ETS! encourages comments, feedback, tips, corrections, and info! Please keep them as concise as possible so we can print as many different voices as possible: ETS!, P.O. Box 85541, Seattle WA 98145, or e-mail ets@scn.org.

A Veteran Speaks

Here's a letter the Seattle Times wouldn't print.

Every time someone angrily tells me that our servicemen fought for my right to protest the Iraq War, I am stunned. You see...that was me! Me and thousands of other military veterans who believe that this war is a bad idea. And who would know better than those who have been there? Do you believe that our government leaders know better? Are you aware that Dick Cheney never served in the military? John Ashcroft never served. The great propaganda orchestrator, Karl Rove, never served. And George W. Bush was AWOL from the National Guard! Most of us would have been given a dishonorable discharge for that...but then, George W. Bush came from the privileged class...so the same rules don't apply. Nevertheless, it takes a whole lot of audacity for any of these guys to call me "unpatriotic" while they sit all warm and cozy at home counting their oil company dividends. We are the patriots. They are only interested in their own wealth and power...at our expense!

But let's suppose that I never served in the military. Many of us, young people at the time, looked for ways out of the Vietnam conflict feeling that it was an illegal and immoral war. (And history has proven us right!) Personally, I don't have a problem with anyone who tried to avoid that war. I thought it took a lot of guts for young kids to leave home and move up to Canada. They didn't know if they'd ever be able to return home again. I can respect that. What I can't respect are the war hawks who beat the drums for war, but have never been to war, have no intention of going, and have no problem sending everyone else's young kids off to fight for them. That is unconscionable, and that is why many of us refer to these types as "Chicken Hawks." They have not earned one bit of respect from those of us who served, and many of us consider them an insult to us.

But there's another issue. What exactly does someone mean when they say, "Our servicemen fought for your right to protest."? I keep waiting for the rest of the statement. What? So, then, we're not supposed to protest? Is that what they're saying? We're just supposed to go off and fight for a right we're never supposed to exercise? Is that it? Or is it that I am just supposed to feel guilty for exercising my constitutional rights? What sense does that make? It's kind of like the people who are stealing "No Iraq War" signs out of people's yards. I want to ask them what is it about free speech and American values that they object to?

Some say it's about "supporting our servicemen"? Is that it? Because, if so, maybe there are a few facts that the average American is not aware of. For example, the fact that over 10,000 Gulf War veterans have died since Gulf War I, allegedly from Gulf War related illnesses. Or that more than 200,000 Gulf War veterans have filed disability claims since "Desert Shield" and "Desert Storm." Or that the Bush administration has slashed $275 million from the health care budget of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Or that many of the chemical and biological weapons Iraq has used, and may again use, against our troops were manufactured right here in the United States of America! No one tells you these facts, but they are available from any number of US military veteran websites for anyone who cares enough to do a little bit of research.

The best way I can think of to "support our troops" is to stop this war so that they don't have to go in the first place! Anything less is immoral. However, if they do end up going, no one will care more about them than us. After George W. Bush has long forgotten them, we will be there. They are us. We won't forget.

Rob Moitoza, United States Navy Veteran, 1965-1971, U.S.S. R.K. Huntington DD781. Anyone wanting more information on veterans groups opposed to this war can go to the following websites: veteransforpeace.org, veteransforcommonsense.org, vaiw.org, vvaw.com, vvawai.com, and vetsforjustice.org.

The People, United, Really Can't Be Bothered!

I think you aptly call yourself "shamelessly biased." I noticed on your calendar you have protests against immigrant abuse, genocide, imperialism, war, and the like, but for some reason you never have the pro-war and pro-complacency rallies scheduled. As you saw on the real media, dozens of local people, along with possibly hundreds nationwide, the silent majority, became the vocal majority, pledging support for our dear leader Dubya.

The people stood up and said, "It is no longer enough to be silent, we must openly declare our complacency and indifference. We must blindly follow the leader, for leaders know best. We will follow Bush whereever he leads us; to Iraq, Colombia, Hell, we support our President that was elected by the people." If the American people didn't support Bush, how would he become Prez? It's because of the best system in the world. America is the land of the free. Now, believe it or not, we PATRIOT ACTors will secretly kidnap and kill you, legally, of course. I will see you anti-American bastards in heaven (that is, insinuating that you are in hell).

"PATRIOTic American," via monitored e-mail

Poetry Not War!

If you have not visited www.poetsagainstthewar.org yet, by all means do so! It is one of the most stunning collections of poetry ever gathered. An unbelievable outpouring of support.

Danika Dinsmore, Seattle

Two Roads

Think piece (think peace):

1. The Manuel Noriega model. Difficulty level: moderate/high. Surround Saddam and play loud rock'n'roll at him until he surrenders. A special bonus prize for the reader who emails me with the best playlist for causing Saddam's capitulation. Benefits of this strategy: Saddam is motivated to save his own life. A country-club atmosphere on an isolated but guarded estate is promised to him. He is aware Noriega has made a deal and is secretly no longer imprisoned in America per se. Seems do-able. Drawbacks: Saddam's forces may fight harder than Noriega's and Saddam may be harder to locate.

2. The President simply picks up a telephone and calls Saddam and commences negotiations. Difficulty level: moderate/high. The President must actually speak meaningfully in a difficult exchange, one-on-one with Hussein. Benefits to this strategy: it is quite simple and may actually accomplish something. Lives will be saved even if only temporarily. Drawbacks: The US President may not be as intelligent as Hussein.

--Russ Newsom, via e-mail