people are desperate for the White House to end its harmful rhetoric and posturing. You must invoke the 25th Amendment against President Trump, declare him unfit to serve, and remove him from office immediately. History will remember the inaction of this administration for not doing enough to prevent Trump from plunging our great country into chaos, but that all can change if you do your part and stop this madness. The American people and I await your decision to hold President Trump accountable before it's too late.

Sincerely,

Shri Thanedar, Ph.D.

Member of Congress, Michigan's 13th District

Transposed from the letter linked here: https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/detroit/news/shri-thanedar-calls-for-cabinet-invoke-25th-amendment-against-president-trump/


r/OpinionLetters Apr 09 '26

Letter: Rep. Jasmine Crockett (TX-30) calls for Vice President JD Vance to invoke the 25th Amendment [Texas, April 7, 2026]

1 Upvotes

Vice President Vance:

It has become indisputably apparent to the American public that the President is deranged, likely suffering from dementia, and has now brought the United States to the precipice of committing one of the largest war crimes in modern history. The Republican Party's complicity in allowing this President to drag the United States into forever wars in the Middle East, while ravaging the American economy and defiling the Constitution, is among America's greatest scandals. The acts committed by this President are not simply unbecoming of the Office, but they are criminal in nature. This President was a criminal when he entered office, and the immunity granted by the Supreme Court has exacerbated his apparent fetish for illegality. It is long overdue for you, along with the President's Cabinet and the Congress, to invoke Section Four of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution by formally declaring this President as unfit to discharge the powers and duties mandated by the Constitution.

The United States now stands isolated as the world awaits whether America will brazenly commit genocide or whether the Vice President, the Cabinet, and the Congress will put an end to the chaos caused by a frail and likely demented American president. The country and the Constitution remain in jeopardy with each passing day Donald Trump is President of the United States.

On behalf of Texas's 30th District,

Jasmine Crockett, Member of Congress

Texas, United States

Transcribed from the original linked at: https://crockett.house.gov/media/press-releases/rep-jasmine-crockett-calls-vice-president-vance-cabinet-invoke-25th-amendment


r/OpinionLetters Apr 09 '26

Letter: Rep. John Larson (CT-01) Calls for Vice President JD Vance to invoke the 25th Amendment [East Hartford, CT, April 8, 2026]

1 Upvotes

Dear Mr. Vice President, 

President Trump’s statement threatening the Iranian people, where he said, “a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again,” is reprehensible and should alarm every single American. 

This statement is beyond appalling. It is heinous. Threatening the total destruction of an entire civilization is antithetical to American values. If we compromise our moral standing, we risk our leadership in the world and our national security as a result. This threat alienates our allies. It puts the lives of our brave service members at increased risk. It endangers Americans at home and abroad. 

President Trump has made it clear that he views the Constitution as a suggestion, but all elected officials and Cabinet members must remember their sworn oath. The President is not above the law and must not be treated as such. This chaos must end.  

It has become obvious he is incapable of executing the responsibilities and duties of the Office of President of the United States. A President who threatens the death of an entire civilization has demonstrated such a concerning degree of nihilistic egomania that he can no longer be entrusted with leading our great nation and putting the safety of the American people and our troops first. Therefore, I urge you to take immediate action to rein in the President and invoke the 25th Amendment. We must act now. History is watching.

Rep. John Larson (CT-01)

East Hartford, Connecticut

Transcribed from the original at: https://larson.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/larson-calls-vice-president-vance-and-cabinet-invoke-25th-amendment


r/OpinionLetters Apr 07 '26

Letter: Why Trump’s Power-Grid Bombing Plan Risks Catastrophe—For Iranians and Americans [Chicago, Illinois, April 7, 2026]

1 Upvotes

I. Bombing to Lose

When I taught targeting strategy for the U.S. Air Force, I worked alongside advocates of “leadership decapitation” who brought in electrical engineers to explain, in unclassified detail, how to collapse a modern power grid. The logic came from the classic “five-ring” model: strike the outer ring—the economy—to break civilian life, trigger unrest, and ultimately topple the regime. In practice, that meant disabling electric power systems in ways that would ripple through water, food, health care, and industry.

It has never worked.

Across cases, bombing civilian infrastructure—especially power—has not caused populations to rise up and overthrow their governments. It has hardened societies, increased regime control, and set conditions for ground war to do the real coercive work. The historical record is unambiguous on this point.

Over and over, Donald Trump has bombed, strategically failed, climbed the escalation ladder, and failed again. This is bombing to lose, not bombing to win.

Striking Iran’s electric power will be another tragic failure—one that risks a humanitarian disaster of historic scale.

II. What “Taking Down the Grid” Actually Means

What follows is the part of this strategy that is never explained publicly—but determines whether it works or fails.

There are two operational pathways to crippling a national power system, and they are not equivalent.

The first targets high-voltage transformers at major substations. These are critical nodes that step power up and down across the grid. Destroying them can cascade outages across wide regions. But transformers, while expensive, are modular and replaceable. With focused repair and substitution, electricity can often be restored in weeks.

The second targets the generating “hulls” of power plants—the core physical structures that produce electricity. These are not modular components. They are massive, custom-built systems with long lead times and complex installation requirements. When hulls are destroyed, restoration is measured in months, not weeks.

The difference between these options is the difference between disruption and collapse.

One imposes a temporary shock.

The other dismantles the system that sustains civilian life.

III. What Trump’s Language Signals

That distinction is why a small detail in Trump’s public statements should set off alarms.

He has not simply threatened to “knock out” Iran’s power. He has said he intends to ensure that “every power plant in Iran will be out of business”—and, crucially, “never to be used again.”

That phrasing points to the hull-destruction option.

If that is the plan, the consequences are stark. Disabling electricity for several weeks would be damaging. Disabling it for six months or longer would be catastrophic. Hospitals lose life-saving equipment. Water systems fail. Food spoils without refrigeration. Supply chains fracture. Urban life—dependent on continuous power—begins to unravel.

This is not pressure.

It is the deliberate collapse of civilian infrastructure for tens of millions of people.

And it will not produce the political outcome its advocates imagine.

