Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (July 14, 2004)
hied ? fits. Gre; ing 1° w 0 and O'- pax lei ^ person, Opinion The Battalion Page 7 • Wednesday, July 14, 2004 giants, Tr iUOUE MONEY FOR THE MILITARY visits Manaif ptid otto .(jemiK ,ugHoutiii !,( with H ,ood wnt; ills. Pleas |0 ursofat ^etsoluto preterrac 1-5. On} ^tacted. I i H-S- Or* payS- idayl Or i'CLE gKffli, seH is, lights iol< sarly 1 .cKdi-Com ./SIMM ack, $25t ATE loan.r o avoid reinstatement of the draft, increased spending on troops is necessary DAVID SHOEMAKER t has been more than 10 years since the fall of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. Since then, the U.S. military i lacked a major conventional enemy that ild match its full might. This has led to a valuation of force levels and strategies for U.S. military. Jfhe strategy adopted was that the U.S. l8+ Ctr< itary would stay sizable enough to be able ? ight two major regional conflicts at the ne time. The stages that were envisioned at I time for these conflicts were the Middle stand the Korean Peninsula, where countries that could pose treat with conventional military forces still exist. BVs recently as December 2002, Secretary of Defense Don- petefBio:ilf Rumsfeld was quoted in a CNN interview saying, “We spec j re capable of fighting two major regional conflicts as the ■ional strategy and the force-sizing construct clearly indi- :atc. We’re capable of winning decisively in one, and swiftly dfeating in the case of the other, and let there be doubt about it.” ■ That has been the stated policy of the United S ites since the end of the first Bush administration, tin iugh Clinton and now George W. Bush. The idc i would be to hold off the enemy in one country, Ap t wl le defeating the enemy in the second. Then the can :;p| force of the U.S. military could be brought to lar against the second enemy. 3W#But the decisions made by lawmakers in Wash- in; on did not ensure that the military could do TES <-gjBiat was expected of it. Units were decommis- ; ;g: ■■ siciied; equipment, planes and ships were retired but not replaced; and training was curtailed some what. Meanwhile, Congress failed to ensure that the p|y and benefits stayed competitive with other jobs, 3,r which is important with an all-volunteer force. But motbii jly problems that were developing went unseen. ;i-648«|Until Iraq. Now, the military, which was stretched with commitments in ie ^ Afghanistan, became drastically understaffed in Iraq. The plan- Avail£ nmg done before the invasion apparently envisioned a quick, easy war like the first Gulf War. But the plans did not consider , j the ferocity with which Saddam’s supporters and radical Is- 979w lamists would fight back. ^ I Now the United States needs more troops in Iraq to secure the ,e 32 gentry and future of the government there. According to Newsday, 23 + .the Army wants to recall 5,674 soldiers who have left the service. >*tegind, according to another article from Newsday, five brigades of rin ? 40 f Tthe National Guard will be going to Iraq, and the 42nd Infantry vision of New York, a Guard formation, will command regular rTndStArmy units as well as Reserve and National Guard ones, tcepi be«The military has not had to lean upon National Guard and reserve units like this in some time. And this pres sure upon members of the Army espe cially, with long tours in the Middle East and Afghanistan, has hurt recruitment and retention. Luckily, Congress has not ignored the current problem. According to an article from The Houston Chronicle, several members of the House Armed Services Committee commented on the fact that the Army particularly was being pushed hard. Rep. Ike Skelton, the top Democrat on the committee, was quoted in the article, saying that, “We’re taxing our part- time soldiers, our Guard and Reserves nearly to the breaking point.” It should now be clear to policymakers and the publ a critical turning point has been reached with the concept of an all-volunteer military. The money that they are paid and the conditions that they function under, such as the length of tours, are not conducive to retention or recruitment. If this country wants to continue to avoid a draft, it is time for the United States to put its money where its mOUtll iS. Congress and ^ ^(l( the American people have to realize that the cost of avoiding a draft includes better pay and benefits for soldiers and the costs of training and equipping them properly. And the public should simply stop comparing current conflicts with the 1991 Gulf War. The United States will never likely fight such an easy war against such a large enemy again. That war was an aberration, an in stance where an enemy with little will to fight simply gave up after weeks of bombing. If the United States were ever to fight North Korea, it would most assuredly not fold like Saddam’s forces did in 1991. Congress and the public must realize that to secure our national interests, without a draft of any kind, serious money and effort will have to be put up, and very soon. There are still countries like North Korea in the world — ones with power ful weapons and the will to use them. In these potential future u- Ifthiscountiy wants to continue to avoid a draft, it is time for the United States to put its money where its mouth is. conflicts the only option will be to resort to the armed forces, which must be ready. As things stand now, the U.S. military is incapable of fighting two regional wars as envisioned by the strategy. This must change. The military can ill afford any further inattention. David Shoemaker is a senior management major. Graphic by Grade Arenas MAIL CALL estaurant has right :o promote politics irj In response to Nick Anthis’ July 13 Knail call: Yes, it’s true that we have the F- Kerry hirts at New York Sub. And yes, it’s true lat there’s an elephant awkwardly posi- oning himself behind a donkey on the reast pocket. Let me get one thing straight for Mr. nthis and anyone else who wants to house. 179-690-1 n/SbthW* n 411 ng rooff igainvillea Jacob ai included. 340/mo, call (97? A//D, 405 5 ! 2bdrni' tile, $361 2ba hoes included /ahoo.co* /2bth ole, DSL 3/2/2, 'ed, $325 jded.on? nished" >a. Jail Jacl 3ke this too far: pulling the “rape" card a cheap shot and insinuating that i/e would endorse such a despicable ct represents mental weakness. Hate n NYS for its politics or because we lessed up your order; don’t claim we romote rape, whether it’s a donkey or a residential candidate. It’s absurd, and I /ould imagine embarrassing to your fel- 3w progressives. You're correct, Mr. Anthis, there IS NOTHING humorous about rape. Also, my goal is not to “alienate rogressives" as you say in your letter, lather, it was a way to embrace the con- ervative members of the community. I nderstand each time you take a side in '/mo. +13 hotly contested subject such as poli os or religion, you automatically anger r offend those people who aren’t of the ame opinion. understand that you will not be re- 0 Jrning to New York Sub, and I under- tand your position. 