Opinion .safes
--——————————
Nebraskan
Editorial Board
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Jeremy Fitzpatrick.. .Editor, 472-1766
Kathy Steinauer....Opinion Page Editor
Wendy Mott... ..Managing Editor
Todd Cooper.. ... Sports Editor
Chris Hop/ensperger... .Copy Desk ChieJ
Kim Spurlock......«.... .Sower Editor
Kiley Timperley...... . Senior Photographer
Pull out
U.S. presence not helping troops, Somalis
The Clinton administration is pursuing a flawed policy in
Somalia that should be halted before it costs any more
American lives.
Three American soldiers were killed in Somalia on Saturday
when their helicopter was hit by a rocket-propelled grenade. The
attack brings to 11 the number of U.S. servicemen killed in action
in Somalia.
A crowd of cheering Somalis surrounded the downed helicop
ter, holding up pieces of the wreckage. The Somalis then report
edly recovered pieces of charred flesh from the wreckage and
paraded them around a marketplace.
The Clinton administration responded to the attack with a
statement of continuing support for the use of U.S. troops in
Somalia.
“Somalia is on the road to recovery,” White House Press
Secretary Dee Dee Myers said. “We must not let this substantial
yet fragile progress to be threatened by the brutality of warlords
who would profit from the suffering of others and thwart the will
of the overwhelming majority of Somalis who seek peace and
reconciliation.”
President Clinton’s decision to leave U.S. forces in Somalia is
wrong.
The country is not on the road to recovery. And the presence of
U.S. soldiers will not force the Somalis to stop the violence in
their country.
U.S. troops should be withdrawn from Somalia or a clear date
for their departure should be set. If the Somalis wanted U.S.
forces in their country it would be different. But they do not and
as long as that is true there can be no U.S. solution to the problem
in Somalia.
When Uwc-Wilhclm Rakcbrand was gunned down in his
Florida rental car several weeks ago. newspapers blared
indignant headlines: Eight European tourists slain in
Florida in less than one year.
The European press denounced America. The American press
was astounded.
A couple weeks later, Florida natives killed another foreign
tourist. That makes nine. The headlines were smaller, but the
outrage was not. Florida’s governor suspended all tourist advertis
ing—at home and abroad. The state’s $31 billion industry was
endangered. The killing was out of control.
But then again, the killing has been out of control for years.
The only difference is that it’s been fellow Americans — not
Europeans — biting the bullet.
Last year, Florida reported nearly 2,000 murders — yet just 22
of them were non-residents, and less than a third of those were
non-Americans.
What all this leads to is a rather morbid conclusion: America is
at war with itself. What’s even more disturbing is that it takes the
deaths of a handful of foreigners, and the threatened loss of
money, before we even begin to take notice, much less call a
cease-fire.
The Chicago Tribune has taken a dead-aim approach to try to
curb the war: It’s publishing a front-page story for every child
killed in Chicago this year. But the message has yet to hit home.
The murder measure stands at SO, and it’s not slowing down.
Perhaps the war with murder already is over. Perhaps we’ve
lost.
— The Maneater
University of Missouri-Columbia
Staff editorials represent the official policy of the Fall 1993 Daily Nebraskan. Policy is set by
the Daily Nebraskan Editorial Board. Editorials do not necessarily reflect the views of the
university, its employees, the students or the NU Board of Regents. Editorial columns represent
the opinion of the author. The regents publish the Daily Nebraskan They establish the UNL
Publications Board to supervise the daily production of the paper. According to policy set by
the repents, responsibility for the editorial content of the newspaper lies solely in the hands of
its students.
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief letters to the editor from all readers and interested others.
Letters will be selected for publication on the basis of clarity, originality, timeliness and space
available. The Daily Nebraskan retains the right to edit or reject all material submitted Readers
also are welcome to submit material as guest opinions. The editor decides whether material
should run as a guest opinion. Letters and guest opinions sent to the newspaper become the
property of the Daily Nebraskan and cannot be returned. Anonymous submissions will not be
published Letters should included the author's name, year in school, major and group
affiliation, if any. Requests to withhold names will not be granted Submit material to the Daily
Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R St, Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448.
POHT 'MMS S\VKE
WfiN'frTCHML HWSXNR.
STBKEtfVsWp "*V
^eh4... cwtCiORvze
^ofcHoia.
Generation X
If Sideshow drummer Paul Tisdale
is a spokesman for Generation X,
we’ve got some serious rethinking to
do (DN, Sept. 22). Tisdale is wrong in
thinking there is no hope for our gen
eration, and he places the blame for
his lack of hope on the wrongpeoplc.