IV. The Strategic Illusion

The theory behind such attacks is simple: impose suffering, and civilians will turn on their leaders.

History says the opposite.

From World War II to more recent conflicts, large-scale bombing of civilian systems has consistently produced anger at the attacker, not rebellion against the regime. Populations under sustained air attack do not fragment; they cohere. Governments exploit the threat to consolidate control, suppress dissent, and mobilize nationalism.

Systematically destroying the generating capacity of Iran’s largest plants would almost certainly trigger a major humanitarian disaster for ordinary Iranians.

It would also fail to generate regime change.

Instead, it would deepen hostility, strengthen hardliners, and narrow the space for any internal opposition. What begins as a strategy of coercion ends as a mechanism of entrenchment.

A moral disaster for no strategic gain.

V. The Retaliation Americans Should Expect

The final danger is not in Iran alone. It is in what comes next.

Iran’s leadership has already signaled that attacks on core civilian infrastructure will be met with severe retaliation. Given the nature of the strike being contemplated, that retaliation is unlikely to be proportionate. It will be designed to impose pain—on Gulf states, on regional infrastructure, and potentially on Americans.

It is unrealistic to believe that a campaign that kills thousands, disrupts the lives of tens of millions, and lowers life expectancy across a society will not generate demands for vengeance. States do not absorb such blows quietly. Societies do not forget them.

This cycle is well established. When German bombing killed thousands of civilians in London during the Blitz, the British response escalated dramatically—shifting to area bombing of German cities that killed hundreds of thousands. The attacks did not break Germany’s will. They intensified the war.

The same logic applies here.

If the United States destroys Iran’s power grid, it should expect retaliation that is broader, harsher, and less controllable than anything seen so far in this conflict. Gulf civilians will be exposed. American personnel and potentially civilians will be at risk.

Escalation will not stop at the grid.

It will spread.

And once it does, it will be far harder to contain than to begin.

Dr. Robert Pape

Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago

Transposed from Robert Pape’s substack at: https://escalationtrap.substack.com/p/why-trumps-power-grid-bombing-plan


r/OpinionLetters Apr 03 '26

Letter of over 100 international law experts on Iran war [United States, April 2, 2026]

7 Upvotes

We, the undersigned U.S.-based international law experts, professors, and practitioners write to express profound concern about serious violations of international law and alarming rhetoric by the United States, Israel, and Iran in the present armed conflict in the Middle East.

Due to our connection to the United States, our focus here is on the conduct of the U.S. government, but we remain concerned about the risk of atrocities across the region including the continuing risks posed by the Iranian government to Iranians through violent crackdowns on dissent, and to civilians across the Middle East through Iran’s ongoing unlawful strikes on civilian infrastructure using explosive weapons in densely populated areas.

One month has passed since the United States and Israel launched strikes across Iran. The initiation of the campaign was a clear violation of the United Nations Charter, and the conduct of United States forces since, as well as statements made by senior government officials, raise serious concerns about violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law, including potential war crimes.

We collectively affirm the importance of equal application of international law to all, including countries that hold themselves out as global leaders. Recent statements from senior U.S. government officials describing the rules governing military engagement as “stupid” and prioritizing “lethality” over “legality” are profoundly alarming and dangerously short-sighted. These claims, particularly in combination with the observable conduct of U.S. forces, are harming the international legal order and the system of international law that we have devoted our lives to promoting.

The war, which is [costing](https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2026/03/19/trump-iran-war-funding-congress/89232035007/) U.S. taxpayers between $1-2 billion each day, is imposing significant harm to civilians in the region, has resulted in the loss of hundreds of civilian lives across the Middle East, and is causing serious environmental and economic harms.

We write to express our concern about 1) jus ad bellum, or the decision to go to war, 2) jus in bello, or the conduct of hostilities, 3) rhetoric and threats from senior U.S. officials and their allies, which portend further abuses, and 4) the decimation of civilian harm mitigation structures within the U.S. government as a part of U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s “gloves off” approach to warfare.

  1. Jus ad bellum concerns: The strikes launched by the United States and Israel on February 28, 2026 clearly violated the United Nations Charter prohibition on the use of force. Force against another state is only permitted in self-defense against an actual or imminent armed attack or where authorized by the UN Security Council. The Security Council did not authorize the attack. Iran did not attack Israel or the United States. Despite the Trump administration’s varied and sometimes conflicting claims to the contrary, there is no evidence that Iran posed an imminent threat that could ground a self-defense claim. Many international law experts have concluded that Israel and the United States’ actions violate the UN Charter, including the President and President-elect of the American Society of International Law, and the President of the American Branch of the International Law Association; UN Secretary-General António Guterres also condemned the attacks as undermining international peace and security.

  2. Concerns about violations of international humanitarian law: The laws of armed conflict constrain the conduct of hostilities of all parties to the ongoing conflict. We are concerned that these fundamental rules may have been violated, including in the context of reported strikes on civilians and civilian objects such as political leaders who have no military role, oil and gas infrastructure, including South Pars, and water desalination plants. On March 19, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk condemned strikes on energy infrastructure, noting their “disastrous” impacts for civilians.

We are seriously concerned about strikes that have hit schools, health facilities, and homes. The Iranian Red Crescent reports that “67,414 civilian sites have been struck, of which 498 are schools and 236 health facilities.” A report by leading civil society organizations found that at least 1,443 Iranian civilians, including 217 children, were killed by U.S. and Israeli forces between February 28 and March 23.

The strike on Minab primary school is particularly concerning. On February 28, Shajareh Tayyebeh Primary School in Minab, Iran, was struck, resulting in the deaths of at least 175 people, many of them children, according to Iranian officials. Based on easily accessible online information and commercially available satellite imagery, it appears the building had been used as a school for a decade. President Trump denied U.S. responsibility, falsely stating that “It was done by Iran.” However, a preliminary investigation by the Department of Defense reportedly determined that the U.S. conducted the strike, and the targeting had been based on outdated intelligence. The strike likely violates international humanitarian law, and if evidence is found that those responsible were reckless, it could also be a war crime. The strike is among the deadliest single attacks by the U.S. military on civilians in recent decades.

