"e Battalion
PINION
Page 11 • Monday, January 25, 1999
her leg,
irgeon ti
aught witln;
they could
unions said
’s left leg«-
e the kneei
nerve da:
*9' A primary
is doing topic of
leg, Lemon;.|»monvei'
ll to place: tiou in
dgmentina ashington
attorney sa r lie past
i ‘s Medical veral weeks
- for-profit ias been how
diatricho5; deal with
utpatientci: tddnm Hus-(
aught between Iraq and a hard place
erica and Middle East better off with
addam in power, not fighting losing battle
k
1 $
Mark
PASSWATERS
art emet; in. For those
t children ho have been out of the loop
^Hie past decade, Saddam is
e dictator of Iraq and a very
id guy. Many Americans, both
side and outside of the Beltway,
am: to see Saddam disposed of
■Mediately, whether the United
1 ates is forced to act unilaterally
not. A dissenting point of
members c ®. though less popular, be-
n Replant : ?ves th at Saddam Hussein
ito see be 4 01 Id not be removed by the
A&MrnnirJled States. The following are a
ar die reasons why:
‘i tn .u|,. America’s Reputation in the
incli]dineCoM on: while Saddam is hated
, .aim, Kuwait City, Riyadh and
! i ]jtS ascus ’ an American-led at-
ptanteaatmpt to depose him would go
uni at the: /er jj^ a j eac j Walloon Arab na-
a d- ® frown on outside interfer-
plant conr. lce> especially from the West,
lior anthropca^nt actions by the Clinton ad
ders have phuni stration have shown a per-
i preparatict-ct mixture of ignorance and stu-
dit by ignoring this fact,
the trees be:- Tjhe United States has decided
ger and hearf si pport seven different opposi-
ius years, an groups against Saddam; by
;e Stationw;»g this, they have guaranteed
I Replant, ane of these groups will ever
began inW 1 * 11 power in Baghdad. If there is
aders and#t hin g that the Ira qi People
3 es to replau® 11 dislike more than Saddam
t , ussein, it would be a govern-
t has annual:' ieni the V see as a sto °g e of the
m Dpnir • n ifed States.
. thousand years of western
' , ‘ teldling in the Arab World, going
?vent. lc ^ t0 t ^ e c rusa( j eS) } ias W orn on
■oiledive mindset of the re-
kB. It has gotten to the point that
■v Arabs believe that any Mus-
—n t hat stands up to “Judeo-Chris-
%■ Agression” is a hero. This is
l l D pn®t Saddam was counting on in
■'M, but was left with egg on his
a liable! ce and bombs on his palace be-
• fte his Islamic brethren were
hours? Uiwfflfthan thrilled with his attack on
/ork with cidArab neighbor,
ating toOnlim! If the United States decided to
Emilaterally after Saddam, the
7 Bation would be totally differ-
it. The United States would run
te risk of not only changing Sad-
il Bi from villain to hero, but ru-
iig America’s status in the re-
Juation 01 • T he populations of many
rah nations might turn against
bie, enthusias: merica and could cause a diplo-
out more aboinat c disaster. With the patience
r website, llations such as Syria, Jordan
■ Saudi Arabia already worn
pi by the continued presence of
•S. forces in the region, this is
ot very far-fetched.
Killing This Guy is no Walk
in the Park: First of all, it has
been against U.S. law for the
United States to order the death
of any foreign head of state for
three decades. Saddam, while
nobody’s favorite, is the acknowl
edged leader of Iraq. During Op
eration Desert Storm, an excuse
of ’’knocking out the enemy’s
center of gravity” could have
been made for killing him. An op
eration solely to kill this man
would be against federal law.
More important
ly, people seem to
forget that getting
to this guy would
require the use of
American ground
forces. Lots of
them. The Iraqi
military did not
fight hard in 1991,
not just because
they were having
the hell hammered
out of them, but
because they were
not really fighting
for their homeland.
While Saddam
and his stooges
may have consid
ered Kuwait part of
Iraq, the average
Iraqi could not care
less about a mythi
cal “Nineteenth
Province” — espe
cially when being
attacked by B-52’s.
