Reading Chandra Muzaffar's reply to my letter shows that he obviously still regards the Iraq war and the US with suspicion and has - as another writer said - a Cold War mentality against the forces of globalisation and capitalism.

Chandra also questions my support for the Iraq war to remove Saddam Hussein. That's perfectly fine, since anyone is free to have an opinion whether it is right or wrong. But he then suggests that I should read a report by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) so that I '... will be in a better position to distinguish right from wrong'.

Chandra, however, should have also said that the Institute of Policy Studies is regarded as a liberal left-wing policy think-tank that generally has an anti-war policy. No surprise then on their conclusion.

Would Chandra be convinced the war was right if the conservative Heritage Foundation or the Hoover Institution said it was the correct action? I'll admit that I haven't read the IPS report, but I think I can make up my own mind using simple common sense.

Can anyone seriously imply that the Iraqi people were better off under Saddam Hussein than they are now? Yes, the Iraqi people are now trying their best in hard times to make the most of their chance for a better life and freedom, but does Chandra honestly think that their future would have been better under the heel of Saddam's brutal totalitarian rule?

Recently the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think-tank, obtained a videotape, available on their website , showing the brutality of life under Saddam. There were tongue cuttings, rape rooms and other unspeakable evil deeds. Can Chandra or anyone that has watched the tape honestly say that the removal of Saddam has brought more bad than good?

Next, Chandra basically ridicules me for my naivety in believing that the US is not out to control the world and establish a global empire. Yes, I'll admit that the US is the sole superpower with a worldwide military presence.

But I don't think that the US is out to create a global empire. Unlike Chandra, I believe the US is more of a benign power that ensures stability, not one out to create a global empire.

And look at the examples Chandra gives to justify his arguments. 'Pakistan's foolish clandestine nuclear network provided Washington with the opportunity to exert greater pressure on Islamabad to act against so-called militants.''

From his language, Chandra seems to think the 'foolish' nuclear network was some kind of second-rate basement bootleg operation, not a dangerous network that provided terrorists and rogue states with nuclear weapons.

And he then says Pakistan's foolish clandestine nuclear network provided Washington with the opportunity to exert greater pressure on Islamabad to act against 'so-called militants'. So-called militants? You mean, the Taliban and Al-Qaeda terrorists I presume?

I'll also admit that I'm not familiar with the Ezzaddin Ibrahim case. But again Chandra's worldview is to regard what the US does with suspicion by default. Does he also think the US's concern about the human rights situation in Myanmar is some plan to control Myanmar?

Then Chandra closes his letter by saying: 'But what I find repugnant is the tendency among people trapped in a particular situation to beg Washington to rescue them. It is an affront to one's dignity and honour.'

I read this sentence with disbelief. If people had followed Chandra's advice, the US would not have intervened in World War II and most of Europe would now be speaking German. Or Eastern Europe would still be under Communism.

Hey, maybe I would be writing this letter in Japanese. If I were in a 'particular situation', I don't know how comforted I would be by Chandra on the sideline cheerleading for my dignity and honour.

Peggy Noonan, a former speechwriter for ex-US president Ronald Reagan, once said and I parapharse:

'When a fire breaks out in the neighbourhood, there are two types of people. One will, from the safety of his backyard, start to give a lecture on fire-safety and start to criticise the firemen for not doing a good enough job. The other person will grab a pail and rush to help put out the fire.'

I think we can safely assume that Chandra resembles the first person. His letter is so full of paranoia against the US, that it's now hard to take him seriously.