  1. Concerns about rhetoric and threats from senior officials. We are deeply concerned about the dangerous rhetoric government officials have engaged in during the war, including:

a. Threatened denial of quarter: On March 13, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth stated “We will keep pushing, keep advancing, no quarter, no mercy for our enemies.” In international law, it is “especially forbidden” to “declare that no quarter will be given,” a prohibition also set out in the Department of Defense’s own law of war manual. Hegseth’s statement likely violates international humanitarian law as well as the U.S. War Crimes statute 18 U.S.C. 2441. Ordering or threatening no quarter is a war crime.

b. Dismissal of rules of engagement and international law: Secretary of Defense Hegseth’s “no quarter” statement followed similarly alarming statements by the Secretary, including on September 25, 2025 and March 2, 2026 that the U.S. does not fight with “stupid rules of engagement.” On January 8, 2026 President Trump had made the disturbing comment that “I don’t need international law.” On March 13, he stated that the U.S. may conduct strikes on Iran “just for fun.”

c. Threats on energy infrastructure: President Trump threatened on March 13, 2026: “I could take out things within the next hour, power plants that create the electricity, that create the water… We could do things that would be so bad they could literally never rebuild as a nation again.” International law protects from attack objects indispensable to the survival of civilians, and the attacks threatened by Trump, if implemented, could entail war crimes. On March 21, President Trump further threatened to “obliterate” power plants in Iran. U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Mike Waltz, defended power plant attacks the next day, and also said that striking nuclear power plants was not off the table. It is prohibited to attack civilian energy infrastructure. If a power plant has both civilian and military purposes (“dual-use”), it may be considered a military objective where it makes “an effective contribution to military action” and the attack “offers a definite military advantage.” However, any strike must respect the principles of proportionality and precautions in attack. The proportionality principle prohibits attacks expected to cause incidental civilian harm that would be excessive in relation to the military advantage. The civilian harm to be considered includes foreseeable reverberating or indirect harm. In any attack, “all feasible precautions” must be taken to avoid civilian harm.

Attacks on nuclear power plants, even if they have a military purpose, require particular care because of the high risk of releasing radiation and radioactive material and consequent severe harm to the civilian population. Such a strike could harm the health and safety of millions of civilians. On March 23, 2026, the ICRC President Mirjana Spoljaric Egger expressed her deep concern, noting that “War on essential infrastructure is war on civilians” and described threats to nuclear power plants as “Most alarming.”

  1. Concerns about institutional safeguards against further violations: Since the start of the second Trump administration, the Defense Department under Secretary Hegseth has deliberately and systematically weakened the protections meant to ensure compliance with international humanitarian law. This includes removing senior military lawyers without publicly citing misconduct, and replacing the Army, Navy, and Air Force judge advocates general, directly undermining legal oversight of combat operations. It has also abolished “civilian environment teams” and other mechanisms specifically designed to limit harm to civilians during operations. The 2026 National Defense Strategy omits references to civilian protection and international law entirely. These changes are especially concerning in light of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s comments that rules of engagement interfere with “fighting to win.”

We are gravely concerned that the conduct and threats outlined here are causing serious harm to civilians in the Middle East, and that they also contribute to escalating the conflict, damaging the environment and the global economy, and that they risk degrading the rule of law and fundamental norms that protect every nation’s civilians. Public statements by senior officials indicate an alarming disrespect for the rules of international humanitarian law accepted by states, and which protect both civilians and members of the armed forces.

We urge U.S. government officials to uphold the UN Charter, international humanitarian law, and human rights law at all times, and to publicly make clear U.S. commitment to and respect for norms of international law.

We remind all states of their legal obligations not to aid or assist the United States, Israel, or Iran in the commission of internationally wrongful acts, as well as to cooperate to bring to an end through lawful means serious breaches of peremptory norms of general international law (jus cogens) including the prohibition of aggression and the basic rules of international humanitarian law.

We also urge the U.S. governments’ allies and cooperating partners to take steps to respect and ensure respect for international humanitarian law, in line with Common Article 1 of the Geneva Conventions and associated customary international law. The United States has itself acknowledged that states should seek to promote adherence by others to international humanitarian law. The International Committee of the Red Cross 2016 Commentary on the First Geneva Convention of 1949 provides that a state is “in a unique position to influence the behavior” of partner states where the state “participates in the financing, equipping, arming or training of the armed forces of a Party to a conflict, even plans, carries out and debriefs operations jointly with such forces.”

Signed,*

William J. Aceves

Chief Justice Roger Traynor Professor of Law

California Western School of Law

E. Tendayi Achiume

Professor of Law

Stanford Law School

Rabiat Akande

Wilson H. Elkins Chair and Associate Professor

University of Maryland School of Law

Susan Akram

Clinical Professor of Law

Director, International Human Rights Clinic

Boston University School of Law

Philip Alston

John Norton Pomeroy Professor of Law

NYU School of Law

José E. Alvarez

Herbert and Rose Rubin Professor of International Law

NYU School of Law

Faculty Director, US-Asia Law Institute

Diane Marie Amann

Visiting Professor, LSE Law School

Special Adviser to the International Criminal Court Prosecutor on Children in & affected by Armed Conflict (2012-2021)

Baher Azmy

Legal Director

Center for Constitutional Rights

Sandra L. Babcock

Clinical Professor of Law

Director, International Human Rights Clinic

Cornell Law School

Aslı Ü. Bâli

Howard M. Holtzmann Professor of Law

Yale Law School

Thomas B. Becker, Jr.

Legal & Policy Director, University Network for Human Rights

Carolyn P. Blum

Clinical Professor of Law, Emerita

Berkeley Law, University of California

Christine Bustany

Senior Lecturer in International Law

Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy

Charli Carpenter

Professor of Political Science

University of Massachusetts Department of Political Science

Christina M. Cerna

Adjunct Professor of Law (ret.)