Going to Baghdad
to get Saddam
would not be like
knocking on the
door and having
him come out. The
United States,
would have to kick
down the door, and
the Iraqi people
certainly would not
sit still and allow a
prolonged military
operation on their
territory. It would
be a long conflict
—Vietnam, anyone?
Better the Enemy You Know:
If Iraq did not fragment with Sad
dam’s ouster (it is not one homo
geneous nation), another possi
bility is the next leader of Iraq
would be a lot like him. One ugly
scenario would have Saddam’s
son, Uday, replacing him. Uday is
not a nice boy.
According to many published
reports (including the Wall Street
Journal and Newsweek), he has
killed several people just for fun
and lacks dear-old Dad’s tact.
Whatever may be said about Sad
dam, he is calculating (he may
calculate wrong, but he tries).
Udai is more headstrong and ag
gressive. In other words, Udai
could be goaded into a huge con
flict which would engulf the en
tire region, including Israel and
its nuclear arsenal. Only the Con
cerned Christians would consider
this a good thing.
Whether or not the next Iraqi
leader is Udai Hussein, it is like
ly the international community
will cut him some slack. This
would be a critical error. We
know Saddam Hussein is not
that far from having a nuclear
weapon, because we watch him
United States should take decisive action and
oust Saddam Hussein before it is too late
s
addam
should
be killed,
first and fore
most, because
he is evil. Sec
ondly, Sad
dam should
be killed be- Richard
cause the Iraqi PADDACK
people want
his head. Some have tried to as
sassinate Saddam and his psy-
like a hawk. The next guy may
not be so well watched, which
could have dire consequences.
In 1918, the German Kaiser
Wilhelm was forced to abdicate
his throne after the defeat of
the Central Powers in World War
I. Europe relaxed, thinking that
the primary cause of the war
was gone. Then they reasoned
peace would flourish on the
continent. Fifteen years later,
the Germans had themselves a
new, democratically elected
Chancellor. His name was Adolf
Hitler. Funny how history tends
to repeat itself...
Mark Passwaters is a graduate
electrical engineering student
chotic son, Uday. After a failed
coup against Saddam in 1996,
relatives of the plotters got the
bodies of their loved ones back,
covered in bites. They had been
eaten alive by savage dogs,
which further illustrates just
how evil he is.
Saddam should be killed,
third, because he is dangerous.
With one rocket and one poison
gas bomb, he could start a war
with Israel, a country capable of
retaliating with nuclear power.
More importantly, the Clinton
Administration should decisive
ly reject Saddam’s brazen at
tempts to undermine the United
Nation’s inspection regime. It
should convince the U.N. to pe
nalize Saddam even further for
violating the terms of the cease
fire ending the 1991 Gulf War.
But the United State’s highest
priority obviously should be to
create conditions that lead to
the toppling of Saddam’s
regime. As long as this vengeful
dictator rules Baghdad, he will
remain a major threat to U.S. in
terests and American allies in
the Middle East.
Aside from the
media and a small
portion of the
American public’s
opinion, the De
cember air strikes
were not a 100-per
cent failure. Had
the Allies hit a
bunker, killing
dozens of children,
then the United
States would have
seen and heard all
about it.
Because the mis
siles hit the head
quarters of several
key players in Sad
dam’s regime and
several other strate
gically crippling
buildings, CNN
was not shown cer
tain areas of dam
age. And, yes, it is
right and humani
tarian to bomb tor
turers and killers, if
there is no better
way of bringing
them to justice.
The Administra
tion should move
quickly to translate
these gains into
stronger Security
Council actions
against Iraq while
retaining the option
to use military
force, the only lan
guage Saddam seems to under
stand. The reasons why America
should remove Saddam from this
world are obvious and inumber-
able, there are several ways the
United States could expedite Hus
sein’s departure. Specifically, the
United States should:
Rule out compromise on UN-
SCOM (United Nations Security
Committee) harassment: Wash
ington should block any U.N.
move to dilute UNSCOM’s pow
ers or to make concessions that
would give Saddam a face-sav
ing way to back down. It should
forge a Security Council consen
sus that Iraq must either comply
with Security Council resolutions
or suffer the consequences.
