Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Sept. 17, 1979)
Slouch by Jim Earle NOW SWW/TmCt 1 see it 8. seueve irf STARRING ROSER'T MlTCI A op thoo AM .4/J -AG<S-i K SPGd What do you think we could get from Mitchumfor all of the remaining copies?” Opinion Peace isn’t parity The focus of the SALT II debate should focus on the under pinnings of the theory of nuclear arms limitation. The focus should be on Mutual Assured Destruction, a concept invented by the people who brought us the Vietnam “body count. ” The idea is that peace results because nations cannot fight a nuclear war without suffering mutual annihilation. It is sometimes referred to as the “Balance of Terror.” MAD supporters often point to “End of the World” re sults after an atomic war. Scientific American stated that such “On the Beach scenarios are utter foolishness. Somehow, the idea is that nuclear war is best prevented by parity with the Soviet Union, and endangered by superiority over it. That is why past arms control experts hailed the Russian acquisition of MIRV (Multiple Independent Re-entry Vehi cles) technology. Multiple-warhead missiles meant parity, they said. U. S. technology threatened to upset the balance. Thus, to keep the destruction mutual, the MAD thinkers have delib erately built U.S. weapons that cannot threaten Russian missiles. U.S. sub-launched Poseidon and Trident missiles are almost useless against Russian missiles safe inside har dened concrete silos. They are good only for wholesale slaughter of unprotected civilians. Civil defense also upsets MAD doctrine. This is because it can save its people and industry from destruction. The Office of Technology Assessment and Boeing aircraft pub lished two reports which affirmed that the United States, by using Russian techniques already in use, could drastically reduce the loss of lives and property in the event of nuclear war. Leaving the American population helpless is not condu cive to peace; it is provocative, as would be leaving a wallet on a Houston park bench. The U.S. should not make it easy for the USSR to take the money and run. It should concentrate on both defensive and offensive nuclear strategic superiority. the small society by Brickman Abb X I-SIM ^bb^-Tl/A^ IVE- R?fZ£*pTT£N TH£ LATEST PAPK&P ^ The Battalion U S P S 045 360 LETTERS POLICY Letters to the editor should not exceed 300 wotds and are subject to being cut to that length or less if longer. The editorial staff reserves the right to edit such letters and does not guarantee to publish any letter. Each letter must be signed, show the address of the writer and list a telephone number for verification. Address correspondence to Letters to the Editor, The Battalion, Room 216, Reed McDonald Building, College Station, Texas 77843. Represented nationally by National Educational Adver tising Services, Inc., New York City, Chicago and Los Angeles. The Battalion is published Monday through Friday from September through May except during exam and holiday periods and the summer, when it is published on Tuesday through Thursday. Mail subscriptions are $16.75 per semester; $33.25 per school year; $35.00 per full year. Advertising rates furnished on request. Address: The Battalion, Room 216, Reed McDonald Building, College Station, Texas 77843. United Press International is entitled exclusively to the use for reproduction of all news dispatches credited to it. Rights of reproduction of all other matter herein reserved. Second-Class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843. Opinions expressed in The Battalion are , those of the editor or of the writer of the ■ ‘ article and are not necessarily those of the t University administration or the Board of MEMBER Texas Press Association .» Southwest Journalism Congress Editor Liz Newlin Managing Editor Andy Williams Asst. Managing Editor Dillard Stone News Editors . .Karen Cornelison and Michelle Burrowes Sports Editor Sean Petty City Editor Roy Bragg Campus Editor Keith Taylor Focus Editors Beth Calhoun and Doug Graham StaflF Writers Meril Edwards, Diane Blake, Louie Arthur, Richard Oliver, Mark Patterson, Carolyn Blosser, Kurt Allen Photo Editor . . . Lee Roy Leschper Jr. Photographers Lynn Blanco, Clay Cockrill, Sam Stroder, Ken Herrerra Cartoonist Doug Graham Regents. The Battalion is a non-profit, self- supporting enterprise operated by students as a university and community newspaper. Editorial policy is determined by the editor. Viewpoint The Battalion •Texas A&M University Monday • September 17,1971 Analysis Discovery of Russian troops in Cuba could qualify as ‘most mismanaged crisis MO the co: lion A laved i vent S bombs U.S who is and