Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (March 25, 2004)
’5.; PINION The Battalion Page 5B • Thursday, March 25, 2004 A coalition in jeopardy? lesults of recent election in Spain will do little to deter the terrorist threat there le ionally tions, isa SSOCMI omewhere out there, in the many caves and holes throughout the Arab world, celebrations are under way. And based on the recent occurrences in Spain, Islamic extremists are surely having quite a party, because the Nicholas strength of the U.S. coalition is DAVIS now questionable. Three days after the devas- g Madrid bombings, which claimed some innocent lives and wounded 1,500 more, lections in Spain transpired as scheduled but oduced a shocking result: The Socialist Party placed the highly-favored Popular Party, mark- ig a tremendous victory for the terrorists. For eight years, the Popular Party controlled e Spanish government, enjoying success in leform of steady economic growth, reduced Inemployment, improvement of Spain’s esteem roughout the international community and Ire-election polls even predicted a substantial [ictory. However, two elements posed a problem. First, former Prime Minister Aznar steadfast- supported the United States and devoted panish troops to aid in the Iraq war even lough the majority of Spain’s citizens opposed itervention. Secondly, Spain suffered a terrorist attack dur- igthe Popular Party’s political watch. Surprisingly, though, many Spanish citizens :garded the terrorist attack not as an assault on le lifestyle or freedom of their country, but nstead as a direct consequence of allying itself closely with the Bush administration’s war in terror. Such an outlook is difficult for many Americans to understand or even sympathize isportatj vith.Think about it: Nearly 3,000 U.S. citizens ost their lives in the Sept. 11 attacks, and the juse I esponseby most patriotic, rational individuals irhapsl l amaii ite and) )ublish i in the a: n Bm iss oil rking was to seek out the per petrators and rid their despotic presence from the world. The Spaniards, how ever, have chosen a dif ferent method of addressing terrorism: appeasement. It resem bles an isolationist defense synonymous with sticking one’s head in the ground, hoping and praying that whatever danger arises passes them by. If the threat of danger remains, the apparent line of thinking goes, pay it off with concessions or “tribute.” Consider this statement by a Spanish citizen reported by Fox News: “I wasn’t planning to vote, but I am here today because the Popular Party is responsible for the murders here and in Iraq.” Another citizen, quoted by The New York Times, stated. l \\v “Maybe al-Qaida will leave us alone now.” How these individuals can believe the government is culpable and not the radical Muslims is beyond all rational comprehen sion. Moreover, the truly disturbing matter is that mil lions of other delusional people subscribe to this same view. So what has Spain’s trib ute purchased? The country has been allotted time from the terror ists to uphold the new Socialist Party’s pledge of with drawing troops from Iraq, and can now enjoy a life of perpetual fear complemented nicely by a feeling of powerlessness as it awaits other terrorist demands. Sounds good, right? But wait, there’s more. Spain also has the leadership of a misguid ed and equally fright ened prime minister, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, to guide the country through the tur bulent years ahead. I “Rather than defeat terrorism, U.S. military actions risk fueling it,” the prime minister said. He also claimed that nei ther bombs nor shock and awe tactics could defeat terrorism, saying instead, “Terrorism is fought by the state of laws.” To believe that the presence of laws alone can rid the world of international terrorism is naive, and to refuse to confront terrorists using any means necessary, is a sign of a cowardice. Prime Minister Zapatero is guilty of both. Here is the crux of the matter. Losing 1,300 Spanish troops is no big material loss. The United States will do what it always does and carry the rest of the load. The real problem, though, is symbolic in nature. No longer does the coalition appear united. No longer does the free world share the same intensity and resolve in combating terrorism. To the contrary, it now appears terrorists can win by frightening countries into submission. Where will they venture to next? How about Britain? After all, a substantial portion of the population disagreed with the Iraq war. No one knows if such an attack could motivate parlia ment to oust British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Nevertheless, to the terrorists it is probably worth a shot. It worked in Spain. Perhaps terrorists will spare appeasing countries the pain of future attacks, but there is a catch. These countries will always be indebt ed to the terrorists for each day of tranquility they enjoy. Such security comes at too high of a price. 4. Nicholas Davis is a senior political science major. Graphic by Chris Griffin oncemsl ]t"Kn ssofU ush’s prescription drug lan invasive, expensive Government can't protect people from selves MAIL CALL r hen the govern ment te away your , you should 2 outraged. When takes away your ps because it is mating you as if mike i were a child, waiters |just plain 'suiting. On March 1, President "sh announced a new strategy to ackdown on the illegal use of pre- l-.nption drugs, at a price tag of $ 10 11 'on from taxpayers. Not only Joes Bush want to take away money jjatyou have earned by working, he |antsto spend it on making sure Pjaren t taking Tylenol with rfcine instead of Advil for that 'adache. I's time to let a little secret out a ults know what they’re doing e n they light up a cigarette, ^ a k eer or smoke marijuana, o honestly thinks that what T re doing is completely safe on they can see black smoke bil- J outh?