Letters to the Editor | May 7, 2025

The Inquirer recognized the 50th anniversary of the end of the Vietnam War last week. Personally, this time also marks the 57th anniversary of my refusal to cooperate with the draft that made the Vietnam War possible. I served 16 and a half months in prison for this, joining many thousands of other protesters whose actions eventually made the war politically unsustainable. These anniversaries left me wondering if the leaders and people of the United States have learned the key lesson of the war: that the U.S. cannot and should not impose its will on other nations.

That war was never about democracy. As President Dwight D. Eisenhower said, had elections been held, “possibly 80 per cent of the populations would have voted for the Communist Ho Chi Minh.” The real reason was the U.S. policy that no nation may establish an economic and political system without U.S. approval. The costs included 58,000 American lives and millions of Asian lives. Afghanistan and Iraq were two more failed wars, costing hundreds of thousands of lives and roughly $8 trillion. The only winners were the profit-hungry military contractors. Now, Republican leaders want to increase military spending by $150 billion. Let’s stop this madness.

John Braxton, Philadelphia, jwbraxton@gmail.com

So, five-time draft dodger Donald Trump wants a Vladimir Putin/Kim Jong Un-style military parade on his birthday? No way! As a proud veteran, I can’t think of a more disgusting display of narcissism. Celebrate the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army? Absolutely yes! But turn it into a celebration for someone who’s called our fallen heroes “suckers and losers”? Absolutely not! How have we, as a nation, fallen this low? Millions of us need to flood Washington and block the parade route to stop this travesty. After all, they can’t send all of us to their gulag in El Salvador.

Robert Saettler, Westmont, robsaettler@gmail.com

After 30 years at Crozer-Chester Medical Center, I watched with heartbreak as its doors closed — not because of a failure in care, but because of a failure in leadership and conscience. Crozer was more than a hospital. It was a united force of doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and staff serving all patients, regardless of zip code, income, or race. They took pride in delivering the best care possible. But Crozer wasn’t destroyed by budget cuts or changing times. It was sold out.

The leadership under Joan Richards and the board of directors handed this trusted institution to Prospect Medical Holdings, a private equity firm that extracted nearly $400 million — plus $94 million in executive payouts — while gutting services and livelihoods. This isn’t just corporate greed. It’s a public health failure. And it won’t stop here unless we all speak out. Pray for the patients who will now suffer and remember this moment. What happened to Crozer is a warning to us all. It’s more of the same greed that is happening in Washington.

Dianne Susi, Wilmington

The Inquirer’s “Philadelphia won’t have a cardinal elector. Here’s why.” is a very interesting article on the age limit for voting cardinals. But the story doesn’t touch on the real reason Philadelphia’s 1.6 million Catholics will have no representation in the conclave. The matter has to do with politics. Philadelphia has long been seen as a conservative diocese. Thus, there will be no more cardinals from Philadelphia. It is essential that conservatives be excluded from church business.

Mike Egan, Plymouth Meeting, mchlegan@gmail.com

The Eagles certainly deserved their recent day in the sun at the White House. But Saquon Barkley took things too far in terms of Donald Trump. Does the premier NFL running back realize that fraternizing with this president sends a bad message to many of his fans — particularly minorities who care about justice, the rule of law, and equal rights? It’s ironic that while Barkley was golfing with Trump and riding on Air Force One, the president was eviscerating the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Justice Department. Appearances matter, especially in this dark time. Jalen Hurts, who declined the White House invitation, appears to understand this. I suggest Barkley read Larry David’s recent piece in the New York Times, “My Dinner With Adolf.”

John Cella, Blue Bell, Johncella1@gmail.com

A recent Inquirer article misrepresents the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism, which has been recognized by more than 1,000 governments, universities, and other institutions around the world as the gold standard for identifying antisemitism. In keeping with this definition, the Anti-Defamation League does not equate all criticism of Israel with antisemitism, and our audit applies rigorous standards to ensure the accuracy of the data. Nationally, ADL reviewed over 5,000 anti-Israel protests and couldn’t find evidence for nearly half of them that they contained antisemitic elements or incidents. As a result, these were not included in our tally. In Pennsylvania, we examined 1,150 incident reports; only 465 met our criteria.

Many misunderstand anti-Zionism, believing it is merely criticism of Israeli policies. It is not. Anti-Zionism seeks the elimination of the world’s only Jewish state, which would uproot almost half of global Jewry. Where would they go if Israel ceased to exist? “Free Palestine,” shouted at elementary-age Jewish children outside their rabbi’s home, isn’t a diplomatic argument, but harassment. A profanity-filled call to a Jewish community center targeted people, not policies. These incidents happened here in our region. That’s the kind of very real antisemitism ADL’s statistics show.

Andrew Goretsky, regional director, ADL Philadelphia

You don’t have to have a degree in economics from the Wharton School to understand how tariffs work: 100% of the tariffs on, say, exports from China are paid by the U.S. importers. Donald Trump knows he is lying when he says, “China will probably eat those tariffs.” But he is a demagogue who skillfully plays to the hopes, fears, and prejudices of his MAGA followers, who may not understand how tariffs work. It is also foolhardy to hope U.S. importers or retailers can “eat” such extreme costs.

Assume an item currently costs them $100, and a retailer sells it for $120. A 145% tariff would increase its cost to $245. If it maintains its $120 selling price, it would be losing $125 (plus its overhead) on each item it sells. Not exactly a golden age for it. No wonder Trump went ballistic when Amazon’s idea to display a tariff charge on their customers’ receipts threatened to expose his shell game. If only we could have been flies on the wall to hear how the president convinced Jeff Bezos to be a “good guy” during their phone call. It’s a safe bet the president didn’t just say “pretty please.”

Jim Lundberg, Quakertown

Join the conversation: Send letters to letters@inquirer.com. Limit length to 200 words and include home address and day and evening phone number. Letters run in The Inquirer six days a week on the editorial pages and online.