Anti-war doesn’t mean anti-American
“It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government.” Thomas Paine was right. A true American would stand up against the injustices his country is about to commit, an action that would make our revolutionary forefathers proud. Being anti-war is definitely not being anti-American. Anti-war is synonymous with anti-terror and anti-murder.
We do support our troops, and that is why we don’t want them to go to war — so they won’t die, so their families won’t cry as their bodies are being cremated in the Middle East, while after being killed fighting for an un-elected, un-American president, fighting in an unjust war.
You say that counter-demonstrators are not pro-war, and that may be true. But, when they have signs that say “Bomb Iraq,” “Liberate Iraq,” etc., it is a call to arms. Even saying “support our troops” is an indirect way of saying, “go to war.”
We don’t have to agree with our government or support our troops to be American or even to be patriotic. That kind of blind patriotism will only get more people killed. There are those who know the facts and can argue both sides, but then there remains the simple fact of a war that is inevitable: People will die, especially the innocent. Precious human life, with all its idiosyncrasies, will be destroyed.
I can’t have that on my hands, and I would not like to see that blood on my fellow Americans’ hands (i.e., the troops). Get rid of the war and you get rid of this inevitability.
Anthony Schmidt is asophomore majoring in anthropology.
War more important than other interests
What a view of the American people in Wednesday’s editorial (“Normal activities should continue”) constructs. We are going into a war in which countless people will be injured, maimed and killed, and you suggest that we ignore this and proceed with “life as usual.”
To agree with you, I would need to believe that the Academy Awards and the NCAA tournament games are more important than the pain and suffering of real people. I’d need to believe that Americans don’t want our television viewing disturbed, especially by images that might upset us, and that ignorance is better than knowledge.
I’d need to believe that we should be “looking forward” to watching Joan Rivers “diss celebrities” at the Academy Awards rather than individually or collectively reflecting upon what has happened and what will happen.
Yes, I agree that “war will wreak havoc on countries all over the globe,” but I truly hope you are wrong in asserting that Americans should want to ignore this pain and wait until the movie version of “Iraqi Freedom” is released. A democracy requires informed and caring citizens. You are urging the opposite.
Donileen R. Loseke is a professor of sociology.
Become informedon Hussein and Iraq
I would like to take a moment to respond specifically to Bisher Tarabishy and to all anti-war supporters. He suggested for pro-war supporters to educate themselves regarding what Saddam Hussein and his country is like. Now, I urge him to do the same. I have taken the time to listen to former Iraqi citizens and have read the stories by Iraqi women. I could list many Web sites, but one that stands out is . This site describes, in painful detail, what living in a country controlled by Hussein is like.
If Mr. Tarabishy is interested in finding the truth, I encourage him to visit this site and read these stories about the atrocities committed by Hussein. Then tell me if this man deserves to stay in power. And my question to the anti-war supporters is: Why are you not protesting Hussein’s actions toward the citizens of his own country?
On a final note, what President George W. Bush is doing now is no different than what former President Bill Clinton did with Kosovo. I would like someone to tell me why the life of a Kosove citizen was valuable enough to intervene but the life of an Iraqi citizen is not?
Yvonne C. Harper is a junior majoring in mass communications.