Lugar boring\nWe attended our daughter's graduation May 10 and never attended a graduation that was so boring. Sen. Lugar used this forum to get across a message that all of us have yet to get!\nEveryone from students to parents and grandparents felt that this man used this day to make some sort of political speech. Many were heard asking, "Is this an election year?"\nDenise Weiner\nHuntington, PA
Graduation address disappoints\nI am writing you regarding the IU graduation ceremonies May 10. After spending four years of my life in Bloomington and working diligently toward my degree, the thought of my graduation ceremony was always something I looked forward to. Several family members traveled from out of state to attend the graduation ceremony this past Saturday; we were all greatly disappointed by the graduation ceremony itself, especially by Sen. Lugar's speech. Not only was it completely inappropriate for him to speak of his personal political views for the entire speech, it was also totally irrelevant for the occasion. Graduations are occasions for moving on, celebrating hard work and looking forward to a bright future, not for discussions of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. I felt more like I was in Washington, D.C., listening to a political speech than at my graduation in Bloomington. My suggestion for the future is to screen possible speech givers and the materials they plan to use more carefully. After at least four years at a school, students expect at least a decent ceremony to send them off to the next stage of their lives. \nMegan Sprecher\nSenior
President Bush is not a 'holy warrior'\nMr. Lyle ("Pre-emptive Christianity," April 21) has accused the president of using God as an excuse to launch a war to remove the Iraqi despot Saddam Hussein. Lyle goes on to point out that even the Pope, John Paul II, has declared that this war was wrong. In fact, the president has never once used the name of God to declare the use of force as legitimate. I challenge him to do so. Yes, the president may have referenced God when referring to the deaths of American GI's; however, he has never used the Lord to justify the war. He didn't need to. The many acts and deeds of Mr. Hussein are what legitimized this war -- so many inhuman acts that can't be mentioned in this short space. I also find it amusing that Lyle brings up the Pope. This is a Pope who can condemn war against an evil tyrant but can't condemn child molestation by his own priests. \nRyan Sheets\nChicago, Ill.
American military is far from charitable; cut the euphemisms\nI firmly disagree with Drew Buser's "The Charitable American" (April 29). There are many ways in which Americans are charitable, but it is not because of the U.S. military. The pervasive view in the article is that America's troops are in Europe because they are there for the interests of European countries. Simply put, U.S. military is used to protect U.S. interests. The military is there not because of the ethical reasoning of wanting allies to be safe -- it is there to make sure that trading partners are safe so money can flow into the U.S. This is not an invalid reason -- there is no problem when a country uses its military to secure its interest. It is unconscionable, though, to make like a savior while securing self-interests. \nIf expanding military is truly altruistic, why has no one come out and said "Let's pull the troops out of Europe, Middle East and everywhere else where they are not wanted, and spend the money domestically on social security, on public universities, on giving the veterans better service." After all, there must be limits to altruism, and with the schism between U.S. and Western Europe's perspective of reasons to war, would it not be a perfect moment to stop those aids?\nThe answer simply is that the U.S. bases are not where they are as a charitable exercise; it is there to make sure some people feel safe from the ideological invasion by the communists, fascists and now, extremists. Again, there is nothing wrong, per se, in securing national interest through military means. Just please cut the euphemisms. \nLastly, I must applaud Drew Buser for making this point with such panache: "Probably the least acknowledged 'charity' given by Americans is foreign investment." I would like to witness someone trying to persuade the bank that deposits are charity and not get laughed out the door. \nChris Chan\nSenior
