Anti-war demonstrators continue to make statements such as "Give peace a chance" and "No blood for oil." But I have serious problems with the logic surrounding both statements.

First, those who say "give peace a chance" have no concept of what peace is or what it takes to achieve it; they are living in a fantasy world.

Throughout history there have been individuals like Saddam Hussein, who have consistently challenged the international community and our God-given freedoms.

I don't know one person that doesn't want to see peace in the world, including President Bush.

But the difference between the anti-war demonstrators and those of us who support Bush is that the supporters understand that there will always be threats to freedom and peace, and we are willing to defend it, even if it requires force when people like Saddam pose a clear and present danger to our values.

Second, for those who say "no blood for oil" this is not a war about oil. It is about defending our freedoms (including the free speech rights of the demonstrators) and freeing the Iraqi people from a homicidal dictator.

I think we should ask France about its motives with regard to the oil question.

I say, "no appeasement for oil." French President Jaques Chirac is threatening Eastern European countries with membership in the European Union and also leaving Iraqi lives to the will of Saddam.

I don't want war any more than the next person, but sometimes peace and freedom must be defended, and I know that I'm willing to defend it. Are you?

Chris Steinmiller
political theory and constitutional democracy senior