Jan. 23, 1991
Skipping Classes to Shout
For Peace Won't Help Now
By Steve Friess.
THIS IS A very unsettling time to be a college
student in America. Despite our constant protests in recent
months, the Bush administration started the Persian Gulf War
precisely on schedule, and now students everywhere are struggling
to figure out how to react. Many students feel that this war
is grotesquely unnecessary - but we also feel that it is time
to unify as a nation in the hope of a speedy, successful conclusion
to the conflict.
Antiwar demonstrators on campus feel betrayed
by such liberal politicians as Sen. Paul Simon (D-Ill.), who
recently called for unity in support of the war effort after
claiming one week earlier to be vehemently opposed to the use
of force against Iraq. The protesters ask: Where have our heroes
of opposition gone? What happened to standing up for what we
believe under any circumstances? It sounds embarrassingly hypocritical
to stop criticizing the Bush administration just when things
are at their worst.
But what Simon and others have realized is that,
right or wrong, when the nation is in a crisis, divided we fall.
Along with the right to protest comes the responsibility to
think through the effect of what we say. I supported the protest
movement over the last few months, but now I feel, as questionable
as the policies that brought the United States into this war
may be, that our troops must know that they have our support.
No one wants soldiers to experience the horrors of war, but
they made a conscious decision to serve and that is exactly
what they are doing. Skipping class to shout for peace accomplishes
very little except for wasting an expensive education and making
it harder for the government to make the difficult decisions
it must to ensure a victory at the lowest human cost.
Beyond this, the antiwar protests are often
simply the brainchildren of '60s peace activists, and many student
demonstrators come off looking like misguided throwbacks to
a bygone era. My generation finds it difficult to deal with
the new reality of war. We are innocent and naive. Our innocence
has been abused by hippies-turned-yuppies who wish only to recreate
their glory years. Like cicadas, the antiwar people have returned
to infest idealistic but ill-informed students with a desire
to revive a mythical time in the past.
Indeed, these relics of the Vietnam era prey
on students who are terrified that a prolonged war will lead
to the reinstatement of the draft. At some rallies, older speakers
even encourage kids to hide out if there is a draft or to try
to obtain documents proving they are conscientious objectors.
All this just affirms our fear of the draft. Although military
officers and professors have been quoted in college newspapers
nationwide insisting that a draft is not a likely option, protesters
still chant, "Hell no, we won't go," as if someone
told them they have to. The antiwar people also encourage demonstrators
to protest at Reserve Officers Training Corps offices and to
scorn ROTC students, who often are just as scared of fighting
as the rest of us, but who could not have afforded college without
government assistance.
Some people are demonstrating from pure convictions;
others are out in the streets because it's exciting. Those seduced
by the thrill of action are fooling themselves if they think
they're doing something good for their country.
That's not to say the mishandled peace movement
doesn't have some legitimate gripes. The war with Iraq never
should have been started. It is hard to believe that President
George Bush is willing to sacrifice the lives of thousands of
soldiers in order to ensure a steady flow of oil from the Mideast
and the stability of our economy, but it's true. This becomes
even more difficult to accept whenever the president repeats
his lie that the United States is only concerned about the defenseless
people of Kuwait. You'd think Bush would try a little harder
not to appear so hypocritical as we turn our backs on the defenseless
people of Lithuania and China. Has the foreign policy of this
country ever been so openly contradictory?
The war became even less palatable on campus
earlier this month when George Bush sent more than 500 college
newspapers a condescending letter in which he outlined the reasons
why we must fight. "It's black and white," the president
wrote, " . . . right vs. wrong." He took a don't-think,
follow tone as he told us of Sgt. Terry Hatfield, stationed
in the Persian Gulf and probably our age, who "understands
the moral obligation" that has compelled the United States
to bomb Baghdad. It stunned students that the president would
show so little respect for America's youth that he would write
such inane, over-simplifying drivel and expect it to convince
us to support an unnecessary war.
But all that is past now. There was a day -
the first Tuesday in November - when student protesters could
have made their point in the voting booth. College-age America
didn't turn up at the polls last Election Day, but they sure
did turn up at all those trendy rallies. Now that the war has
begun, the best thing we can do is go back to class and hope
the government knows what it's doing.
LETTERS OF RESPONSE:
Feb. 8, 1991
Wars Kill Soldiers, Not Protests
Dear Editor:
Regarding the article by Steve Friess on student
antiwar protesting ["Skipping Classes to Fight for Peace
Won't Help Now," Viewpoints, Jan. 23]: Friess presents
some very cogent arguments as to why the United States should
never have begun the war in college without government assistance.
Some people are demonstrating from pure convictions;
others are out in the streets because it's exciting. Those seduced
by the thrill of action are fooling themselves if they think
they're doing something good for their country.
That's not to say the mishandled peace movement
doesn't have some legitimate gripes. The war with Iraq never
should have been started. It is hard to believe that President
George Bush is willing to sacrifice the lives of thousands of
soldiers in order to ensure a steady flow of oil from the Mideast
and the stability of our economy, but it's true. This becomes
even more difficult to accept whenever the president repeats
his lie that the United States is only concerned about the defenseless
people of Kuwait. You'd think Bush would try a little harder
not to appear so hypocritical as we turn our backs on the defenseless
people of Lithuania and China. Has the foreign policy of this
country ever been so openly contradictory?
The war became even less palatable on campus
earlier this month when George Bush sent more than 500 college
newspapers a condescending letter in which he outli literally
or figuratively, that the worst of government can emerge. And
it is when we accept the old saw of "divided we fall"
that we will have fallen.
- Way Shen. Mt. Sinai
Dear editor:
The article by Steve Friess exemplifies the
confusion felt by many who protested the Gulf War before it
began and now feel obliged to stand on the sidelines cheering
the home team on. Those of us who oppose the war believe it
is both hypocritical and unconscionable to "stop criticizing
the Bush administration just when things are at their worst."
It is when things are at their worst that dissent must be loudest
if a democratic society is to flourish.
Thus far, the main "accomplishment"
of this war is glowing advertisements for the military toys
developed by the U.S. permanent war economy. Corporate chieftains
and Pentagon officials are delighted to show how efficiently
their missiles can destroy things and to tell the American people
how wise they have been in shelling out trillions of dollars
to build these neat war gadgets. Not examining and criticizing
this war supports the Reagan-Bush philosophy that military prowess,
death and devastation are effective and worthwhile means of
conflict resolution. Thus, uncritically supporting this war
will only make it easier for the next war to start.
The increasingly popular assertion that protests
disheartened the soldiers in Vietnam illustrates just how little
Americans really have learned about that conflict. Rather, most
soldiers in Vietnam, like the demonstrators at home, grew disheartened
because they had been lied to for years about the reasons for
fighting that war. When cheerleaders of the current war draw
parallels to Vietnam, perhaps they are focusing on the wrong
lesson. Protests don't kill soldiers; wars kill soldiers.
This country is curre relatives and neighbors
have been shipped off to die in a war that was precipitated
by diplomatic mishandling, cultural ignorance and misinformation.
How can we live with our consciences if we
wait to speak out until the euphoria dies off as body bags are
counted, Iraq and Kuwait are turned to ashes and grave domestic
problems like poverty, homelessness and a gargantuan national
debt suffocate us?
Friess may think that "those seduced by
the thrill of action are fooling themselves if they think they're
doing something good for their country." On the contrary,
we would argue that it is those seduced by the thrill of war
who are fooling themselves into believing that they are helping
their country.
-- Monica Nicosia, Rick Eckstein. East Setauket.
###
Go
to list of Newsday stories
Go
to list of Publications
