Memorial day weekend means extra time with the family.  It is the christening of a new summer, along with some well-deserved time off work.  It means going to the ballpark, the barbecue, or the beach.  School children will soon be celebrating three months of freedom.

Freedom.  Yes, that’s what Memorial Day is all about.  This is the day we celebrate the lives of those who have gone to war to assure that we can enjoy the ballgames and barbecues.  This is the day we honor the young men and women who have endured the ultimate sacrifice in battle.  These are the young people who had their entire lives ahead of them, only to have all their dreams and possibilities ended in one cruel second.  For the girls not kissed, for the marriages that never happened, for the children not born, for the careers never realized, for the grandparents that never were, we pay homage to these brave young people.

Some say that war has never solved anything.  I don’t buy that argument.  Except for slavery, Fascism, Nazism and terrorism, I suppose that war hasn’t solved anything.  War is truly unfortunate, but there are bad guys out there.  They have been out there since the beginning of time and sometimes they need to be confronted.  Sometimes freedom-loving people are threatened and damaged to the point that they must confront violence with violence.   It happened at Pearl Harbor.  It happened again on September 11, 2001.  The cost of war in terms of human lives and national treasure is always unbearable and unthinkable, but the alternative of being ruled by madmen can never be acceptable to those who cherish liberty.

I know several young men and women who have already served one deployment in Iraq.  These are incredible people.  Well-spoken, caring, loving, and enthusiastic are these, our collective children.   I’m sure that they have always been that way, from Desert Storm, to the Siege of Khe Sanh, to Pork Chop Hill, to D-day, to the Argonne forest, to Gettysburg, to Bunker Hill.

Last semester a young veteran of the Iraq war was a student in my economics class at Winona State University.  Quiet and unassuming, he sat in the back of the class.  One day, after I found out about his military service, I made a statement to the rest of the class.  I said, “In the back of the class sits an Iraq war veteran.”  As the students looked back to recognize him, I further added, “This is a man among boys”.  As one who has enjoyed his freedom but never served in the military, I have only one thing to say to each and every one of you who serves or has served.  YOU ARE MY HERO!

In the May 9, 2005 issue of Newsweek reporter Michael Isikoff ran a short piece about inmate abuse at Guantanamo prison.  One sentence in that article indicated that U.S. interrogators at Gitmo had flushed a copy of the Koran down the toilet to irritate detainees.   According to Isikoff, the information came from an “internal military investigation.”

Within hours Imran Khan, an enemy of Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf and a respected cricket legend was reciting from the Newsweek article, claiming that the U.S. was desecrating the Koran.  This outraged many Pakistanis and the news quickly spread along the Arab “street”.  The news was particularly consequential in Afghanistan where fifteen people were killed in the resulting riots.

Newsweek has now retracted the story.  Isikoff says that his source has “backed away” from his original account and that Newsweek could “no longer stand by” it.  Administration officials were quick to blame the Newsweek article for sparking anti-American violence in Afghanistan and Pakistan.  White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan said, “The report had real consequences.  People have lost their lives.”

The Whitehouse is wrong.  Those who blame the liberal press are wrong. Radical Muslim extremists, not Newsweek, are responsible for this recent, tragic loss of life in the Arab world.

The report was bad journalism.  The single sentence appearing in Newsweek was a big mistake and regrettable, but it did not cost a single life.  The Koran is rightly considered by believers to be a holy book, as is the Bible and Vedic writings.  These books represent holy ideas, but they are books.  Books can be replaced.  Only irrational extremism values bound pages, no matter how holy, over the life of man.
Such extremism is indicated by the comments of computer teacher Muhammad Archad during an interview with Newsweek immediately after the riots.  Archad said, “We can understand torturing prisoners, no matter how repulsive, but insulting the Qur’an is like deliberating torturing all Muslims.  This we cannot tolerate.”  How ridiculous, how monstrous it is to say that human torture is preferred to the desecration of a book.

Newsweek’s mistake, as unfortunate as it was, is tolerable.  Even if Newsweek was correct and someone did flush the Koran, a violent response is not justified.  Twelfth-century attitudes like Archad’s are intolerable, inflammatory, and extreme.  The responsibility for these barbaric, visceral, and deadly responses to a single sentence in a magazine fall squarely on Muslim extremists, who hold a near-monopoly on much of the unrest, violence, and injustice in our world.

This week Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced the closing of 33 large bases and the realigning of another 29 major facilities.  Another 180 smaller installations will be closed or restructured.  Significant closures and personnel reduction in US bases overseas is also a key part of the Rumsfeld plan.  The closure and realignment proposal should save the government roughly $50 billion over the next twenty years.

