Allan Luft – 3/19/06

This page was last updated on March 19, 2006.

Protests don’t hurt; Allan Luft; Beaver County Times; March 19, 2006. This letter first appeared on the Times website on March 16^th. Shortly after its website publishing, however, it was removed as were other letters. I should note there are minor differences – editorial, not content – between the March 16^th letter – critiqued below – and that of March 19^th.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“Letter writers Sgt. Daniel Mullenax and 1st Lt. Aaron Barr are both grossly incorrect in their assumptions that we cannot support the troops without supporting the war.”

[RWC] I would have included a link to the Mullenax letter, but it was removed from the Times website.

By the time you reach the end of Mr. Luft’s letter, you’ll find he not once tells us how he supports the troops.

“As one who served during Vietnam, I protested the war both before and after my time in the service. I saw the damage to the troops coming home with physical and mental scars received that will never heal.”

[RWC] Mr. Luft doesn’t say, but I think it’s safe to assume he was drafted if he served in Vietnam as he claims. Today’s military is an all-volunteer force. Those soldiers who didn’t want to serve in Iraq didn’t have to enlist, or didn’t have to re-enlist.

“One cannot state that supporting a human’s right to life is subject to terms of killing others. To say we must support the war when people are dying from unjust causes is just absurd.”

[RWC] Does anyone know what this paragraph means?

If I understand it correctly, Mr. Luft believes it is wrong to defend yourself if it means killing the person who wants to kill you. I don’t know of any mainstream religions that make this claim.

The second sentence appears to claim it’s wrong to kill the killers of the innocent. For example, it was wrong to kill the Nazis who were exterminating Jews, Gypsies, et cetera during World War II?

“How can Barr say most people don’t understand the military lifestyle? What does that have to do with the war or supporting the troops?”

[RWC] Does Mr. Luft claim most people “understand the military lifestyle?” I believe it takes special people to serve in the military and I believe most people don’t understand that. If you don’t understand that, I believe it can mislead you into thinking your actions support the troops when your actions are doing exactly the opposite. Further, those actions embolden the enemy, and when did emboldening the enemy ever help our troops?

What’s especially sad is Mr. Luft is an alleged vet and yet he claims not to understand what true troop support is.

“I know lots of people who have lives worse off than being in the military. I know people who lost friends from crimes committed on U.S. soil.”

[RWC] Let’s hold a pity party for Mr. Luft. To Mr. Luft, there’s no difference between losing your life to a criminal and losing your life because you chose to put yourself in harm’s way to protect your country. While both deaths are tragic, one is the result of random violence and the other is the result of bravery and a sense of duty.

“Should we support vigilantes when they seek illegal justice? According to the two writers, the answer to that should be ‘yes.’ It’s a just cause, isn’t it?”

[RWC] Vigilantes operate outside the law. Congress authorized the war in Iraq via the Iraq War Resolution.

“We are supposed to be a civil race of beings. Killing is not justified, en masse, for any reason. Not unlike Vietnam, a majority of soldiers are in the military for a variety of reasons, but going to war and killing isn’t one of them.”

[RWC] “Killing is not justified, en masse, for any reason?” Let me get this straight. No matter what our enemies do to us, or how many people they kill, we are not justified in killing our would-be killers?

“Not unlike Vietnam?” Regardless of the time or war, all soldiers are in the military for a variety of reasons.

Let me get this right. People who enlist in the military don’t think they may need to go to war someday?

“I can assure the sergeant and the lieutenant that given the choice, the vast majority of people under their commands would leave there to find a peaceful place to finish out their time.”

[RWC] No s***, Dick Tracy. No one wants to be in a war.

However, if what Mr. Luft means is that our troops would rather come home than finish their mission, I believe he is wrong. After all, as I noted above, everyone in Iraq is a volunteer and they can choose not to re-enlist. Instead, our troops are re-enlisting.

“That’s why we can and should support our troops and not the war.

“No one wants their child, father, brother, sister, whoever, to die for a wrongful cause and live with guilt for having to kill others.”

[RWC] As I noted at the beginning of this critique, Mr. Luft never told us how he supported the troops. All we got was a list of senseless talking points.

The bottom line is Mr. Luft doesn’t have the courage of his convictions to say something like “the end justifies the means.” Instead, he and his like come up with a warped definition of supporting the troops to hide behind.

Here’s what fellow anti-war guy Joel Stein wrote in an L.A. Times column of January 24, 2006. “I DON’T SUPPORT our troops. … And being against the war and saying you support the troops is one of the wussiest positions the pacifists have ever taken — and they’re wussy by definition. It’s as if the one lesson they took away from Vietnam wasn’t to avoid foreign conflicts with no pressing national interest but to remember to throw a parade afterward.” While I obviously disagree with Mr. Stein’s position regarding troop support, at least he has the courage not hide behind a false claim of troop support.