Columns

Letters to the Editor

CHRISTOPHER FRIZZELLE: I read through your article with the hope that you would go on to legitimize your statement that the peace rhetoric you hear is unsophisticated, cowardly, irrelevant, and retarded ["War Bonds," March 27]. You did not. You point out the flawed knowledge of many protesters, yet admit knowing little about the issues yourself: Factual knowledge must not be the divider between you and the retards.

Truth be told, your brother's death would do nothing to discredit or validate the Iraq War: He is just one man and history is bigger than any dead soldier, news headline, or protest march. History is a complex, ugly thing that is even harder to understand as we live it, and while personal stories make better war movies, they are shaky (often contradictory) foundations for opinion. I respect the fact that you and I may disagree on a number of things, and if your friends hate you for writing the article, they should go fuck themselves. But for God's sake, learn a little more about the world before calling someone's opinion retarded.

Joshua Thompson, via e-mail

CHRISTOPHER FRIZZELLE: There is a major inconsistency in your reasoning. You believe "military action in Iraq is justified and necessary." You then go on to state that you know nothing about the environment, oil, Turks, Kurds, or geopolitical consequences. Do you see no correlation between these things? I'm wondering, then, what informs your opinion. The United States does not exist in a vacuum. There are BILLIONS of other people on this planet. To think it solely belongs to us is beyond arrogant. I suggest you and 70 percent of America do a little further investigation into our motivations for this invasion and the inevitable global consequences.

Shannon Welles, via e-mail

CHRISTOPHER FRIZZELLE: YOU ARE NOT ALONE!! Your article "War Bonds" hit so many nails on their heads. Most protesters are so grossly misinformed about why "our troops" are fighting that I have basically given up listening to their chants. They are silly little nuisances at this point who deserve no more attention than a lazy fly at a picnic. I support this war and I support our troops, and I don't even know anyone in the military! But I do know this: War is never pretty nor is it ever cheap, but it is almost always necessary in the liberation of countries that are being unfairly ruled by a sadistic regime. Yours was the finest article I have read in The Stranger in a good long time.

Kimmer Pare, via e-mail

EDITOR: I'm glad The Stranger is willing to give people like Christopher Frizzelle the right to speak out in favor of the war with Iraq, and I'm glad he's willing to stick his neck out to speak his peace. That said, he didn't give me a single reason to change my mind about the stupidity and shortsightedness of this war. Does he think the intelligence officers who see no connection between Iraq and al Qaeda are missing something? Does the U.S.' history of "nation building" in places like Iran, Chile, and Guatemala give him hope for the person we'll install in Hussein's place? Does he believe the people of Iraq will welcome with open arms an army that's invaded their homeland, wrecked their infrastructure, and killed a whole lot of their countrymen? His argument would be more convincing if it offered reasons we should fight this war rather than just insulting the peace protesters.

Mark Horowitz, via e-mail

JOSH FEIT: Thank you for writing your piece about the hypocrisy of saying "I support the troops." ["Troop Dupe," March 27.]

For the last week or so, I've come to the realization that I don't support the troops, and for many of the same reasons you wrote about in your article.

I've also come to the realization that this is not a popular viewpoint to hold, as I've already lost at least one online friend over this, and have actually alienated my husband just a little bit. Thank you again for writing that article. It helps.

Stephanie Bryant, via e-mail