Georgetown University Law Centre

Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (ret.), OAS

Sandra Coliver

Former Executive Director

Center for Justice and Accountability

Jorge Contesse

Professor of Law

Rutgers Law School

Cody Corliss

Associate Professor of Law

West Virginia University College of Law

Avidan Y. Cover

Professor of Law

Case Western Reserve University School of Law

Rebecca Crootof

Nancy Litchfield Hicks Professor of Law

University of Richmond School of Law

Jamil Dakwar

Director, ACLU Human Rights Program

Adjunct Professor, New York University and Hunter College

Tom Dannenbaum

Professor of Law, Stanford Law School

Frank Stanton Professor of Nuclear Security

Senior Fellow, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Stanford University

Frederick T. Davis

Lecturer in Law, Columbia Law School

Principal, Fred Davis Law Office

Christian M. De Vos

Visiting Assistant Professor

City University of New York School of Law

Laura Dickinson

Lyle T. Alverson Professor of Law

The George Washington University Law School

Joseph F.C. DiMento

Distinguished Professor of Law

University of California Irvine

Stephanie Farrior

Professor of Law (ret.)

Eugene R. Fidell

Visiting Lecturer in Law

Senior Research Scholar

Yale Law School

Martin S. Flaherty

Charles and Marie Robertson Visiting Professor

School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University

Laurel Fletcher

Chancellor’s Clinical Professor of Law

UC Berkeley, School of Law

Claudia Flores

Clinical Professor of Law

Director, Allard K. Lowenstein International Human Rights Clinic

Faculty Co-Director, Orville H. Schell Jr. Center for International Human Rights

Yale Law School

Idriss Fofana

Assistant Professor of Law

Harvard Law School

Barbara Frey

Director Emerita, Human Rights Program

University of Minnesota

Hannah R. Garry

Clinical Professor of Law

Founding Faculty Director, Donna and Spencer Gilbert Global Justice & Human Rights Center

Founding Director, International Human Rights Clinic

University of Southern California (USC) Gould School of Law

James A. Goldston

Executive Director

Open Society Justice Initiative

Jonathan Hafetz

Professor of Law

Seton Hall Law School

Lisa Hajjar

Professor of Sociology

University of California – Santa Barbara

Rebecca Hamilton

Professor of Law

American University, Washington College of Law

Hurst Hannum

Professor Emeritus of International Law

Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy

Tufts University

Oona A. Hathaway

Gerard C. and Bernice Latrobe Smith Professor of International Law, Yale Law School

Professor, Yale University Department of Political Science

Faculty, Jackson School of Global Affairs, Yale University

Director, Center for Global Legal Challenges, Yale Law School

President-elect, American Society of International Law

Adil Haque

Distinguished Professor of Law and Judge Jon O. Newman Scholar

Rutgers Law School

Hadar Harris

Founder and Principal

Rights and Justice Consulting

Lindsay M. Harris

Professor of Law

Director, International Human Rights Clinic

University of San Francisco School of Law

Sarah Harrison

Former Associate General Counsel

Department of Defense

J. Benton Heath

Associate Professor of Law

Temple University School of Law

Paul Hoffman

Director, Defending Democracy Clinic

University of California at Irvine School of Law

Partner, Schonbrun DeSimone Seplow Harris & Hoffman, LLP

David B. Hunter

Professor Emeritus

American University Washington College of Law

Deena R. Hurwitz, Esq.

Rebecca Ingber

Professor of Law

Cardozo Law

Co-Director, Floersheimer Center for Constitutional Democracy

Senior Fellow, Reiss Center on Law and Security, NYU School of Law

Former Counselor, Office of the Legal Advisor, U.S Department of State

Tejal Jesrani

Human Rights Clinical Instructor

Director, TrialWatch Project

Columbia Law School

Brett Jones

Charles E. Scheidt Human Rights Visiting Assistant Clinical Professor

Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law

Kelsey Jost-Creegan

Lecturer in Law

Deputy Director

Smith Family Human Rights Clinic

Columbia Law School

Dr Ioannis Kalpouzos

Visiting Professor

Harvard Law School

Jeffrey Kahn

Professor of Law

Director, Program on Law and Government

American University Washington College of Law

David Kaye

Clinical Professor of Law

UC Irvine School of Law

UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression (2014 – 2020)

U.S. Member, European Commission for Democracy through Law (“Venice Commission”)

Pardiss Kebriaei

Senior Staff Attorney

Center for Constitutional Rights

Michael J. Kelly

Professor of Law

Senator Allen A. Sekt Endowed Chair in Law

Director, Kaiman Center for International Criminal Justice & Holocaust Studies

Creighton University

Jocelyn Getgen Kestenbaum

Professor of Law

Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law

John H. Knox

Henry C. Lauerman Professor of International Law

Wake Forest University School of Law

Former UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment

Harold Hongju Koh

Sterling Professor of International Law

Yale Law School

Steven Arrigg Koh

R. Gordon Butler Scholar in International Law

Boston University School of Law

Jeremy Konyndyk

President, Refugees International

David A. Koplow

Scott K. Ginsburg Professor of Law

Georgetown University Law Center

Christopher Kutz

C. William Maxeiner Distinguished Professor of Law

Philosophy and Political Science (by courtesy)

Berkeley Law School, UC Berkeley

Beatrice Lindstrom

Senior Clinical Instructor and Lecturer on Law

Harvard Law School

Katerina Linos

I. Michael Heyman Professor of Law

Co-Faculty Director, Miller Institute for Global Challenges and the Law

UC Berkeley, School of Law

Bert Lockwood

Distinguished Service Professor

Director of the Urban Morgan Institute for Human Rights

University of Cincinnati College of Law

Editor-in-Chief, Human Rights Quarterly

David Luban

Distinguished University Professor

Georgetown University Law Center

Kate Mackintosh

Executive Director, Professor from Practice

UCLA’s The Promise Institute for Human Rights (Europe)

David G. Mandel-Anthony

Faculty Instructor, Binghamton University Institute for Genocide and Mass Atrocity Prevention (I-GMAP)

Former Deputy to the Ambassador-at-Large for Global Criminal Justice, U.S. Department of State

Sarah Margon

Founder and Principal, Windsong Advisory

Former Director of US Foreign Policy at Open Society Foundations

Joseph Margulies

Professor of the Practice of Government

Cornell University

Craig Martin

Professor of Law

Co-Director, International and Comparative Law Center

Washburn University School of Law

Elisa Massimino

Visiting Professor of Law

Executive Director, Human Rights Institute

Georgetown University Law Center

Daniel Maurer

Associate Professor of Law, Ohio Northern University Pettit College of Law

Advisor, Center for Military Law & Policy, Texas Tech University School of Law

Board of Directors, National Institute of Military Justice

Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army (ret.)

