Mr. Ramagli in his column on April 11 ("Pelosi's actions harmful to the country") forgot to mention, as I'm sure the "liberal media" did, the fact that a Republican-led delegation met with President Bashar Al-Assad in Damascus on April 1 -- a few days before Speaker Pelosi's trip.

While one may disagree with Speaker Pelosi's trip on ideological grounds, I point to former Secretary of State Jim Baker's words on negotiations: "I believe in talking to your enemies," he said in an interview noting that he made 15 trips to Damascus. "It's got to be hard-nosed, it's got to be determined. You don't give away anything, but in my view, it's not appeasement to talk to your enemies." Of course, this isn't the first time the current President Bush has ignored the words of Mr. Baker.

As for undermining the troops in Iraq, who are the real culprits? Is it those people who want our men and women to come home from a battleground that is lost? If the fight in Iraq is part of the "war on terrorism," which is debatable, a lost battle does not mean a lost war. Or are the culprits those people and the administration who sent the troops to a war that was waged on false grounds, without the proper equipment and training? Oops, I forgot, you go to war with the army you have. Maybe Mr Ramagli should talk to the six generals who were forced into retirement because they disagreed with Donald Rumsfield's lowball estimation of the initial force size to enter Iraq.

Finally, why would crazy, religious fanatics care about the terminology their enemies are describing to fight them? Instead they care about the U.S. bombers flying over head, and 200,000 troops looking for them as they hide in their caves. It's a shame, for many reasons, that those troops are in Iraq.