Regarding Friday’s letter to the editor, ‘Anti-war even before war’ (Nov. 1, pg. 12):
Mr. Bryan, you are so right. It is ludicrous to protest a war that hasn’t even started yet we have no right to complain until people are actually dead. While we’re at it, let’s eliminate other preemptive actions: we say take condoms and birth control off the market! Why waste your time and money when you aren’t pregnant yet?
Perhaps we can explain some things to Mr. Bryan. We for three do share anger and despair over President George Bush’s warmongering. An offensive war to expand our nation’s economic interests is immoral and unjust. Mr. Bryan asserts that Bush’s intended war is ‘not about oil.’ He would like us to believe that George W. wants to oust Hussein out of sheer humanitarian good will. Now that, Mr. Bryan, is downright ludicrous. Mr. Bryan also states that allowing Hussein to remain in power would promote stability in the Middle East. Apparently his definition of ‘stability’ overlooks Iraq’s war with Iran, its invasion of Kuwait, and Hussein’s open support of the destruction of Israel.
As students, we would expect a ‘higher level of intellectualism’ from the student body. But Mr. Bryan’s letter preempts that hope. ‘In the old days anti-war protesters would actually wait for a war to begin’ and they used to walk 40 miles barefoot uphill in the snow to get to school and bathe only twice a year. However, as with most other aspects of civilization, things change with social advancement.
Then again, maybe Kevin has a point about the ‘ludicrosity’ of pre-war protests. We’ll just wait until this war start. It worked in Vietnam right?
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
