OPINION
Need more talk,
fewer weapons
House Republicans detailed some of their policy objectives
this week, including continued research in space weapons and
continued production of the MX missile and the B-l bomber.
With the deficit as it is, the government needs to put a lid on
spending. If research is continued in space weaponry and the
MX missle and B-l bomber continue to be produced, the gov
ernment will only be facing more headaches.
The U.S. wants to invest at least one trillion dollars on the
Star Wars research alone. Even if it’s a foolproof defense system
against nuclear attack, what good is it if the U.S. economy col
lapses?
Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger said Wednesday if
the U.S. does not increase its military spending by more than 3
percent to 4 percent — which seems to be as high as Congress
may be willing to go —- it will, in effect, endanger national secu
rity and prevent an arms talks agreement with the Soviets.
But in reality, continuing production of the MX and B-l
bomber and continuing research in space weaponry would be
destabilizing to world peace because it would upset the precar
ious arms balance between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R.
The U.S. has to do more than ensure its own national de
fense. It must take into account how its actions and rhetoric will
be perceived by the Soviets, because their perceptions can affect
future relations between the two superpowers.
The Reagan administration says its military proposals are
defensive. But the Soviets see these proposed build-ups as offen
sive, not defensive. The Soviets fear — and rightfully so — that
the U.S. is trying to establish first strike capability, one which the
Soviets have pledged not to use.
If the U.S. perfected its Star Wars dream and was able to ef
fectively destroy approaching Soviet missiles, that would leave
the U.S. with first strike capability. That thought makes the So
viets’ blood run cold.
Weinberger says if the U.S. does not develop space weapons,
it will not be able to use that system as a bargaining tool witn the
Soviets in arms negotiations.
But even if it could be used as a bargaining tool, it couldn’t
be used as a serious threat for decades. The U.S. shouldn’t
spend trillionss of dollars and who-knows-how-many years on a
concept that may never be utilized.
Why not use it as a bargaining tool now? Why not agree in
the upcoming arms talks with the Soviets to at least slow down
research on Star Wars? The Soviets certainly would be more co
operative in arms talks if their fears of U.S. military superiority
could be eased a little.
Such a threat is as serious to them as it would be to the U.S. if
the situation were reversed.
This administration also advocates continuing production of
the MX missile and the B-l bomber. But there is no evidence
that there is any real need for another generation of mobile
land-based missiles like the MX.
Replacing the B-52 with the B-l bomber is just as ineffective.
There is no new technology involved with the B-l Bomber. It is
just a newer, more expensive model and is no more capable of
penetrating Soviet airspace than is the B-52.
If the U.S. wants to funnel money into an aircraft system
that could penetrate Soviet airspace, it should direct money
away from the B-l bomber and into research of Stealth aircrafts.
At least those planes, supposedly undetectable by radar, might
stand a better chance of not getting blown out of the sky.
In addition, Weinberger wants to re-establish anti-aircraft
radar installations and planes to protect against bombers and
cruise missiles that might slip in under an anti-missile space
shield — chalk up another 50 billion dollars, at least.
By slowing down Star Wars research and discontinuing pro
duction of the MX and the B-l bomber, the U.S. would not be
exposing itself to the risk of nuclear blackmail by the Soviets.
The U.S. has enough nuclear weapons now to protect itself. The
two superpowers can blow each other away numerous times as it
is.
Someone needs to take the first step in nuclear disarma
ment. If the U.S. agrees to slow down research on Star Wars,
then the Soviets would certainly be more eager to negotiate.
Actions often speak louder words. And in this case, the Sovi
ets would certainly be more cooperative if they saw the U.S. take
the first step toward ensuring world peace, instead of just hear
ing more U.S. chatter.
The Battalion Editorial Board
gb^»
vjt hr rwt re5Qkcu
league: fUl THAT A ^TUPEhlf
ruouLp PE PtUPPacuokpwq
T° hp i/uApiury to r>o
AHV'fHIkJG fAPCUT IT 1 .
