I feel obliged to respond to Harold F. Crowell's letter "Beware of Obama's willingness to negotiate" (July 24), because he is wrong and his arguments are specious. He writes that negotiating with our adversaries is the wrong thing to do. In particular, talking with Iran is bad and that doing so would be a sign that they are bringing the West to its knees. That they would love to see a Democrat elected. He is basing this on what his Middle Eastern friends and acquaintances told him and that what they say must be true because they are truthful and reliable and speak Arabic.

I don't think Mr. Crowell is a liar. He really does believe what they're telling him. I don't care to whom he's listening to or has dinner with or whether he speaks a lot or a little Arabic.

His question of why would the Muslim world be interested in our presidential election and why they openly support Obama, even if true, has a simple answer - they don't want a war on Iran. The rest of the world doesn't either. They also want a just settlement of the Palestinian problem. Mr. Crowell, the whole world pays attention to the American election. We're one of the most powerful nations in the world. Who wouldn't be interested?

Mr. Crowell says we should be concerned that Obama would sit down with the Iran to talk about the issues we're concerned with, and that the Muslim world likes Obama because he would further their world conquest. The implication is that Sen. McCain won't negotiate and that that is evidently a good thing.

We have serious problems in the Middle East. Iraq, the Palestinian situation, and one that could have a profound effect on the region, the world and you - Iran. The Iranian problem is very dangerous. The belligerent comments made by Iran, like Israel should cease to exist, worry Israel, the U.S.A., the other countries of the region, and the world. If they are allowed to acquire a nuclear capability they may act out these pronouncements. It'll only take one atom bomb to destroy the little country called Israel. Therefore, Israel has stated many times that they will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. And you better believe them.

Why is the world worried about Israel attacking Iran? Iran is a big country. Their nuclear production sites are well entrenched, well protected, and dispersed. A conventional weapons attack will not be enough to accomplish the mission. Israel doesn't have the resources to conduct a drawn out conventional weapons attack to destroy these sites and to destroy their retaliatory capabilities. Israel's losses would be unacceptable, as would ours should we be involved. It has been reported that Iran is purchasing an anti-aircraft missile system from Russia. It would take approximately six months to a year to become operational. Besides missiles with possible gas warheads fired on Israel, the first target Iran will strike will be the Saudi oil fields, thereby wreaking havoc on the world's economies. Therefore, the only alternative is to use tactical nuclear weapons to prevent this from happening. This is what is meant when you hear "all options" are on the table. The attack has to be quick and definitive.

That's why it's important to meet with them to talk about the consequences of their nuclear program. And that is what the world is doing. If "talking" is a sign of weakness, why did Iran attend the July 19 meeting in Geneva to discuss their nuclear ambitions? Is that a sign Iran is weak? Of course not. The current administration sent Undersecretary of State William Burns to the meeting. Is that a sign we're weak and on our knees? Of course not. But Mr. Crowell is correct when he says they think it is: Iran recently called the U.S. participation in the latest round of nuclear talks in Geneva "a victory for Iran." Believe that and I have a bridge I want to sell you in Brooklyn. Do I care if Hamas endorses Obama? Of course not. For he too realizes that if an attack on Iran occurs they also will cease to exist.

But as David Halberstam said in his book "The Best and Brightest", "sometimes events are in the saddle riding mankind." So no matter who is elected in November, unless Iran comes around and allows inspections of their nuclear facilities, Israel will attack Iran and very well may use nuclear weapons for the reasons previously stated.

That's why the world is worried with their intransigence and want dialogue. But as it's been reported (July 24): "Iran remains defiant. Iranian Vice President Gholam Reza Aghazadeh signaled that it will no longer cooperate with U.N. experts probing for signs of clandestine nuclear weapons work, confirming the investigation is at a dead end a year after it began."

That is what should bother you

In conclusion, the world is talking with Iran because, as you all know, things can get out of hand very quickly in a war. To find out for yourself what I'm talking about, do a web search using Iran, Israel, War. And you'll be as concerned as I am.

JOSEPH MASCIA lives in Mansfield.