Dear Editor,
I read the Sept. 24 editorial "Hurricane
Ch�vez,"
characterizing President
Hugo Ch�vez as a petro-bully with some amusement. What rich irony. Michael
Klare in "Blood and Oil," Kevin Phillips in "American
Theocracy," Noam Chomsky in "Survival or Hegemony" and many
others make a compelling case that President Bush's invasion of Iraq was about
control of the world oil supply. Certainly if our country invaded and destroyed
Iraq to control oil and maintain our hegemony, then labeling Mr.
Chavez as a petro-bully is arrogant and hypocritical.
In defense of Mr. Ch�vez, most nations including the United States, the United
Kingdom, Norway and Mexico are experiencing reduced oil production.That is
called depletion. Blaming Venezuela's depletion on its president ignores a
worldwide phenomenon. But if Mr. Ch�vez is cutting back Venezuela's production through premeditated planning or serendipitous incompetence, it is the right thing to do.
Selling off Venezuela's future to Americans so that we might waste it in our
sport utility vehicles would be tragic. It is better to leave it in the ground.
I would like to see The Post discuss the Iraq war tragedy and why we invaded
that country. As a nation, we need to confront our past honestly if we are to
have a hope of extracting ourselves from that quagmire.
TONY NOERPEL
Founder
Loudoun County Committee for a Sustainable Society
Lovettsville