Speaks Out
Monday, August 24, 1998 Speaks Out
Speaks Out
The United States recently responded to terrorist bombings on U.S. embassies by bombing chemical plants in Afghanistan and Sudan. Do you feel that military strikes are appropriate methods of dealing with acts of terrorism?
“I don’t think so. If that’s the measure that we’ve come to, then we’ve obviously given up on trying to have a diplomatic relationship with these countries or trying to deal with these people in a rational matter. There has to be other ways. Military strikes don’t seem like they’re accomplishing much, because they just promote more violence.”
Adam Weintraub
Fourth-Year,
History
“You have to take a stance somewhere, and if you say we’re going to bomb people, though you might be killing innocent civilians there, you also have to take into account the people killed here. You have to send out your message in some way, and if they’re not going to understand it from conferences or professional meetings, then you have to take a stand in some way.”
Ani Tokat
Third Year,
American Literature and Culture
“I think that terrorism should be dealt with. I don’t think it should be tolerated. Period. I think that military strikes are a good countermove because we can’t just sit there and be slapped in the face. Sometimes you’ve got to strike back.”
Chris Rivas
Third Year,
Linguistics/Anthropology
“I think it’s difficult to tell when we, ourselves, become terrorists. Are we, in bombing them, also committing the same crimes that we accuse them of? I don’t necessarily support the bombings, but if the targets are isolated and easily identified, then maybe it’s better in the long run.”
Dane Mohl
Graduate,
Biochemistry
“I don’t think we need to bomb other countries. I think there are other ways of dealing with the problem. I think we should have more conferences.”
Rebecca Lewis
First-Year,
Undeclared
“I think we’re retaliating violence with violence, which I don’t think is very effective.”
Sarah Lee
Fourth Year,
Psychology


Comments
Post a comment