A person could get whiplash trying to follow the logic in Chuck Dietrick’s letter (“Are Any Vital U.S. Interests at Stake in Crimea?” March 24). He begins by asking what vital U.S. interests are being threatened by Russia’s annexation of Crimea. Instead of expanding on that point, however, he immediately pivots to ridiculing President Barack Obama’s “weak” response to Russia’s actions.
Say what? The United States has no compelling reason to involve itself in the Crimean situation, but Mr. Obama should have imposed stronger sanctions on Russia, and his entire presidency is a failure because he hasn’t done so? This seems to be yet another manifestation of Rule No. 1 for those who oppose the president: Whatever Mr. Obama does, he’s wrong. Rule No. 2: See Rule No. 1.