To the Editor:
Re “The Value of Putin’s Belligerence” (editorial, March 12):
Your editorial is calm and measured, and presents severe suggestions for efficient de-escalation and cessation of hostilities that require rational, reality-based dialogue. The counterpoint I’d make is that Vladimir Putin just isn’t a rational actor. His asserted casus belli is ahistoric, not supported by the Ukrainian inhabitants and never based mostly in actuality.
Working a few years within the behavioral well being subject, I typically handled nonrational sufferers. None of them managed a nuclear arsenal or have been surrounded by those that shared and supported their irrationality.
William A. Ferry
Lafayette, La.
To the Editor:
It’s a typical query that has been requested each time President Vladimir Putin’s expansionist moods seem: Is Mr. Putin a rational actor? The quick reply is: sure.
Irrationality shouldn’t be conflated with horrific impacts and human struggling. Rational doesn’t imply good or simply.
Mr. Putin’s objective just isn’t struggling first. Battle as an alternative is a way to an finish — his view of Russia within the twenty first century. He sees the human issue as collateral injury, a obligatory evil, and as a facet impact of his army technique.
The spotlight of Western media proper now could be exactly the human struggling angle, and it revolves round denouncing Russia’s actions, however that doesn’t make Mr. Putin irrational. He’s after political targets, and never after struggling as an evil grasp plan. All of us have a stake in Mr. Putin being rational.
Iveta Cherneva
Sofia, Bulgaria
The author is an creator and a political commentator who has served with United Nations businesses.
To the Editor:
Re “This Is Why Putin Can’t Again Down,” by David Brooks (column, March 11):
I appreciated Mr. Brooks’s column about Vladimir Putin and the components within the sport of predicting what he’ll do subsequent.
Mr. Brooks’s point out of narcissism opens an avenue towards understanding Mr. Putin. In my estimation, the connections between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump are many, diversified and deep. They perceive one another exactly as a result of they’re each narcissists, and as evidenced by the harms attributable to their actions and attitudes, they’re malignant narcissists.
Every has proved in his personal method that anybody who stands in his method is to be disenfranchised, forged out into the wilderness, dehumanized and in the end erased. Mr. Putin does his work with bombs and missiles, Mr. Trump does his with minions, sycophants, grifters and true believers.
It’s, paradoxically, an excellent factor to see the terrible outcomes of each males’s relationship to the world round them. Mr. Putin’s agenda may learn one thing just like the restoration of the Soviet Union’s former glory, and Mr. Trump’s could possibly be restoration of himself to a place of energy and steps to make sure that he stays in energy indefinitely.
Right here’s hoping that Mr. Putin’s and Mr. Trump’s eventualities is not going to play out as they want.
Fredrick Stephenson
Roseville, Calif.
Chinese language Mediation With Russia?
To the Editor:
Re “It’s Time to Provide Russia an Offramp. China Can Assist With That,” by Wang Huiyao (Opinion visitor essay, nytimes.com, March 13):
Dr. Wang’s suggestion that China take part mediation efforts to finish Russia’s unprovoked assault on Ukraine is a prescription for inviting the arsonist to assist put out the hearth he helped ignite.
Based on experiences, China knew of Vladimir Putin’s conflict plans, and its sole contribution to world peace was to request that the invasion be delayed till after the Winter Olympics it was internet hosting.
As certainly one of Russia’s only a few present allies, China doesn’t want Western cowl to demand that its “buddy” instantly stop fireplace, withdraw from all occupied Ukrainian territory, together with Crimea and the Donbas, and pay reparations. What’s proposed right here is nothing lower than gaslighting.
Charles Knapp
Roxbury, Conn.
Battle Crimes by Russia in Ukraine
To the Editor:
Relating to potential conflict crimes dedicated by Russia in Ukraine:
I believe it will be attention-grabbing to ask particular Russian officers, if arrested sooner or later and accused of complicity in conflict crimes, will they are saying they’d no selection? Will they are saying that they’d have been killed had they disobeyed, and that they have been “simply following orders”?
Get them on the file now, so we will use their phrases towards them later.
Edward Kissel
Boca Raton, Fla.
Being a Father or mother in These Instances
To the Editor:
Re “There’s Extra Than One Proper Solution to Increase Youngsters,’’ by Jessica Grose (Opinion, March 11):
Parenting philosophies provide helpful ideas and so they could make a mum or dad really feel much less alone, however the fact is that the job of parenting is all however reinvented with each new parent-child mixture, even throughout the similar household.
Mother and father do effectively by their kids as a result of their hearts are in the fitting place and since they know them greatest. My recommendation is, if a parenting handbook is a assist, take benefit, however whether it is something however a consolation, toss it.
As we speak’s technology of oldsters ought to really feel proud and assured at having cared for his or her kids by way of two stable years of concern and uncertainty and the far-reaching restrictions and shifting protocols that went with it. There can’t be many challenges to come back that can be as powerful as those they’ve already confronted.
My technology had it simple by comparability. Congratulations to all of them. They’ve my utmost admiration.
Margaret McGirr
Greenwich, Conn.
A Actual Dialog, Not E-mail. Keep in mind That?
To the Editor:
Re “Really feel Free to Ignore Some Texts and Emails. We All Perceive,” by Erica Dhawan (Opinion visitor essay, Feb. 23):
Once I was working, I’d see an e-mail from a co-worker who sat 20 toes away and skim it, not forming a solution immediately so I may give it some thought. Invariably, that co-worker would amble over and ask me if I had seen his e-mail, to which I’d say, sure I noticed it.
He would ask if I had learn it, and I’d say sure. The co-worker, clearly anticipating a solution to his e-mail, would look disgustedly at me and I’d say nothing. He would ask me what my thought was, and I’d say I’m fascinated about it.
I questioned why he simply didn’t stroll over so we may speak about what was on his thoughts. However he was a 20-something and I’m a boomer. He was extra interested by placing his inquiry on the market and copied all of the bosses so he was assured they knew he was working and I used to be not reacting as he wished.
That made for some attention-grabbing e-mail exchanges. One boss would pile on and advise that the e-mail was fairly pressing and demanded a solution from me. One other boss would ship an prompt message, telling me to reply the e-mail.
Ah, the digital communications age, with all of its stresses and strains. Once I began in enterprise, the one strategy to talk in an workplace was to stroll over and speak to somebody. How quaint that appears as we speak.
I’m fortunately retired, and any e-mail I get now will in all probability be ignored.
Ted Fisk
Naperville, In poor health.
Don’t Stroll and Textual content
To the Editor:
Re “Hazard on the Intersection” (letter, March 10):
I used to be hit by a supply boy on a bicycle whereas crossing at an intersection. I sustained two fractures of the pelvis and was on crutches for 2 months. I didn’t want surgical procedure, so I thought of myself fortunate.
On the time of the accident, I used to be wanting down at my iPhone texting. I didn’t even notice I used to be hit by a bicycle till I used to be on the bottom, wanting up.
I now by no means textual content when strolling.
Judith Eisenberg Pollak
New York