A prep course for the month-long World Cup soccer tournament, a worldwide pheno

ommemorated with a minute of silence and hope that World War I had been the war 

to end all wars . And two sides can use shared memories to heal and reconcile . 

For example , American veterans of the Vietnam War have increasingly been meetin

g and comparing recollections with their one-time foes . And yet some memories a

re so bitter that they can be shared with only the greatest difficulty , if at a

ll . President Ronald Reagan 's visit to and conciliatory remarks at the militar

y cemetery in Bitburg , Germany , were condemned because some German SS troops w

ere buried there formations that personified the brutality of Nazism and played 

a role in the Holocaust . Less than a year after the D-Day ceremonies , however 

, there will be a greater occasion for remembrance : the 50th anniversary of V-E

 Day , marking the German surrender of May 8 , 1945 . V-E Day could become anoth

er triumph of victors , although the fact that the Soviet Union made the greates

t contribution in blood to that victory adds a problematic dimension . Or it cou

ld , and should , be an occasion for Americans , Canadians , British , other Eur

opeans , Russians and citizens of the newly independent states formerly in the S

oviet Union , and especially of all Germans , to celebrate the defeat of or libe

ration from Nazism . It could and should be a time of reflection over the causes

 of World War II and contemplation of measures that might have prevented such su

ffering and of measures that need to be applied to preclude a recurrence . With 

the overwhelming majority of Germans today appalled by the recrudesence of ultra

right movements bearing a whiff of Nazism , such an approach to remembrance woul

d be very appropriate . In the meantime , the perfectly understandable victors '

 urge to celebrate will have been satisfied in 1994 by the memory of D-Day .

 When plans to celebrate the 50th anniversary of D-Day were being developed , th

e question arose of what role the Germans should play in the rituals of remembra

nce . They had been the enemy in 1944 , the defenders of Hitler 's wicked regime

 . But for most of the last half century they have been allies , not enemies . A

n invitation should have been extended and accepted in recognition of shared par

ticipation in the tragedy of the war and of Germany 's escape from Nazism . An i

nvitation need not have been a denial of the evil inflicted by Hitler . It would

 have created an opportunity to recall the deeper meaning of D-Day without assig

ning guilt to survivors who at the time were mostly in their teens and 20s . But

 the idea was not widely welcomed on either side . German officials and veterans

 have understandably displayed little eagerness to join the party in honor of th

eir defeat . And those embarking on a vacation trip to the land and time of what

 writer Studs Terkel called `` the good war '' had little appetite for the ambig

uities of a German presence . The issue raises interesting questions of how and 

why great battles are remembered and whether a distinction ought to be drawn bet

ween the celebration of a particular battle and that of an entire war . The Amer

ican mood for D-Day , 1994 , is a combination of nostalgia for a simpler age , w

hen the moral and political purpose of war was clear , justifiable congratulatio

n for a complex task successfully and quickly completed , and the fun of relivin

g a tremendous adventure . There will be wreath layings and memorial services , 

but the occasion is not primarily for mourning or meditation on human folly . Bu

t there are other ways of remembering . Abraham Lincoln at Gettysburg in 1863 re

affirmed deep philosophical values . Nov. 11 , 1918 , Armistice Day , was long c

ommemorated with a minute of silence and hope that World War I had been the war 

to end all wars . And two sides can use shared memories to heal and reconcile . 

For example , American veterans of the Vietnam War have increasingly been meetin

g and comparing recollections with their one-time foes . And yet some memories a

re so bitter that they can be shared with only the greatest difficulty , if at a

ll . President Ronald Reagan 's visit to and conciliatory remarks at the militar

y cemetery in Bitburg , Germany , were condemned because some German SS troops w

ere buried there formations that personified the brutality of Nazism and played 

a role in the Holocaust . Less than a year after the D-Day ceremonies , however 

, there will be a greater occasion for remembrance : the 50th anniversary of V-E

 Day , marking the German surrender of May 8 , 1945 . V-E Day could become anoth

er triumph of victors , although the fact that the Soviet Union made the greates

t contribution in blood to that victory adds a problematic dimension . Or it cou

ld , and should , be an occasion for Americans , Canadians , British , other Eur

opeans , Russians and citizens of the newly independent states formerly in the S

oviet Union , and especially of all Germans , to celebrate the defeat of or libe

ration from Nazism . It could and should be a time of reflection over the causes

 of World War II and contemplation of measures that might have prevented such su

ffering and of measures that need to be applied to preclude a recurrence . With 

the overwhelming majority of Germans today appalled by the recrudesence of ultra

right movements bearing a whiff of Nazism , such an approach to remembrance woul

d be very appropriate . In the meantime , the perfectly understandable victors '

 urge to celebrate will have been satisfied in 1994 by the memory of D-Day .

 How do we teach children about morality ? By doing the right thing ourselves . 