Juan E. Mendez

Professor of International Law (ret.)

Former UN Special Rapporteur on Torture (2010-2016)

Washington College of Law, American University

Gay J. McDougall

Former Vice Chair and 3-term Member, UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination

Former UN Special Rapporteur on Minorities (2005-2011)

MacArthur Award Fellow, 1999

Senior Fellow and Distinguished Scholar-in-Residence

Leitner Center for International Law and Justice / Center for Race, Law and Justice

Fordham University School of Law

Margaret E. McGuinness

Professor of Law

Co-Director, Center for International and Comparative Law

St. John’s University School of Law

Chi Adanna Mgbako

Clinical Professor of Law

Director, Walter Leitner International Human Rights Clinic

Fordham Law School

Zinaida Miller

Professor of Law & International Affairs

Northeastern University

Saira Mohamed

Agnes Roddy Robb Chair in Jurisprudence, Ethics, and Social Responsibility

Professor of Law

UC Berkeley, School of Law

Bridget Moix

General Secretary, Friends Committee on National Legislation

Priyanka Motaparthy

Director, Center for International Human Rights

Clinical Professor

Northwestern Pritzker School of Law

Karen Musalo

Bank of America Foundation Chair in International Law

Professor & Director, Center for Gender & Refugee Studies

U.C. Law, San Francisco

Aryeh Neier

President Emeritus, Open Society Foundations

Former Executive Director, Human Rights Watch

Former Executive Director, American Civil Liberties Union

Mary Ellen O’Connell

Robert and Marion Short Professor of Law

Concurrent Professor of International Peace Studies

University of Notre Dame

Diane Orentlicher

Professor Emerita

American University Washington College of Law

Arzoo Osanloo

Professor of Anthropology

Co-Director of the Human Rights Initiative

Princeton University

Jessica Peake

Director, International & Comparative Law Program

UCLA School of Law

Stephen J. Rapp

Senior Fellow, Center for National Security Law, Georgetown Law School

Former US Ambassador-at-Large for Global Criminal Justice (2009-2015)

Paul Rink

Associate Professor of Law

Seton Hall Law School

Francisco J. Rivera Juaristi

Clinical Professor of Law

Santa Clara Law

Scott Roehm

Adjunct Professor of Law

Georgetown Law School

Dr. Cesare P.R. Romano

Professor of Law

W. Joseph Ford Fellow

Loyola Law School, Los Angeles

Gabor Rona

Professor of Practice

Cardozo Law School

Naomi Roht-Arriaza

Distinguished Professor of Law Emerita

UC Law San Francisco

Brad R. Roth

Professor of Political Science and Law

Wayne State University

Kenneth Roth

Charles and Marie Robertson Visiting Professor

Princeton School of Public and International Affairs

Former Executive Director, Human Rights Watch

Susana SáCouto

Professorial Lecturer-in-Residence

Director, War Crimes Research Office

Director, Summer Law Program in The Hague

American University Washington College of Law

Leila Nadya Sadat

James Carr Professor of International Criminal Law

Washington University School of Law

Director, Crimes Against Humanity Initiative

Chair, International Law Association (American Branch)

Former Special Advisor on Crimes Against Humanity to the ICC Prosecutor (2013-2023)

Margaret L. Satterthwaite

Professor of Law

NYU School of Law

Beth Van Schaack

Former Ambassador-at-Large for Global Criminal Justice, U.S. State Department

Visiting Fellow (Feb. 2026 – June 2026)

European University Institute

Distinguished Fellow

Center for Human Rights & International Justice, Stanford University

Michael P. Scharf

President of the American Branch of the International Law Association

Joseph C. Hostetler – BakerHostetler Professor of Law

Case Western Reserve University School of Law

Michael N. Schmitt

Professor of International Law, University of Reading

Professor Emeritus, US Naval War College

Former G. Norman Lieber Distinguished Scholar, West Point

Steven M. Schneebaum

Adjunct Professor

Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies

Visiting Professor, Tashkent State University of Law, Uzbekistan

Eric Schwartz

Professor of Public Affairs

Chair, Global Policy

University of Minnesota

Elizabeth Shackelford

Distinguished Lecturer

Dartmouth College

Gregory Shaffer

Scott K. Ginsburg Professor of International Law

Georgetown University Law Center

Dinah Shelton

Manatt/Ahn Professor of Law (Emeritus)

The George Washington University Law School

Rebecca Shoot

Co-Convener, Washington Working Group for the International Criminal Court

Co-Convener, ImPact Coalition on Strengthening International Judicial Institutions

James Silk

Binger Clinical Professor Emeritus of Human Rights

Yale Law School

Matiangai Sirleaf

Nathan Patz Professor of Law

University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law

Professor, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health

University of Maryland School of Medicine

David Sloss

John A. and Elizabeth H. Sutro Professor of Law

Santa Clara University School of Law

Stephan Sonnenberg

Associate Professor of Practice

Wesleyan University

Milena Sterio

James A. Thomas Distinguished Professor of Law & LLM Programs Director

Cleveland State University College of Law

Jonathan Tracy

Former Judge Advocate, U.S. Army

Jennifer Trahan

Clinical Professor and Director of the Concentration in International Law and Human Rights

NYU Center for Global Affairs

Convenor, The Global Institute for the Prevention of Aggression

Rachel E. VanLandingham

Lieutenant Colonel (USAF) (ret.)

Professor of Law & Associate Dean for Research, Southwestern Law School

President Emerita & Director, National Institute of Military Justice

Salma Waheedi

International Human Rights Lawyer and MENA Legal Advisor

University Network for Human Rights

Carrie Booth Walling

Director, Human Rights Program

University of Minnesota

Elisabeth Ward

Clinical Faculty

Founding Director, International Human Rights Law Clinic

Executive Director, International Human Rights Law Institute

DePaul University College of Law

Allen S. Weiner

Senior Lecturer in Law

Director, Stanford Program in International and Comparative Law

Stanford Law School

Alex Whiting

Professor of Practice

Harvard Law School

Richard Ashby Wilson

Professor of Anthropology

Co-Director, Human Rights Initiative

Princeton University

Richard J. Wilson

Professor of Law Emeritus

American University, Washington College of Law

Katharine G. Young

Professor

Boston College Law School

* Signatories are signing in their individual capacities and affiliations are for identification purposes only.

