Piattology lacks validity

Andy Rock
alumnus, Carterville

Dear Editor and Jack Piatt:

The most recent article of Piattology was very interesting. Mr. Piatt, you are a very eloquent and descriptive writer. However, using intellectual metaphors and descriptive fiction doesn't make your points valid. Here are some validity flaws in your article: First, you point out that the troops want to come home, that they have been lied to, that the military didn't need its president to pay a surprise visit, and that they [the military] aren't defending our freedom over there.

Did you see the footage of President Bush's entrance in Iraq, Mr. Piatt?

Soldiers were jumping out of their chairs; tears were shed because the commander in chief was in Baghdad. I didn't see a bunch of upset troops that felt they have been lied to, did you? Furthermore, my brother-in-law has been gone since March 2003. He is currently in Baghdad, and they have extended his stay until next July. He was supposed to come home in March 2004, but he got extended, not lied to, but extended.

I frequently communicate with him through e-mail, and never once has he expressed any anger or resentment for President Bush or his administration's policies. He doesn't feel lied to and he was ecstatic to see President Bush in Baghdad. And I wonder what would be the response if I forwarded your article on to my brother-in-law to pass around to other soldiers.

Would the soldiers agree with you that they are not over there defending our freedom?

What an ignorant statement to make. When bullets are flying over the heads of our soldiers, the only belief that keeps them going is the belief that they are defending our, YOUR, freedoms. Your lack of understanding of that illustrates your utter contempt and disdain for the military.

Secondly, Mr. Piatt, what about Hillary Clinton's visit to Afghanistan and Iraq? (Or did you forget that we still have troops in Afghanistan, or do you just not care?) Was her visit politically motivated the same way President Bush's was? Was it more uplifting for the troops to have United States Senator Hillary Clinton criticizing the military strategies of President Bush while in the war-torn areas?

I see no criticism of Hillary Clinton's "morale" trip, yet President Bush receives countless criticism. Mr. Piatt, it is obvious through reading your article that YOU have anger and resentment for President Bush. YOU feel that you have been lied to. Please do not manifest your personal feelings in soldiers that you have never met. The soldiers support President Bush completely, even if you don't. I will take your advice Mr. Piatt and I will not, " . . . be fooled by the propaganda of political-savvy masterminds who find harmony in the heat of chaos."

Big words, big meaning. These words represent what you and the rest of your "groups" are doing to President Bush, not what President Bush is doing to us.

Mr. Piatt, metaphors, colorful language and catchy lines do not make your argument intelligent. However, with the views you expressed in this article, I am sure that SIU would hire you as a professor in a heartbeat.

Andy Rock
alumnus, Carterville

Copyright 2008 - Daily Egyptian