As we move from the a cold war strategy to the threat of global terrorism the Pentagon is less likely to use facilities in the more isolated interior of country and more likely to deploy forces from the coasts.  In addition, while the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines have functioned separately in the past, they will be asked to operate seamlessly, often being deployed from the same base.  The US military must be leaner, meaner, and more mobile than ever before.

Key proposed closures include the Navy’s submarine base in Groton, CT, Fort McPherson in Georgia, the Pascagoula Naval station in Mississippi and Ellsworth Air Force Base in South Dakota.  The closure recommendations were sent to the Base Realignment and Closure Commission (BRAC), which will hold public hearings this summer before final closure decisions are enacted.  In the past roughly 85% of the closure proposals reviewed by BRAC have resulted in closings.

Politicians in the communities most directly affected by the closings have already ramped up the rhetoric.  Connecticut Senator Joseph Lieberman attacked the plan to close the
Groton, CT submarine base saying, “It is cruel and unusual punishment that Connecticut does not deserve and our national security cannot afford.”  Olympia Snowe the republican senator from Maine said of the proposal to close Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, “In arriving at these inexplicable decisions, the Defense Department and the Navy must have been operating in a fog so thick they couldn’t even see the facts in front of them.”  Particularly vulnerable is newly elected South Dakota republican John Thune, who claimed that he would be more able to prevent the closing of Ellsworth Air Force Base than Tom Daschle, whom he defeated last November.

The base closings will devastate many local economies in the short run.  Not only are military jobs lost, but also thousands of private sector workers are often employed at military bases.  Moreover, the spending of military people and their families supports many private businesses.  The process of economic recovery can take 15 years or longer but many communities experiencing closures in the past have recovered remarkably by diverting the facilities for private sector jobs.  One example is Larson Air Force Base in Moses, Washington a supersonic bomber base that was closed in 1966.  Today it boasts a 13,500-foot runway used for training by Japan Air Lines and Boeing.  It also has industrial sites and a community college.

In this author’s opinion, despite the short run pain and protesting of politicians, the recommendations of BRAC should be implemented.  The fact that the government is providing good paying jobs in a community is not an acceptable reason to keep a base open.  Using that logic the federal government should open a base in every American community!  We must remember that all government jobs are financed by private sector productivity; this isn’t manna from heaven!  American taxpayers deserve efficiency from the federal government and our military should be no exception.

North Korea.  Land of political repression.  Land of despotism.  Land of starvation.  Good old North Korea, virtually everyone’s top nominee for the worst nation on earth.

Heading this armpit of a country is Kim Jong Il, son of his despot father, Kim Il Sung.  At 5 foot two inches, Kim Jong Il wears platform shoes and “styles” his hear sticking straight up to appear taller.  He is such a punk.  In North Korea it’s all about KJI.  He runs the place at the point of a gun, protected by the military.  Always wary of assassination KJI leads a reclusive life, a necessary condition for sadistic dictators.  If you’ve got the stomach for it, you can click here to see a photo of KJI.

On the wall outside my university office I’ve got a satellite map that shows the world at night.  You see the bright lights in large cities, whereas farming areas in the western states are black.   Looking at the Korean peninsula you can literally see the demilitarized Zone (DMZ) on the 38th parallel between North and South Korea.  The entire country of South Korea is brightly lit but north of the line there is total blackness.  The contrast is so great that you can actually see the shape of the DMZ.  The darkness north of the DMZ is undeniable proof of KJI’s legacy of misery and coercion of his 21 million subjects.  Little of this concerns KJI.  His estimated net worth is over $4 billion.  He loves fast cars, and is a connoisseur of fine liquor and gourmet food.  He also keeps a harem of European and Asian sex slaves around his P’yongyang palace.

The only thing worse that a nutcase like KJI is a KJI with nukes.  The North Koreans indeed have a nuclear weapon and have successfully deployed a two-stage missile over the Pacific Ocean.  Some experts maintain that his two-stage missile has the capability of hitting San Francisco and other California cities.  A three-stage missile would be capable of a nuclear strike anywhere within the continental United States.  Equally threatened are Russia, Japan, South Korea, and all east Asian countries.  Without nukes, KJI is just some tin-horned dictator that the world can easily ignore.  With them he is exactly where he wants to be; front and center on the world stage.

For years South Korea, China, and the United States have bribed KJI with billions of whenever he threatens to use his nukes.  Much of the money has been earmarked to feed ordinary North Korean people, but no one is allowed in the country to monitor the distribution of the aid.  The food ultimately feeds KJI’s army and solidifies his power.  Recently international negotiations aimed at convincing KJI to do away with his nuclear capability have broken down.  The talks include the two Koreas, the United States, China, Japan and Russia.  Kim wants to deal with the US directly.  We refuse to give him that status.

