COUNTERPUNCH LETTER : Another Response in Alamo Debate

In his Counterpunch, “The Alamo Battle . . . Redux” (Calendar, May 15), Dr. Rudolfo F. Acun~a avoids dealing with any of the principal points raised in my May 8 Counterpunch discussion of the Alamo: comparisons of weaponry, combat experience, numbers, leadership, training, logistics--all favoring the Mexican army.

However, Dr. Acun~a does attack and refute things I did not assert. No one, myself included, is spared. Crockett begs for mercy, Travis is a coward, Jim Bowie a slaver, Sam Houston an opium addict. As for myself, Taylor is “an ex-military officer, playing war games,” locked in the present. Albeit “well-intentioned,” a “chauvinist” whose “cheerleading justifies racism toward Mexicans.”

While I respect Dr. Acun~a’s zeal, even deplore the injustices underlying his obvious frustration, as a scholar he has a duty not to allow advocacy to eclipse accuracy, not to resort to ad hominem attacks when cornered by unpleasant reality.

EUGENE A TAYLOR JR.

Colonel, U.S. Army (Ret.)

Valencia