Home
| MailBox 10-07-2005 |
|
|
| Written by Argonaut Staff | ||||||
| Friday, 07 October 2005 | ||||||
|
columnist relies on personal attacks Dear Editor, How long did it take Brett Walter to write his column, “We surrender,” for Oct. 4’s Argonaut? Ten minutes? Well, it shows. His column was filled with more off-the-mark personal attacks than a Rush Limbaugh show. In case he, being the “intellectual giant” he is, can’t figure out what I am referring to, let me list them off: “intellectual giants,” “dressed in hippie clothing,” “smelled,” “explains their infatuation with France,” “the lives of the soldiers are (not) of great concern to the left,” the left doesn’t “admire bravery,” “like little children,” and liberals “trust Saddam.” It is important to note that those people who resort to name-calling are typically just on the losing end of a debate. But after wading through your trite and uninspired diatribe some arguments did show up. Nothing new, mind you. What was surprising was that Walter would compare an internationally illegal, immoral and unnecessary war to World War II. WWII was a horrible war against a hostile regime bent on taking over the world. In the Iraq war, we are the hostile regime. Regardless of what the talking heads and President Bush say, the war in Iraq did nothing for the war on terror except create more terrorists. There were no weapons of mass destruction, Saddam was not associated with al-Qaida and the 9-11 terrorists didn’t even come from Iraq. They came from our ally, Saudi Arabia. I have some words to describe the protestors too: patriotic, brave, informed, caring, passionate, concerned, human and loving. Try using all of those words to describe Bush. I would challenge Walter to write one, just one, column that is void of all personal attacks. Talk about substantive arguments. Argue real points. All in all, quit being a dullard. Josh Studor Coeur d’Alene Article hurts columnist’s credibility Dear Editor, I am writing in regard to Brett Walter’s Oct. 4th column, “We Surrender.” Besides being incredibly mean spirited, his column was also poorly thought out and devoid of any actual argument. Although the letters policy for The Argonaut states that “letters should focus on issues, not on personalities,” at least half of Mr. Walter’s column consists of ad hominem attacks on Democrats and “the left.” In light of the fact that his column contains no clearly stated thesis, it seems as if its sole purpose is to smear those who oppose the war with a wide range of unsupported accusations — everything from bad personal hygiene to appeasement of terrorists. The debate about the war in Iraq is not as black and white as Mr. Walter would have us believe. There are many Democrats who support the war, and many Republicans who have called for a withdrawal plan. Indeed, two of the sponsors of a recent bill calling for a withdrawal plan to be in place by the end of the year are Republicans, Sen. Chuck Hagel and Rep. Ron Paul. Some of Mr. Walter’s other accusations aren’t just wrong; they are shameless and vicious. How dare he claim that Democrats don’t believe that “the lives of American soldiers are of great concern,” and “don’t admire bravery.” Try telling that to former Sen. Max Cleland who lost three limbs fighting in Vietnam, or former Sen. Bob Kerrey who won the Meal of Honor as a Navy SEAL. I appreciate The Argonaut’s attempt to bring different viewpoints to the opinion page, but I think conservatives would be better served by someone who uses well-reasoned arguments instead of malicious smears. Geoff Beidler Graduate student, computer engineering Columnist hits the mark Dear Editor, I’d just like to comment on the “We surrender” article (Oct. 4). I thought it was awesome. I actually laughed when I read the “are we there yet?” quote. It’s so true, liberals whine about ridiculous stuff and I hate when they think Saddam wasn’t involved in any kind of terrorism. Anyways, great article. I hope to see more of these in the future. Kenny Jones Sophomore, TV/radio/digital productions Iraq money could be better used Dear Editor, We have all been touched by Hurricane Katrina and its devastating effects. This tragedy could have been prevented by our government if levies that could have withstood a Category Five hurricane like Katrina would have been constructed. Instead of funding this vital project, the money for it was diverted to the Iraq war and the rebuilding effort. After the tragic events of 9-11, we all realized that terrorism is a real threat and we need to defend ourselves. It shocked the American psyche, changing us forever. It demonstrated how real terrorism was. Our government wants to prevent another 9-11 from happening, and that is a worthy goal. By doing this, our government has allowed the fear of terrorism to overwhelm them and influence their decisions to a point where are own citizens’ needs have been neglected. This is clearly demonstrated by our government’s decision to fund the Iraq campaign rather than building Category Five levees to protect New Orleans. By pouring large quantities of money into the Iraq occupation, it is affecting our nation by cuts in education, multiple work projects (like building the levee), and multiple cuts in disability and social services. If we were to divert money from the war on terrorism, it would mean more money for higher education, improvements within our public school system, and the funding of more domestic projects. So we can prevent another Katrina from happening, write a letter to your senator to express your concern about the over-funding of the Iraq occupation and the negative effects it is having on our country. I hope to never know what the cost will be next time if we continue to fund the Iraq campaign as we do today. Jacob Taylor Junior, business  Add as favorites (22) | Views: 819
Write Comment
|
||||||