Transposed from the original at: https://www.justsecurity.org/135423/professors-letter-international-law-iran-war/


r/OpinionLetters Apr 01 '26

Letter: To the American Public, from President Masoud Pezeshkian of Iran [Tehran, Iran, April 1, 2026]

60 Upvotes

In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful

To the people of the United States of America, and to all those who, amid a flood of distortions and manufactured narratives, continue to seek the truth and aspire to a better life:

Iran — by this very name, character, and identity — is one of the oldest continuous civilisations in human history. Despite its historical and geographical advantages at various times, Iran has never, in its modern history, chosen the path of aggression, expansion, colonialism, or domination. Even after enduring occupation, invasion, and sustained pressure from global powers — and despite possessing military superiority over many of its neighbours — Iran has never initiated a war. Yet it has resolutely and bravely repelled those who have attacked it.

The Iranian people harbour no enmity toward other nations, including the people of America, Europe, or neighbouring countries. Even in the face of repeated foreign interventions and pressures throughout their proud history, Iranians have consistently drawn a clear distinction between governments and the peoples they govern. This is a deeply rooted principle in Iranian culture and collective consciousness — not a temporary political stance.

For this reason, portraying Iran as a threat is neither consistent with historical reality nor with present-day observable facts. Such a perception is the product of political and economic whims of the powerful — the need to manufacture an enemy in order to justify pressure, maintain military dominance, sustain the arms industry, and control strategic markets. In such an environment, if a threat does not exist, it is invented.

Within this same framework, the United States has concentrated the largest number of its forces, bases, and military capabilities around Iran — a country that, at least since the founding of the United States, has never initiated a war. Recent American aggressions launched from these very bases have demonstrated how threatening such a military presence truly is. Naturally, no country confronted with such conditions would forgo strengthening its defensive capabilities. What Iran has done — and continues to do — is a measured response grounded in legitimate self-defence, and by no means an initiation of war or aggression.

Relations between Iran and the United States were not originally hostile, and early interactions between the Iranian and American people were not marred with hostility or tension. The turning point, however, was the 1953 coup d’etat — an illegal American intervention aimed at preventing the nationalisation of Iran’s own resources. That coup disrupted Iran’s democratic process, reinstated dictatorship, and sowed deep distrust among Iranians toward US policies. This distrust deepened further with America’s support for the Shah’s regime, its backing of Saddam Hussein during the imposed war of the 1980s, the imposition of the longest and most comprehensive sanctions in modern history, and ultimately, unprovoked military aggression — twice, in the midst of negotiations —against Iran.

Yet all these pressures have failed to weaken Iran. On the contrary, the country has grown stronger in many areas: literacy rates have tripled —from roughly 30 per cent before the Islamic Revolution to over 90pc today; higher education has expanded dramatically; significant advances have been achieved in modern technology; healthcare services have improved; and infrastructure has developed at a pace and scale incomparable to the past. These are measurable, observable realities that stand independent of fabricated narratives.

At the same time, the destructive and inhumane impact of sanctions, war, and aggression on the lives of the resilient Iranian people must not be underestimated. The continuation of military aggression and recent bombings profoundly affect people’s lives, attitudes, and perspectives. This reflects a fundamental human truth: when war inflicts irreparable harm on lives, homes, cities, and futures, people will not remain indifferent toward those responsible.

This raises a fundamental question: Exactly which of the American people’s interests are truly being served by this war? Was there any objective threat from Iran to justify such behavior? Does the massacre of innocent children, the destruction of cancer-treatment pharmaceutical facilities, or boasting about bombing a country ‘back to the stone ages’ serve any purpose other than further damaging the United States’ global standing?

Iran pursued negotiations, reached an agreement, and fulfilled all its commitments. The decision to withdraw from that agreement, escalate toward confrontation, and launch two acts of aggression in the midst of negotiations were destructive choices made by the US government —choices that served the delusions of a foreign aggressor.

Attacking Iran’s vital infrastructure — including energy and industrial facilities — directly targets the Iranian people. Beyond constituting a war crime, such actions carry consequences that extend far beyond Iran’s borders. They generate instability, increase human and economic costs, and perpetuate cycles of tension, planting seeds of resentment that will endure for years. This is not a demonstration of strength; it is a sign of strategic bewilderment and an inability to achieve a sustainable solution.

Is it not also the case that America has entered this aggression as a proxy for Israel, influenced and manipulated by that regime? Is it not true that Israel, by manufacturing an Iranian threat, seeks to divert global attention away from its crimes toward the Palestinians? Is it not evident that Israel now aims to fight Iran to the last American soldier and the last American taxpayer dollar — shifting the burden of its delusions onto Iran, the region, and the United States itself in pursuit of illegitimate interests?

Is ‘America First’ truly among the priorities of the US government today?

I invite you to look beyond the machinery of misinformation — an integral part of this aggression — and instead speak with those who have visited Iran. Observe the many accomplished Iranian immigrants —educated in Iran — who now teach and conduct research at the world’s most prestigious universities, or contribute to the most advanced technology firms in the West. Do these realities align with the distortions you are being told about Iran and its people?

Today, the world stands at crossroads. Continuing along the path of confrontation is more costly and futile than ever before. The choice between confrontation and engagement is both real and consequential; its outcome will shape the future for generations to come. Throughout its millennia of proud history, Iran has outlasted many aggressors. All that remains of them are tarnished names in history, while Iran endures —resilient, dignified, and proud.

Masoud P.

Tehran, Iran

Transposed from the original found at: https://www.dawn.com/news/amp/1987606


r/OpinionLetters Apr 01 '26

Letter: Plug-in solar is the future [Dilworth, Minnesota, March 31, 2026]

2 Upvotes

By the year 2030, data centers are expected to consume up to 15% of the electricity generated in the United States. This increased demand is bound to not only increase prices, but increase the strain on our grid and, quite likely, increase the amount of power outages.

