Mr. Hiatt, it’s not your message or intent that needs clarification; it’s your methodology.

The government sends troops to other countries to kill for other purposes than freedom and democracy; this killing includes that of women and children.

The United States has deployed troops in situations that do not involve freedom or democracy. Troops have been sent in to prevent the overthrow of allied nations’ governments. They’ve been sent to neutralize, if necessary by killing, perceived enemies of the United States. And 100 years ago, they were sent to expand the borders of the country through conquest. What you fail to mention is that troops have also been sent to make peace in the Balkans, rescue U.S. citizens in Monrovia, deliver food to the starving in Somalia, and lend aid and comfort to disaster sites the world over, from Florida to Turkey.

Regrettably, sometimes non-combatants are killed. But in the vast majority of situations, the deaths of the innocent were not intentional, but by-products of unfortunate circumstance.

In Somalia in 1993, Task Force Ranger was locked in a firefight against the Habr Gidr clan militia of Mohamed Farrah Aidid in the streets of Mogadishu. Aidid’s militia was without uniform and comprised of women and children as well as men. The only thing that distinguished enemy from innocent was that the enemy shot at you. These factors combined with the militia’s willingness to use civilians as cover led to many innocent deaths. When this is taken into consideration, it is hard to criticize their actions so flippantly.

Our government supports terrorist regimes in other countries that murder and torture their own people. Again, true. Depending on how you define terrorist, which is a term as ambiguous as patriot. In the past, the United States has supported oppressive regimes in Iran, Iraq, and the Philippines.

These cruel regimes were supported as part of the strange and unfortunate dual we were locked in with the USSR, which was doing the exact same thing. We supplied their rebels, and they supplied ours. And as cruel as it was to use these people as pawns, it just may have prevented overt nuclear war.

The government purposely misled its soldiers and the American public in Vietnam. The Gulf of Tonkin incident, which sparked the war, is under suspicion, and body counts and field successes were falsified to paint a better picture for the homefront, but the fear of Soviet domination was very real and very rational. The Soviets were actively attempting to undermine democracy every way they could, just as we were trying to undermine communism every way we could. We both saw it as self-defense.

Your right to express your ill-conceived argument was paid for with American blood not less than 58 years ago. If it were not for the sacrifice of millions, Nazi Germany would rule most of the world.

You challenge people to get angry, get informed and expect more from their government. You are already angry and expect more from your government, so I’ll just challenge you to get informed.

I’ve agreed with you on most points with certain caveats, but the difference is I’ve backed it up with examples and reasons for the actions of the government instead of manipulating No Gun Ri to express my prejudices as educated opinion.

In the future, when peddling your pseudo-radical “Screw America” monologue, please keep in mind that not everyone is impressed with bluster and melodrama, especially when it’s supported with nothing but assumptions you’re “too fed up” to actually research.

Pablo Capistrano

Senior

Political Science