editorial
(Am i o?a 6r
ITURSJEO 19
great. tT5
GET ft0WO.
00 Y0O REALIZE
WHAT THAT MEMS?
IT MEANS yOU
CAN BUY.
SCREWED ON A
wimss m i
tCAHGiT SENT
TO PflScW....
' 111 1 K
iiri, I,, mti iiiii.rii ' mi .. ' .... ... ril - hmiiiT-ftm. mm
you can
ALSO BUY.
THE THOUGHT OP
All THAT SCWSffc
X HttO .4 DRNK.
wow wMe.
Dear editor:
Bruce Nelsons arguments (Daily Nebraskan, Feb. 3) are
merely a rationalization of the attitude "let them pull themselves
up by their bootstraps," while, of course, most Indians have no
boots. -
Let me respond to some of his comments:
(1) Birth Control: It is hard not to agree that birth control
information and devices need to be more available in India and
elsewhere. However, Indian budget-planners must make decisions
between birth control and food, birth control and essential
industry, and so on. In a country with limited resources many need
go unmet. This argues for more, not less, aid to meet such needs.
(2) Hinduism. In our largely Christian country people indulge in
feeding large numbers of dogs and cats while leaving children to go
hundry. What should be our penalty, given our greater resources
for feeding people?
(3) Nuclear reactors. For non-peaceful purposes, these are a
waste. They are no less a waste in the U.S. The U.S. is also in a
much stronger position to guarantee security and to limit nuclear
weapons than a border-threatened, poor country like India. How
much progress have we made in the thirty years?
None of this is to. argue that the Indian government might not
be more efficient and more sensitive to the needs of its people.
Unfortunately, this is true of our government even though our
country has the resources to solve many of our problems. This
brings us to the basic question: do human beings have any
responsibilities to others less well off than they? And if Nelson
were starving, would he wish to be ignored because of the
government above him, his religion or his non-use of birth control?
Genie Gupta
More facts bantered
Dear editor:
Mr. Nelson, in his editorial of Feb. 3, seems immature in
judgement, sarcastic in the face of human deprivation and
incapable of completing the local paradigm he starts.
If one wishes to banter facts, here are a few more:
From 1945 to 1969, U.S. grants in aid to India totaled $7,788
million. During the same period West Germany, Great Britian and
France received $13,728 million in VS. aid. India had a population
estimated at 442 million living upon 1,269,952 square miles. Hie
population for the three Euiupean states tct-Icd H6 million on
389,135 square miles. The population densities are similar, yet the
Indians receive only $17.30 per capita compared with $93.38 for
the Europeans. A real cynic might ask, "Why the discrepancy? Arc
not all needy men equally deserving of our Christian benevolence?"
Could the difference be based upon the fact that U.S. general
imports from Western Europe totalled $10,139 million in 1968 but
only $344 million from India?
A true cynic might further point out the different usages aid
money was put to in India and West Europe. Much of the Indian
grant was made in surplus munitions. American aid after World War
I simply rearmed the belligerents from World War II. Now Europe
is once again an armed camp.
It is too cynical to say that the arms race has led us to the brink
of environmental degradation and is a major cause of the inflation
we are enjoying at present? Would we not have more money to put
into agricultural research if we stopped feeding the Pentagon's of
the world?
The basic fault in Mr. Nelson's reasoning is that sheer hypocrisy
of his stand, Hie U.S. is rich in agricultural products and
technologies. India is poor in these areas, ergo, India must starve.
But if we are to expect self-sufficiency from other nations, let us
first see what sort of example the ILS. sets.
America has a very big lesson to learn. This is a global
community now and if any mankind is going to survive it must be
by redognizing the moral responsibilities that tic us all. A cynic
mipht say that each year sees the thickening of the callous upon
the soul of America when it can be readily suggested that we no
longer feci "guilty about starving children with distended bellies. .
W.R. f laugher
fririav, februarv 7, 1975
Nuclear power still debated
(Editor's note: Rob Aiken is chairman of the
ASUN Environmental Task Force.)
After World War II ended with Hiroshima and
Nagasaki, the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC)
was created to explore other uses for nuclear
power. Energy production is one use for nuclear
power that is hotly debated in the. academic and
political arena.
According to U.S. .Energy Policies, a study by
Resources for the Future, the AEC became
increasingly involved in civilian nuclear energy in
the mid-50s. By 1962 the AEC had used $1,275
billion for civilian nuclear research-each year an
additional $500 million went to nuclear reactor
development.
