Skip to footer

Readers write: Leicester victory, hunting grizzly bears, view of nuclear weapons

Letters to the editor for the June 27, 2016 weekly magazine.

|
Marc Cooke/Wolves of the Rockies/AP
A grizzly bear is seen near the Lamar Valley in Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming in 2012.
  • By Alistair Budd Monitor reader
  • Michelle Kretzer Monitor reader
  • Paul Bloustein Monitor reader

Leicester victory

Regarding the May 16 OneWeek article “Why unlikely Leicester’s on top”: The comment that the top teams in the Premier League were “rubbish” this year is gratuitous and unfair. It undermines the magnitude of Leicester City’s achievement in winning the Premier League title. Manchester City, for example, played excellent soccer this season. They reached the semifinal of the Union of European Football Associations Champions League, where they lost narrowly to Real Madrid.

Alistair Budd

London

Hunting grizzly bears

Regarding your May 6 article “No longer endangered? Montanans prepare for grizzly bear hunt” (CSMonitor.com): Well, that didn’t take long. It took 40 years for the grizzly bear population in and near Yellowstone National Park to rebound from as few as 136 in 1975. The Yellowstone ecosystem is doing what nature does when humans stop interfering: maintaining a delicate balance that ensures the survival of a healthy number of most species.

In the face of habitat destruction and now bloodlust, it won’t be long before our majestic grizzly bears are endangered again.

PETA Foundation

Norfolk, Va.

View of nuclear weapons

Regarding your May 10 article “No Obama apology at Hiroshima, but more Americans now say bombing was wrong” (CSMonitor.com): Since 2011, more than 300,000 Syrian civilians have been slaughtered with conventional weapons. Clearly, what concerns us with nuclear weapons and sets them apart is not the number of deaths, but rather the efficiency of the death-dealing. These are ample reasons for limiting their propagation without yielding to the view that we should castigate the scientists who led the way or the decision to use them in August 1945.

Paul Bloustein

Cincinnati

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.
editor@csmonitor.com
Subscribe
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

QR Code to Readers write: Leicester victory, hunting grizzly bears, view of nuclear weapons
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Readers-Respond/2016/0625/Readers-write-Leicester-victory-hunting-grizzly-bears-view-of-nuclear-weapons
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe