Pubdate: Tue, 05 Feb 2002 Source: Daily Texan (TX Edu) Copyright: 2002 Daily Texan Contact: http://www.dailytexanonline.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/115 Author: Todd Willis Note: Willis is a geosystems engineering and hydrogeology junior. A WAR WE JUST CAN'T WIN Our government has a daunting task ahead of it, for the network of terrorism support is vaster than we could have imagined. Just last weekend, for instance, there were likely dozens, if not hundreds of raucous meetings held right here in Austin to further the cause of terrorism abroad. Disgustingly, many of these supporters are probably UT students themselves. Football fans around the country were informed Sunday during the Super Bowl that buying drugs supports terrorist activities. These gravely somber commercials were broadcast in an apparent attempt to unite the causes of the War on Drugs and the war on terrorism. Not since World War II, when America was faced with fighting in both Europe and Japan, have we had to brace ourselves for such a two-front assault. Nancy Reagan herself could never have dreamed this one up. Surely it makes sense to capitalize on Americans' newfound patriotism by telling us that the dime-bag profits the neighborhood dealer makes eventually wind up bankrolling Osama's new shipment of AK-47s. It introduces an entirely new way to "just say no." Instead of simply pointing out the potentially addictive and harmful effects of drugs, you can now scream "terrorist lover!" and get a direct line to Homeland Security adviser Tom Ridge. How could such an advertising campaign possibly go wrong? In every way, it turns out. For one thing, the commercials' lofty soap-box stance was laughable. Both the war on terrorism and drug abuse are serious subjects, but joining the two into one omnipotent evil is absurd. Granted, the premise might be true, but surely an even bigger support system to foreign terrorism are the millions of barrels of gasoline consumed in this country every day. The "gasoline consumption supports terrorism" commercial campaign probably isn't forthcoming though. The war on terrorism is many things that the War on Drugs is not. For starters, the war on terrorism is justified, since wiping out terrorism would undeniably benefit the entire world. The war on terrorism pursues a definite, if evasive, enemy. Perhaps most importantly, however, is that the war on terrorism, at least this far, has been wildly successful. The War on Drugs has not. Americans have been told that our part in the war on terrorism is to simply return to life as usual: Go to work, spend time with your family, and spend your money. But now there is a rather large exception being made: If you used drugs before, you can't now, or else you are supporting terrorism. The problem is that most Americans readily support the gung-ho attitude of the Bush administration against international terrorists. But now they are overstepping their bounds, as big government tends to do, and are passing moral judgments by telling us what we should and should not do. It is ironic that American tax dollars were spent to tell us what not to spend the rest of our money on. Can non-drug users expect a refund check in the mail? The point of advertising is to persuade the target audience to accept your message, whether that message is "buy this product" or "visit this Web site." But it is unlikely at best that John Doe is going to put the crack pipe down because he feels guilty for supporting terrorists. It is equally unlikely that someone will pass on an ecstasy pill because they don't want to support terrorism; more likely, they will decline because of strongly held principles and convictions formed even before Sept. 11. This campaign amounts to a waste of taxpayer dollars, specifically to the tune of $1.6 million dollars every 30 seconds, that could be better spent upgrading outdated military equipment or beefing up national intelligence assets. But it does serve as a prime example of "good intention, bad judgment." While there might be a good message behind it, it probably rings hollow in the ears of someone who loves and supports America, all the while passing around a bong amongst friends. Probably, if the commercials' designers had thought the matter through, they would have realized that such assertions are overstretched and silly. Perhaps a war on mediocre advertising schools should be our next agenda. - --- MAP posted-by: Terry Liittschwager