Author's Criticism of Peace Movement Is Misguided
To the Editor:
There seems to be a lot of confusion. When those against the war criticize the American government and the Bush administration, some think they're actually attacking America itself, apple pie and all. When some attend a teach-in led by academic voices against the war, they expect their high school history teacher to step in with an exercise in point-counterpoint. As the Spectator's J. R. Wilheim asks in "Déjà Vu All Over Again"(April 1, 2003), how about some compromise and consensus here? Sure, it would be nice.
However, all any war opponent has to do is cast an ear to the White House or tune in to a single Donald Rumsfeld press conference to know that's pure fantasy. If the administration can't reach a compromise with Canada on the war, what hope is there?
More to the point, how can Mr. Wilheim's opinion related to the invasion of Iraq be seriously regarded when he confesses that last week he joined the chorus of pro-war supporters on College Walk, not because he wholly supports the war, but because war-supporters supposedly have better manners? Is this to say he's more motivated by attention to perceived etiquette than actual deliberation and thoughtful consideration of an issue? It's quite an admission and I can't help but wonder how representative within the pro-war camp his experience may be. It's been interesting for me to see just how much more pissed off people get about protest than they do with war.
Still, I also have to question Mr. Wilheim's perception of reality. The pro-war faction guys have it easy. The war is on. There's no stopping it. The president, Congress, the media, and the majority of public opinion are committed to it. They've got their bombs and they'll soon have their Baghdad. The fact is that in this nationalist climate, people dedicated to expressing their opposition to the Bush war and dismay over the diplomatic nightmare that led up to it are forced to make a little noise to be heard above the Fox News / MSNBC din.
Mr. Wilheim further suggests that all this disquiet on campus is inspired by little more than '60's nostalgia--while, fairly enough, he confesses a special affinity for the days of Camelot and Great Society. Perhaps America may also have pulled its military out of Vietnam earlier if not for the silencing of some our most powerful anti-war voices with the 1968 assassinations of Martin Luther King and especially Robert Kennedy. We'll never know.
Mr. Wilheim accurately points out that for America, "1968 wasn't much fun." Neither is 2003. Still, it doesn't make sense to imply that digging "Sgt. Pepper" or the Jefferson Airplane is all it takes to turn someone against war in Iraq. If it was, I wouldn't bother lining up for a campus teach-in or marching down Broadway. I'd be sitting on the Low steps cranking "White Rabbit."
Keith Lyle, TC
April 3, 2003
American Troops Protect Freedoms For All of Us
To the Editor:
In her article, "Whose Troops?" (April 3, 2003), Laura Durkay states that "[e]everyone is supposed to be shocked when the Iraqis refuse to line up quietly to be slaughtered--If you were living in Iraq, what would you do?" I would welcome the freedom from oppression. Obviously, I might not rise up at once to U.S. cries of liberation: after all, Iraqis heard such cries in 1991 and saw Saddam's brutal reprisal. I would likely be silenced, not by fears of occupation, but by fear of Saddam, until I was sure the U.S. would win and armed Iraqi irregulars were no longer shooting fellow civilians. At the moment, there is no reason for Iraqis to line up in support of the US--that would be lining up to be slaughtered by Saddam. It is human to want freedom, but it is also human to fear reprisal. Then again, being Jewish, the question of what I would do is easy--I would already be dead. Then again, so would those who vocally call for the defeat or surrender of their own, including characters like Ms. Durkay.
Ms. Durkay may not see the troops as hers, but, as much as she despises them, they are the people who have volunteered to fight for all of our freedoms. Every day they put their lives at risk to preserve her freedom to criticize their efforts. As Ms. Durkay states, "The only time I would proudly declare my support for U.S. troops is when they deliberately disobey the orders of their superiors." She takes her anti-war sentiment out on all U.S. troops, ignoring the great lengths soldiers have gone to not to harm civilians, and the great sacrifices such efforts have caused. There is no reason to criticize troops for massacres that have not happened--at least not by American troops. It is not the troops who choose to go to war. Whether pro-war or anti-war, it is irresponsible, then, to direct sentiments against the brave men and women who risk their lives for our nation. I, for one, owe my life to the American Army's liberation of Nazi-occupied Europe. For that, and the duties they perform everyday, I--unlike Ms. Durkay--am proud to call the U.S. troops mine, and I pray for their speedy and safe return.
Dennis Schmeltzer, CC '06
April 3, 2003
ROTC at Ivy League Will Improve Diversity of Military
To the Editor:
In her article "Whose Troops?" (April 3, 2003) Laura Durkay states that "the military is made up of mostly working class men and women, disproportionately people of color." If Ms. Durkay truly sees this as a problem, that the full spectrum of people in this nation is not represented, surely she must support the return of ROTC to universities such Columbia. An ROTC program is clearly the best and most direct way to bring military jobs to "intellectual," ivory tower communities such as Columbia, and thereby include the group that is most under-represented in the military, Ivy League graduates. It is true that there is a substantial rift between the military and the upper class. For this to change, a path must be forged to give students in our universities access to the same opportunities that are given to the working-class men and women in the military. The most obvious path is the Reserve Officer's Training Corps.
Sean Wilkes, CC '06
April 4, 2003