Letters to the Editor

Bombing not answer to suffering in Kosovo

Peace will not come to Kosovo as long as NATO forces continue to drop millions of dollars of bombs, missiles and F-117 Stealth Nighthawks into Serbia. Our morally bankrupt leader President Clinton calls our bombing campaign on Serbia a "moral imperative." I agree that something must be done to end the suffering in Kosovo now, but bombing is not the answer. In fact, since the bombings began last week, more than 100,000 Kosovar Albanians have fled into neighboring countries, with most of the refugees fleeing to destitute Albania.

I was a missionary in Albania last summer, and the country is so poor that it’s own people are starving — what are they going to do with 100,000 refugees? My missionary friends in Albania report that they, along with the United Nations and related church relief groups, are overwhelmed in their attempt to help all the refugees.

Why is our government spending millions of dollars on bombing Serbia — supposedly to help the Kosovar Albanians — yet not aiding the Kosovar refugees when they need us most? Since the bombing began last week, the Albanian Kosovars have suffered more, and innocent Serbian women and children are dying and losing their homes because of the NATO air strikes. The resources used to mount an aggression on Serbia should be used to solve this conflict diplomatically.

"We will not give up Kosovo, even if we are bombed," said President Milosevic to Madeleine Albright on Feb. 23. Haven’t we learned our lesson yet? The Nazis could not bomb England into submission in World War II 50 years ago. The United States could not bomb the North Vietnamese into submission 30 years ago. And NATO will not be able to bomb Milosevic into submission now. For the sake of the helpless Kosovars and Serbians, as well as the men and women of our armed forces, I pray that the bombings stop now and that our leaders negotiate a peaceful settlement before more innocent blood is shed.

Hector Firoglanis
senior-biobehavioral health

After reading the Collegian article, "Protesters say ‘no’ to beef," I was outraged. The article was extremely biased, not presenting both views of the story. The article did not cover why the groups of students were protesting.

A vegetarian diet saves our water from being polluted and our forests from being cut down to create grazing land. A person who consumes meat has a 50 percent chance of experiencing a heart attack, whereas, a vegetarian has a 4 percent chance. Most importantly, the meat industry exploits animals. None of this was mentioned in the article.

I went and experienced the Beef Expo. The conditions of the animals were not as awful as factory farms, where animals cannot move in their crates, but the animals were in no way under good conditions.

I experienced a young girl smacking a cow around. The cows could walk around, but they were in a lot of manure. There were farmers around them. I reached my hands out for the cows to sniff, and they quickly walked away. They were afraid. At the end of the expo, I revisited the cows with no farmers around. They were no longer afraid. They came directly to me. They rubbed their faces against my hands. They squashed together so they could all be within my reach. Cows are just like our pet dogs and cats, but for some reason it’s OK to eat them.

The Collegian’s coverage of the protest didn’t present both sides of the story.

Erica S. Rohrbach
sophomore-human development and family studies

As we come to and pass yet another Undergraduate Student Government election day, I see more clearly than ever that money is power. During the past few weeks, one couldn’t move through campus without seeing blatant examples of this. Candidates were wearing T-shirts with their names on them, handing out money and free food and plastering their faces on millions upon millions of fliers, cards and the like. The students know that all of their campaign promises and ploys are as empty as the conversation at a fraternity party.

Because Penn State President Graham Spanier didn’t get the extra money he begged the state legislature for, all the campaign promises would require raising tuition to keep them. The future Ross Perots of our campus understood this and decided to try to buy votes by dipping into their trust funds or asking mommy and daddy for a few thousand dollars. I guess love for this school and its students are measured in dollar amounts. Sorry Penn State, it seems I don’t love you because I don’t have that kind of money to toss around. Something has to be done, or all of our future presidents and vice presidents will be snotty rich kids. My question is, how representative of our population is this?

Chris Steinmeier
sophomore-English