Guardsman - Opinions

Volume 137, Issue 8

Opinions

Yellow Ribbons

STAFF EDITORIAL

COLLEEN CUMMINGS / GUARDSMAN

The minute San Francisco is out of sight, they’re visible everywhere. Magnetic yellow ribbons are plas-tered on cars, office buildings and homes; yet, few cars in San Francisco possess these $4 “Support the Troops” ribbons.

There is intense opposition to the war in San Francisco and it overshadows the ability to support our men and women who are fighting in the Middle East. This brings about the question: Is it still possible to support the troops and oppose the war? Absolutely. These should be two separate issues: the war, and those fighting it.

“Support our troops” does not mean you must side with the Bush administration. Some might argue that it is unethical to protest against a war while Americans are fighting and dying, but this war is the main source of misery for our troops.

Blind acceptance of the government’s policies when we would otherwise disagree will not save our troops. There is no reason to support the war, because it does not benefit the troops.

On Jan. 26, President Bush asked for $80 billion more to go toward war costs in Iraq and Afghanistan. “First, our troops will have whatever they need to protect themselves and complete their mission; and second, the United States will stand with the Iraqi people and against the terrorists trying desperately to block democracy and the advance of human rights,” he said.

While initially these costs may seem to benefit the troops, Bush has not specified where these monies will be spent. It is unclear whether these funds will be used to develop a clear strategy in Iraq. "We have never heard a clear plan from this administration for ending our presence in Iraq,” House Minority leader Nancy Pelosi said.

Furthermore, when — and if — our troops return home, they and the rest of America will have to face a glaring deficit for years to come.

While our troops are fighting, however, it would be unjust not to support them. To ignore the fact that good people (many of whom we love) are dying every day would be completely callous.

The monies derived from the “Sup-port the Troops” ribbons are said by various organizations to go directly to the troops and their families, not to war costs. Displaying these ribbons does not indicate an endorsement of the war, but it does show support for our troops who are struggling to survive a conflict they did not start.

General Douglas MacArthur, a man not unfamiliar with the realities of war, summed it up this way: “The soldier above all others prays for peace, for it is the soldier who must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war.”

Two Party System

BY JOSH LEHMAN
Contributing Writer

JOSEPH SHARKEY / SPECIAL TO THE GUARDSMAN

I remember the first time I voted just like it was four years ago.

I saw Ralph Nader speak during the months prior to the election and was pleasantly surprised. The hope for a third party seemed especially viable during that election cycle and I was excited to think I could vote for representatives that had cohesive, progressive ideas driving their campaigns. I felt I understood what a representative republic was all about.
That all changed in 2004. I, like many past supporters of the Green Party, defected to the Democrats. It wasn’t that I felt the Democratic Party had come to represent my interests more closely; I was simply scared to death about another four years with President George W. Bush.

The Bush administration charged into Iraq under the pretext of protecting the world from imminent physical threat. Now, almost two years after the initial invasion, the rhetoric about physical threat has fallen to rhetoric about democratizing the world and securing world markets. The administration downplayed some of the legitimate economic concerns that fueled the invasion, and in doing so they hurt their own credibility. I cannot feel properly represented by an administration that I do not trust.

I voted for Kerry because he met my two basic requirements: he was less threatening than Bush and he was the only candidate I felt could possibly beat him.

We are a nation that boasts of itself as a model for democracy around the world. We pride ourselves on creating an equitable government that struggles to leave none of its citizens behind. We live in a republic whose political leadership was intended to reflect the complexity of its population, but Americans have historically had only two realistic options at election time.

I would like to point out that in order to have a choice you need at least two options (i.e. to be or not to be). This is what we have with our two-party system — the lowest possible number of options. I think we can do better.

COMING IN

Faculty Poll

Has modern technology helped you to be a better teacher?

Yes: 81% (13 out of 16

No: 19% (3 out of 16)

"Yes, I use the WebCT, which keeps all the online quizzes and discussions for my class. It’s an easier way to answer student questions and view the grades online.”
Diana Markham, science

“Yes, technology has helped me become a better teacher. Graphic calculators and computers have helped me especially since I am a math teacher. I have to be precise with my work.”
John Veroksy, math

“It’s a tool ... if you aren’t a good teacher, technology won’t make you one.”
Asatar Bair, economics

ON THE RECORD

What’s more important, money or love?

Jason Mitchell