BAT
ULlj
Opinion
The Battalion
ID
mJ
Not to be taken literally
iKerry took the president's words out of context
r O'
i encourages
>n 53-3.
■ It’s just ini]
it atmosphert
bad, either,
rned three of
itions for ton
/in.
n Sports An
i-l I are Stadi.
bleachers. Li
ssed three fi
uateda41-7i
Tommy Tut
.ip victory cig
me, they
dfield.
their share I
he average M
0.5 points 'if
icver wins li
lionshipgait;
nised he wot
stogie until
is. “For ust?
finite advant;
, and we'dl 1 -
ir schedules
o\v over arS'
I n an interview
that aired Aug.
30, President
Bush told Matt Lau-
er, “1 don’t think you
can win (the war on
terrorism). But you
can create conditions
so that those who use
terror are less accept
able in parts of the
world.” Heavy coverage of the statement
for the rest of the week brought proof of
a liberal bias in some parts of the media,
while unmasking the true ignorance of
Sen. John Kerry’s presidential campaign.
Perhaps if anyone had analyzed Bush’s
comments more than momentarily, they
would have understood what he truly
means: his is a different kind of war. It
is a war to preserve the good of human
ity, fought against an unknown enemy.
Unfortunately, bad news is good news for
the elite media and the president “admit
ting the failure” of his strongest campaign
issue seemed too good to pass up.
The Charlotte Observer ran a story cov
ering Bush’s remark, under the headline
“Bush: War not Winnablc.” The article
explains that. “Taken at their face value.
Bush’s words would put him closer to
the positions of the European allies, who
do not consider the war winnable.” The
Observer’s biggest mistake was taking the
president’s words at
In keep
ing with a tradition starting with Socrates,
people have learned to think on a much
deeper level, to question the true meaning
of words.
Bush’s stance has by no means moved
closer to those of his Huropean counter
parts, who have often called his method
of fighting this war barbaric and arrogant.
Bush still believes democracy will prevail
over terrorism and totalitarianism, and
assures the American people that “we are
winning and we will win,” as he stated on
the record repeatedly Aug. 31.
Secondly, it doesn’t take much thought
to understand that the president was not
losing hope or admitting defeat, but rather
explaining the different type of ending
this war will have. As John McCain said,
“What he meant was, we’re never going
to have a peace signing on the Missouri,”
in reference to how World War 11 ended
in the Pacific. Sen. McCain, like others, is
making the point that a dramatic, victori
ous ending to the War on Terror may be
absent from the history books, but that is
not say there will be no victory.
Kerry heard the same thing the media
reported about Bush's statement and saw a
chance to exploit the president’s supposed
lack of confidence in a most ignorant fash
ion. Phil Singer, a spokesman for Kerry,
inferred that, “The president has gone
from mission accomplished to mission
miscalculated to mission impossible on the
war on terror.” Once again, the president’s
words have been taken out of context by
his opponents in an attempt to weaken his
stance on the war.
Kerry’s running mate, Sen. John Ed
wards took the ignorance to even greater
heights, saying, “The war on terrorism is
absolutely w'innable,” on ABC’s Night-
line. For Kerry and Edwards to run on that
platform is absurd. It would be like a dis
trict attorney candidate saying, “1 will win
the war on crime,” in a campaign speech.
One cannot absolutely and forever win
such wars because they are not actually
wars with definitive beginnings and ends.
Like the war on crime and the war on
poverty, the war on terror is being fought
against an unknown enemy. There will be
no actual battle grounds with two armies
trying to take control of a
certain area. It is not a con
ventional hot war between two
powerful countries. It is not a
cold war, like with the former
U.S.S.R., where no actual
fighting occurs.
This is a different kind of
war, the outcome of which will
determine the fate of the civi
lized world. The enemy is not
one country, but rather people
in countries all over the world.
There will be no day where the
war on terrorism comes to a close
forever. All Bush did in his in
terview with Lauer was to openly
state this fact.
His remark did not deserve the
media attention it received because
it was not late-breaking news. The
president did not admit failure or
defeat, and has foreseen neither
throughout his entire presidency
thus far. The war can be won, just
not on the level that so many expect.
