OCR Text |
Show VOMKCIE (D)IF There's a tunnel Editor: , "Crosswalk Catastrophe 7 Whether the editorial editor is fishing for replies or Mr. Eckhard A Prawitt's literary style is in demand as an example of bad satire, perhaps both. If Mr. Prawitt would get to bed one or two hours earlier he would possibly be awake enough m the morning to drive safely as well as to discover the underground crosswalk which has been dug at , the north end of the stadium parking lot. It has been there since the road was widened. I hope Mr. Prawitt will take the time to use the walkway as most students, whom I have observed, prefer the Prawitt method of getting to the other side of the street or as Mr. Prawitt describes it, "the ultimate challenge of survival." R. Brent Jensen ROTC logical Editor: I would like to add my 2 cents worth to the ROTC issue. First let me point out I'm not in any way under the control of the ROTC and hence can say what I please. My first and main point about the ROTC is this - it is none of the business of most of the people making the fuss whether the ROTC does or does not exist. They are being busy bodies poking their noses in where they have no business. If the History Department, for example, feels free to criticize the ROTC and asks that their standing be reduced, then it is logical to assume the ROTC people should be allowed to suggest that Roman History for example is of no practical use and that credit for that should be dropped. I am sure golf I and child development also could be rationalized into the same catagory. I am not suggesting these be dropped as credit courses, merely trying by example to show where busy bodyism leads if allowed to run rampant. Look, you meat heads, a strong military is mandatory to the United States or else you will lose all academic freedom and be free to follow the "party line" (or perhaps-let us say it softly-is that what our "comrades" want?) The people who voluntarily joined the ROTC are willing to defend your right to say what you please. Many of them may die so you can go on attacking your own defense. I graduated from the University of Louisville in 1959. Two of my 21 classmates are career Navy through NROTC and are both Lt. Cdr. USN on board two ships. One was a straight A student, Magna Cum Laude, the second in the entire school (he had one B in five years and only second as he had one credit hour less than another similar student). His job is navigator in the SSBN Pulaski, and thus third in line of command. He is responsible right now for some 20 men under him and within three years probably will be responsible for well over 100 In total responsibility he is equivalent to a full professor here except the full professor could hardly kill a whole ship (150 men) by a single goof. Credentials? The ROTC officers are teaching the students how to ,er ,fficers-There is n better (and presently no other) school than experience. The department head in the NROTC mIeXtmp'e U ""Weiit to the man who commands the USS New Jersey, some 2,000 odd men. I don't believe there is another department head here with that sort of responsibility. The instructors under him have lesser experience, but not one is as green as a new first year instructor. They are teaching a group of young men as best they can to do what those men have chosen to do for a living. If the critics can offer some constructive comments on how to better do this, they should speak up. Otherwise, I'd suggest they shut up. One main objective of the University is to help people learn the knowledge and skills of their chosen profession and that is exactly the goal of all ROTC. James H. L. Lawler What a cache Editor: We would like to encourage Pres. Fletcher to stock his office with good cigars and fine brandy (maybe some hot Postum to increase participation) so we can see whether the "chicken liberals" are only blowing more hot air or whether they're really serious this time. Hank Huey Jim Bradley Ed Muir ROTC offensive Editor: The three points of Dr. Demars' article defending the ROTC's affiliation with the university simply ignore the most important assertion made by the opponents of ROTC-viz., that the nature of a university and of the military are incongruous, such that it becomes offensive to house the two under the same roof. His first point merely says that the ROTC training is "desired and needed" by many students. I could claim to desire and need a lot of things, but that doesn't mean that a university ought to be the source for providing me these things. The fact is, most cadets "desire and need" ROTC because the draft is breathing down their necks they desire and need an alternative. Is this any reason to invest that alternative with the University's respect and authority by incorporating it into the University? Dr. Demars' second point is the claim that ROTC instruction is of "university quality" and should thus carry University credit. One might argue that activities of "university quality" should carry University credit, but even if one accepts this premise as reasonable, it does not follow that an organization which provides "university quality" activities should be moved onto the Campus as part of the University. Just because the ROTC can give a pretty good course in the History of Warfare does not justify setting it up as a second, one-course, Department of History. Such a procedure ignores the fact that the ROTC, as part of the military, is a political tool which has influence vastly surpassing anything to do with the History of Warfare! Dr. Demars' third point is that the ROTC is important to our "national defense efforts". So what? The opposition has never attacked the ROTC's university affiliation on the grounds that it doesn't strengthen the position of the military. The controversy has nothing to do with ROTC's usefulness. The question is rather, "What has the military to do with a university?" Ideally, the climate of a university should be one of free inquiry. It should be as devoid as possible of governmental influence, and of authnrit The ROTC is, fay 2 governmental and al this system i 11 "defense" 0f thefo' should be set uptC!?