Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Cluster bombs? No! Never again! ("Biden defends giving Ukraine cluster arms," July 8.)

I served in Vietnam. The farmers and their kids in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos are still losing hands, eyes and lives from when we used cluster bombs many decades ago. I served in a big gun battalion. Some of the shells we fired exploded above the heads of the enemy and sent hundreds of bomblets fluttering down to be caught in trees — to be knocked down and injure whoever walked by later, or land on the ground, where they formed an automatic mine field. They were supposed to disarm themselves after a while. They did not. I do not trust current versions are any better, especially since they are banned by many countries as well and should not have been in design or production.

Another tidbit about cluster bombs, or improved conventional munitions, which was what they called them in training. There are many different kinds, but the AP — anti-personnel — versions were not designed to kill the enemy, except by chance. They were meant to wound people by tearing up their flesh. A war casualty is not a body count, it is a count of every enemy combatant taken off the field of battle. By that logic, it's better to wound than kill an enemy. A dead soldier can be picked up later and doesn't have to be cared for — one person off the battlefield. A wounded soldier requires immediate attention and must be cared for — more people out of the fight.

Even though Russia uses cluster bombs, we must not. I will be long dead when my grandchildren are reading stories of little Ukrainian boys and girls having their hands and eyes torn by this weaponry.

John M. Widen, Minneapolis

•••

Please urge President Joe Biden to withdraw his approval of sending cluster bombs to Ukraine. I protested against their manufacture in the 1980s because of their devastating and inhumane impact on civilians. I am horrified that this president, whom I have enthusiastically supported, would go against principles of the United Nations and not only endorse the use of cluster bombs but supply them. We as a nation are better than that. The ends do not justify these means!

Michele Fallon, Inver Grove Heights

•••

I read with interest Kathleen Collins' commentary "The dangers of ceding territory for peace in Ukraine" (Opinion Exchange, July 8). She may have been inspired to write this as a response to my recent letter to the editor ("Russia won't back down," June 6) where I called for the cessation of sending weapons to Ukraine along with an immediate ceasefire and peace negotiations. Many of us in the peace community strongly recommend this position.

Most of Collins' commentary recalls the history of Russia during the Josef Stalin years. There is no denying that Stalin's actions in Ukraine and elsewhere were brutal and certainly criminal. She was trying very hard to equate them, with Russian President Vladimir Putin as the new Stalin, and saying Putin is ruling in the same manner. This is just like comparing world leaders (American leaders included) to Adolf Hitler. When that comparison is made most of us view it with disdain. No one can be sure of that.

Collins went on to list all the Russian atrocities that have taken place in more recent times and wants us to believe that Russia will continue to act in that manner. How does she know this? If that is true, will the United States again repeat some of its crimes? What Russia has done, we have done but maybe to a lesser degree. With the U.S. having been "less bad," that makes us better than the Russians? I don't think so.

If people like Collins continue to encourage the United States and our president to maintain its present course, I always ask them, "How do you think this will all end?" Make no mistake, we are at war with Russia, and we are sending more and more lethal weapons to Ukraine. We are now sending cluster bombs. Next month, will it be tactical nukes? We are getting much closer to a nuclear war with Russia, and that would be the end of all of us, not just Ukrainians. An immediate decision to start peace negotiations seems to be the better choice. That is not appeasement but faces the reality of the situation we are in.

Bill Habedank, Red Wing, Minn.

The writer is executive director of Veterans For Peace, Chapter 115.

I read the heartbreaking editorial "Sprinter's labor death is a call to action" in the July 8 Star Tribune. The death of a mother and baby is a tragedy beyond measure and a cause to improve our health care system. The situation in many other countries is far worse. Though we always compare ourselves with other developed countries, we should not lose sight of the reality in other parts of the world.

As the program director for Rural Health Care Initiative (RHCI), I am very aware of the maternal mortality in Sierra Leone, a small West African country that was plundered during colonization and more recently endured a decade-long civil war and the Ebola outbreak. Yearly, in Sierra Leone, thousands of pregnant women lose their lives while giving birth. The majority of these maternal deaths in Sierra Leone are due to preventable factors such as hemorrhage or hypertensive disorders.

Despite a reduction of almost 40% in the maternal mortality ratio from 1,165 per 100,000 live births in 2013 to 717 per 100,000 live births in 2019, Sierra Leone continues to be one of the countries with the highest maternal mortality ratio in the world. This rate is 22 times (or 2,200%) higher than the U.S. average of 32.9. It is over 10 times (1,000%) higher than for Black women in the U.S.

RHCI is a small Minnesota-based nonprofit founded in 2011 by an immigrant from Sierra Leone, Alice Karpeh of Brooklyn Park, whose dream was to help mothers and babies survive in her home village of Tikonko. The mission of RHCI is simply to decrease maternal and child mortality in Sierra Leone. RHCI is doing just that through our birth waiting homes, children's malnutrition program and health system strengthening projects. Funded by compassionate individuals, several churches and small grants, RHCI is striving to do the impossible and is making progress.

Let's everyone, everywhere, do what we can to keep moms and babies alive and healthy, whether here in Minnesota or far away in rural Sierra Leone. Quoting from the Lancet 2016: "Every woman, every newborn, everywhere has the right to good quality care."

Carol Nelson, White Bear Lake

The writer is a physician and program director of Rural Health Care Initiative.

Regarding Police Chief Brian O'Hara ("O'Hara: I hadn't seen Timberlake video," July 10): Dismissing questions of his integrity, we have to first wonder about his investigative skills as a policeman and, second, his morality for foisting off an unreliable and dangerous officer on unsuspecting and vulnerable citizens. And finally, his decisionmaking skills as an executive and leader of an organization on which our safety and lives are irrevocably dependent.

John Crivits, St. Paul