I have heard many good and convincing arguments as to why the United States should find itself at war in the Persian Gulf. Although I tend to disagree with most supporters of the war regarding its eventual outcome, people who speak of the war as a means to upholding international law and protecting human rights have my respect.

This is not true of Russ Suchana. His comments in The Daily Collegian (Feb. 4) regarding the economic aspects of the Gulf War are repulsive. He argues that the economics of oil and the protection of U.S. "investments" are suitable motivations for military action. Even if this were not a morally reprehensible sentiment, I would have to question his economics.

Remember, Russ, that fighting this war is costing our country tens of billions of dollars and that the military buildup of the Reagan Administration, which brought us all of these wonderful high-tech weapons, is primarily responsible for our multi-billion dollar federal deficit and the desperate financial condition in which we find ourselves.

But, economics not withstanding, the question Mr. Suchana raises is a troubling one. How many lives, American and Iraqi, should we eliminate to sustain our wasteful way of life? How many lives, Russ?

Although I disagree with the war, I support our troops in every way possible, because I know that they believe that we are fighting for something a little bit more important than oil. When you attempt to rationalize their actions economically by reducing their role to that of mere slaves of corporate America, you degrade them and us. If you honestly believe that economics are a justification, fine. But, as for me, I'll choose to support policies which change the economic system and make some personal sacrifices rather than watch people like you send my friends and countrymen off to kill and die in the desert.