Page 2/The Battalion/Wednesday, July 13, 1988
Opinion
Alcohol is an insidious part of our drug problen
Much ado has
rightfully been
made concerning
the problem of
drug abuse in our
society. But while
the police bust
crack houses, they
ignore the liquor
stores that cause
much more dam
age. I have known
the joy of a beer
after a hard day’s work. I’ve eaten crack-
ers and shared a pitcher in T he
Chicken. My goal in this column is not
to suggest that anyone’s liquor be taken
away. I just want to make the point that
it is ironic that we have a war on drugs
going on, while at the same time our so
ciety condones and even encourages the
use and abuse of alcohol.
It is hard to watch any sporting event
without it being interupted by beer or
wine cooler commercials. Some of the
most popular actors, Bruce Willis and
Mark Harmon, peddle the beverages
while Phil Collins and Eric Clapton sing
the catchy jingles. Even an obnoxious
dog is popular because he drinks the
right beer. These commercials have a
common message. Want a date? Need
excitement? Romance? Male bonding?
Well, then drink the correct brand of
beer and all the world is yours! The ad
vertisers want us to believe that alcohol
is nothing like those illegal drugs that
make people beat their spouse and chil
dren, commit crimes and lose their
mind. Alcohol is not a drug. No, it is
only a mood enhancer say the commer
cials.
Our society has created an aura about
alcohol. Dim lights and the bottle of
wine starting a romantic evening. Whis
key in a tin cup around a campfire.
Finding a smokey bar to go to with your
broken heart. Alcohol is part of the ini
tiation rights in many social organiza
tions. It is entrenched in things in that
our society sees as positive events.
Some people sit around their living
rooms talking about “those people” who
use drugs, while they sip on their beer,
or pour another scotch. Substance abuse
is not a “we — they” issue. Even if the
human cost is ignored, the Financial
consequences of substance abuse show
how serious a problem it is for all of us.
Alcohol abuse is a major problem. But,
because alcohol is legal, many people
drink (80% of college students), and a
lot of money is made from it, it is seen as
not as dangerous as other drugs. The
facts give a different view.
Illegal drug abuse costs the United
States $32 billion in lost productivity ev
ery year. Alcohol costs the U.S. $65 bil
lion a year in lost productivity. Add to
that the drunk drivers, the alcohol re
lated crimes, the human misery and
waste of life. The logical thing to do
would be to wage a war on alcohol. But
our society won’t do that because that
would be admitting that it isn’t a “they”
problem. Enough of us drink so that we
would have to look at ourselves, and
that is not a pleasant thing to do. It is
easy to create programs to try to help
solve problems of other people, but
when the people in our society have to
look at their own behavior, and how it is
contributing to the problem of alcohol
ism, they are understandablely scared.
Every time a beer commercial using
young people’s heroes airs on MTV, the
idea that drinking is cool is reinforced in
a young person’s mind. As long as
drinking is held in high esteem, as a
symbol of adulthood, then society' will
continue to distort and ignore the alco
hol-caused devestation around us. Alco
hol use could be compared to cigarettes.
It has been said that if the harm ciga
rettes did was shown on the outside then
no one would smoke. People started
smoking because it was the cool thing to
do. Then people became educated and
could see enough death around them
and it was not cool, it was stupid. There
is nothing wrong with drinking in mod
eration. But it should not be glamo
rized. It should not be a symbol of adul
thood. Drunkenness is not a positive
state. As a responsible society we need to
start sending that message to children
and the great number of adults who do
not seem to have grasped that fact.
Just because something is socially ac
ceptable does not mean that it is mor-
C- /0aM> 88
rally correct. As time goes on wen
become ashamed at the prevailencei 1
reverence of alcohol in out society,ji
as we are now beginning to shakes
heads over the vast number of peop
who used to smoke.
Jill Webb is a senior secondary eim
tion major and columnist for TheB
talion.
Jill
Webb
Mail Call
Let your fingers do the walking
EDITOR:
I look to the Bible (just one book) for a lot of my answers (I use the back
of the textbook for odd numbered problems, yet I consider myself to be
extremely patriotic; I do not see any irony in this conception. National
freedom through military victory and individual freedom through the
exercise of volition are two major doctrines found in the Bible.
People like Jefferson and Hamilton, who died generations ago, decided
they wanted freedom for the United States. Men and women who died
recently in places like the Ardennes, Guadalcanal, Saigon, and Beirut also
opted for freedom. I stand by their decisions, and I believe we have freedom
(democracy?) today because of those decisions.
Why was the Bible written in Hebrew and Greek (and not English . . .)?
Lots of reasons. Koine Crreek is far superior to any language for written
expression of ideas. T he human authors spoke and thought in Hebrew
and/or Greek. God could have chosen to “publish” the Bible at any time. If
God is infallible, we must conclude that He chose the right time and thus the
right languages.
Millions have been slaughtered in the name of God, but I don’t believe
that anything any one of us does makes God any happier, sadder, sicker or
healthier than He has always been. Anthropopathisms are great training aids,
but they usually misrepresent the essence of God.
Ms. Webb was within her rights to write her column of July 6; I find it
almost ludicrous that she ran roughshod over writings which many hold
sacred. The column would have been more apppropriate at a meeting of a
certain recognized student organization than in the campus-wide newspaper.
Has The Battalion abandoned rational journalism in favor of emotional con
tent?
