In his April 30 response to the letter titled “The Dogs of War,” U.S. Army Sgt. 1st Class John Haas wrote: “You can tell what the writer thought about us, as soldiers, by the way she used the term ‘dogs of war.’” I should think, as old as the term is, that everyone understands that the term dogs of war does not refer to soldiers in war but those who send soldiers to war. As for “the POWs being starved, sleep-deprived, beaten and possibly tortured,” would any of this happen if the dogs of war did not have more political power than the promoters of peace who protest sending U.S. troops unnecessarily into harm’s way?

Sgt. Haas closed with: “So let them speak and protest. That is their right, but I hope everyone uses their right to shun each and every one of them.” How ironic it will be if those who send our troops into harm’s way are heralded, even by the troops, while those who protest the sacrifice of U.S. soldiers lives on the altar of oil industry profits are shunned for their efforts.

Robert C. Currie Jr.