The EU

Google says the EU requires a notice of cookie use (by Google) and says they have posted a notice. I don't see it. If cookies bother you, go elsewhere. If the EU bothers you, emigrate. If you live outside the EU, don't go there.

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Harvard and ROTC

The issue of Harvard and ROTC came up again in today's Boston Globe.  The reporter, Tracy Jan, gives us an overview of Harvard President, Drew Gilpin Faust's Press Conference yesterday.

And, of course, the topic of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, came up.  One wonders if it would have come up if there was ROTC on the Harvard campus?  Here are the key paragraphs from the story.
Harvard’s president, Drew Gilpin Faust, speaking the day after the US Senate declined to take up a measure that would have repealed the “don’t ask, don’t tell’’ policy, said vestiges of antimilitarism on campus dating to the Vietnam War are largely gone and she would now welcome the opportunity to “regularize our relationship’’ with the armed forces.

“We are very much looking forward to the end of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell,’ ’’ Faust said.  “It will be a very important moment to us when that happens.’’

Faust’s comments on the university’s relationship with the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps came during a wide-ranging discussion with reporters and editors at the Globe, kicking off a day of events at which she sought to highlight the university’s contributions to the city of Boston.
Frankly, I don't care if Harvard has ROTC.  I would be gladdened if Seccretary of Defense Robert Gates issued a directive to each of the Services and all DoD agencies, directing them to de-fund all contacts with Harvard, including sending students to the JFK School.  If ROTC is not good for Harvard, because of DADT, surely sending Colonels and Navy Captains and high ranking civilians to Harvard is wrong.  Sure, Harvard is a distinguished university, with a distinguished faculty—the second oldest on the continent—but still, if they want to demonstrate rectitude, we should help them.  The Viet-Nam War is long over, the original cause of their discomfort.  The current excuse is just that.  It is an excuse.

Maybe DoD should even stop taking political appointees from the Harvard Staff.  The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, The Honorable Ashton Carter, must be extremely discomforted by DADT.  If he submitted his resignation now he could be back teaching at Harvard with Professor Larry Summers at the start of the new term.  On the other hand, if he stalls around, the US Congress could kill DADT, or sufficiently modify it, in the lame duck session in December, after the Secretary of Defense reports out on his studies of the impact of changing DADT, obviating the need to show the strength of his convictions.  If Congress should fumble this he should show the courage of the Faculty's convictions and resign and go home.

Regards — Cliff

In the interest of full disclosure, my Brother, then a GS-15 or an SES, attended the short program.  An Air Force Colonel, who had been a "personnel" officer before she came to work for me, and went on to gain two stars on a totally different career path (ending up as a Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations at No Such Agency), was sent off to Harvard JFK School for a year.  An Army Colonel who, in retirement talked me into coming up here in my own retirement, went for a year.  My buddy Juan did the short course as a Navy Captain.
That said, Harvard President Drew Faust, like Harvard Presidenty Larry Summers, before her, has been more than generous with those Harvard students who take ROTC over at that neighboring Morriell Act (Land Grant) college, MIT.

5 comments:

lance said...

It is hard to tell from your blog, but did the President connect ROTC coming back and repeal of DADT?

C R Krieger said...

Yes, she did.  Very specifically—if you believe the Boston Herald.

Regards  —  Cliff

lance said...

Well then I applaud her for her courage and principles. Your part of the argument that they should resist all Government money is a little strained: senior military and civilian DOD officials have probably reached an age where they aren't as impressionable as teenagers and able to make their own decisions. The argument reminded me of sitting in graduate school at Santa Clara last year in a room that happened to have been donated by Lockheed and listening to a young man go on about how the school should reject all funding from Lockheed since it was a company of baby killers. How far should one take that argument? Should Harvard reject any student who's parents are paying for their tuition based on jobs with any company that is involved in support of the military? From any company that pillages the environment? Should they refuse any tax money from any source in the Government or only DOD? etc.

C R Krieger said...

OK, if we take your view, how about changing the age of voting back to 21?

As for the money thing, I would say just money from DoD.  I am not saying that this should be a total separation of government and the academy.

Regards  —  Cliff

C R Krieger said...

Oh, and due to the Australian Ballot we could never know for sure, but don't you bet she (President Faust) voted for Democrats, all the way down—those Democrats who gave us DADT back in the Clinton Administration and, as the party controlling the US Congress, were not able to get it repealed last week.

Regards  —  Cliff