-' conjunction with nni, that the unh'tft. place where premL the defense needs are examined- not a the Pentagon's!: practiced. ns W Larry D. Livigs(on Music barbarism Editor: Here is my signature for , Mi tion against Union lawn rausir doesn't matter if it is Bt Airplane or other good musicTh audience is indeed "captive" moment music goes beyond h, ears of people who want to ha, it, it becomes noise pollution We are battered by unasked-lo, music in every store, restaurant bar, elevator and waiting room k town. Does the Union lawn have to fall prey to such barbarism tMi Cameron Wilson Wake Up Editor: Please inform Eckhard 4. Prawitt that in his excitement to cross "the new street just south ol the Field House" that he his overlooked the tunnel that ni underneath the street, and that it has been there all year long. Perhaps Eckhard A. Prawitt (and many of his fellow underciassrnen) really are not as awake as they would like us to believe. Ken Burton Uh-huh!! Editor: The past few weeks the Chronicle has seen numerous letters and articles going to pal lengths to support the milituj establishment and prove that il is essential to national security.il anyone contesting this?? The question is not whether militarj-training militarj-training should exist, only whtt Most pathetic of all are conclusions the authors draw. TH most common sounds someN like this: "Since I have shown the military is vital to orf security, it should be clear V ROTC MUST be included in i University curriculum." Yeah. Uh-huh. Love is service Editor: . ,u I have an objection to W ROTC which is not often rai believe that the ROTC is co" to the Christian ethic of I J enemies and the policy the other cheek. You don someone by blowing his or napalminghim or nerve pfl him. The Christian .deal and love is service. Christian society it serving its enemies nfl killing them. I advot . & unilateral disarmament v United States as a sign ( will toward the' enemy, this means the destruction of our (continued on page 3) f DUE rPffidDIPILIE i (continued from page 2) vine the ROTC from the u would be a positive initial fp toward disarmament and the Sh of the military complex. dcath John W. B. Smith Some friend Ed would like to have conclusive evidence that Miss Heidi Sorenson Ifair and immoral due to her tf riing oftheASUUcam- Pafam her best friend and I lost. If she is unfair and immoral, she is not a very smart rigger or else Uisnotaverygootfnend. Yea Gerlach Editor. Congrats to L. R. Gerlach, assistant professor of history, the gallant! knight defending the ' freedoms of the students of this institution. Hooray for the abolishment of ROTC, the training facility for officers in the defense and security mechanisms of this country, the system that guarantees our right to educate ourselves in whatever field we ,hnn Good riddance to - destry that right, communist or history professor. Richard T. Maughan Thanks Segel Editor: I would like to commend the Chronicle on its tribute to Kerry Segel.. Certainly no one is more deserving of such praise than he. More than any other single student Kerry is responsible for the University's involvement in . community and minority problems. I am certainly sorry to see him leave the University. Steve Gunn We're going Editor: Just a note to those right-wing factions who persist in referring to those of us who belong to the liberal elements as members of the Students for a Democratic Society. Go to hell, we would not belong to such an apathetic organization. Geroge H. Milligan Craig M. Peterson to teach that subject, who is'' Do you suggest that an assistant professor of history should teach advanced military tactics and marksmanship? Maybe a music professor would do as well teaching at the medical school in courses such as molecular biochemistry. As for nonacademic classes, how about those physical education classes? They really stimulate thinking. Mr. Gerlach, with all due respect to your position as a faculty member, I wonder what motives you have for abolishing ROTC. The communists would like to do as much. Freedom of education is just that, and inasmuch as ROTC is not imposed, but rather voluntary, let the cadets choose their courses of study. By the way, I remember as a freshman that I was required to complete something like nine hours or more of history. Strange that you should mention that military science students have little to say about their courses. I say let ROTC stay on campus as long as there is enough interest to keep even one section open. Freedom to educate is a basic right, and I will be the first to oppose anyone who tries to discipline and uniforms on campus. Let's include the campus cops, the marching band, the varsity athletics, all performing groups whatsoever, since we are opposing imposed dress standards. Perhaps we should abolish history courses as well. History is I dead. Nothing can be done about water gone under the bridge. Since history is dependent on the military system for a very great part of its course, let's abolish both the cause and effect and eliminate all controversy. Mr. Gerlach, as a professor of history, perhaps you can project your thoughts past the end of your nose and see where the United States would be without a substantial military system. And maybe you can suggest a way of providing adequate educational facilities for all the volunteers who participate in ROTC programs all over the country. If the officers who teach military science are not qualified |