Push for tougher U.N. sanc
tions against Iraq: Washington
should press for the strongest
possible sanctions to penalize
Iraq’s continued failure to abide
by its UNSCOM inspection oblig
ations. These sanctions should
include rescinding Resolution
986, which allows Iraq to export
limited amounts of oil to pay for
food and medicine; suspending
Iraq from the General Assembly
and all other U.N. forums; pro
hibiting Iraqis from serving as
U.N. agency officials and requir
ing all U.N. member states to re
strict the size of Iraqi embassies.
Maintain a military option to
punish Saddam: The United
States should maintain a strong
military presence. It is believed
by many that a strong and deter
mined military action would fur
ther weaken Saddam’s dwin
dling base of support, encourage
defections and coup attempts
and demonstrate to the Iraqi
people that Saddam’s wicked
aversion to compliance threatens
their national interests.
Develop a comprehensive
strategy to overthrow Saddam:
The ultimate goal of U.S. policy
should be to oust Saddam, not
just contain him. Washington
should deny Saddam Hussein a
diplomatic victory over UN
SCOM by injecting a spirit of re
solve into the U.N. Security
Council. It should also make
sure any military response is de
signed to punish Saddam, not
just slap his wrist.
Saddam’s grip on power is vi
cious and cruel, but it is not se
cure. The Iraqi National Con
gress — Saddam’s most
dangerous opposition — believes
he could be overthrown in 10
days if the “no-fly” zone became
a’no-drive’ zone, specifically for
tanks. The ground troops would
be supplied by the Iraqi army,
who hate the regime as much as
the rest of Iraq. The Iraqi people
would do the rest.
The problem with Western
policy concerning Saddam is its
lack of clarity. To wound, to
cage, but not to kill the tyrant is
a dangerous mistake.
Life will only get better for or
dinary Iraqis once the West final
ly stops hesitating and commits
to a clear, unambiguous policy
of snuffing out Saddam. And
when he falls, the people of Iraq
will ask, “What kept you? Why
did it take you so long?”
Richard Paddack is senior
journalism major
Admissions criteria need revision
■rom heckling
« H drunks at
1 ■Northgate to
s Fratei#P, tual scrapin s °f
■droppings off of
e’s windshield at
>h i .ot, Aggies are
Bng back into
hr old routines
ssional*
,, Jan. 26
mer 113
0 p.m.
David
LEE
aimmersing
sin so Ives in the
w semester. However, before the tradi-
nai cursing of classes begins, students
ould take a moment to pat each other
i the back for being able to return to
i i Prpcchni xas A&M this semester.
Regrettably, many students were
10:00 p.m. rcec } t0 withdraw from school at the
d of last semester due to their poor
ades. It is understandable, at a
hool of this caliber, that a certain
irfientage of students fail out at one
>int or another.
However, it is saddening to see the
tiyersity not take all the steps neces-
ry io encourage as high a retention rate
possible. The missing step lies within
■urrent admissions criteria for in
ping freshman, specifically the ab-
Be of a method for screening out stu-
)rial
, Feb. 1
views*
., Feb. 4
28 & 229
2:00 p.m.
— “tits who are weak in the fundamentals
■ssary for certain majors.
flBurrently, the admissions process at
is relatively straightforward; once
■pplicant is accepted, he or she has
,eir pick of any academic major avail-
WelcOW Ae at A&M. Unlike other leading uni
pities in the state, such as Rice, Texas
Tech and the University of Texas , there
are no additional requirements for stu
dents entering more subject intensive
majors such as math or the sciences.
The science and engineering depart
ments at those universities require higher
math SAT scores and/or a more exten
sive background in advanced math, in
addition to the admissions criteria for the
university as a whole. These additional
criteria prevent underqualified students
from getting into a major in which their
chances of success are slim.
The effects of this policy at those uni
versities are apparent. Because freshmen
who are unable to get into their major of
choice enter as an undeclared major —
the equivalent of A&M’s general studies
— they take basic level classes in order
to strengthen the areas they are weak in.
