As a liberal/leftist Marquette student, I have read Viewpoints over the years that I heartily disagree with. Rarely has one angered me so greatly as to join the debate with a Viewpoint of my own. But Joseph Kastner's Viewpoint March 1 pushed me over the line. Here is what I have to say of it.

We on the left do support our troops. We have been utterly appalled at our government's inability (or perhaps far worse, their disinterest) in providing for our men and women in Iraq. Nearly two years since this war began, many hundreds of vehicles are not properly "up-armored," and many thousands of troops still lack the Kevlar vests that would so greatly increase their safety.

Meanwhile, the government has granted Halliburton Inc. a $2.51 billion reconstruction contract, for the purpose of rebuilding the destroyed Iraqi petroleum infrastructure. This money could have been spent on our warriors, rather than relying on charities like "Adopt a Sniper" to outfit our fighting troops. We do support our troops. That is why we argue so vehemently to bring them out of harm's way.

Furthermore, I was horrified to read in that Viewpoint the idea that the Iraq war will focus the terrorists on the American soldiers securing Iraq, thus reducing the likelihood of an attack on our own soil. If we are to use our fighting forces, sworn before God to defend their nation and constitution, as a bulletproof vest to absorb hostilities towards our policies abroad, we at the very least should come up with a better reason than this.

As for Saddam Hussein's "reign of terror," a little perspective on a few areas may be helpful. Hussein's murder of his own citizens was no doubt an atrocity, but in the first 18 months of the Iraq war an estimated 100,000 Iraqi citizens met a violent death. True, some of these deaths were a result of insurgent bombs and munitions, but the vast majority were inflicted by the air war and continuing ground campaign. At this rate, we are on pace to crush Hussein's record. With respect to the Geneva Conventions, it was our own attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, that drafted a memorandum arguing that sections regarding interrogation were "quaint" and "obsolete," paving the way to Abu Ghraib. These facts do nothing to diminish Saddam's atrocities, yet they compel us to question the purity of our own actions.

In response to the idea that pre-war Iraq was a grave and growing threat to American security, I do not know which "fat man" Kastner was referring to, but I have some rather skinny academics to sic on him. Iraq was not a friendly nation. Saddam was not a friendly dictator. There is a surplus of evidence that before the 1991 Gulf War, he was deeply involved in the quest for Weapons of Mass Destruction. But the United Nations sanctions that have so readily been scorned had successfully contained him.

The proof of this is the degradation of his military between the wars, and the absence of the weapons we were so certain we would find. An excellent summary of just this topic is available in the July/August 2004 Foreign Affairs, the official publication of the Council on Foreign Relations. Those that would argue that this and my other sources are puppets of an elitist, liberal media and academia … well … there's no real response to that. Perhaps that is why it proves so effective.

While I am here, I beg your indulgence for a moment more. Vladimir Lenin never made the statement that was attributed to him in this Viewpoint. On the contrary, he repeatedly went on the record as opposing this notion, used by what he called a "capitalist" media to rake in money, with nothing providing a greater profit margin than war. The most likely source of this quote is in fact far right-wing ideologue Josef Goebbels, who said, "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it." Take care in your insinuations, Kastner; it would be most unfortunate for some ignorant fool to label you a Nazi.

Erich Delang is a junior in the College of Arts & Sciences.

This article appeared in The Marquette Tribune on Mar. 15 2005.