Readers Write: Iran and Israel, tuition at state schools, trans athletes, airships

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

As I hear our political leaders, both Democrats and Republican, warning Israel against continuing its attack on Iran’s nuclear program, I can’t help but recall the phrase “It’s déjà vu all over again” — coined by the late, great Yankee Yogi Berra. Yogi was referring to the tendency of Mickey Mantle and Roger Maris to hit back-to-back home runs. But the phrase can just as easily describe the condemnation of Israel by the international community and some in our own government. Consider: In 1981, Israel destroyed Saddam Hussein’s nuclear reactor in Iraq. For this action Israel drew condemnation internationally and from our own President Ronald Reagan. In 2007, Israel sought approval from the U.S. to destroy Syria’s nuclear reactor then under construction. President George W. Bush refused to give approval to this endeavor, but Israel went ahead anyway and destroyed the reactor.

Those who are now condemning Israel for trying to stop Iran from achieving nuclear weapons, which it threatens to use on the Jewish state, should ask this question: What would the Middle East look like today if there were nuclear weapons in Syria and Iraq?

Ronald Haskvitz, Minnetonka

•••

A letter writer on June 19 stated that “President Jimmy Carter displayed weakness during [the Iran hostage crisis], and it was a big factor in his loss to President Ronald Reagan in the 1980 election. Reagan exhibited strength and his warnings to Iran led to the hostages’ release when he took office.” This statement is misinformed and simplistic.

There is compelling evidence that Republican operatives, led by former Texas Gov. John B. Connally Jr., conspired to secretly delay the hostages’ release by sending a message that Reagan would give the Iranians a better deal than Carter, and therefore Iran should wait until after the election to release the hostages. This sabotaged Carter’s ongoing hostage negotiations, which were quite advanced at this point, and undermined his re-election campaign. The hostages’ January release was not due to Reagan’s “strength” or “warnings” but rather to back-channel rogue deal-making, without which the hostages might well have been released before the election. For full details, see the 2023 New York Times story "A Four-Decade Secret: One Man’s Story of Sabotaging Carter’s Re-election."

Nancy Brewster, Plymouth

Regarding “U faculty decries spending priorities” (June 18): As an old codger (very old!) I was saddened to read about the infighting between the academicians and the bean-counters. The sad reality is, you can’t have one without the other. And I surmise that both camps have the same goal: to produce citizens who are not only educated but who recognize their obligation to apply their education toward the betterment of the community. Finding the perfect budgetary balance that places academics as the top priority of a world-class public university, while recognizing that this requires practical administration, is the crux of the current debate.

Back to my status as an old guy. As an undergrad at the University of Illinois, 1959-1963, my in-state tuition was $100 a semester. Nobody graduated with student debt, so everyone was happy. But then came medical school at the U of I. Whoa! Sticker shock! They wanted $150 a quarter! But our youthful distress was assuaged when the dean of our med school welcomed our freshman class of 215 students. He immediately left a favorable impression. Besides wishing us success, he said, “When you’re finished here, be an asset to your communities. Remember, the taxpayers of Illinois are paying for your education. ”

So, the debate over priorities will always plague budget planners. If not already in place, perhaps an independent agent can advise state legislators as to what a reasonable state funding allotment to the U should be. Hopefully that could move toward the mission of land grant colleges as written over a hundred years ago — free tuition for all (or at least graduating without too much debt). And maybe an independent agent could weigh in on the proposed budget requested by the administration? All parties might sleep better at night.

Richard Masur, Minneapolis

•••

After reading about the need for steep tuition increases at the Minnesota State system (“Minnesota State tuition jump is largest in nearly 2 decades,” June 19), why is no one is asking whether our state even needs all 33 campuses we now have? Maybe this number made sense prior to the internet and the completion of our modern highway system. However, with the popularity of online courses and better highway access, Minnesota State could easily close five or even more locations and save enough, through lower administrative cost, course consolidation and building maintenance, to reduce or even eliminate the tuition increases while still providing a wide variety of courses to students across the state either online or at nearby campuses.

Earl Hoffman, Minnetonka

Hooray for the Minnesota State High School League for standing its ground and refusing to discriminate against transgender youth from participating in high school sports.

Ron Way’s June 20 commentary, “Anti-trans rhetoric is tyranny of the majority,” shines a necessary light on the harm caused by passing laws that prohibit transgender students from MSHSL-sanctioned sporting events. Even well-meaning adults can fall guilty of shortsighted beliefs that a trans student’s genetics create an unfair advantage for a team or a disadvantage in individual competitions. This commentary provides the deeper truth: The outrage is misplaced; the reality is the number of trans athletes is statistically minimal. Why do we do this to our trans youth community when there are so many other means of stacking the deck that go unnoticed, such as recruitment strategies and coaches playing only the biggest and the best just for the “W” on the scoreboard?

Singling out trans youth in school sports is not only cruel — it’s unwarranted. When we step back and look at the full picture, it becomes clear that fairness in sports cannot come at the cost of compassion, dignity and inclusion.

Thank you for publishing this commentary. Now, how do we make sure more people read it?

Susan Thompson, Roseville

Aaron Brown’s June 15 column on using Minnesota’s abundant helium in airships comes at a perfect time (“Minnesota helium could lift airship reboot,” Strib Voices). Dirigible airships — also known historically as zeppelins — are coming back, and Minnesota could ride the vibe, grabbing attention, jobs, investment and economic advantages.

Decades ago zeppelins earned a bad reputation in war and disaster, but now technology — and helium — have made them much more safe and functional.

St. Paul, of all places, sparked the invention of the airship. Zeppelin Company founder Count Ferdinand von Zeppelin visited St. Paul in 1863, as a Prussian officer observing (and going up in) balloons for aerial reconnaissance. He credited his St. Paul visit as the inspiration for his eventual invention of the dirigible airship.

Just recently, the New York Times ran a feature on airships. The German Zeppelin Company is still in business and has designed and supplied a new generation of Goodyear dirigible airships.

Minnesota’s role in Zeppelin’s career predates even Friedrichshafen, Zeppelin’s legal home. It would be both a great symbolic gesture, and an economic benefit, to reach out to Germany, which itself is in unaccustomed economic flux, in a partnership to promote this rebirth.

Zeppelin might even be interested in a U.S. base of operations as a way of avoiding tariffs.

Mathews Hollinshead, St. Paul

The writer served six years on the Metropolitan Council Transportation Advisory Board.