A little American know-how
can go a very long way
By ART BUCHWALD
Columnist for The Los Angeles Times Syndicate
At the end of the year I always have a
three-vodka-martini lunch with my
mole from the Soviet embassy in Wash
ington. His code name is “Nutcracker.”
“So tell me, what’s new in the Krem
lin?” I asked him.
“We cutting defense research budget
by 75 percent,” he said.
“Come on. Nutcracker, planting KGB
disinformation with me will get you
nowhere.”
“Is true. Politburo made decision
early this year to stop developing new
weapons because they were getting too
expensive.”
“So how do they expect to keep up
the arms race if they don’t spend tril
lions of rubles for research and devel
opment?”
“Is simple. We plan to let Americans
spend money to do scientific dirty work
and then buy it from you.”
“You don’t think the United States is
going to sell the Soviet Union our mili
tary weapon secrets?”
“Not directly from manufacturer, but
we can always go through the middle
man.”
“What middleman?”
“Somebody who works for defense
contractor and wants to make little extra
money to achieve American dream.”
“What exactly do you mean by that?”
“Take Stealth bomber. You people
spent billions of dollars to develop air
plane that could escape Soviet radar.
We had choice of spending twice as
much to find answer, or buy plans from
one of your people in California. We
found engineer who delivered
blueprints to us for $25,000. Was a' lot
of money, but still cheaper than starting
from scratch and building Stealth
bomber of our own.”
“That’s dirty pool,” 1 said. “In an
arms race each side is expected to pay
top dollar for developing its own weap
ons. It’s not fair of the Soviets to make
us do all the work and then go out to
California and buy the system for a
song.”
“Sue us for patent infringement,”
Nutcracker said. “Comrade, I will tell
you dark secret. Russian computers
lousy, and if we had to depend on them
for new weapons, we would have
dropped out of arms race long ago. The
only thing keep Russian war machine
going is American know-how.”
“How do you find these middlemct
who sell our secrets?”
“Is easy. We plug into credit ratini
system on cheap Apple computer, ami
find California defense worker wkt
can’t make payments on house. Thfl
we go to him and pay mortgage in a
change for plans to guidance system fa
MX missile.”
“Why have you concentrated on Cal
fornia?”
“Because nobody can pay his mon
gage in California.”
“You would think the Soviets woulo
have too much national pride to repro
duce a weapons system Americans ha\(
worked on for years.”
“Is not a question of pride. Isquesliof
of cost. Soviet taxpayers getting tiredof
paying so much money for defense. If
Moscow can deliver bigger rumble ton
ruble, Soviet peoples don’t care who
came up with idea first.”
“Is $25,()()() the highest price tht
Kremlin will pay for an American weap
ons system?”
“That’s all Moscow has allotted it
R&D military budget for 1985. But if
someone wants to sell us secrets ol Star
Wars’ we would go to $50,000, even if
we had to take money out of Soviet
school lunch program.”
LETTERS:
Possible tuition
hike questioned
EDITOR:
In reference to Gov. White’s an
nounced investigation into the possibli-
ity of increasing tuition costs for stu
dents attending state suported
universities, he noted that the Texas Re
search League found the median in
come of families with a student in a
Texas public college or university to be
$31,730.
I’d like to know how they arrived at
this number, since only those students
who apply for financial aid are required
to submit data on their parent’s finan
cial status; data which is supposed to be
kept in confidence by those organiza
tions which rate students on eligibility
for financial aid. (Though it seems ob
vious that such a high income figure was
not that of students in financial need.)
Nor does Texas have an income tax
from which such information would, be
gleemed. Finally, even our federal in
come tax returns would require that
their confidentiality be breached by
Gov. White’s “Research League” — a
dangerous precident.
The study also assumes that parents
are legally obliged to put their children
through school. I know many students
from upper middle-class families who
work their way through school, because
their parents can afford only minimal
subsistence beyond their usual fiscal
burdens. Even those students from fam
ilies in higher-income brackets often
pay a substantial portion of their ex
penses, taking pride and self-satisfac
tion in doing so — and therefore better
preparing themselves for the rigors and
responsibilities they will encounter
upon graduation.
