A "news analysis" in the international section of today's New York Times says, "It is widely accepted that nuclear weapons are virtually useless in a war on terrorism or on rogue states, and in the case of America's nuclear arsenal that is particularly true. As the Nuclear Posture Review notes, the American arsenal is overwhelmingly based on cold-war thinking, when deterrence meant convincing rivals that the United States possessed the ability to wipe out their cities and missile silos. Mr. Bush has said that approach is outdated and has embraced deep cuts in America's traditional nuclear arsenal. But terrorists do not have cities, and Iran and Iraq do not have silos."
The Times claims that "terrorists do not have cities." That's absurd. The American State Department lists seven countries as state sponsors of terrorism: Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Sudan, North Korea and Cuba. There are cities in each of those countries.
The Times also claims confidently that "Iran and Iraq do not have silos." Well, at the rate things are going, Iran will have them before long. According to a report in the Washington Times, Benjamin Netanyahu, speaking in Washington in September of 1998, said of Iran, "'They are building an enormous infrastructure [including] hardened missile silos,' which can house the missiles and protect them against any U.S. or Israeli pre-emptive strikes." And as for Iraq, there's no way of knowing for sure whether it has silos or not, because Saddam Hussein has refused to allow U.N. weapons inspectors there.
Exclaiming: A dispatch in the national section of today's New York Times reports about whale watching. The third paragraph of the article is as follows:
"Oh my God, there's another calf!" exclaimed Alisa Schulman-Janiger of the American Cetacean Society, which has counted gray whales as they commute up and down the California coast for almost 20 years. "It's so exciting to see a rebound! We're sure due for one."
"Oh my God, what a badly written paragraph!" exclaimed the editor of Smartertimes.com. "It's bad enough to include two exclamation marks. But if you are going to use exclamation marks, it's redundant to use the verb 'exclaimed'!" Not only that, the sentence doesn't make clear whether the phrase "for almost 20 years" refers to the whales or to the American Cetacean Society.