So what will our children conclude about the way we and the rest of the world ha

ve turned our backs on the slaughter of 200,000 people in Rwanda ? They 'll thin

k we are long on rhetoric but short on courage . U.N. Secretary-General Boutros 

Boutros-Ghali pleaded with world leaders to send troops to the ravaged country ,

 but those leaders did nothing . President Clinton said he could find `` no stra

tegic reason to do so . '' When crimes against humanity are being committed , th

ere needn't be a strategic reason to intervene . The catalyst ought to be a mora

l imperative that says : Thou shalt not kill . Boutros-Ghali blamed the world 's

 refusal to help on `` donor fatigue . '' Presumably , we were all tired of doin

g good and decided to sit out this massacre . So much for 200,000 innocent men ,

 women and children who were mutilated and killed . So much for the thousands mo

re who may still die if no one intervenes . Evil wins when good men and women ar

e silent . Haven't we learned anything from history ? John Donne said , `` No ma

n is an island unto himself . We are each a piece of the continent , a part of t

he main .. . so do not ask for whom the bell tolls , it tolls for thee . '' We s

hould all be writing the president , our senators , our congressmen and congress

women , begging them to intercede out of justice and mercy . We should be explai

ning to our president that it 's more than the economy , stupid . There are mora

l absolutes out there . If we had to help feed starving Somalians and I believe 

we did then the same principles apply to the besieged people of Rwanda . The wor

ld is more than our own back yard . We can't stand idly by and endure the slaugh

ter of innocents . If we only act on behalf of what is right when it is convenie

nt to do so , we will not long hold onto the mantle of moral leadership that sho

uld be ours . We need to teach our children that sometimes it 's hard to fight f

or our values . After all , the United States is supposed to be the last best ho

pe on Earth . We are the country founded as the defender of freedom , as the cit

adel of individual rights . There is no more basic individual right than the rig

ht to life a right that is being violated daily in Rwanda . We should be showing

 the rest of the world fatigued or not how to behave . It is hard to understand 

a mentality that can fight so hard for gun control laws in this country and then

 ignore the slaughter of thousands in another country . The world should be a mu

ch smaller place , one where we reach out to each other , protect one another . 

We may not be able to help everyone all the time , but certainly in a case like 

Rwanda , if we are not there , we are nowhere . Surely , those poor helpless vic

tims deserve better than our indifference . And if some American sons and daught

ers , all volunteers in the armed forces , were to die in defense of these victi

ms , that is just the price we pay for taking moral stands . No guts , no glory 

. Or , put another way , if we are unwilling to act on our values , we have none

 . We need to set the kind of example for our children that says : Violence does

 not always win , might is not always right . We need to show them that there ar

e knights in armor who will rescue the world 's innocents . Distributed by the L

os Angeles Times-Washington Post News Service .

 With all the talk these days about the Internet that vast network of computers 

that links millions of people around the world one of the most frequent question

s I get is , `` How do I get on ? '' The answer is : With some difficultly . Unl

ess you 're affiliated with a university or a large corporation that maintains a

 dedicated Internet link , you 're going to have to find an on-ramp to the `` in

formation highway . '' When you do find one , there will undoubtedly be a toll b

ooth at the entrance . And once you 're on the road , given the state of today '

