Letters to the Editor
Published Letters: 78 Editor's Choice: 28
-
male bonding and iron nails
[Read the article: Virtually dead in Iraq]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Lex, this is starting to devolve into a flame war…and it shouldn’t.
But you miss the point. CPT Mitch…and most people in the Armed Services…signed up for various reasons, but specifically going to fight in Iraq was not one of them. This guy CPTMitch sounds like he signed up to protect and serve…and to do so with eyes open to the moral reasons and implications of his actions. A good reason to sign up and a good mindset to have, in my opinion. That is why he sounds like a good soldier.
Is your position that no one should ever join the army, thereby “don’t show up” for the war? That’s not a new idea BTW. The Chinese have an old saying (I think its old anyway…not sure); “good iron doesn’t (should not be used to ) make a nail / Good son doesn’t become a soldier”. But I don’t believe in this viewpoint. I believe it is important to have a peacetime standing professional army and I would like that army to have good leadership which appreciates diversity. Is your position that every individual soldier should have the freedom to decide if they are going to fight in any particular war? I don’t think that is very practical or realistic, do you?
And why do you start talking about male bonding and macho this or that? I don’t understand where you are coming from. Not that I see anything wrong with male bonding. I just don’t think my views have anything to do with being a man. The values of service, courage, loyalty, and dedication – values which I hope are values of the US Military – are not sex-specific values. Neither are compassion are understanding sex-specific values. And I would like to see more of these values in the military as well.
-
Reasons why not news worthy
[Read the article: Virtually dead in Iraq]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]As others have pointed out, gamers are against what DeLappe is doing. Or better to say that gamers think this is stupid and pointless as a form of protest whether they agree with the sentiment or not. But this does not matter. Mark Prokop and others have pointed out that this should not have been an article worthy of publishing. The reasons are:
1. Its not affecting anything other than a few blog sites. This “media art” is only known within a small, mostly sympathetic online community.
2. The gamer community which this “media artist” (whatever that means) is targeting his message to does not care about this message in its current form (online video game protest…not saying they care or not care about the Iraq war itself or the broader issues involved). Furthermore, only about 16 – 32 people might be able to see his message every 15 minutes or so. Said gamers might not even be American. They may not be of military service age. They could be any gamer playing anywhere in the world. Including American Soldiers playing in Iraq.
3. The video game in question – America’s Army – has been around for 4 years. The fact that the Pentagon spent money on this and uses it as a recruiting tool was news…four years ago.
In another sense, DeLappe has become more news-worth for doing something not news-worth., simply by being the subject of this article.
-
This story IS a liberal media attack piece
[Read the article: Teammates: Allen used "N-word" in college]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Its trying to establish that Allen is a racist based upon his attitudes and actions 30 years ago. Even if he was racist back then... people change. People can grow. Or devolve sometimes too.
And lets say that everything said and implied here is true...he was a big racist bully in college and he still is a big racist bully now. Allen supporters won’t make the connection between then and now, so they will see this as an attack piece, and hence ignore the content of this article.
-
time limitations on accountability
[Read the article: Teammates: Allen used "N-word" in college]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Anonymous wrote “Plus, w/respect to the "30 years ago" argument, when is it fair to consider it? 20 years ago? 10? 5? An 85 year old German woman who had been in the US for 50 years was just deported recently. She had worked at a concentration camp for a year or two *60* years ago. If she's held accountable for a heinous racially-motivated act, he should be too...”
I have thought about this a lot in different contexts. But here is the thing…that woman worked at a place where people were being dehumanized and exterminated. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE DEER HEAD INCIDENT, Allen just voiced opinions and had a racist attitude. Not a crime. The former is a crime against humanity, while the later is not in itself hurting anyone. If he really did stuff a deer head into a mailbox of a black family because the family is black, well that’s a hate-crime and it should not be overlooked unless he is punished and/or has owned-up to his actions.
I believe that people should be held accountable for a crime until they die and/or until they have been held accountable for their actions. But the key here is "actions". That he was a racist earlier in life is not something that should be focused on. That he seems to be a racist asshole now is what should be brought to light.