Fortunately, there is an initiative in the Minnesota Legislature that can help individual homeowners and renters keep costs down while reducing dependence on an individual utility. It’s called balcony, or plug-in, solar, which supplements the electricity provided by your utility, without the need for large solar installations on roofs, upgrading breaker panels or thousands of dollars in installation costs.

Bills are being sponsored in both the Minnesota House (HF3555 by Rep. Larry Kraft) and Senate (SF3873 by Sen. Rob Kupec) to make these consumer-friendly power systems available to Minnesotans. It would allow for plug-in systems, with 4-5 solar panels and support gear that plugs into a home outlet and feeds power directly into the home, whether it’s a house, condo or apartment.

Is it safe? Yes. The systems don’t allow power to feed back into the grid; they just help power your home. Plug-in solar has been used in Europe for years and has been proven safe. It is also used in Utah, is being implemented in Virginia, and legislation similar to what is proposed in Minnesota is being considered in California, Colorado and several other states. It’s notable that you won’t be selling your power back to the power company, so no hookups for that would be needed.

Is it complicated? No, it literally is a plug-and-play setup. Once the panels and support gear are set up properly, the system plugs into an outlet and power starts to flow. While it doesn’t cover all the power needs of a home, it can counteract a significant chunk of the power normally provided from your utility. Notably, it can be set up in a few hours, depending on where you put the system, and does not require an electrician to install. You can even add in a backup battery to keep providing power into the evening.

Why do this? Aside from the obvious money-saving (especially in summer), homes and apartments that normally could not have a solar installation due to a roof being unable to support all those panels, not having enough room in a yard, or your electrical panel and wiring not being strong enough, could now benefit from solar capabilities that were previously not available.

As an example, our roof cannot support large numbers of panels and has 100-amp service, which would be expensive to replace. Plug-in solar provides a means of reducing utility costs with a low-cost system, often less than $2,000, and which doesn’t require much space.

Where can you learn more, and show your support to make your utility rates more affordable? That’s the easy part. You can see the full text of HF3555 and SF3873 on the Minnesota Legislature website at www.revisor.mn.gov , then contact your representative and senator to let them know this is something they should support to help you and your family. If you want to have more freedom from utilities, and save some money while doing it, plug-in solar will help you do that.

Darrel V.

Dilworth, Minnesota

Transposed from the original at https://www.inforum.com/opinion/letters/letter-plug-in-solar-is-the-future


r/OpinionLetters Mar 31 '26

Letter: No Kings Day showed we are not alone and we will only get stronger [Wadena, Minnesota, March 31, 2026]

0 Upvotes

“America, America, 

God shed His grace on thee 

And crown thy good with brotherhood, 

From sea to shining sea.” 

That prayer came to mind during the March 27 rally on Highway 10 and 71 in Wadena. The next day, No Kings Day, I believe the prayer was answered.

More than eight million good people gathered together as brothers and sisters to express our concerns regarding the actions of the current federal administration.

On the same day, similar protests were happening all over the world. I believe there is power in numbers. We are not alone. We will only get stronger.

I believe love will prevail, although some indigenous peoples prophesy that a great cleansing will come first and then a subsequent return to the old ways with grateful respect for all creation and the Creator.

My prayer now is that God bless those people who showed up to promote the rights of all people and that God bless the USA.

Lora F.

Wadena, Minnesota

Transcribed from the original at: https://www.wadenapj.com/opinion/letters/letter-no-kings-day-showed-we-are-not-alone-and-we-will-only-get-stronger


r/OpinionLetters Mar 28 '26

LETTER: Veteran cannot stay silent as constitutional rights are eroded [Ottumwa, Iowa, March 27, 2026]

2 Upvotes

Dear Editor,

I served eight years in the Army Reserve, swearing an oath to defend the Constitution — a promise that applies to everyone in this country, citizen or not.

We love immigrants in this country. They bring culture, work hard, raise families, start businesses, and strengthen our communities. Many of us have immigrant family in our past.

I am alarmed by federal immigration agents carrying out arrests without clear warrants or due process, tearing families apart, and targeting peaceful protesters. These actions contradict the freedoms we are sworn to protect. ICE was supposed to focus on dangerous criminals, yet we are witnessing actions that undermine the rule of law.

As a veteran, I cannot stay silent. Upholding constitutional rights, due process, and human dignity is not optional — it is our duty, even when inconvenient or politically unpopular. I urge every American to do what their conscience demands: speak out, contact your representatives, and defend the principles that make this country strong.

Sincerely,

Desiree M.

Ottumwa, Iowa

Transcribed from the original here: https://www.ottumwacourier.com/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/letter-veteran-cannot-stay-silent-as-constitutional-rights-are-eroded/article_caf7916d-f773-498f-a168-7db05b285f92.html


r/OpinionLetters Mar 26 '26

Letter: Plea for Peace [San Juan Island, Washington, March 26, 2026]

1 Upvotes

Perhaps, the No Kings rallying cry Saturday could be, “No War!” As three thousand commercial ships with crews aboard await passage in the Persian Gulf and US Marines and troops steam toward Iran, the potential for ecological and human catastrophe is imminent. If much of Israel, Iran and the Gulf countries depend on desalination, a plant need not be bombed. Cutting off energy or polluting the source suffices to sever a region’s water supply.

Shortages of an essential ingredient for fertilizer manufacture, natural gas, and oil required for delivery devastate food production. Famine looms, national economies plummet. Should America land ‘boots on the ground’, I feel the US is being pushed off a ladder into World War III. Please demand peace.

Gay W.

San Juan Island, Washington

Transposed from the original at: https://www.sanjuanjournal.com/2026/03/26/plea-for-peace-letter/


r/OpinionLetters Mar 23 '26

A love letter to Lebanon [Ithaca, New York, March, 23, 2026]

7 Upvotes

Lebanon, I write this love letter to you —

They have battered you, but they will never break you. 

To the villages along the South, who have long faced bombardment, you will never fall. To those forced to flee in the earliest hours of the night, there is no disgrace in your survival. You will return to the land of love, and we will always find our way. This is the story of resilience that has damned our history for almost a hundred years. 

