Where I Stand — Brian Greenspun: Time to give thanks

Friday, Nov. 16, 2001 | 9:48 a.m.

Brian Greenspun is editor of the Las Vegas Sun.

NEXT WEEK we give thanks. Today we should spend a little time thinking about why we are thankful.

Thanksgiving has long been one of my favorite holidays. It is the time of year when themes of family and friends, and expressions of gratefulness for all that we have, take front and center stage over the din of everyday life. This year, because of the lesson we have just re-learned about the fragility of life, we have even more reason to give thanks.

But the blessings in life are not free. The ability to gather friends and family around for a celebration like Thanksgiving is not something we should ever have taken, and can never again take, for granted.

While we plan our dinners and order the turkeys and go over the guest lists, men and women wearing the uniform of the United States military are searching caves in Afghanistan for the man and his men who brought such sorrow and devastation to the United States on Sept. 11. Most of them will live through the experience to celebrate with their own families. The knowledge that some will not come home, however, must give us pause to reflect on the cost of freedom in the 21st century.

Having said all that, I think there are some questions to ponder.

Now that it appears that Afghanistan is falling into anti-Taliban hands, what's next? What are we going to do to make sure that country and its people never again aid, abet, play host or give shelter to people who believe that terrorism is acceptable at any level?

And after we clean up Afghanistan's act, what is the United States going to do to make sure that our new friends -- many of who remain on the U.S. list of terrorist countries -- dismantle their terrorist networks and remove from their midst the ways and means of wreaking havoc on civilized society? Are we going to bomb Iraq? Invade Syria? Put an end to the double-speak in Saudi Arabia?

I admit none of this is great dinner table conversation while carving up the turkey, but we must consider how we feel about these issues as a nation because once bin Laden disappears and Afghanistan is no longer on the radar screen of worrisome nations, the hard questions will come. And the stronger the resolve that exists amongst the people of America, the easier it is going to be for President George W. Bush to make the right decisions in the face of overwhelming international political reasons not to act in the best interests of the United States.

On a related subject, I was asked yesterday what I thought about the president's use of military tribunals to deal with captured and accused terrorists. There are many people who legitimately fear the abdication of our justice system in favor of secret trials and far swifter punishment. They think it will diminish us in the eyes of the world as the beacon for democracy and fair play.

I have two thoughts: secret trials are not something I relish because, as a citizen, I want to know what our government knows about this terrorist thing. Jailing or executing people under cover of darkness and secret proceedings seems wrong except in the most exceptional circumstances. Secondly, I am a person who believes in wiping the world slate absolutely clean of those who contribute to terrorism, be they individuals or governments. There is no place in that equation for either kind of trial, open or secret. So, my answer is, ask someone else.

And way off the subject of terrorism, but directly related to it, is the unfair, oppressive and irresponsible decision that will soon be made by President Bush to send the nation's high-level nuclear waste to Nevada. Forever. Or at least until it gets into the water table, the environment or the hands of some terrorist group looking to spread that deadly mess to the four corners of the earth.

The discussion the other night with some Republican friends who claim to know what is happening centered on Gov. Kenny Guinn's chances for re-election if his friend the president chooses Yucca Mountain to bury what the rest of the world doesn't want in its back yard. Remember, it was our good governor who told Nevadans that George Bush was our friend and he felt our pain. Selecting us to be buried under a hundred thousand tons of nuclear garbage doesn't sound like a very friendly act, do you think?

Assuming a fait accompli, my friend suggested that we talk about what Nevada should get in return for the nuke waste. My answer was simple. I told him I didn't care since I and my family would no longer be living here when the radioactive garbage rolled through town.

It took a night's contemplation to come up with a different solution.

If the federal government is hell-bent on doing the worst to those of us who live in Southern Nevada, then it should be willing to pay for the privilege. So far, our government has proved willing to compensate people for terrorist acts by strangers, as we should.

So why not write a check for the value of Southern Nevada -- it would be far less than the last tax cut Congress sent and the current one in the works -- to pay for the terror we will endure if that stuff comes our way. I would think $50 billion to $60 billion would cover it.

That way the government gets to try its stupid plan of burying nuclear waste in our desert and everyone who lives here gets fairly compensated so they can choose to live somewhere else. Someplace without the warm glow of a disastrous decision yet to prove itself.

Just a few questions to ask before we give thanks. I will thank you in advance for your answers.