First, Tisdale says, “I don’t think
there is any hope for this generation.”
It’s hard to know what he means by
this. He himself hopes tQ achieve
creative success. He nopes new peo
ple will be exposed to his music. And
I think he hopes to sell some albums.
But 1 assume from the context of the
article that he means Generation X
has no hope to achieve the American
Dream, meaning financial success as
it is traditionally understood.
We look at a band like Nirvana,
which has profited from a society it
says it despises, and we scratch our
heads in bewilderment. Here isa wildly
successful band — and not just in the
creative sense—telling us there’s no
hope. The hypocrisy and naivete of it
is mind-boggling.
Second, Tisdale blames the wrong
people for his hopelessness: our par
ents and“former political administra
tions,” presumably those of Presi
dents Reagan and Bush. If anything,
both of these groups give him reason
10 nope.
America has never been about
“sharing the wealth.” It has been about
individual achievement. America’s
status as a beacon ofhopc to the world
came, for the most part, from an eco
nomic system that rewarded elTort
and encouraged people to stand on
their own two feet. And America is
great today because of self-reliant
individuals — including our parents
— who didn’t wait for somebody to
“distribute the wealth.”
And to say that the Reagan and
Bush administrations made Genera
tion X “directionless and shiftless” is
ridiculous. Let’s think for ourselves,
rather than listen to our president on
this one. The much-maligncd ’80s
were a time of increased opportunity
for all Americans — including the
minorities Tisdale accuses our par
ents of neglecting — as economic
statistics from that decade plainly
show. v
Our generation needs to abandon
the sort of sloppy thinking Tisdale
articulates. There are plenty of us in
Generation X who believe that “the
age-old American dream” is alive and
well. I hope our viewpoint will be
represented in future articles.
Todd Van Campen
Lincoln
Censorship
If Sam Kcpficld is trying for the
all-time complaint mail record for a
DN columnist, his latest lunacy will
certainly help his cause. Now he’s
— -
proposing we help relieve the univer
sity’s financial ills by chucking the
Affirmative Action Office (DN, Sept.
22).
Sam, some of us see a double stan
dard in this “censorship’’ issue con
cerning the conservative backlash to
such things as affirmative action and
diversity on campus. Hey, if people
on campus want to publ ish an altema
» —■ . • —i
David Badders/£>N
five newspaper or make a mock tax
return form, that’s fine. All of us with
our heads on straight don’t advocate
the censorship of any expression as
long as it isn’t violent or seditious.
Where was this outcry for free
speech from the conservative right
when Omaha for Decency, a group of
moralists, were trying to ban an ad
mittedly inappropriate but perfectly
legal 2 Live Crew album that wasn’t
even selling that well? Where was it
when a bunch of egotistical far-rights
in our Congress were trying to pass a
constitutional amendment to ban peo
ple from burning the flag?
I now see your conservative point.
Be it printed or spoken, when the
controversial speech comes from the
liberal left, it is obscenity and any
right-wing movement to crush it is
considered a crusade for these so
called “traditional” values. When the
situation is reversed, the speech is
justifiable and anything that tries to
challenge it is nothing more than a
fascist PC tirade.
For the most part, Sam, you’ve
rehashed nothing more than that pa
thetic plea to return to the good old
days before those God-awful ’60s. I
say let’s bring them back. Most of us
arc too young to remember the time
when a woman’s place was assumed
to be in the home, when anyone who
didn't kiss Joe McCarthy’s butt was
labeled a communist, or when Jim
Crow laws were in effect. Maybe if
we all saw firsthand that the aood old
days were only good to a few rich,
t
privileged, Caucasian males, we might
understand why we have things like
affirmative action today.
Scott Carpenter
junior
English
Safety
The DN has appropriately remind
ed us of the anniversary of Candice
Harms’ abduction. It is indeed a good
time for all of us to think about pre
ventative measures we can take against
assault, rape and other violent mmes.
The recent mugging of a friend of
mine is a fresh reminder that these
assaults continue to occur. However,
the assumption that to solve this issue,
we need merely to be careful and not
walk alone is asimplistic and ignorant
response.
Instead, I challenge the DN to deal
with the complicated. Yes, each indi
vidual must take precautions, but let
us also make an assertive effort to
improve and expand the entire com
munity’s response to these crimes.
The wonderful emergency telephones
around campus arc an excellent bc
