This is in response to the May 10 editorial “King’s comments do disservice to modern military.”

Contrary to what was written, the editorialist and King seem to be on the same page, except King seems to be against the Iraq war, and the editorial seems to support it.

The editorial says that, historically, the illiteracy rate among U.S. soldiers mirrors that in the civilian population, but that in recent years, literacy among the military is improving – without any citation of source. What is left out is whether the modern military, in fact, enlists recruits with literacy issues. If they don’t, then King is partially wrong about employment opportunities for folks with literacy issues.

Further along in the editorial, it was written that illiteracy is a national problem.

It is a crippling problem for people in all walks of life and in all types of jobs.

Both seem to be saying, if you have a literacy problem you can end up in a job, civilian or military, that has high risks and low rewards.

Regardless of national averages, historical trends, technological advances in warfare or whatever, I don’t see any controversy in King’s comment, other than the one created in the editorial opinion.

William Bruce, Bath