Americans should not lose faith in
their leader and his will to protect
them now because of such an unim
portant remark being blown way out
of proportion.
Page 5B • Friday, September 17,
LINDSYE FORSON
Adam Scharn is a junior
political science major.
BRANDI DUNN • THE BATTALION
r ab Privatizing social security
only correct course of action
i0 ml
ass
1 L
■
ristotle once re
marked, “The ideal
.situation is that
all families should own
property.” While this seems
to be agreeable to most
Americans, the idea is fun
damentally different from
a dictatorship where one’s
land, possessions and life
are owned by a leader or, in
the case of communism, the state.
Aristotle’s notion is a necessity for
a free country.
The Social Security program
tries to play it both ways. By tak
ing money from each paycheck,
the government says that this is
your money, only you’ll get it back
later, at a time of their choosing.
By seizing your money in any arbi
trary manner, the government fails
to live up to the promise of a sys
tem based on reason and freedom.
Recently, President Bush has
been talking about privatizing
Social Security. This is the only
right thing to do with a system that is wrong in
principle and failing in practice. “Ownership
brings security and dignity and independence,”
Bush told GOP convention-goers in New
I York. “In all these proposals, we seek to pro-
I vide not just a government program, but a path
1 a path to greater opportunity, more freedom
I and more control over your own life.”
Bush’s plan would allow workers to keep a
I portion of their Social Security taxes and place
1 it into private accounts containing stocks,
1 bonds or other securities. Current retirees and
I those nearing retirement would not lose any
I benefits. In addition. Lifetime Savings Ac-
I counts would be created to allow Americans to
I collect funds tax-free.
Naturally, such a bold plan has its critics.
| “It’s a Trojan horse,” Gene Sperling, head of
former President Clinton’s National Economic
I Council and adviser to Democratic nominee
I John Kerry, told The LA Times. “They’re try
ing to get through the gate with rhetoric that
implies this would help the middle class save
more. But that promise is hollow and the only
thing inside is yet another opportunity for those
who already have wealth to see their wealth
compound tax-free, and shift more of our tax
burden to the work of the middle class.”
As college students, most non-economics
majors are hard-pressed to decide whether this
u
Preserving the
freedom of choice
is the only moral
acction here, and
Bush's plan seems
to be a step in the
right direction.
plan will succeed, since the details are based
on assumptions and projections that may not
pan out. However, the question all Aggies
should be able to answer is, “Which presents
the moral choice?” It’s been said that man is
the “rational animal,” and since man does not
possess claws or instinct to scratch his liveli
hood from nature, he must use his mind to
create tools and jobs to thrive. In short, a man’s
mind is his tool and key to survival.
Money, which is a tool used to represent
the effort of man’s mind that
enables him to work, stands at
the end of a line tied to man’s
survival. It is for this reason
that theft is such a crime —- it
attempts to rob man of his abil
ity to live, which is why it’s
almost as serious as murder.
Given this, it should be clear
that the only moral choice is
to let the person who earns the
money keep the money.
Most people are probably
capable of saving their money
for retirement in a respon-
sible manner. They can invest
it in certain funds or stocks, which have the
potential for both gain and loss. Education is
an even better alternative, as it’s much more
guaranteed to enrich knowledge and future
bank accounts.
Americans must recognize that the government
isn’t responsible for solving all of their problems.
As adults, we should be capable of taking care
of ourselves. For those who don’t wish to accept
that responsibility, they alone must bear the con
sequences of their poor choices.
That doesn’t mean there won’t be people
who want to help those who have made poor
choices or are the victims of unlucky circum
stances. This is the reason for charities, which
allow individuals to donate or personally vol
unteer. To believe that man must be forced to
be charitable through taxation is to possess a
low esteem of human generosity, and a twisted
sense of righteousness to believe that people
must be forced to help others at the point of a
gun and a paycheck seizure.
Preserving the freedom of choice is the only
moral action here, and Bush’s plan seems to be
a step in the right direction.
