Page 2/The Battalion/Tuesday, September 29, 1987
Opinion
Arms treaty won’t provide path to peaceha
Hopes for
nuclear
disarmament have
been boosted
substantially by
the recent talks
between U.S.
Secretary of State
George Shultz and
Soviet Foreign
Minister Eduard
Shevardnadze, in
which they have
reached a tentative agreement that
would eliminate all intermediate-range
nuclear missiles.
Brian
Frederick
Though these missiles make up only a
small percentage of the superpowers’
nuclear weapons, many are hailing the
agreement as a major breakthrough. In
a recent speech, Shevardnadze
declared, “Today we are taking the First
major step towards a nuclear-free
world.”
For the treaty to be signed, only two
questions remain to be resolved: the
timetable for removing the weapons
quickly and a means to prevent
cheating. Negotiators will work to
resolve these questions before the
summit proposed for later this fall
between Ronald Reagan and Mikhail
Gorbachev.
Shevardnadze has predicted that, if
signed, this treaty will stimulate
disarmament in other areas. He
foresees a reduction in long-range
missiles — if the United States abandons
SDI — a complete ban on chemical
weapons, and cutbacks on conventional
weapons in Europe.
Are such sanguine hopes warranted?
Is this the first step down the road to the
world peace for which mankind has
waited so long?
Though the treaty seems to be a
splendid achievement, it is seriously
flawed. The West Germans have said
that, with the removal of the nuclear
weapons upon which their defense
depends, they will be open to a
conventional attack since the Soviets
and the Warsaw Pact have an
overwhelming preponderance of
conventional forces in Europe. Though
reductions in conventional arms could
mitigate this concern, an agreement to
that effect may be some time away. In
the interim, the defense of Germany
and all Western Europe would be
compromised.
Though the Soviets have made
themselves look good by abandoning
their traditional hard line and offering
these significant reductions, it may be
only for show. There are reports that
they have developed a new missile that
is carried and launched from railroad
cars. This missile, which is not covered
in the talks, gives the Soviets an effective
replacement for the missiles they are so
generously eliminating — and
undermines the entire basis for the
treaty.
Dentist jokes end
following session
with ‘Born to Drill’
I went to see my
dentist. Dr.
Marvin “Born to
Drill” Fillmore,
for my semi
annual probing,
picking and
gouging.
Dr. Fillmore is a
beady-eyed little
man with the
touch of an anvil.
His pet peeve is a
numb gum.
“You will get Novocaine only if I say
you will get Novocaine,” is his
customary greeting to patients.
Dr. Fillmore is the father of the
square-headed drill and the author of
the recent article in Dental Floss Weekly
titled “I’d Rather Do a Root Canal Than
Have Sex.”
When I sat down in Dr. Fillmore’s
chair and was strapped in by his nurse,
former East German Olympic
weightlifter Hildegarde Brooze, who
took so many steroids while training she
has an extra ear, I noticed an even more
sinsister smile on his face than usual.
Dr. Fillmore revved his drill,
touching it to the bottom of his jackboot,
bringing off a dull, gray smoke and a
retching, grinding sound — all for
effect.
“Is anything wrong?” I asked
apprehensively.
“Nothing is wrong,” he replied, his
left eye twitching as it often does just
before he goes for a nerve.
“I just want to remind you of one
thing,” he went on.
I hadn’t paid my bill?
“There will be no more dentist jokes.
Do you understand!” he screamed
suddenly.
“I am telling all my patients,” he
continued, both eyes twitching
diabolically now, “that you do not have
dentists to kick around anymore.”
Then I remembered. Johnny Carson
did some dentist jokes on “The Tonight
Show” recently, and a tooth fairy in New
York is suing him for several million
dollars.
“Is this about Johnny Carson?” I
asked Dr. Fillmore.
“The swine!” he screamed into my
face. “His tongue should be cut from his
mouth and ...”
“But Dr. Fillmore,” I interrupted,
“you can’t blame all your patients for
what Johnny Carson said.”
“Silence, you cavity-ridden scum!” he
shot back.
“For years all of you have made sport
and poked fun at my profession. But no
more!
“Now open wide, infidel, and prepare
to pay the price!”
Moving quickly, I unfastened the
straps from around my chair, head-
faked Dr. Fillmore and his drill, stiff
armed Nurse Brooze and dashed out of
the office and into the safety of my car.
I’m not certain what I’m going to do
about my teeth in the future, but until
this Carson thing blows over, I think I’ll
take them to a chiropractor.
At least those guys have a sense of
humor. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t do
those silly television commercials.
Copyright 1987, Cowles Syndicate
Lewis
Grizzard
The Battalion
(USPS 045 360)
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Sondra Pickard, Editor
John Jarvis, Managing Editor
Sue Krenek, Opinion Page Editor
Rodney Rather, City Editor
Robbyn Lister, News Editor
Loyd Brumfield, Sports Editor
Tracy Staton, Photo Editor
Editorial Policy
The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting newspaper oper
ated as a community service to Texas A&M and Bryan-College Sta
tion.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the editorial
board or the author, and do not necessarily represent the opinions
of Texas A&M administrators, faculty or the Board of Regents.
The Battalion also serves as a laboratory newspaper for students
in reporting, editing and photography classes witnin the Depart
ment of Journalism.
The Battalion is published Monday through Friday during
Texas A&M regular semesters, except for holiday and examination
periods.
Mail subscriptions are $17.44 per semester, $34.62 per school
year and $36.44 per full year. Advertising rates furnished on re
quest.
Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald, Texas A&M
University, College Station, TX 77843-4111.
Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Battalion, 216
Reed McDonald, Texas A&M University, College Station TX
77843-4111.
