Joseph Kastner's March 1 Viewpoint was a grossly oversimplified caricature of the American left and of those who voiced their dissent over the Iraq war. Kastner feels that taking the position of supporting the troops, but opposing the war is both hypocritical and misguided, despite the fact that this position has been a common one among politicians and everyday Americans alike. As someone who takes this position myself, I was disappointed with Kastner's portrayal of war opponents as people who support the likes of Saddam Hussein and Vladimir Lenin and as people who, quite clearly enough, must not understand the complexities of global politics and the threat of terrorism as well as he does.

One's ability to support the troops but oppose the war seems no different than one's ability to maintain a friendship with someone who may have different habits, opinions or values. If this is criminal, or hypocritical, are not we all guilty? It should come as no surprise that I do not support the cause that the troops are fighting for. I strongly disagree with the way the Bush administration went about convincing Americans of the necessity of this war, with the way it squandered America's unprecedented global support in the wake of 9/11 and with the way it planned, or failed to plan, for what would happen in the aftermath of the fall of Baghdad.

This was a contrived war from the start, with the justifications for it changing as often as the political tide. First, it was about security from terrorism. When the administration bent over backwards to find evidence of a solid terrorist connection and came up short, it became a war over weapons of mass destruction. In the absence of WMD materializing, the war became about freedom. Kastner, to his credit, defends all of these justifications, rather than focusing solely on the reason du jour, the freedom of the Iraqi people, as so many of the war's supporters have been quick to do.

I differ from Kastner and other supporters of the war because I feel it is imprudent for the United States to exercise its "prerogative to help spread freedom and democracy" through military means. As the old adage goes, just because you can doesn't mean you should. The quickest way to fill terrorist training camps around the world is to exercise American military might with all but a handful of countries supporting our endeavors. Not only has the Iraq invasion solidified the resentment of America in the minds of our terrorist enemies, but it has opened up a new battleground in the war on terror, one which is putting our troops at risk every day. I too am hopeful that the war results in freedom for the Iraqi people and to see Iraqis casting ballots was an inspiring sight, but nation building has a shaky history and the Middle East is an unfriendly region.

Despite my opposition to our decision to invade, I still support the men and women on our front lines. As the grandson of a soldier who was on Omaha Beach during the D-Day invasion, I have a tremendous respect for any American who wears the uniform, regardless of where they are fighting. I have no doubt that the troops in Iraq are giving their all to the people of that country and for the people of this country. I have heard wonderful stories in the news of soldiers building schools for Iraqi children and teaching Iraqis the power of democracy, and that represents the best of America. I pray every day for a safe return of every American soldier and for the families of those men and women. Most of all, I admire and respect them for doing something neither I, nor I presume Kastner, have ever done: they are putting their lives on the line for a cause. That cause is one which I may disagree with, but I support, respect and admire them for doing it and doing it with the best of intentions.

Patrick Whitty is a freshman political science and economics major.

This article appeared in The Marquette Tribune on Mar. 10 2005.