Thank you for the Opinion page article "Another '68 Grad Looks at the Draft Issue," Sept. 29. No supporters of the Vietnam War said that the United States was in danger. A superpower was fighting a country one and a half times the size of New York state in an undeclared war by using search-and-destroy tactics, massive bombing, napalm, and Agent Orange, and the US measured progress by body counts. Thousands of young Americans went to Canada and were later pardoned. Can we blame men of draft age in those y ears for deeply questioning their roles? C. L. Johnson, Owl's Head, Maine
Regarding the news article "Clinton Leads Race, but Can't Shake Draft Issue," Sept. 24: I find it amusing that Gov. Bill Clinton is being condemned for his opposition to war and lack of military experience. Bush supporters have called Mr. Clinton a "dodger" as well as someone who has evaded the draft.
It is comforting to know that Clinton has opposing views on violence. He could be a president who will bring about some change without military force. I can agree with the argument: What happens if the United States was under siege by some other foreign power? But then again, aren't there more than enough military advisers in the government? I stand behind Clinton and his antiwar background. M. Nauman, Kirkland, Wash. Serving in Vietnam
The editorial "Vietnam's Long Shadow," Sept. 25, states that Gov. Bill Clinton and Vice President Dan Quayle hardly differ on their draft status, and that both simply sought to avoid combat in Vietnam. This isn't quite true.
Mr. Clinton opposed the war and did everything he could to avoid going. Mr. Quayle supported the war and did everything he could to avoid going. In other words, Clinton didn't think anyone should fight, including himself; Quayle wanted people to fight as long as he wasn't one of them. That is a clear difference. Brannon Moore, Seattle Perot's policies
Regarding the editorial "Don't Do It, Ross," Sept. 30: Now that Ross Perot is back in the race, it is important that your editors become fully aware of his proposed programs for our country. His book "United We Stand," not only outlines a fair and comprehensive deficit-reduction plan but spells out his platform on social and foreign policy issues as well.
The statement, "We still don't know his platform on issues such as abortion," is answered as follows: Perot stresses the need for a standard of personal responsibility in regard to human procreation. He is, however, supportive of a woman's right to choose, encourages adoption as an alternative to abortion, supports federal funding for reproductive counseling and education, and supports additional funding of abortions for the poor. Dorene Paoluccio, Modesto, Calif. Environment as a priority
Regarding the article "Candidates Compete for Top `Green' Spot," Oct. 1: The League of Conservative voters was shown to be tough on both candidates. Yet if the league itself was rated by practical scientists, it would receive an "F" grade. It's a shame that at a time when so many citizens are interested in the environment, we don't have better environmental leaders. Y. Leon Favreau, Shelbourne, N.H.