After obtaining credit in these classes,
the department of their choice will be
more inclined to admit them because
their potential for success has improved.
In contrast, A&M gives freshmen
free reign when selecting a major. A
freshman who selects chemical engineer
ing, but barely passed high school alge
bra, faces the probability of disappoint
ment and frustration in his first semester
because heavy doses of calculus and sci
ence are part of the core curriculum. If
the College of Engineering placed addi
tional criteria — along the lines of the
corresponding departments at these oth
er universities — this student would be
placed in general studies and would take
additional courses to strengthen his
foundation in mathematics, preparing
him for such a math-intensive major.
However, without these restric
tions in place, students find out “the
hard way” that they are not pre
pared for their academic major,
which is reflected in poor grades
during the first semester. This leads
to a waste of valuable time and mon
ey — time and money that could
have been invested in general stud
ies to prepare and strengthen their
academic background.
It also puts them at a huge disadvan
tage in regards to grade point ratio and
those ever-precious Q-drops. If a student
wishes to switch to economics after his
attempt at engineering has failed, there
could be a problem. His grade point ratio
might not meet the transfer criteria.
These students will be digging them
selves out of a huge hole for the rest of
their college careers.
Granted, during the years the current
admissions criteria have been in place,
the student body at A&M has grown and
prospered. However, it would be prudent
to have an admissions process that re
flects such high standards.
If university administrators are re
ally committed to the idea of A&M
becoming a “world class” university,
a reevaluation of the current admis
sions criteria for many of its colleges
is needed.
David Lee is a sophomore general
studies major
Aggies defend
A&M traditions
In response to H. Green’s
Jan. 21 Mail Call
On behalf of this cam
pus in which I am proud of,
on behalf of a student
body that works to pre
serve tradition and honor
and on behalf of all of the
brave, courageous Aggies
that the “architectural
hodgepodge called the
Memorial Student Center”
represents: Please go back
to La Porte, Texas and
learn one thing, a word
many Aggies know quite
well. It is called respect.
Rob Ferguson
Class of '01
The grass surrounding
the MSC is respected by
all Aggies past, present
and future. There are
signs posted to not walk
on the grass around it in
respect to those Aggies
who died in war.
To H. Green, I apologize
if you were yelled at rudely.
I can understand someone
asking you to get off the
grass and explaining the
situation to you, but I do
MAIL CALL
not know any Aggies who
would have “ordered” you.
If the individual did so,
they were frustrated be
cause you were walking on
sacred grass.
You traipsing through
the grass is equivalent to
me walking on your close
relative’s grave.
I hope you will visit
again and learn more
about our traditions so you
will understand why this oc
currence had to take place.
I leave with this, “From
the outside looking in, you
can’t understand it and-,
from the inside looking out,
you can’t explain it.”
Kimberly Rasco
Class of ’02
Ceremony for
women’s clinic
First I wanted to thank
The Battalion for printing
the article about the Cham
ber of Commerce’s deci
sion to revoke Planned Par
enthood’s membership in a
fair and accurate way.
Indeed, Planned Par
enthood has decided not
to have a ribbon cutting
ceremony.
However, members of
the community have decid
ed to have a ribbon cutting
ceremony for them.
If there are any stu
dents, faculty or staff inter
ested in signing a small
piece of red ribbon to com
memorate Planned Parent
hood’s long tradition of ser
vice in the Bryan-College
Station area, they can con
tact either the Women’s
Studies office or the Gen-^
der Issues Educations Ser
vices office.
Community activists will
present all of the signed
ribbons to the Chamber
sometime in February.
Alexandra Hamilton
Class of ’00
The Battalion encourages let
ters to the editor. Letters must be
300 words or less and include
the author’s name, class and
phone number.
The opinion editor reserves the
right to edit letters for length,
style, and accuracy. Letters may be
submitted in person at 013 Reed
McDonald with a valid student ID.
Letters may also be mailed to:
The Battalion - Mail Call
013 Reed McDonald
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX
77843-1111
Campus Mail: 1111
Fax: (409) 845-2647
E-mail: batt@unix.tamu.edu