° Ut ^ t ^ Ni * 6 * r n ° Se anC * Ib/i' 8 ^ an t0 w '^ en th e scope of I , a jondy-doomed war on drugs to me not only illegal drugs, but LP rescr 'Pti on medications is *n its very premise of advo- ■ § n paternalistic state at the cost at T nCm 1 ‘gh ts and in the idea aim Can 1 solve th e problems it bnsto be able to. o thc big question is: Where )L f § overnr nent think it gets the * e ;to tel! us howto live our «i»css 0 o/t P the Peace ’ ■' has ,he iher!! * kee P'ng men safe from dves not sa ^ e f rom them- ;ss n ° i ^ ree t0 P urs ue happi- I lake o 60 * 3 C 1111181 a ' so I 36 f ree t0 le a J\ 0 d ar, d bad choices. If peo- avemn? acce P t fhe idea that the irethfv en > t 18 ^urg 6 ^ with making irtheJ, a , Ways do the right thing NenderT VeS ’ the situa tion is an hould [ZT l0n ° f bad P arentin g- tent a i P §° vern ment then imple- , gal bedtime for everyone? “I’d like someone to show me Congress’ constitutional authority for the government protecting me from making unwise choices,” wrote Dr. Walter Williams, an opinion writer for Capitalism Magazine. The simple fact is that no one could. Although taking drugs may involve certain risks, the principle of individual rights demands that government stay out of one’s pursuit of his own happi ness, which includes any choice that does not infringe upon others’ rights. America was founded on the principle of individual rights and has no authority to act in opposi tion to this. r This plan to widen the scope of the already-doomed war on drugs to include not only illegal drugs, but also prescription medications is flawed in its very remise of advo cating a paternalistic state at the cost of American rights. Furthermore, Bush’s plan will not even solve the problems he thinks it will. He’s claiming his plan of cracking down on prescription drugs will solve the problem of teenagers buying drugs such as Xanax and Vicodin off the Internet with their parents’ credit cards. But if you have a child who’s willing and able to steal your credit card to buy something off the Internet, hurt ing their chances of buying Valium is really the least of your worries, and it certainly won’t fix what s wrong with him. Not only would this be a failed attempt to take care of other peo ple’s children, but the crackdown would have repercussions on med ical workers and everyone under their care. The Associated Press reported that another $138 million would be dedicated toward physi cian training and education pro grams as well as fighting illegal Internet sales. This means that doc tors, who are already under the stress of dodging malpractice suits and paying for the related insur ance, will have to spend even more stressful hours to attend seminars and training, while worrying that Big Brother is breathing down their necks with every painkiller they prescribe. “The principal impact of this campaign when you step up the law enforcement response is that doctors will err on the side of under-treating pain,” warns Ethan Nadelmann, . executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance. And do you really want doctors under-treating your pain when you are hurting, all on account of rebellious teenagers and parents who are incompetent at rais ing children? It’s time for Americans to wake up and smell reality. The govern ment wasn’t created to baby-sit the punk children of irresponsible par ents, and it has no authority to regu late bad decisions that harm only the person making them. The idea of being free starts with being free to make one’s own choices when they affect only oneself — where to go to college, what to buy at the grocery store, whether to risk can cer by smoking and even the risk of taking more dangerous substances. People own their lives — it’s time to stop letting the government say that it does. Yell Leader positions for Corps of Cadets only In response to a March 24 news article: I am a junior mechanical engineering major and am also a non-reg. I disagree with some of the comments made in the article regarding the topic of non-reg yell leaders. First of all, if yell leaders are supposed to represent and reflect the entire student body, wouldn't it follow that we would need to elect women to that position? That is a ridiculous concept because the yell leaders are a reflection of our traditions, not a reflec tion of the student body. The student body is represented by the SBP, class officers and student government. Second of all, I feel that Justin Woods' comments in the article were chosen very selectively. The Corps members are not more qualified simply because of their work ethics. They are more qualified because of their dedication to Texas A&M and its traditions. They are more qualified than any non-reg to lead this school in some of our most important traditions. It is an honor to do that, and I feel that members of the Corps of Cadets are the most deserving of that honor. They have chosen to give up the normal college life to dedicate four years to the traditions of our school, and quite a few have also dedicated time after college to serve our country. If Jacob Scher has such a love for the Aggie Spirit, why isn't he in the Corps? To me, that is the epitome of representing Texas A&M. Personally, I will never vote for a non-reg yell leader. Call me prejudiced, but I don't feel that that position is one that should go to just any student at Texas A&M. The Corps of Cadets is the glue that holds this school and its traditions together. They are the "Keepers of the Spirit.” Let's give them the respect they deserve and allow them to do that job. Amy Gray Class of 2005 SBP candidates’ campaign should not focus on race Spring is in the air, or at least discarded fly ers are. Campaigning via association is a very popular idea with student elections coming up. Five Corps guys have the votes of the Corps for yell leader. Two other guys are out to represent the other 43,000 students for yell leader. SBP candidates are out to prove who has the most friends, and most students are already tired of getting flyers and it’s only day four. But one campaigner for “NDC for SBP" really reached a low point with a campaigning slogan, or more so slur. “She’s black — You gotta vote for her!" the young lady exclaimed in the middle of Academic Plaza Wednesday mid-morning. It’s shameful enough that the administration only sees diversity as being a race issue, but when students are going out on the same weak branch, we’re all doomed to fall. Granted, the elections are mainly populari ty contests and most voters don’t care about the empty promises of the candidates, but I would hope the candidates would associate themselves with their accomplishments and involvement in campus organizations, not race, sex or religion. I’m sure the candidate probably doesn’t agree with the words of her campaigner, but she must know who is rep resenting her and the ideas that are being let out in her name. To all the candidates, best of luck in campaigning and represent some thing worth the students’ time and votes. Terri Wilson Class of 2007 The Battalion encourages letters to the editor. Letters must be 200 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 sub mitted in person at 014 Reed McDonald with a valid student ID. Letters also may be mailed to: 014 Reed McDonald, MS 1111, Texas A&M University. College Station, TX 77843-1 111. Fax: (979) 845-2647 Email: mailcall@thebattalion.net Mike Walters is a senior psychology major.