Mike Walters is a senior
psychology major.
Putin must reform approach
in order to curb terrorism
On Sept. 1, a group of
Chechen rebels took an
entire school in Beslan,
Russia hostage. More
than 1,000 Russian
children and adults were
held until Sept. 3, when
the school was taken
back after a long strug-
jonathan gj e Ti ie high casualty
SMITH rate t j iat resu i te( i showed
the world that Russia is not prepared to deal
with terrorist threats in the beginning of the
21st century.
During those defining moments, the Rus
sian government’s poor decisions quickly
turned the crisis into its worst-case scenario.
The Russian Spetsnaz, or elite forces, failed
to prepare a plan to storm the school and were
taken by surprise when a bomb went off in the
school and ended the standoff. The result of
this poor procedure was 10 hours of violent
struggle that ended with the death of 40 per
cent of the hostages and the injury of another
40 percent.
Chester Dunning, a history professor at
Texas A&M, criticized the Spetsnaz “for slow,
stupid, poor tactics, low measures of safety and
indifference to loss of innocent life.”
In fact, two of the elite squads, the Alfa and
the Vympel, did not even fare well in the com
bat, which pitted the traditional expertise of the
Spetsnaz against the hostage-takers, as both
groups suffered unprecedented casualties.
The Chechens were so well trained that the
Kremlin and Putin are reexamining possible
connections to Muslim extremist groups such
as al-Qaida.
Dunning said he sees other clues indicating
ties to al-Qaida. When al-Qaida is involved he
added the “United States feels uncomfortable
criticizing Russia’s heavy hand in the Cau
casus.” He also said the connections help the
Kremlin by making “requests for more money
seem defensible...even prudent.”
To many, the Beslan crisis shows that
Russia has many expensive changes to make
if it wishes to better defend its citizens from
terror. The poor coordination, planning and
training of the Russian special forces must
be dealt with. “The Russian officer class still
belongs to the generation educated in waging
total war on the plains of Europe, rather than
the carefully calibrated art of a small amount
of firepower,” according to the British Broad
casting Corporation.
Russia should work to emulate the transfor
mation that the U.S. military has gone through
since the Cold War; a transformation that al
lowed America to wage successful campaigns
in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Russia might also have to change its poli
cies regarding Chechnya, even though the
last 10 years of despicable acts on both sides
(such as the killing of children by Chechen’s
or the carpet bombing of cities by the Rus
sians) have made peace an increasingly hard
goal to achieve.
Flow has Putin dealt with the exploding ter
rorist problem in his country since the hostage
crisis? Primarily, he offered $10 million for in
formation about Chechen rebel leaders Shamil
Basayev and Aslan Maskhadov. Maskhadov
was elected president of Chechnya in 1997 and
Basayev is a Chechen field commander. The
capture of both men might make Russia safer,
but more must be done to reform Russia’s way
of dealing with terrorism.
In this quest for a new method, Putin fol
lowed President Bush’s lead and revealed
a doctrine stating that Moscow planned to
launch preemptive strikes on terrorist bases
“in any region of the world,” according to the
British Broadcasting Company. Dunning said
this statement is probably a bluff because “in
truth, the Russians would have great difficulty
projecting power far beyond their borders.”
Putin went one step further than Bush when
he made a power grab and introduced new
measures this week that would end direct
election of governors in Russia’s 89 regions.
Putin apparently believes this will make
Russia stronger, but this tactic does not seem
to be as much about terrorism, as it is about
solidifying the state’s power in a moment of
crisis. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell
directly criticized these moves, telling the
BBC, “1 hope... that the government of the
Russian Federation will not conclude that the
only answer to terrorism is to increase the
power of the Kremlin.”
The problem within Russia is much deeper
than Putin admits. His recent power grab
shows his priorities aren’t what they need to
be. In the words of Dunning, “all in all, the
forces of defense and repression have suffered
serious budget problems and serious person
nel problems.” Until Putin reforms his tools
of fighting terrorism, Russian citizens will be
in constant danger of terrorist attacks.
Jonathan Smith is a junior
history major.