Regarding the Feb. 12 news article “Interview exposes Putin’s war motive: To own Ukraine”:
I am a high school senior. I have a YouTube channel for which I interview veterans and historical witnesses from World War II to the modern day. More than 60 videos can be seen on my channel. Some of the unique people I’ve met include ex-mercenaries, a Nazi hunter, an exiled Cuban rebel, and former CIA and KGB spies.
My experience has made me realize that journalists should have the freedom to interview whomever without receiving the backlash that Mr. Carlson did. In 1977, Barbara Walters interviewed Fidel Castro for the first time. Larry King interviewed Moammar Gaddafi in 2009. Interviewing controversial figures does not mean we agree with their ideology; it is a medium for the public to hear from individuals themselves. They are part of our ongoing history. Hearing what all sides have to say is crucial if we are to understand people and events better.
Luke Basso, Wilmington, N.C.
The Feb. 12 news article “Interview exposes Putin’s war motive: To own Ukraine” rightly pointed out the many flaws in Tucker Carlson’s interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin, but it was far too mild in its criticism. Mr. Carlson’s effort at a propaganda piece was laughable, with half-truths, small lies, big lies and absolute whoppers revealing the fundamental injustice of Mr. Putin’s arguments for his war against Ukraine.
The biggest whopper was Mr. Putin’s statement that “the Poles ... forced Hitler to start World War II” by being “uncooperative.” Mr. Carlson nodded and smiled as Mr. Putin sided with Hitler. Isn’t Mr. Putin’s justification for invading Ukraine the same as Hitler’s in 1939? I want some (or all) of your territory, and if you don’t “cooperate,” it is your fault if I invade.
Hopefully, every American can see this, especially those members of Congress who must gather the moral courage to defy Mr. Trump and vote for the next aid package for Ukraine.
Paul B. Terpak, McLean