1 would most likely ot eat at an establishment if it had F- 3/2/214 lush on its T-shirts. I understand that I will look like an immoral guy to some people, and that's OK. It’ll happen as long as I’m fortu nate enough to portray my opinion in a public forum. “Rape" card aside, I respect your views Mr. Anthis as well as the views of every other dissenter. For the record, my goal is never to anger or offend people, but rather bring like-minded people to gether and have a sense of humor in the process. It’s just a shame that your din ing experience has to suffer as a result. Austin Harkness Owner New York Sub Restaurant T-shirt is free speech In response to Nick Anthis’ July 13 mail call: I am upset about the utter disregard for free speech displayed by Mr. Anthis. This T-shirt was made at a local estab lishment and their employees are of fered this chance to wear the shirt. Free speech is free speech and it should not be censored in order that others may not be offended. My advice is for those offended to grow thicker skin. Before he starts slinging accusa tions or impropriety he should be fully informed on the situation. By the way I will be dining at New York Sub. Michael W. Hart Class of 2004 Wal-Mart should settle lawsuit and stop discrimination policies R emoving sexual dis crimination from the workplace has been a difficult but worthwhile cru sade for the millions of American women in America’s work force. Recently the country’s largest company, Wal- Mart, learned that it too will have a place in the history of this fight. Whether Wal-Mart wants to go down in history as a chauvinistic corpora tion or a progressive caring company depends on how it handles the court case set before it. In San Francisco, a federal judge has ruled that a sexual discrimination lawsuit filed in 2001 by six women employed by Wal-Mart can now proceed as a class action suit. This new suit represents all 1.6 million of Wal-Mart’s current and former female employees. This case is easily the largest sexual discrimination lawsuit in United States history. When the numbers are considered, Wal-Mart certainly appears to be a sexist company. According to Time magazine, 65 percent of Wal-Mart’s hourly employees are female, but two-thirds of the company’s managers are men. Female employees work ing hourly jobs take home $ 1,100 less than men, while female manag ers earn $14,500 less than their male counterparts. On average, it takes men 2.86 years to get promoted to assistant manager, yet, despite better perfor mance ratings, it takes women 4.38 years to accomplish the same task. If these numbers aren’t bad enough, the plaintiffs present many stories that describe how Wal-Mart’s manage ment blatantly discriminated against its female employees. USA Today recounts the tale of one woman who said that her division’s monthly sales meetings were held at a Hooters restaurant. Such a policy definitely does not fit into Wal-Mart’s image as a pro-family company. Another woman recalls what hap pened when she confronted her boss about the fact that her male counter parts were paid more. His answer was that men “had families to support.” Such outdated thinking on the part of the company’s management must be changed if Wal-Mart wants to stay out of court. Finally, a female Wal-Mart employee tells of the discrimina tion she faced when she asked to be transferred to the hardware depart ment. She was asked, “You’re a girl. Why do you want to be in hard ware?” When manage ment makes decisions based upon incorrect stereotypes, it is no surprise that most of Wal-Mart’s work force feels like the company doesn’t care about their needs. Wal-Mart must deal with these problems. Wal-Mart’s excuse for these in equalities is not convincing. Accord ing to BBC, the company believes that it should not be held responsible because “promotions were decided by local managers.” The fact that Wal- Mart shifts the blame to its individual stores instead of settling the issue indicates that it does not have a legal leg to stand on. The obvious and correct choice for Wal-Mart is to settle the case outside of a courtroom. Any jury presented with such evidence would easily find Wal-Mart to be in the wrong. Wal- Mart should willingly pay the largest settlement ever to avoid the largest legal embarrassment ever. Even a multibillion-dollar settlement would be peanuts compared to the money lost when the company’s stock drops after a lost lawsuit. Wal-Mart needs to solve the prob lems the lawsuit addresses. It should offer free childcare to offset some of these costs to its underpaid workforce. Business Week also suggested that a settlement could bring in an indepen dent monitor to review Wal-Mart’s pay and promotion records. Wal-Mart spokeswoman Mona Williams said the company would be happy to cooperate with an indepen dent monitor. The company should use this opportunity to purge itself of insti tutionalized discrimb nation and prove to its employees and customers that it cares about women. Since it is obvious that Wal-Mart would lose this case, its law yers have been doing everything they can to keep the case out of court, with Wal-Mart executives describing the case as “unmanage able and unconstitu tional” for the court room according to the BBC. It is time for the company to take responsibility for its actions. Sam Walton, the original founder of Wal-Mart, once said that he had “al ways been driven to buck the system, to innovate, to take things beyond where they’ve been.” At this critical juncture, Wal-Mart finds itself faced with an interesting question: Does it follow the words of its former leader and “buck the system” of discrimi nation, or does it refuse to pull its company’s policies into the twenty- first century? For Wal-Mart’s sake, it should choose to reform itself without the help of the legal system. Yet if the company refuses to go the easy route, it is certain that a jury will have no problem “rolling back” some of the company’s sexist policies. Jonathan Smith is a junior history major. JONATHAN SMITH Wal-Mart should willingly pay the largest settlement ever to avoid the largest legal embarras- ment ever.