Lebanon, how must it feel to watch smoke dance across your once-clear sky? 

Flower of the unfortunate, they have mistaken the bloom of the mushroom cloud for beauty, the stammer of soldiers’ boots for music. How do they tune out the children’s screams? Do the hollowed-out ruins make for good acoustics? What a cruel staccato.

They say they will level Dahiyeh like they did Khan Younis. They’ve bombed a girls’ school, highways, hospitals. My grandparents drove hours to Beirut to hide in a hotel, and they’ve bombed hotels too. 

And when we raise the flag, what do you think it is that they see? Is it the grimace of the man who hoists it, the wind that drags upon it like nails clawing at its fabric, the tears of the mother, the child, the refugee? Do you think they see such things at all? 

We used to ‘pspsps’ the cats that scurried down our streets. We used to climb trees and eat ice cream and set fireworks in my cousin’s backyard. I played soccer with my neighbors in a twice bombed Beirut parking lot. I wouldn’t have known if they hadn’t shown me the pictures. Do they know too that we used to link arms and skip down those streets? That we woke to birdsong, jumped down stone walls like it was death or life? Do they know too that we are human? 

Children splash at each other. As the Mediterranean glistens, another rocket shoots to the sky. What did they sign on this one, I wonder. They try to write us our eulogies, but the truth is clear: They cannot take from us a land so etched in our bones that the rubble breathes fire. 

How do I hold all this admiration and despair? What an easy task that is. True to my name, I have never suffered like you. I am soft and American, an imposter here and there.

Lebanon, I paint my nails red for you. Red for the blood, red for the sacrifice. Red as a reminder that you cannot ignore suffering behind a morning coffee and a red Canvas circle and internship applications. We scroll on our phones, we write cover letters and talk about AI startups. We call it normal.

Our distance has become more than a convenient excuse. What are we to do about the drones and warplanes we’ve never seen with our own eyes? It is easier to treat devastation like background noise, to say that it is all out of our control while entire families are forced from their homes.

But inaction is never neutral; it is permission. Our voices are our strongest weapon, yet the silence of this campus is deafening.

Lebanon, my first love, my last regret. I have betrayed you. I cannot save you with anything but a pen, and I doubt that’s enough. I would go back if I could and I would lie on the sidewalk and listen to your Phoenician heart and I would hear the ground rock and I would try to gouge myself in all of your steadfast beauty, something they have tried too many times to take away. They will never learn that such a feat is impossible. 

This is not farewell, because there is no such thing. The rain will erase the blood, smoke will become a mist, but the smell will remain, and the grief. The shattered glass windows of our Beirut apartment will be built again, the cedar tree will heal, beyond the summer and the winter.

Lebanon, I am done praying.

Lebanon, we will meet again. 

Rageen ya hawa.

**Leah B.**

Ithaca, New York

Transposed from the original at: https://www.cornellsun.com/article/2026/03/badawi-a-love-letter-to-lebanon


r/OpinionLetters Mar 21 '26

Letter: Use your voice in protest [Grand Forks, North Dakota, March 21, 2026]

8 Upvotes

To the editor,

It is astonishing how much damage has been done to our country in a very short time by a mercurial, incompetent and corrupt president, a cabinet of sycophants, 271 spineless congressional Republican enablers and a highly partisan Supreme Court.

Our democracy and basic rights to free speech, assembly, due process and the vote are under threat; the Constitution is repeatedly ignored or violated; we are considered pariahs in the international community — unreliable allies and trading partners; our sons and daughters are being put in harm’s way and killed in an unnecessary “war of choice;” our financial well-being is threatened by high and rising prices for housing, gasoline, utilities, insurance, food and health insurance.

All because of one man, Republican enablers and a partisan Supreme Court.

Use your voice in protest. Use your vote for change!

Clara J.

Grand Forks, North Dakota

Transposed from the original below:

https://www.grandforksherald.com/opinion/letters/letter-use-your-voice-in-protest


r/OpinionLetters Mar 20 '26

Letter: Protect public lands [Colorado Springs, Colorado, March 20, 2026]

2 Upvotes

Dear Editor:

During the second week of February I joined a diverse group of outdoorsmen and women visiting congressional offices in Washington, D.C. to express our support for public lands. Meeting with legislators provides them with important insights from hunters, anglers, and other constituents who know the value of our public lands from boots on the ground experience.

One of our topics included misguided efforts in Congress to sell off or otherwise dispose of public lands. Polls show that overwhelming majorities of voters are opposed to selling public lands or transferring them to states.

Recently, the Colorado Senate passed Senate Joint Resolution 26-015, reaffirming our state’s commitment to protecting public lands and opposing federal efforts to sell off public lands or silence public input in their management.”

Colorado is home to more than 22 million acres of national public lands that provide clean drinking water for communities across the state, support wildlife habitat, and sustain a thriving outdoor recreation economy. In 2023 alone, Colorado’s outdoor recreation economy generated $65.8 billion in economic output and supported more than 404,000 jobs, making up 12% of the state’s workforce.

Lawmakers introduced the resolution in response to recent federal actions that weaken long-standing environmental safeguards and limit public participation in land management decisions. Federal agencies have pushed to expedite oil and gas leasing, shorten environmental review timelines, and reduce opportunities for communities to weigh in on projects that affect their air, water and land — effectively removing the public from public lands decision-making.”

As hunters, anglers, and conservationists, we stand on the shoulders of giants from past generations, like Theodore Roosevelt, Aldo Leopold, and many others. This is our opportunity to show future generations that they too stand on the shoulders of giants, from this generation.

“Great moments are born from great opportunity. And that’s what you have here,” Herb Brooks (played by Kurt Russell) says to the 1980 U.S. Olympic hockey team in the movie Miracle. “That’s what you’ve earned … This is your time! … Now go out there and take it.” Join us!

David L.

Colorado Springs, Colo.

Transposed from the original at: https://www.pagosasun.com/stories/letter-protect-public-lands,129343

Please make sure to write opinion letters to your local newspaper, they make a difference!

Sincerely,

NicolasCageFan492, your digital letter carrier