Thursday, August 25, 2005
Reply to Walter Williams
I am an avid reader of Walter Williams. Though I usually agree with him, I felt compelled to send an objection to his latest column. Here it is:
Dear Dr. Williams,
I am an avid reader of your column, and I agree with most of the points you make
in your latest column, Security or Hysteria.
However, I do take issue with one point you make. You compare the reaction to
deaths in the Pacific campaign of World War II with the reaction to deaths in
the Iraq War, and conclude that America has "become feminized and turned into a
nation of wimps and nervous nellies".
I think this conclusion fails to take into account a crucial difference between
World War II and the Iraq War. Specifically, you fail to take into account what
the soldiers are dying for. In World War II, American soldiers died to defend
America, and Japan and Germany became civilized countries. American soldiers
are dying in Iraq for the establishment of an Islamic theocracy (or something
close to it) the way the Iraqi constitution is shaping up. Yes, they say
they'll respect human rights, but they also say that no law will be able to
contradict Islam, and certain human rights-such as freedom of religion
(converting from Islam to another faith is a death penality offence under
Islamic law), women's rights (in our "ally" Saudi Arabia, a state where, like
in the future Iraq, Islam is the source of all law, women get beaten for not
wearing headscarves), and freedom of speech (it is a death penality offence to
say anything against Islam under Islamic law), are contrary to Islam. One
wonders how Americans would have reacted to combat deaths in World War II if,
during the war, it became clear that American soldiers were dying for the
establishment of regimes that, human rights-wise, would not be much better than
what had preceded them. Personally, though I would be willing to lay down my
life for my country (I am a 21 year old male), I would NOT be willing to lay
down my life for the establishment of an Islamic theocracy, or any other kind
of tyranical regime, and I would not be happy if my child (if I had one) or one
of my friends did so, and I am not at all pleased to see American soldiers
doing so.
Regards,
Daniel R. Marx
Dear Dr. Williams,
I am an avid reader of your column, and I agree with most of the points you make
in your latest column, Security or Hysteria.
However, I do take issue with one point you make. You compare the reaction to
deaths in the Pacific campaign of World War II with the reaction to deaths in
the Iraq War, and conclude that America has "become feminized and turned into a
nation of wimps and nervous nellies".
I think this conclusion fails to take into account a crucial difference between
World War II and the Iraq War. Specifically, you fail to take into account what
the soldiers are dying for. In World War II, American soldiers died to defend
America, and Japan and Germany became civilized countries. American soldiers
are dying in Iraq for the establishment of an Islamic theocracy (or something
close to it) the way the Iraqi constitution is shaping up. Yes, they say
they'll respect human rights, but they also say that no law will be able to
contradict Islam, and certain human rights-such as freedom of religion
(converting from Islam to another faith is a death penality offence under
Islamic law), women's rights (in our "ally" Saudi Arabia, a state where, like
in the future Iraq, Islam is the source of all law, women get beaten for not
wearing headscarves), and freedom of speech (it is a death penality offence to
say anything against Islam under Islamic law), are contrary to Islam. One
wonders how Americans would have reacted to combat deaths in World War II if,
during the war, it became clear that American soldiers were dying for the
establishment of regimes that, human rights-wise, would not be much better than
what had preceded them. Personally, though I would be willing to lay down my
life for my country (I am a 21 year old male), I would NOT be willing to lay
down my life for the establishment of an Islamic theocracy, or any other kind
of tyranical regime, and I would not be happy if my child (if I had one) or one
of my friends did so, and I am not at all pleased to see American soldiers
doing so.
Regards,
Daniel R. Marx