It is time for all nations to refuse giving even humanitarian aid to North Korea.  Let KJI feel the pressure from his starving masses.  It is also time to consider some kind of a pre-emptive strike on his military facilities while he is still weak.  The world cannot delay its responsibility to put KJI out of the nuke business.  Failure to do so might make 911 look like a fireworks display in comparison.

On Wednesday, April 27, 2005 President Bush gave a major energy policy speech in which he called for additional oil and gas exploration in the United States, drilling for oil in Alaska’s ANWAR refuge, and the construction of many new power plants, including nuclear plants.  The problem is that he made virtually the same speech on May 17, 2001, the day after the National Energy Policy Development Group presented President him with a National Energy Policy Report.  The 2001 report had 105 recommendations, including those mentioned above.

So what happened between 2001 and 2005?  Nothing.  The “talk” has to stop.  The Indian and Chinese economies are at critical growth stages.  This will result in a permanent and increasing demand for oil, which will put upward pressure on energy prices for at least the next 50 years.  Only vast increases in the supply of energy will solve the problem, and only the private sector can solve this crisis.

Contrary to the beliefs of many, energy isn’t a free good.  It must be produced.  Oil must be pumped out of the ground or sea.  It must be refined and delivered to consumers.  Coal must be mined.  Electricity must be generated from coal, gas, oil, or nuclear sources.  Producing energy is work.  It is a legitimate and necessary business.  For the last thirty years the government has been guilty of both obstruction and inaction where energy production is concerned.

Conservation

Before discussing what the government should do to increase energy production, let’s talk about conservation.  Conservation is a legitimate part of the energy crisis puzzle.  If we have more fuel-efficient cars, planes, and busses, this slows the increase in the demand for energy, which both conserves energy and mitigates the growth rate of energy prices.  However, conservation is a “bit actor” in the total energy picture.  At best, conservation can only reduce the growth of US demand for energy.  No matter how many conservation measures are taken, energy prices will still rise.

Nevertheless, the Federal Government should, in my opinion, set challenging minimum gas mileage standards for automobiles sold in the United States.  It should also provide research and development funds to assist auto companies in producing more fuel-efficient cars, including hybrid cars, electric cars, and hydrogen-powered cars.  The auto companies have had a free pass on mileage requirements for too long.

Increased Energy Production

Enormous increases in energy production are the only solution to present and future energy problems.  I suggest a three-fold approach to solving the energy problem.

First, we need to “go Nuclear” in a big way.  Many more nuclear plants need to be constructed for electricity generation.  Nuclear power is safe, extremely efficient, and virtually pollution free.  We haven’t built a nuclear plant in over 30 years and this is nonsense!  A large increase in nuclear powered electric facilities could supply electricity for huge numbers of electric cars.  Instead of using coal and oil to generate electricity, our nuclear plants could be the main source of power for short-distance cars and the heating and air-conditioning of nearly all US homes and businesses.

The Federal Government needs to take the initiative and streamline the hurdles and licensing process for utilities that want to build safe, efficient nuclear energy plants.  The Feds also need to implement the safest plan technologically feasible to store and transport nuclear waste.  Once the plan is devised it needs to be implemented over the howls of well-meaning environmentalists.  Nuclear technology is safe and advanced.  Construction of additional nuclear facilities is a political problem, not a technological problem.

Second, we need to develop and drill for oil in all feasible locations within the United States.  Even after the nuclear initiative is complete, a large amount of oil will be needed for commercial trucking, agriculture, and aircraft transportation.  It behooves us to reduce our dependence on foreign oil for economic and geo-political reasons.

Third, mass transportation projects in major cities should be expanded and created.  Except in major US cities (over 8,000,000 in population) subways and trains simply don’t encompass enough of the geographic area of the city to be useful to the public.  Cities the size of Minneapolis, San Diego, Detroit, and Kansas City should have at least one east-west route and one north-south route for commuter trains.  Efficient busses can transport people from the commuter train stations to their residences.  It makes sense, and to modify the phrase of a popular movie, “if we build it, they will come!”

To conclude, the construction of many new nuclear electric generation plants is the essential element of any energy plan.  With these plants, even if no promising energy-saving technologies are discovered, we can substantially reduce our dependence of fossil fuels.  Without them we must hope for some new technological breakthrough, such as cars that run on water.  I don’t think we can afford to “hope” any longer, either for technological breakthroughs or for the rest of the world’s oil producers to increase their production.  It is time for the Federal Government to pass the legislation necessary to release the creativity and productivity of the energy sector.  It is also time for the citizens of this great country to pull their heads out of the sand and to finally realize how important energy production is to our jobs, families, businesses, and way of life.