Letters to the editor, Nov. 16

Downplaying Fort Hood shooter's religion is irresponsible

This country has taken political correctness to a ridiculous extreme, and it sticks out like a sore thumb in the staff editorial from Nov. 9 titled "Shooter's faith masks bigger issues." Criticizing the media for pointing out the fact that Hasan is a Muslim is ignorant.

You try to spin the facts and make it seem like Hasan's religion is the main reason the story is such a big deal to the media. The guy killed 12 people at an Army base! I don't care what his faith is, that is certainly worthy of attention. And whether you like it or not, his faith is an important detail of the story. Details are still being uncovered, and his ties to Islamic extremists are becoming more apparent. (And no offense to you and your psychology Ph.D., but I don't think you are in a position to blame this nut job's motivation on the treatment of veterans.)

Maybe it's not politically correct, but wondering if his faith was a factor in this tragedy is valid and certainly logical. I'm not ignorant to assume that all Muslims are terrorists, but you cannot deny that fact that most terrorists also happen to be Muslim. It's a trend we cannot pretend to ignore. And the practice of media, like the Daily Nebraskan, trying to downplay this fact is irresponsible journalism. This is a particularly timely story as John Allen Muhammad, another Muslim, was executed Nov. 11 for his murders in 2002, and I believe Hasan deserves the same sentence. I think if Hasan had yelled "Jesus Christ is great" as opposed to "Allahu Akbar," the DN would be singing a whole different tune.

Jackson Little

Sophomore Finance major

U.S. should ‘man up' by bringing troops home

I was extremely disheartened to see Nick Pelster's editorial from Nov. 12 titled "Afghan war needs more support." The Afghan war needs more support? According to Pelster, supporting the troops means supporting the war. I reject that notion. I support the troops by calling for them to be brought home.

Over the course of the war, more than 869 American troops have been killed. These are our brothers and sisters, fighting for a senseless war. In the past eight years we are no safer than we were prior. We have substituted one corrupt Afghan government for another. Of the more than 18,000 Afganis killed, a vast majority have been civilians, whose families now have legitimate reason to hate America.

I agree with Pelster that the country must "man up." We must, however, realize that the difficult choice is putting aside the militaristic strategy that has gotten us nowhere, and take an approach to foreign policy that is not dated in the Cold War. Finally, we must support our troops by bringing them home, to stop thinking of them as an endless commodity.

Michael Dunn

FRESHMAN English Major

Cost of incarceration is worth paying

In response to the Sarah Melecki's column from Nov. 5 regarding prisons as well as the letters to the editor responding to it: It seems everyone is failing to ask themselves one question.

What is your safety and protection worth?

Obviously, the burden to the taxpayers to incarcerate prisoners is substantial. But so are many other things the taxpayers pay for. What are we paying for when the police arrest criminals? What are we paying for when the court system prosecutes and convicts these criminals? What are we paying for when we pay to have these convicted criminals incarcerated? We are paying for our safety and protection. We have the system we have to keep you and your family safe. To arrest, prosecute and incarcerate those we find to be a danger to ourselves, our loved ones and our society.

What else do we pay for to provide the safety and protection of our ourselves, our loved ones and our belongings? Insurance protects our property, the well-being of ourselves and the well-being of our loved ones futures. Police keep the streets safe so we can go about our daily lives in relative safety. Firefighters protect our property and lives should something accidentally or even intentionally catch on fire. Banks protect our money and precious documents. Anti-virus and firewalls protects our computers and files.

Anti-spam software protects our time and maybe even our sanity. Security staff provide protection to us while we enjoy a football game or have a few drinks with friends at your local bar. How much do you already pay for security and protection?

If we didn't incarcerate those people who willingly break the laws that protect us, then what is that going to do to the costs of our other protections? How much more would our insurance cost? How many more police officers and fire fighters would we need? How much more in fees would the banks have to charge to protect your money? Crime is expensive. It's expensive for everyone.

If we had no protection and no safety, what would be our quality of life? How happy would you or your loved ones be if you couldn't go anywhere without looking over your shoulder? What is your protection, safety and happiness worth? We live in a civilized society. Civilization has an expensive price tag.

Zackary T. Soderquist

Freshman Forensic Psychology major

U.S. should step back and reconsider Afghan war strategy

I would like to comment on Nick Pelster's column from Nov. 12 titled "Afghan war needs more support." First, allow me to quote Mr. Pelster, as he writes about "a complex form of guerrilla warfare that can be fought head on with AK-47s, or with IEDs, suicide vests, commercial airliners or a pistol on a U.S. military base."

I understand the mutually shared grief over the regrettable Fort Hood incident, and numerous credible suggestions that the shooter was linked to terrorist groups.