Even if this were not the case, the
Soviet interpretation of the treaty may
differ form ours. We may be distressed
to discover later that they have taken
liberties we did not intend.
Furthermore, there is no practical
way to hold two nations to a treaty. We
are right in insisting upon inspections to
verify that the treaty is kept, but even if
we are able to work out a system for
inspections, what are we going to do if
we discover a violation? Should we
politely ask the Soviets to rectify the
situation? What if they don’t comply?
Should we deliver a strong rebuke?
Impose sanctions? Cry that they don’t
play fairly?
History shows that treaties usually are
temporary expedients which are
repudiated at whim. They lull the
vigilance of a nation into a feeling of
false security and thus are poor
repositories for national security. This is
especially true when the signatories of
the treaty are avowed enemies. A scrap
of paper will not prevent one from
assailing the other if the opportunity
presents itself.
While the Soviets have loudly
proclaimed their desire for peace, they
do not necessarily want the same peace
we want. Communism declares that
there is an irreconcilable class conflict
both on a national level and on an
international level between communist
and capitalist nations. This conflict can
be ended only when the old capitalist
order is destroyed and the communist
classless society prevails. For a
communist, peace means communism’s
conquest of the world. Until then, a state
of war, namely the class struggle, will
remain. For us to base our negotiations
on the premise that the Soviets want
peace is unsound.
Even if, in the face of reason, we
retain this premise and by treaty
successfully eliminate the world’s
nuclear weapons, the knowledge to
produce them will remain. Who could
possibly ensure that this knowledge
would not be again employed to build
weapons? If one power were to rebuild
nuclear weapons, it would put the rest
of the world in an untenable position.
Surely disarmament is a futile road to
peace.
Nuclear weapons are with us and
evermore will be. It is up to us to find
ways to live with them and neutralize
the threat they pose to us. In the past,
new advances in weaponry were
countered by new technologies and
tactics. Tanks, for example, ended the
dominance of the machine gun on the
battlefield in World War I. Instead of
throwing up our hands in despair that
nuclear weapons represent the end of
the world, we should work to develop
ways to counter them. Reagan’s SDI
proposal, though by no means the
whole answer, is a step in the right
direction.
Rhetoric about a “nuclear-freeworid'
sounds nice and soothes exaggerated
fears of nuclear war. It does not provide
real answers to our problems. Treaties
give politicians something to display
when seeking re-election but offer no
guarantees of peace. Human naturewil
continue to find ways to circumvent
treaties — as it always has. Only
strength, resolve, and wise policy can
secure peace and security.
Brian Frederick is a senior history mil
Russian major and a columnist forlht
Battalion.
Mail Call
A display of fascism
EDITOR:
Rarely have I seen such fascism so prominently
displayed, even in The Battalion. Brian Frederick’s
columns on AIDS and the public schools grate on my mind
like the cool rationality of Hitler in his youth. Yet
Frederick seems to be gathering followers, as evidenced by
the Sept. 22 letter by Don Griffiths, “Put ’em in
California.”
In both of Frederick’s columns there is freedom, but
only for the few, the proud, the healthy and the rich. What
of the poor? What of the many who don’t have the option
to travel miles to school? Desegregation and busing were
designed to ensure the best education possible. All that is
necessary is to pay the teachers more money, to attract
intelligent people.
And since when has America been turning its back on
the sick? AIDS must be fought like all other diseases —with
preventive measures, not by imprisoning the ill. What kind
of jelly-spined coward needs to victimize the ill to feel
secure — and slanders California in the process?
It seems that both Brian Frederick and Don Griffiths
need to either open their eyes to our social goals, or, and I
hope this is not true, they actually would go forward with
such measures and believe in them seriously.
Brian Donovan ’87
One honest person
EDITOR:
Last week I came out to my car parked in Lot 19 only to
find that someone had hit the car and damaged the
bumper moulding strip. I drove off in a foul mood,
wishing death and destruction on the culprit. During the
drive home I noticed that a note had been left on the
windshield of my car. I wish to commend Cristina
Gonzalez for leaving me the note explaining the damage.
The damage was minor, but my good feelings about this
honest person are great.
Paul Wellman
associate professor of psychology
Letters to the editor should not exceed 300 words in length. The editorial staff re
serves the right to edit letters for style and length, but will make every effort to main
tain the author’s intent. Each letter must be signed and must include the classifica
tion, address and telephone number of the writer.
AUSTIN (.
a few cities v
ringdiscrimir
dents, but loc;
come a difficu
“The law is
people are c
Doyal said.
Amparo I
hand how
months after
the city’s Hun
sion saying sh
son has AIDS,
her job back.
“They’re sti
gins said of
I’m not going
have a case.”
Doyal has h
on behalf of p
lated illnesses
jobs, their hea
“The hum;
number of ca
Tabl<
will b
On Monc
printed a stoi
Class of ’84,
A&M studer
organizations
money for a !
plant.
The stor
there would
the MSC thi
dents can
Stone’s trans
ever, Scott
BLOOM COUNTY
by Berke Breathed
om, pew... i mv
ONLY BB A HeftT HALLUCI
NATION, Birr TNI STfLL
VOUR MOTHeR ANP
YOU'LL LISTEN TV ME-
/
NOIN OET YOUR WITS
ABOUT YOU ANP JUST
(jet Your little
FANNY OUT OF THIS
PESERT MESS'
MM
1 PtPNT RAISE
MY SON TO BE
A QUITTER,
PIP 1 7
\
ANP YOU WILL TAKE
CARE OF THAT B/0
ZIT ON YOUR NOSE.
WONT YOU, PEART
/
(817)
l-8<
THp UECCM987