2003 CPEO Military List Archive

From: CPEO Moderator <cpeo@cpeo.org>
Date: 19 May 2003 15:57:48 -0000
Reply: cpeo-military
Subject: [CPEO-MEF] Out of step
 
The following editorial is in response to another editorial titled "Out
of Step", originally published in the San Diego Union-Tribune on May 13,
2003
(http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/uniontrib/tue/opinion/news_mz1ed13top.html).

This letter, as well as several other responses to "Out of Step," can be
viewed online at:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/uniontrib/sat/opinion/news_mz1e17morele.html
____________________________________________________

California
THE SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE
EDITORIAL
May 17, 2003

Your editorial stance  that the Department of Defense doesn't need a
general waiver from environmental laws  is a step in the right
direction, but it doesn't go far enough. The statement that "if national
security were threatened  then the military would have a good case for
exemption," postulates that "national security," whatever that is, is
more important than the land, water and air in which we live. I do not
agree.

I think that if the military cannot protect us from the devastation of
our natural resources, then it has failed to defend our national
security. The "common" in "common defense" is our environment. Any time
the Department of Defense declares it needs an environmental waiver, it
has declared itself impotent to provide for our national security.

JIM RICKER

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/uniontrib/sat/opinion/news_mz1e17morele.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  Prev by Date: [CPEO-MEF] Senate Calls for Perchlorate Study
Next by Date: [CPEO-MEF] san pedro alert
  Prev by Thread: RE: [CPEO-MEF] Life Cycle Costs and Military Housing
Next by Thread: [CPEO-MEF] san pedro alert

CPEO Home
CPEO Lists
Author Index
Date Index
Thread Index