serving the students of the University of North Carolina at Asheville,
Volume 2, Number 6
Thursday, March 3, 1983
Nuclear arms freeze: Weigh the alternatives
By Sara Orozco
Lipinsky Auditorium hosted a
town meeting on the discussion of
the nuclear arms freeze on Thurs.,
Feb. 24, at 7:45 p.m.
Debating the issue were guest
speakers Dr. Dietrich Schroeer,
physicist at UNC-CH, and John H.
Morse, counselor to the U.S.
Defense Department. Each speaker
gave a ten minute introduction.
A panel consisting of Dick
Cullom, WISE radio. Bill Moore,
senior editor of The Asheville
Times, and Pat Smith of WLOS-TV
took turns questioning the speakers.
The audience then wrote questions
down on a slip of paper. The panel
read these questions to the speakers,
who in turn, commented. Question
ing also took place from the floor.
To conclude the meeting, both
speakers gave a two minute sum
mary of their stands on the issue.
Before proceeding into the actual
debate between the speakers, it
might be helpful to clarify exactly
what is the issue being discussed.
The nuclear arms freeze is, in
other words, private citizens saying
about further nuclear arms buildups
“enough is enough.” A freeze of
nuclear arms would mean that the
United States and the Soviet Union
would both begin an immediate and
complete halt to the nuclear arms
race. Along with the arms freeze,
both nations would also pursue ma
jor mutual and verifiable reductions
Dr. Dietrich Schroeer, physicist at
UNC-CH was one of the guest
speakers at the town meeting on the
Nuclear arms freeze debate held in
Lipinsky Auditorium Feb. 24.
Staff photo by Carol Whitener
in their nuclear warheads, missies
and other delivery systems. Sta
bility would be maintained through
annual inspections or the like. So
the argument here is, “Should the
United States negotiate a nuclear
arms freeze?”
Taking the pro-freeze side was Dr.
Dietrich Schroeer. John H. Morse
presented the opposing viewpoint.
Old track saved but new
sports facility in plans
By Elise Henshaw
Athletic director, Ed Harris has
scrapped plans to remove the track
at UNCA, and a different site is be
ing considered for the proposed
multi-purpose outdoor recreational
facility.
Harris said the university con
tracted to survey the area behind
the tennis courts as a possible loca
tion for the new facility which is to
include a soccer field, regulation
baseball field and a softball dia
mond.
When Harris disclosed the plan to
remove the track last fall, it met
with opposition from several faculty
members. They thought the track
was too costly an investment and
too great an asset to the university
to be destroyed.
“I am delighted to hear they are
not going to destroy the track and
John. H. Morse’s
argument against the nuclear
arms freeze: “After working on
defense issues for 55 years, I am cer
tain that neither side wants a
nuclear war. I think there is a better
way to achieve the objective. The
constitution sets forth that one
function of our government is to pro
vide for the common defense. In my
opinion, a nuclear arms freeze would
be impractical for the following
reasons:
1. There is no way to verify that
the U.S.S.R. has in fact halted
the production of nuclear arms,
Can we trust the Russians?
2 . We’re being completely ignorant
of our strong and capable
leaders. The nuclear arms freeze
handicaps the leaders of the
world.
3 . If the U.S. did have a freeze, and
the U.S.S.R. did not, that would
automatically put us in an in
ferior position to the Soviets.
4 . And finally, having a freeze
would destroy our deterence
with the U.S.S.R. Having
nuclear weapons is a mutual
threat to either side’s acutal use
of weapons.”
Dr. Dietrich
Schroeer’s pro-stand
on the nuclear arms freeze:
“If both the United States and the
Soviet Union already have enough
nuclear weapons to destroy each
other, then what’s the purpose of
producing more nuclear weapons?
“A freeze would not harm one side
more than another. The notion of
any one winning in a nuclear war is
nonsense. A war of that type is
mutual suicide.
“Another argument for having
the freeze is in the event of a crisis.
Having nuclear weapons is an incen
tive to use them. Each side has
enough weapons to destroy the
weapons of the other side. It’s a
matter of who strikes first. Having
a nuclear arms freeze among two
leading nations would discourage
the other world nations from turn
ing to nuclear weapons.
“Also there exists the possibility
of human errors and accidents.
There is no telling how human be
ings will react in a nuclear crisis.
“Finally, if a nuclear war were to
occur, it would be Virtually impossi
ble to provide sufficient medical care
for everyone injured.”
~J
are pursuing the idea of putting the
complex in another location,” said
Dr. Russ Reynolds, chairman of the
athletic committee.
An important consideration in
determining where to locate the
facility is the ability to utilize ex
isting facilities such as water, rest
rooms and parking. The area behind
the tennis courts “is a good site in
relation to the gym,” said Harris.
However, the survey showed a
major obstacle in the area. Three ci
ty sewer lines which didn’t show up
on any topographical maps were
discovered. “They are old but in use
lines,” said Harris. Also a Carolina
Power and Light Co. right of way
runs through the center of the pro
perty and power lines are there.
Harris said, “It will take an
continued on page 8
WW'-
Kafka
Poseidon, played byjloug Miller, expresses his thoughts while an assistant
jlayed by Kazuo Miyabara looks on in Arnold Wengrow’s Kafka,
See related story, page 6 Staff photo by Carol Whitener