Chuck Hagan: Serious topics re. the military |

Chuck Hagan: Serious topics re. the military

Chuck HaganBreckenridge

Re. by Alex Miller, opinion, June 5

In reference to your comment: “Now, I don’t dispute the fact that the military occasionally needs new stuff, although I’ll never stop arguing the military has a great deal more than it needs and gets way more from Congress than it should.”While there is an argument to be made that the money spent on bombs might be better spent on Planned Parenthood, potholes, or school funding, it is unlikely that many (if any) will die due to reduced funding. What your article seems to ignore is that there is also a compelling argument to be made that if our country is going to send young men and women into combat where they will kill and be killed, we have a moral obligation to give them the best chance of survival that money can buy. I’m not saying which of these two should prevail, just that both should be given equal consideration.Your article tends to trivialize a serious matter. This is a shame, because it is a topic worthy of discussion. It is indicative of what many of us find so disappointing in today’s media. Your unwillingness to tackle a serious topic with serious thought relegates your thoughts to background noise. Rather than challenging your readers with serious food for thought, your flippant approach serves to only to alienate and anger. How do you suppose the line above is being received by the friends and family of those who have been killed in the war on terror? Could you stand in their living room and make the same statement? While no one will ever mistake the SDN for The Economist, serious topics deserve serious consideration, especially in an election year. I would have much preferred you discuss the relevant merits of social spending vs. military spending. You might also have discussed local vs. state vs. federal funding for different projects. Some things aren’t funded at the federal level because the states want it that way. Perhaps that is part of the problem, or part of the solution.Overall, I’m disappointed that as editor of this paper you chose to provide a “Jim Rome” rant instead of a well-thought-out editorial.

Support Local Journalism

Support Local Journalism

As a Summit Daily News reader, you make our work possible.

Now more than ever, your financial support is critical to help us keep our communities informed. Every contribution, no matter the size, will make a difference.

Your donation will be used exclusively to support quality, local journalism.