re few di ing in delays The By JIM ANDERSON United Press International WASHINGTON — When the definitive work is written on “How to Mismanage a Crisis, there surely will be a chapter de voted to the Carter administration for the way it has handled the discovery of Soviet combat forces in Cuba. It began with Sen. Richard Stone, D-Fla., who kept telling the State Depart ment there was such a contingent. On July 27, Secretary of State Cyrus Vance wrote him that there “had been no significant increase” in Soviet military capabilities in Cuba. Then, the U.S. intelligence community accidentally discovered Stone was right, there were 2,000 to 3,000 combat troops in Cuba. That was credibility gap No. 1. After that, there was an elementary breakdown of communications between the administration and one of its strongest supporters on Capitol Hill — Sen. Frank Church, D-Idaho, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. When Church was informed about the troops, he decided a public announcement was necessary and telephoned Vance to say he was going to make it. Church thought he had Vance’s agreement — and although he did not — the news conference he held put the issue out in the open. Alarm ran quickly up the diplomatic scale. The State Department made an offi cial announcement about the combat units and President Carter asked for nationwide television time to urge everyone to be calm. Until then, everyone had been pretty calm. But the presidential seal of impor tance on the issue guaranteed big headlines and lots of publicity. At that point, Vance tried to snuff the flames of panic by clamping a lid of secrecy over his talks with Anatoly Dobrynin, the veteran Soviet ambassador. He spent hours with Dobrynin in the privacy of the State Department dining room, and almost as much time on Capitol Hill, urging senators to give quiet diplomacy a chance. But, while Vance was heading off poten tial leaks from the Senate, the State De partment itself was coming up with a gusher. One of Vance’s top deputies. Undersec retary of State David Newsom, held a background briefing for a group of news paper reporters last Wednesday. He listed a series of State Department theories about the Soviet combat unit. One prominent idea he mentioned was that the unit was there as a demonstration or training unit, to show Cuban troops how a brigade-sized unit maneuvers. That theory acknowledged for the first time that the Soviet party newspaper Pravda might have been correct in saying the Russian forces were in Cuba for training purposes. At that stage, the crisis — which had been an American-Soviet confrontatiom a matter of principle — turned into legalistic argument. What makes a mill organization a combat unit. The definiin could determine whether the Soviet® are perceived as a threat. It would be a harmless and educatis exercise in international politics except! two things: —It comes while the administration showing disarray in other areas, such aid Middle East negotiations. U.S. credit! in foreign affairs took another untim blow. plex — stucco should which into th ton. The pensivi were a tions o ged or times c “Dm tween —Some senators, such as Stone: Church, who were prepared to vote ratification of the SALT II treaty, nownl the withdrawal of Soviet troops fromCs a precondition for their support. Other committed senators, such asRussellLo^ D-La., have turned against the treat) One U.S. official said, “SALT may Is. just gone down the tube.” Embas: El fa AUS' tions for fall, bui port uni i proposi ments p spring. One would a establisl teed loa chase of The a $10 mil bonds, t be ad mi commiss ; The b —Gu; vate len purchase —Acq ; trust on ! guarante —Adv centage i due on a Rep. sponsore • • ■ i:' tional ar DICK WE ST Brown could up chances for nominatm by changing his name to ‘Alternative By DICK WEST United Press International WASHINGTON — A new political phenomenon has appeared on the Ameri can scene. All over the country, we are seeing the formation of groups seeking “a Democratic alternative. The latest, and typical of the genre, is the D.C. Committee for a Democratic Alterna tive. It joins similar organizations already created in 19 states. The committee pledges itself to “work to provide a viable alternative to President Carter as the Democratic nominee in 1980. But some analysts believe there is more to the movement than that. The suspicion is that the alternative committees actually are Kennedy fronts setting up a campaign nucleus in anticipa tion of the Massachusetts senator formally entering the race. But at this point, that is only speculation. Go to their headquarters, bang on the door and ask to see Teddy Kennedy, and