Editorial uninformed
While I commend the editorial board for voicing its support for
the troops fighting in Iraq, I find its reasons for protesting the
war uninformed and the nature of its editorial misleading.
The March 31 editorial said Iraq and Saddam Hussein are only
suspected terrorists while al-Qaeda are known terrorists. Do
the al-Qaeda agents in contact with the Iraqi army not count as
terrorists? Are the Iraqi military leaders who trained these
known terrorists not terrorists by extension? And furthermore,
President Bush said Hussein is suspected of supporting terrorism,
not being a terrorist. How do you expect to quell terrorism if
you do not take away terrorist supporters?
The editorial called Bush a coward for having never gone to war
himself while sending troops to Iraq. Maybe my memory is blurry,
but Clinton never went to war either; still, he sent troops to
Somalia.
Furthermore, the editorial implied that the majority of people
protest this war, which is completely false. A recent Gallup
poll says that 70 percent of Americans support the war with Iraq.
Though I do agree all Americans have the right to voice their
opinions, I find it ironic that the people most vocal about their
freedom of speech are also protesting an effort that will grant
millions of Iraqis the freedom of speech.
Hayden Lee Maynard Third-year, political
science
Tang’s argument shows ignorance
I am simply amazed at the willful credulity of Eric Tang
(“Bush administration’s deception, push for war,
threaten democracy,” Viewpoint, March 31).
Apparently not joking, he argues that the United States should
have “allow[ed] the Iraqi people to vote” on whether to
retain Saddam Hussein or suffer an American invasion. Tang further
displays his ignorance of the American political system by stating
that, while the United States is not a “pure
democracy,” American politicians should nevertheless
“hold off from acting until they have persuaded a majority of
people to support or, at the very least, not oppose their
plans.”
In actuality, our republican system of government provides for
the exercise of governmental power by elected representatives
pursuant to law. Voters elect those representatives that they think
will exercise power responsibly, even if acts must be taken
contrary to the prevailing popular opinion.
This happens all the time, whether it’s the refusal of
Democrats to support a ban on “partial-birth” abortion
that polls suggest has majority support, or the determination of
Republicans to impeach Bill Clinton in the face of considerable
opposition.
At any rate, all indications show the majority of Americans
support the current campaign in Iraq, so Tang’s point is
moot.
David M. Marquez Northwestern University School of
Law