Blame for air crash lies with Chinese government, pilot
Young patriots look to teach Americans a lesson, fail to see that United States helps fuel nation’s weak economy

Is it just me or has the whole idea of America as the “Great Satan” gone a little too far lately? Granted, virtually all of China doesn’t believe in Satan, but if they did I’m sure we would have the pleasure of receiving such a compliment from them.

After all, nations must care about us a great deal to want to equate us with the living embodiment of pure evil. I get choked up just thinking about it.

But I digress.

I’ve sat idly for too long now having watched the pointless standstill between China and the United States basically resort to a dialogue consisting of both sides repeating, “I know you are but what am I.”

We’re still a far cry off from another testosterone-fueled Cold War, but it’s really starting to look like things would be better off if President George W. Bush and Chinese President Jiang Zemin just had an arm-wrestling match to dictate which nation should apologize. (I’ve got $50 and 2-1 odds favoring Bush.)

As easy as it would be to try and find fault with our new president, most of his actions have been well thought out and diplomatic. As biased as I am, it seems painfully obvious that fault lies with the Chinese government.

Jiang claims the U.S. spy plane swerved to ram the Chinese fighter plane. However, basic rules of aviation dictate it’s the duty of the smaller plane to get out of the way. Also, the Chinese fighter pilots have been criticized lately for flying to aggressively and getting too close to American planes. Not to mention, it’s pretty difficult for a bulky plane to swerve while in autopilot.

There was even one instance of the same pilot who crashed into the spy plane when he flew close enough to a U.S. plane to flash his e-mail address. That’s just what the world needs: a bunch of Chinese Tom Cruises flying around and shouting, “Woohoo, Jester’s dead!”

Even if the spy plane had swerved, it moves slowly and the jet would’ve had ample time to get out of the way. It doesn’t exactly take a physicist to figure this one out.

Also, the United States would have no reason to ram a Chinese jet. The U.S. crew would know they’d have to make an emergency landing. Is there any logic in a spy plane with plenty of top-secret info wanting to land near China, where they could easily steal the plane? I’m tempted to just write a big “DUH!” This is so easy to figure out.

Sadly, it seems the Chinese reasoning between all this is that Jiang is nearing retirement as the ruler of the wonderful authoritarian regime and has been criticized lately for being too soft in international affairs. Basically, he’s intentionally lying and drawing the matter out to improve his reputation.

What’s really scary is the patriotism of our Chinese college peers. As a Time magazine Web site article points out, the same students wearing Nike shoes, eating Big Macs and watching MTV are the same ones saying the United States needs to be taught a lesson for its cockiness.

Let’s forget the fact that trade with the United States is virtually single-handedly fueling their weak economy, and most of what the United States gets out of the trade goes to already filthy-rich private investors. Sure, teach us a lesson. Let’s “Kill the Imperialist American Pigs” as literature on Chinese Internet message boards states.
It just doesn’t make sense how a nation living under authoritarian rule and almost

s a third-world country would want to make an enemy of the nation most helping it economically. Although China is a powerful nation, their military is exponentially weaker than ours. So why does their youth want war?

The answer can only be found in ignorance or a total disregard for human life.

It’s a sad situation, but scarier still.

Jordan Blum is a sophomore broadcast journalism major from New Orleans.
He can be reached at (j.d.blum@student.tcu.edu).

Editorial policy: The content of the Opinion page does not necessarily represent the views of Texas Christian University. Unsigned editorials represent the view of the TCU Daily Skiff editorial board. Signed letters, columns and cartoons represent the opinion of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board.

Letters to the editor: The Skiff welcomes letters to the editor for publication. Letters must be typed, double-spaced, signed and limited to 250 words. To submit a letter, bring it to the Skiff, Moudy 291S; mail it to TCU Box 298050; e-mail it to skiffletters@tcu.edu or fax it to 257-7133. Letters must include the author’s classification, major and phone number. The Skiff reserves the right to edit or reject letters for style, taste and size restrictions.