ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1995, Roanoke Times
DATE: Monday, December 4, 1995 TAG: 9512050004
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-8 EDITION: METRO
REGARDING President Clinton's case for the Bosnia mission:
He is asking for the support of the American people in sending U.S. soldiers to Bosnia to enforce a tentative peace agreement reached in Dayton. He claims this is necessary in order to bring peace to Europe, support NATO and bring relief to the many innocents who suffer from this horrible and lengthy civil war. Surely, this should be a noble cause.
However, what is the vital U.S. interest that justifies the potential shedding of the blood of American servicemen and women who volunteered to defend our country? Agreed, people of the former Yugoslavia are suffering and beg for relief. Agreed, this war should be very troubling for Europe, especially for our NATO allies of Italy, Greece and Germany.
The United States should do all it can to bring the fighting to an end - short of risking American lives.
What makes it more desirable for American soldiers to enforce this peace than those of other NATO countries with legitimate security concerns? Those countries are providing two-thirds of the I-Force, but why not all? Unfortunately, the answer has little to do with why members of our armed forces volunteered to wear their country's uniform.
Clinton helped to prolong and aggravate the struggle by refusing to lift the arms embargo on the Bosnian Muslims, even after Congress urged such action by resolution. Now, by playing peacemaker and diplomat, he can right his past wrong, prove to the world the United States is still the policeman, score a foreign-policy success for political points at home and do a great humanitarian deed. And the words to say to wives, husbands or children of soldiers who die in this operation? "They did it for their country."
This rings hollow. Bosnians deserve peace. If the accord holds, the nations to enforce it should be their neighbors - those with a true national interest in seeing it work. Clinton could have done a much greater service to all parties involved by brokering an agreement with NATO enforcement without forces from this hemisphere. The other NATO nations are certainly capable of the task, as evidenced by their majority role in the operation. It seems American forces are being thrown in, not for purposes of operational success or a U.S. vital interest, but because Clinton wants them there. Is that worth dying for?
TIMOTHY J. KEEFER
BLACKSBURG
Pipeline may upset nature's balance
I AM a student at the Roanoke Valley Governor's School, and I am writing this letter in reference to your Nov. 17 article (``Va., N.C. congressmen join anti-pipeline effort'') on the Lake Gaston pipeline.
I believe that building this pipeline isn't right. Just because Virginia Beach is a major source of tourism for Virginia doesn't mean it can do as it pleases. It is taking away the resources that Lake Gaston has provided for us for its own growth. The lake provides recreation, as well as work for many individuals.
The pipeline also would have an effect on the hydrologic cycle. To move water from an inland freshwater lake to a basin close to the Chesapeake Bay would affect the balance of nature.
CHRISTOPHER POHLAD-THOMAS
FERRUM
Put the ponies on parade
SURELY, with all the talent available to Roanoke Valley's parade organizers, a way could be found to let children see horses in the parades. The organizers' logic for the decision simply doesn't add up (Nov. 17 article, ``Riders hope to jump over horse ban''). You don't eliminate all floats because of one drunken driver pulling a float or ban all bands because a baton twirler hits a bystander!
Why not open the parades to horse clubs that can organize their own members and will agree to certain conditions to provide for the safety of spectators, parade participants and themselves? The November newsletter of the Roanoke Valley Horsemens Association published a listing of 26 horse clubs in the local area. These clubs consist of dedicated, knowledgeable and conscientious horse people, including college professors, civic leaders, prominent business and professional people, and professional horse trainers.
How about it, parade organizers? Would you be willing to consider initiating discussions now for the 1996 Christmas parades? Let's work together to give our children the opportunity to see horses in 1996!
RONALD C. SMITM
SALEM
Timely response is state's policy
YOUR NOV. 15 editorial (``Hello? Anyone there?'') incorrectly accuses me of being uncooperative with The Roanoke Times. The Virginia Council on Child Day Care and Early Childhood Programs is alert to Gov. George Allen's directive to be responsive to inquiries made by all of Virginia's consumers. That includes the Times.
During the week of Oct. 30, I spent at least two hours on the phone with your reporter, Leslie Taylor, for her article (Nov. 2, ``Small change; big impact''). In addition, I spoke with her a couple days later. At that time, I faxed a copy of the Auditor of Public Accounts report that she requested. I spent another two hours on the phone with an Associated Press correspondent. I had difficulty reaching him and called him at home at 7 p.m. I spoke with him for about 20 minutes and again, at his request, the following morning. On Nov. 20, I answered numerous questions from Taylor, from 6:15 p.m. until 6:55 p.m.
The council and the Department of Social Services spent several hours before and after the Head Start press conference in Roanoke in an effort to resolve issues raised by the press and parents. When dealing with in-depth questions that require research, as these Head Start cases do, we request that the question(s) be given and clarified by staff so that we can provide accurate, well-researched answers.
Your editorial writer called the council when I was out of town at a meeting, and later when I was out of the office at a meeting. Your rush to judgment and haste to publish appear to have blinded you to the conscientious manner in which the Allen administration responds to the press and consumer concerns. When I did reach the editorial writer, I answered questions and faxed numerous letters confirming the validity of the two-year plan that the council amended with the approval of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
ELIZABETH RUPPERT
Executive Director, Council on Child Day Care and Early Childhood Programs
Commonwealth of Virginia
RICHMOND
Pushing more industry on Glenvar
REGARDING your Nov. 10 news article (``Not here, Glenvar residents say to growth'') on the Glenvar rezoning meeting and Tim Gubula and his Economic and Tourism Development Committee that met at Glenvar High School with their charts, maps and studies with graphs to dupe local citizens into several more large industrial-zoned areas:
How many people on this committee live in the Glenvar area? How many have been inconvenienced by existing and ever-increasing traffic, especially when rerouted from Interstate 81 through two-lane U.S. 11/U.S. 460? Remember this spring when the sinkhole developed on I-81? Remember when the tractor-trailer truck spilled several tons of grapes? Both times, the area came to a standstill. Are their wells and drinking water as stressed and as much of a health hazard as Glenvar's? Do they want to attend church across the street from an industrial park?
Already, the area's infrastructure is stressed. We don't even know the impact the new Valley Tech Industrial Park and Rusco will have on the area. And they want us to have more?
Never mind the committee's other agenda of fostering tourism in the area. Who is going to want to camp and explore at Dixie Caverns, Camp Roanoke (where county-sponsored renovations are under way), the new Spring Hollow Dam and surrounding areas if it's one big industrial lot?
Never mind the issue of property values! Our community has had very little turnover in housing. And when a house has gone on the market, it has been snapped right up. Why? Because people want to relocate in our area to escape what is being proposed. Glenvar is finally getting a middle school, and the committee is going to drive people away with rezoning. And stop trying to sneak one by the citizens by only notifying adjacent landowners and not soliciting local input.
The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors shouldn't sell us out to the highest bidder. Please vote no to industrial rezoning in the Glenvar corridor.
SHIRLEY T. SUITS
SALEM
LENGTH: Long : 150 linesby CNB