The Goal Is Daunting,

But It's Critical

Before criticizing President Obama's "overtures" to Muslim -countries, -consider these recent -comments by Jack Gold, professor at the George Mason School of Public Policy:

1. Most of the world's future -population growth will occur in today's youngest, poorest, most -heavily Muslim countries.

2. For the first time in history, most of the world's population will be urbanized, and the largest cities will be in the poorest Muslim countries.

3. Younger populations in fast-urbanizing Muslim countries are extremely vulnerable to gangs, crime lords and insurgencies, and are prone to anarchic violence. Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Nigeria, Pakistan and Turkey are terrorists' prime -incubators for recruitment and -networks. This is largely due to a lack of food, water, education, employment, health care, proper sanitation, legitimate law enforcement and a lawful judicial system.

4. Most Muslims view the West as antagonistic and militaristic, and they blame the West for the current state of affairs.Today there are 28 million Afghans, and by 2050 there will be 75 million.

If the United States can help Afghanistan become self governing, prosperous and reliably stable, the example might motivate the 1 billion other young Muslims growing up in poverty around the world to view us as a friend rather than an enemy. Major changes don't happen overnight, the new global economy won't happen overnight, and certainly a mutual -beneficial relationship between Muslims and the West won't happen overnight.

For the sake of a win-win happy -ending for all, a future properous -coexistence between the poverty-stricken Muslim countries and the more industrialized nations is a -necessary, unchangeable goal of the highest -priority. To his credit, Obama's presidential global political instincts recognized the immediacy, scope and rewards of such an -unpopular, daunting undertaking, thus his "overtures."

"That's one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."

Harvey Thibodeau

Pinehurst

Committed to Choice

Thank you for Paul Dunn's rational thoughts on the controversial subject of abortion (March 14).

I am firmly committed to pro-choice. I cannot understand why -anyone should think our government should be involved with such personal decisions.

The most adamant pro-life advocates I have encountered always say, "Just don't ask me to pay for the abortions," or, "I don't believe in -murder." I wonder who they think pays for all of the social services -provided for unwed teenagers and others who have no means of support. An abortion at $300 is a drop in the bucket compared with Medicaid and other social services provided, -especially since most abortions are probably paid for privately.

If you ever organize a rally on --pro-choice or end-of-life counseling, count me in. I wonder if all these --pro-lifers are also against capital punishment.

Rita Clayton

Pinehurst

No Simple Answer

Paul Dunn's March 14 column -concerning the abortion debate seemed to state that the cumulative number of abortions in the nation has decreased from 29.3 million in 1981 to 21.1 million in 2001. My understanding is that the number of abortions has increased from 1967 to 2009 more than 1 million per year to almost 50 million.

With the exception of the current health-care initiative, no other social controversy has affected people's opinion to the extent that abortion has. Issues such as gun control, school sex education and race relations are simply not comparable issues, at least in order of magnitude of numbers of people holding a definite opinion.

Whether pro-choice or pro-life, every person should ask themselves one simple question concerning -abortion. That question suggested by Dr. Billy Graham is: Where are the children of abortion now?

Tom Snead

Seven Lakes West