the only answer you will get is: “There ain’t nobody in here*but us alternatives.” Whatever their motivation, the commit tees offer a golden opportunity for Gov. Edmund Brown of California to advance his candidacy. The talk is that one reason Brown has not caught fire as a Carter challenger is because so many Democrats are waiting to see what Kennedy does. It further is speculated that the moment Kennedy announces, the groups now de voted to seeking alternatives will im mediately endorse him. Very well. What Brown should do with out delay is go into court and have his named legally changed to Edmund Alter native. Do you see the beauty of that ploy? First, it would give bodily form to the alternative movement, incarnating what now seems mainly some sort of vague long ing on the part of many Democrats for 1980 options. In preference polls in which the names Brown and Carter appeared, there hasn’t been a great deal of difference in the per centages. But if the polls offered a choice between Carter and Alternative, I’ll war rant there would be a strong swing to the latter. Brown should exploit that poteni Seondly, by changing his nametol mund Alternative, Brown quite lild would prevent Kennedy from preenipi the alternative movement. I mean, an organization that has pula professed its desire for a lower case alteii tive could hardly turn its back on an d case one. To do so would create an imp* sion of fickleness or perfidy. Kenned), feel sure, would disassociate himself any group held in such repute. In short, the alternative bandwagon! rolling. Now is Brown’s chance to clii aboard. If he waits too long, he may I that President Jimmy Alternative has ten there first. T -j--, rp»fTiT-i MSC cafeteria luncher shocked and mad 1 i ii J_ J_ 1j Jtl O to find coffee refills are no longer free Editor: While lunching in the MSC cafeteria I picked up my coffee cup to get it refilled and was shocked to discover that refills are no longer free, but are the same price as the first cup of coffee (19 cents). I most strongly protest this cavalier treatment of Aggie coffee drinkers. The right of coffee drinker to refills as part of the purchase price of a cup of coffee is recog nized by many restaurant chains, and is vital to those long discussions requiring more than one cup. If the MSC cafeteria needs to increase revenues, raise the price of a cup of coffee, double it if necessary, but leave us our free refills. —Gregory K. Taggart Cyclists, take care Editor: I would like to make a comment about the bicycle riders here on campus. I want to make it perfectly clear that I know that all bicycle riders are not the same and by no means do I want to make a general com ment about all of them. There are some bicycle riders who think that they are not pedestrians and they are not cars so they are going to make the best of the situation and take advantage of inno cent people. I believe that a bicycle rider should be treated like a car. They should yield right of way to pedestrians and should obey all of the rules that a car has to follow. I am a bicycle rider myself; as a matter of fact it used to be my only means of transpor tation, and believe me I know the anger and frustration of having a car pull out in front of you when it was your turn to go at a four way stop. You patiently waited your turn at the intersection, when all of a sud den some hotrod pulls out in front of you. But there are always two sides to a story. There are bicycle riders who never stop at stop signs, they just cruise right through them thinking that God is going to stop the traffic because they are riding a bicycle. I almost hit a man on a bicycle last Monday when he failed to even think about stopping at a busy intersection on campus. I would have been at fault even though he was the one who almost made the deadly mistake. I have passed the point of defensive driv ing and reached the point where I have to watch out for the bicycle riders because they refuse to watch out for themselves. If the bicylce riders want to be treated like cars then they should act like cars, anil they want to be treated like pedestri! then they should get off their bicyclesH on their feet. As a closing point I would just like to$ that if you are fortunate enough to jj within riding distance of campus, andf do ride your bike, please he careful. Onl these days there is going to he somef who swears that they “JUST DIDN’TS® YOU.” —-Allyson Gail ( idillz ■-v t lr i •tlJTJ THOXZ by Doug Graham ■thor guy to 0<T y. X want 'to ~s leep\ Idon'T want'to reporter 0*K. Let's have. if., j VjVx>j wihar, wjherg ^ and 'bye _ Pssrt The blackovt was f caused by a, ' leak at -muccflgtes. Y( i