I feel the need to respond to Michael Niman’s article titled “Who’ll Stop the War?” (Artvoice v6n5). As someone who serves in our nation’s military I was able to see exaggeration and inaccuracy in his arguments.

I’d like to begin with the February 2006 Zogby poll that he cited. It is true that 72 percent of deployed soldiers polled felt that we should pull out of Iraq by the end of 2006. However, this same poll noted that 85 percent of the soldiers polled felt that the war was meant to retaliate for Saddam Hussein’s role in 9/11, while 72 percent also felt that our presence there was meant to prevent Hussein from protecting Al Qaeda in Iraq. Only 11 percent felt that it was to secure oil and six percent that it was to establish long-term bases in the region. This is hardly a moral indictment of the war, but rather points toward a desire to alter strategy. As a soldier I can tell you that this is not a rejection of the war, but a logical reevaluation of the American position in order to achieve mission accomplishment.

Niman also makes arguments attesting to the existence of a de facto draft within the framework of an all-volunteer force. One argument surrounds the existence of an economic draft. I come from a family of meager means and can tell you that it was the Army ROTC scholarship that allowed me to attain an undergraduate degree at a private college with the accrual of minimal loans. This was a choice as it is for anyone else who joins the military. One does not need the military; one can always take out loans to attend a public college or university.

He also mentions the Individual Ready Reserves (not Independent Ready Reserves). Anyone who joins the military does so for a total of eight years. While one may only serve three years actively, anyone who signs up knows they must enter the IRR after leaving active service until a total of eight years passes. The IRR is intended to allow the president to call up trained forces in time of war. This is not a secret, or a draft. It is part of normal procedures designed to save the taxpayer money from having to train new soldiers.

Finally he speaks to the intentions of National Guardsmen. He states that many joined the Guard for education benefits or to serve their communities. While pre-9/11 this may have been true, any recruit post-9/11 is told to expect deployment. These Guardsmen join with full knowledge that they will serve overseas; they do so out of patriotism. Furthermore I know of many Guardsmen who joined pre- and post-9/11 who have volunteered to serve overseas once, twice and sometimes three times. With the exception of Vietnam, the Guard has served in every war as they do now.

Niman hangs his argument on the sentiment of a small handful of deserters and vocal dissenters. This group hardly speaks for the majority or even many of those who serve. One should not mistake an intelligent, thinking military capable of reevaluating strategy for support of the views of the radical left.

Jon F. Mellott, Captain, Army National Guard

Buffalo