Matt Steinglass joins the chorus of liberals telling me that no one will care if American public officials are arrested for official actions.

This strikes me as--farfetched. American public opinion was pretty solidly against Singapore's caning of Michael Fay, who got four strokes with a rattan cane for acts of local vandalism he'd confessed to. There was, to be sure, a vocal minority that favored it, and I myself was not overly sympathetic to the obviously troubled teen. But if you can get a majority against corporal punishment of a teenage criminal at a time when lots of schools in the south still had corporal punishment . . . well, what will you see when another country decides that their laws get to judge our policy?

I quite agree that in Manhattan, where both Matt and I were raised, there would be quite a bit of support for the action. My assessment of my relatives living outside of dense city cores, however, suggests a vehement antipathetic reaction. And there are still a lot more of them than there are of us.

As I told another reader who wrote with similar objections, maybe the thing to do is measure our relative confidence levels. I have $1,000 I'm willing to put down at Longbets that if a US official is arrested by a foreign power for acts committed in his official capacity, the majority reaction will be a vicious backlash against said foreign power, not "ho-hum". Now, of course, I could simply be overconfident, or biased by the fact that I indeed have relatives who boycotted the French. On the other hand, those relatives hate Bush and usually vote for Democrats.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.