The Research League found that the
tuition paid by a Texan attending a uni
versity in California is more than double
that paid by a Californian attending a
state university here. An unjust burden
on we Texans, having to support stu
dents in California (residents there at
tend school free); Gov. White doesn’t
complain about out-of-state students
bringing their money and enthusiasm to
enrich Texas college communities — a
value which far exceeds the tuition that
reaches state coffers.
As for raising professional and grad
uate tuition for Texas residents, we
have a hard enough time as it is — and
often with poor earnings, even employ
ment opportunities after graduation!
Take away that little extra incentive of
reasonable tuition costs, and Texas in
dustries may have to depend on out-of-
state schools to provide qualified profes
sionals to support the technological
boon of the decade, as local students
pursue careers which are more fiscally
sound.
William H. Clark II
Physics
Ring returned;
faith intact
EDITOR:
Here is a story that reflects the true
spirit of Aggieland. January 16th, I left
my diamond ring, given to me by my
boyfriend, on the piano in the MSC.
Three hours later I discovered that it
was missing from its usual place on my
finger. When I frantically arrived back
at the piano I found a note that said, “If
you left your ring here, I have turned it
in the main office at the MSC. Signed,
the Good Ag, ’88.” To whomever this
“Good Ag” is, I say thank you from the
bottom of my heart. Thanks also to Sil
via Andrews for her kindness and hon
esty.
Lana Poynor
The Battalion
USPS 045 360
Member of
Texas Press Association
South west Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Brigid Brockman, Editor
Shelley Hoekstra, Managing Editor
Ed Cassavoy, City Editor
Kellie Dworaczyk, News Editor
Michelle Powe, Editorial Page Editor
Travis Tingle, Sports Editor
The Battalion Staff
Assistant City Editors
Kari Fluegel, Rhonda Snider,
Assistant News Editors '
Tammy Bell, Cami Brown, John Hallett
Assistant Sports Editor «
Charean Williams
Entertainment Editors
Shawn Behlen, Leigh-Ellen Clark
Staff Writers Cathie Anderson,
Brandon Berry, Dainah Bullard,
Tony Cornett, Michael Crawford,
Kirsten Dietz, Patti Flint,
Patrice Koranek, Trent Leopold,
Karla Martin, Sarah Oates,
Tricia Parker, Lynn RaePovec
Copy Editor Kay Mallett
Make-up Editor Karen Bloch
Columnists Kevin Inda, Loren Steffy
Editorial Cartoonist Mike Lane
Sports Cartoonist...., Dale Smith
Copy Writer I Cathy Bennett
Photo Editor Katherine Hurt
Photographers Anthony Casper,
Wayne Grabein, F rank Irwin,
John Makely, Peter Rocha, DeanSaito
Editorial Policy
The Bailnlion is a non-profit, self-supporting newspaper
operated as a community service to Texas A&M anil
B ryan-College St a l ion.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those ot the
Editorial Board or the author , and do not necessarily rep
resent the opinions of Texas A&M administrators, facuh)
or the Board ol Regents.
The Battalion also ser ves as a laboratory newspaper for
students in reporting, editing and photography class#
within the Department of Communications.
Letters Policy
Letters to the Editor should not exceed HOI) words in
length. The editorial staff reserves the tight to edit letters
for style and length but w ill make every effort to maintain
the author’s intent. Each letter must be signed and must
include the address and telephone number of the writer.
The Battalion is published Monday through fridat
during Texas A&M regular semesters, except tor holidaf
and examination periods. Mail subscriptions are f 16.75
pet semester, f.Vi tfo per school year and Slia per lull
year. Advertising rales furnished on request.
Our address: The Battalion. 2II> Reed McDonald
Building, Texas A&M University, College Station, 7’X
7784$. Editorial staff phone number: (409) 84.5-26.11). Ad
vertising: (409) 845-2611.
Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843.
POSTMAS1ER: Send address changes to The Battal
ion, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas
7784.1
IT