As a college senior at Rice University, I take exception to the assertion in your Nov. 12 cover story, “Generation 9-11,” that “before September 11, American college students were remarkably insular.” Yes, recent events have altered the mood on campus (as they have everywhere else), but it is simplistic to rely on sparse anecdotal evidence to infer that we have just now started to care about developing an “intellectual framework for learning and understanding.” From my perspective, the terrorist tragedy has only strengthened an already present intellectual engagement with the world. We don’t have to conduct sit-ins or participate in rallies to be interested in politics: both before and after September 11, I can attest that discussion around the dinner table and in dorm rooms here focused more on current events than on entry-level salaries. The authors of your article acknowledge, “It’s always tricky to generalize about a generation.” Perhaps they should have heeded their own advice. Kevin Askew Houston, Texas
In “Generation 9-11,” your coverage did not fully represent my generation. My generation consists not only of students attending the University of Michigan, and it is certainly not illuminated by posed pictures. Since September 11, colleges have responded in different ways to the tragedy. Unlike Michigan, Wabash College played its football game on that Saturday. We did not give in to terrorists. We continued, and continue, to work for an education. Our generation is the generation that will fight ignorance with knowledge. My generation will find a cause worth fighting for, and then, instead of reading history, we will make it. Jacob Pactor Crawfordsville, Ind.
When I saw your cover story that labeled today’s youth “Generation 9-11,” it struck me as an inappropriately restrictive term because the evil that occurred on September 11 affected every living American. Our relatively carefree lives have been altered by high-security alerts and the realization of the depth of our enemies’ hatred. Although today’s youth will be called on to secure our future, I hold a separate sympathy for America’s seniors, especially veterans and Holocaust survivors. After all they have endured, it is tragic that they must witness this kind of evil at the end of their lives. Beth Hirschfield Chicago, Ill.
Our Grave New World
There is one thing that’s been bothering me about the newfound patriotism in the United States. From President Bush on down, people keep saying “God bless America” and “God protect America.” But how does this make our neighbors and allies feel? Shouldn’t Britain, Canada and every other peace-seeking nation be blessed and protected too? Perhaps a better way to end a speech is to say, “God bless America and all peaceful people in the world.” I still fly my American flag outside my home, but next to it are a flag with a peace symbol and a picture of our planet. After all, shouldn’t global peace be our ultimate goal? Dorothy Henry Milwaukee, Wis.
The answer to the security question at the airports does lie with federal employees, but not the kind of employees most people are discussing. The answer is the military. We need to get rid of the incompetent, low-paid and bored screeners used today and replace them with professional soldiers. As part of each soldier’s tour of duty, he or she should be required to spend three months working as an airport security screener. By rotating these soldiers out every three months, which would keep them fresh and on their toes, we could significantly reduce the risk of the security lapses we read about every day. We don’t need private firms, and we don’t need federal employees who cannot be terminated for ineptitude. We need 28,000 professionals. John W. Schmitz Park Ridge, Ill.
In April 2000, the National Transportation Safety Board recommended that video cameras be installed in all cockpits. Video recordings would have helped the NTSB solve many accident investigations, including EgyptAir Flight 990. Video from the four hijacked planes on September 11 would have provided helpful information for investigators about the methods the terrorists used to take over the planes, who led the takeovers and whether passengers fought back. Now we have yet another crash, this time in the New York City borough of Queens. It’s a no-brainer: the FAA should mandate video recorders immediately. But pilots complain that video recorders would be an invasion of their privacy. We have video cameras in practically every convenience store in the nation in case someone shoplifts a bag of chips, but not a single video camera in cockpits. Aren’t the lives of airline passengers more important than a bag of potato chips? Matthew J. Barry Issaquah, Wash.
There has been much debate in the past month about whether America should continue bombing Afghanistan during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. Why debate? This is war! If George Washington had decided not to cross the Delaware because it was Christmas night, our country might not exist. Why is everyone so worried that we might offend someone? Were the terrorists representing the Taliban on September 11 concerned about offending us? Chris Reid Dothan, Ala.
New York’s skyline has a history of many and frequent deletions and additions. To most of the very large American population now 50 and older, the World Trade Center’s mere 30-year presence did not qualify it as a symbol of our country (“Up From the Ashes,” Nov. 12). I hope that designers and decision makers avoid succumbing to the emotion and hype of those who declare, “We’ll show them; we’ll rebuild it bigger than ever.” That bravado just generates more resentment and supports the opposition’s claims of “overbearing America.” Yes, New York needs more commercial structures built to manageable size, improved safety standards and new communications requirements. However, it makes no sense to resurrect structures that have been called the twin phallic symbols of the American ego. Barbara J. Hatzel Fair Lawn, N.J.
John Barry’s assertion that “a ‘radiological weapon’–a conventional explosive device used to scatter radioactive particles–would be nearly as devastating as an actual nuclear bomb, producing fallout that could render an American city uninhabitable for years” is wrong and needlessly alarming (“Priority: Pakistan’s Nukes,” war on terror, Nov. 12). There is no comparison between the potential destruction caused by a nuclear bomb and a radiological weapon. The amount of energy released by even a small nuclear bomb–obtained by fissioning or splitting apart atoms of uranium or plutonium–exceeds by many times the explosive power of even the largest conventional bombs. Radiological weapons, by contrast, rely on conventional explosives such as TNT or even ammonium nitrate to spread radioactive materials in an effort to contaminate people and property and sow fear and panic. A hypothetical radiological weapon employing a large quantity of highly radioactive spent reactor fuel, and detonated under optimal weather conditions in a dense urban area, could potentially kill several thousand people, injure many more and require extremely costly and time-consuming decontamination procedures. But because of the danger and complexity associated with handling spent fuel, radiological weapons are more likely to incorporate smaller quantities of less radioactive substances and, for this reason, do less damage if actually used. It’s also worth noting that explosives are not necessary to spread radioactive contamination. Most experts agree that while the potential for use of either type of weapon is still relatively low at present, terrorists seeking to employ radioactive materials in weapons will find it far easier to construct radiological weapons than bona fide nuclear bombs. Stephen I. Schwartz, Publisher Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Chicago, Ill.
Looking for Laughter
LBJ: The No-Win War
can
It does not come as a surprise to me that LBJ felt as he did about the war in Vietnam. My letters home from South Vietnam in 1966-67 suggest that we knew exactly what the situation was–that is, that the chances of complete success were limited. I am sure LBJ hoped for a Korean War type of settlement. However, the North Vietnamese would not settle for a divided country. Still, LBJ did make an additional stand against communism and totalitarianism, as JFK wanted. JFK reportedly said, “Vietnam is the place.” Would the dominoes have fallen without intervention in South Vietnam? Of course, we will never know for sure now. Still, as author Michael Lind has argued, the American war in Vietnam served a useful purpose, and it was necessary. Michael D. Wittenwyler Madison, Wis.
When Hormones Go Haywire
Thank you for your story " ‘It’s Not Your Fault’." I have PCOS, a heartbreaking disease that makes achieving pregnancy difficult, if not impossible. There are a lot of us with this disease, and we all share the same symptoms: excess hair, obesity, lack of menses, infertility. Many doctors know almost nothing about what plagues us or how to treat it. Please help us to bring this condition to the attention of the medical profession by running more articles like this one, articles that show how common PCOS really is, and how much attention it deserves. Few people realize that sufferers are prone to such life-threatening conditions as diabetes, high blood pressure (which I already have at 26) and heart disease. We need to get the word out, and you have helped. Michele Combs Skullbone, Tenn.