Craig E. Groeschel ’91
The Battalion
(USPS 045 360)
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Richard Williams, Editor
Sue Krenek, Managing Editor
Mark Nair, Opinion Page Editor
Curtis Culberson, City Editor
Becky Weisenfels,
Cindy Milton, News Editors
Anthony Wilson, Sports Editor
Jay Janner. Art Director
Editorial Policy
The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting newspa
per operated as a community service to Texas A&M and
Bryan-College Station.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the
editorial board or the author, and do not necessarily rep
resent the opinions of Texas A&M administrators, fac
ulty or the Board of Regents.
The Battalion also serves as a laboratory newspaper
for students in reporting, editing and photography
classes within the Department 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 request.
Our address: The Battalion, 230 Reed McDonald,
Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-1 111.
Second class postage paid at College Station, TX
77843.
■ BPS f MASTER: Send address changes to The Battal
ion, 216 Reed McDonald, Texas A&M University, Col-
lege Station TX 77843-4111. .
Shooting down the Iranian airplane
was a serious American mistake
Disasters like
the shooting down
of Iran Air Flight
655 are invariably
shrouded in ambi
guity and first re
ports are always
wrong. They’ll be
weeks and months
in unraveling the
details, after
which experts will
argue about them
for years. Anybody who would resume
to cornment on the matter at this point is
a damn fool. Here goes:
President Reagan has called the inci
dent “an understandable accident.”
Nonsense. How understandable it was
remains to be seen but it was no acci
dent; it lacks the necessary element of
chance. We shot down that plane on
purpose. The fact that the action had
unintended and unwelcome results (the
murder of 290 men, women and chil
dren) does not make it an accident. It
was, to indulge in exquisite understate
ment, a mistake.
Mistakes are worse than accidents
and at the very least demand apologies,
but Mr. Reagan wasn’t up to that imme
diately following the shooting. Instead
he gave the world a lame excuse, in ef
fect blaming the victims. He even went
so far as to say there was “no compari
son” between this incident and the So
viet downing of Korean Air Lines Flight
007 five years ago, at a cost of 269 lives.
Wrong again, Mr. President. While
the incidents are not identical, they do
bear a certain family resemblance. Each
involved the shooting down of a civilian
aircraft by a great power in circum
stances that made misidentification of
the civilian plane easy.
BLOOM COUNTY
The Iranian airliner was in a war
zone, flying right at a ship of war en
gaged in combat. The Korean plane was
hundreds of miles off-course, flying in a
militarily sensitive air zone. The Iranian
plane was just another blip on a radar
screen, indistinguishable (perhaps)
from a Fighter plane. The Korean plane
was flying at night, resembling (from
certain angles) an American spy plane.
And the greatest similarity of all: In
each instance nearly 300 innocent peo
ple died.
Mr. Reagan was all indignation and
sharp words when the Russians shot
down KAL 007, remember? He said:
“What can we think of a regime that
so broadly trumpets its vision of peace
and global disarmament and yet so cal
lously and quickly commits a terrorist
act to sacrifice the lives of innocent hu
man beings?
What indeed?
We do roughly the same thing and he
calls it “an understandable accident.” As
we Washingtonians like to say: “That
dog won’t hunt.” If the Soviets were ter
rorists when they shot down KAL 007,
we’re terrorists now. If we’re mere vic
tims of circumstance now, so were they
then. Fair is fair.
If Mr. Reagan is confused as to the
distinction between accident and error,
he might think of it in this way. His elec
tion in 1980, corning as the residue of
uncontrolled events like the oil embargo
and the Iran hostage crisis, was an acci
dent. His re-election in 1984 was a mis
take.
Speaking of fairness, however, if
there is a grain of justice in all of this, it
is that Iran keeps getting the shaft from
President Reagan. Iran didn’t invent
Ronald Reagan, but it certainly made
him President. By taking those 53
American hostages in 1978 ihey |x
soned the last year of the Carterpre
deucy, making it all but impossiblef:
him to w in re-election. So in asenseln
deserves what it’s getting. It’s the resi
us who don’t.
Iraq, on the other hand, desen
some sort of award for diplomatic br
an ce.
It was Iraq who started the warw
Iran in 1980. It was Iraq who first to
the war to sea in an attempt to dismfi
Iran’s oil exports in 1984. It wasn't a
1986 that Iran retaliated by attack'
Kuwaiti ships carrying Iraqi oil ini
Persian Gulf. This prompted us tosfi |
the U.S. Navy into the gulf to, in effe
protect Iraq oil. Iraq responded bv
tacking our guided-missile frigateStai
killing 37 American sailors.
And what does Iraq get from all
this? Our support. I wonder if if
would consider renting out their foreis
secretary? We could certainly use him
Our major presidential candidates,
use an oxymoron, were characteristic^
bold in commenting on the incidel
They called it a “tragedy,” they called I
a “terrible accident.” And they did!
care how many votes it cost them. Ht
only political leader with an approprii
response was the one they keep save
has no foreign policy experience, Jesf
Jackson said:
“. . . it sounds so much like the satj
arguments that the Russians were nuj
ing when the KAL was shot down.j
did not accept those arguments as bcl
valid, and most people in the world«|
not accept our arguments at thispointj
being valid. The issue is not just fait
technology, but failed and vague pot
for the region.”
He keeps that up, he’s going togi 1
experience a bad name.
Copyright 1988, Tribune Media Services,Inc.
Breath#
Donald
Kaul
La
of
rai
hi
claim
the b
dm i
Texa
Tf
year-
the i
lupe
mile
cross
were
Coui
Be
foun
ternc
T1
its n
said.
“I
prob
anot
said.
T1
picki
cros:
of th
cam]
K
ers 1
shor
dow
C
A!
knov
schoi
supe
stitul
not j
prob
“4
and l
a co
Scho
com
cour
Di
her i
tern ’
consi