The AEC first cultivated the fission reactor
which uses uranium and thorium as fuel. Now
work is being done to develop more efficient
breeder reactors-projected by an Iowa
consultant to be available in about 20 years.
The first big reactor was constructed on the
east coast in 1962, according to U.S. Energy
Policies, beginning a proliferation of nuclear
power plants in the mid-'60s. In 1968 two
reactors, Ft.. Calhoun and Cooper, were under
construction in eastern Nebraska and are among
the 44 reactors now licensed to operate (source:
Committee for Nuclear Responsibility-Calif.).
This rapid acceptance of nuclear power by
utilities has grown into dependence on nuclear
power. Our energy needs are expanding 3.8 per
cent each year, according to a Chase Manhattan
Bank study. By 1990, the Federal Power
Commission projects nuclear energy will provide
half our energy.
Twenty-eight years after the first large reactor
was built, nuclear power is expected to
dominate energy produciion.
Could this promise for the future develop into
a Pandora's box of magic tricks? How could
utility companies become committed to a system
not satisfactorily tested in the field? (The Wall
Street Journal reported last week that 21
reactors, including one in Nebraska, will be shut
down for up to two weeks to check for cracks in
the primary cooling system.) Why do a number
ASW opinion
of American, German and Swedish scientists
recommend broad restrictions or moratoriums on
nuclear reactor operations? What effect does
existing and projected nuclear power have on
Nebraska?
We hope to explore these questions in future
articles before the March 6 public hearing on a
bill to place a moratorium on further reactor
development in Nebraska.
Intelligence quotient high
Seeing that everyone else is investigating The
Intelligence Community these days, I thought I'd
drop by the place myself.
As you probably know, The Intelligence
Community is located on the outskirts of
Reality. You can't miss it. There's a road sign
saying "Intelligence, Pop. 764,591," and above
that a banner emblazoned "WATCH US
GROW!"
I was greeted at the gate by a jovial man who
handed me a card identifying himself as Herbert
Galosh, president of the community's Booster
Club. "Welcome, welcome," he said, "fellow
spy."
"Fellow spy?" I said. "But ..."
"No one comes here but spies," said Galosh.
"And is our tourist business booming! White
House Commissions, Congressional committees,
investigative journalists , . . You wouldn't believe
how many Americans arc spying on us Americans
in The Intelligence Community. Not that we
have anything against that. 'If you can't expose a
Russian,' we say, 'expose an American.' But what
would you like to know?"
"Well, for starters," I said, "what exactly do
you do here in The Intelligence Community?"
"Why, we gather intelligence," said Galosh.
"It's the greatest growth industry in the country.
You should've seen this place 50 years ago -a
forgotten hamlet with a few hundred souls.
"And look at us today. Booming! Now over
there you can see our workers in the field
gathering intelligence while they happily sing
their favorite spiritual, 'You'll Never Know.' And
over here's our sorting plant where we. separate
genuine information from scurrilous rumors
about prominent people."
"And you burn the latter?" I asked.
"Oh, no," said Galosh, "we always send that
to the President. Hie rest, however, is taken to
our processing mills where it is spun out,
daily nebraskan
cross-carded and woven
realize that in the last
produced 13.2 metric tons
says our free society
totalitarian nations?
"But what do you do wi
Galosh looked surprised
course," he said. "Today,
America has more surplus
other country in the world.
"An enviable record,"
you attribute your success?
into plots. Do you
fiscal year alone we
of information? Who
can't compete with
th it?" I asked.
. "Why, we store it, of
thanks to our efforts,
intelligence than any
I said. "To what do
orthur hoppe
innocent bystander
"To the free enterprise system," said Galosh.
"Competition's the key. We now have 60
different agencies competing for intelligence.
Look at that marvelous scramble over there!
That's the CIA, the FBI and the IRS fighting
gallantly over a piece of intelligence, while the
poor Bureau of Weights & Measures Intelligence
Agency lurks on the side-lines, hoping for a
scrap. Frankly, that's the main problem we face:
There just isn't enough intelligence in this
community to go around,"
I thanked Galosh for his tour and asked if I
couldn't have a secret to take home as a souvenir.
"Certainly," he said. "Who's in charge here."
"Great!" I said. "Who is in charge here?"
"That," he said, clapping me warmly on the
back and ushering me out the gate, "is a real
secret for you."
(Copyright Chronici Publii-htriB Co. 1975)
page 5
...
