The antiwar voices: then and today

Mark Rudd (Opinion, Nov. 10) is deluded by self-importance when he implies history would somehow be different if his armed, violent, upper-class and overconfident Weathermen had opted instead to educate the American people to oppose the building of an American empire.

Perhaps Rudd hasn’t noticed, but far-left ideologues have maintained a healthy representation on the faculties of college campuses. My children at college today are bombarded in their classes with leftist, anti-imperialist rhetoric that hypocritically rationalizes a very aggressive form of Islamism.

The rhetoric is the same, but it’s not the same struggle. Admittedly, it’s not easy to justify imperialism, but it’s the only sane response to 9/11 and Iran having a nuclear program. It was necessary in World War II to oppose the Nazis, even if it was imperialist. Today, our very existence demands a strong response to those who are actively trying to annihilate us, even if it means we are imperialist.

JEFF MILLER

Rolling Hills

*

As explanations for today’s lackluster antiwar movement compared to the Vietnam era, Rudd cites the lack of a current draft as well as the dismal national performance by the Democrats nationally in 2004 (Sen. John Kerry was not even antiwar).

I would add the lack of a Democratic Party stand against this war or its future spinoffs and the co-opted Republican news media.

BILL WRUCK

Alta Loma