s software , you 'd better be prepared for flat tires , broken transmissions and

 radiator boil-overs . Those disclaimers aside , the journey can be a rewarding 

one . There 's an incredible amount of information out there , not to mention a 

direct link to 23 million Internet users around the world . Before you decide to

 make the trip , it 's a good idea to learn a little bit about what the Internet

 is and isn't . You may also be able to take a shortcut that can save you time a

nd money . In this column , I 'll talk about Internet basics . First things firs

t . The Internet is not Prodigy or CompuServe or America Online . These companie

s are complete , self-contained information services . For a fee , they provide 

you with a well-organized universe of electronic mail , news , weather , feature

s , discussion groups , information databases and collections of programs , grap

hics and other files to download . They also provide friendly , dedicated commun

ications software that makes their offerings easy to navigate . With any of thes

e large providers , you have a standard business-to-customer relationship . They

 have to keep you satisfied , ensure that the quality of information they delive

r is good , and make the service attractive in order to keep your business . You

 have every right to demand good service in return for your money . ( It doesn't

 always work out that way , but that 's the theory ) . The Internet , by way of 

contrast , is a huge , worldwide network of networks of individual computer syst

ems run by universities and corporations , largely to enhance their own research

 and development efforts . These institutions have agreed to share their resourc

es with users on other systems . The Internet as a whole also provides a vehicle

 for sending and receiving electronic mail , and that 's how most people use it 

. E-mail capability also has given rise to thousands of special interest `` mail

ing lists '' and `` news groups '' that have made the Net an electronic meeting 

place for millions of people . Linked by high-speed phone lines , the Internet s

preads in all directions , and it 's growing every day . There 's no plan , no o

verview . Other than a committee that sets technical standards and maintains the

 system 's high-speed , fiber-optic backbone , nobody runs the Internet . Each o

rganization is responsible for its own computer system , and the people who run 

those systems are responsible to their organizations . In fact , many of the arc

hives and databases that make the Internet so interesting are maintained by volu

nteers who devote a great deal of their free time to them . Some computer system

s on the net are virtually closed , allowing little access other than E-mail . O

thers put out the welcome mat , allowing users on other systems to share their w

ealth . For example , most large university and public library systems make thei

r card catalogs , periodical indexes and archives of scholarly and research pape

rs available on the Net . There are interesting databases everywhere you can fin

d libraries of computer programs , the complete works of Shakespeare , on-line m

agazines , collections of NASA space photographs , electronic comic books , comp

ilations of Bill Clinton 's speeches almost anything that someone had a mind to 

store and catalog . Each system on the Net also has its own look and feel . Some

 provide nothing more than a cryptic prompt , and users have to memorize dozens 

of the unintelligible commands that have made the Unix operating system so belov

ed for years . Others welcome you with GOPHER , a friendly menu-based system nam

ed for the University of Minnesota programmers who developed it . Still others p

rovide sophisticated World Wide Web and Mosaic servers designed to work with spe

cial PC-based programs that treat the Internet as a gigantic hypertext document 

. These systems point the way to the future , but they 're still in their infanc

y . Given this anarchy , there 's is no such thing as an `` Internet Manual , ''

 which is one of the reasons that half the books crossing my desk for review the

se days bill themselves as Internet manuals . The problem is that by the time th

ey 're in print , they 're often out of date . As a result , getting around the 

Internet can be either an exercise in frustration or a marvelous if somewhat qui

rky adventure , depending on your state of mind . If you 're not affiliated with

 a university or company that maintains an Internet link with dial-in capability

 , you 'll have to set up an account with an Internet service provider . These a

re companies that maintain computers linked to the Internet . They make their mo

ney by providing you with a way to dial in with a modem and make connections wit

h other systems . They also give you an electronic mailbox through which others 

can reach you . Most of these Internet providers are local or regional . The Bos

ton-based DELPHI service is available nationally through local calls in most met

ropolitan areas , and a few , like Cerfnet , provide access through an 800 numbe

r at a stiff price . Almost all can be accessed with standard communications pro

grams . Some providers can set up more expensive SLIP ( Serial Line Internet Pro

tocol ) connections that require special software but make Internet access easie

r and more secure . If your communications experience is limited to Prodigy and 

America Online with their friendly , no-brainer start-up kits , you 'll be in fo

r a rude shock . Some Internet providers may offer basic menu services to help y

ou navigate a bit , but basically , all you 're buying is access to the highway 

. Once you 're in , you 're on your own , and when you do log onto other systems

 you 're there as a guest . These folks don't get anything for allowing you to g

et your foot in the door , and you may find that systems you 're looking for are

 unavailable because they 've been taken off line for maintenance , changes or r

epairs . That 's life on the Net .

 Environmentalism isn't what it used to be . An awareness is building that not e

very program identifying itself as `` good '' for the environment delivers real 

value to society . Many voices are now being raised in favor of more common sens

e and realism in allocating the burdens and benefits of environmental protection

 . So the opponents of environmental legislation have become the environmentalis

ts themselves . The reauthorization of environmental statutes is being stalled o

n Pennsylvania Avenue not by conservatives , but by liberals . Their fear is tha

t the `` Zeitgeist '' no longer favors unqualified environmentalism . The enviro

nmentalist imperative to preserve the status quo is best evidenced by their camp

aign to kill congressional reform of the Superfund law . Likewise , Congress has

 been stymied in reauthorizing the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and th

e Endangered Species Act . Even the bill to give the EPA Cabinet-level status wa

s stopped in its tracks by the environmental side of the aisle . The tension bet

ween balanced and absolute environmentalism has hit a social nerve because a par

ticular form of conservation the need to save money has become so urgent . It co

sts business owners , shareholders , workers and consumers , as well as state an

d local governments , hundreds of billions of dollars a year to comply with the 

existing environmental laws enacted by Congress . This money is well spent only 

if the results are worth it . There is no question that the public loathes pollu

tion and loves the idea of a green world . But people are starting to object to 

policies that protect the environment stupidly . Crime can't be fought , childre

n educated , cancer cured or welfare reformed if environmental-protection money 

isn't used wisely . Cleaning up dirt at industrial Superfund sites to edible lev

els , forcing schools to rip asbestos from behind sealed walls or sacrificing jo

bs to protect subspecies can seem disproportionate to our more dangerous risks .

 Environmental realism seeks to find a balance by enhancing respect for honest s

cience , private property and state and local budgets . There is growing consens

us on the common-sense need to assess risks scientifically , compare relative ri

sks and weigh the costs and benefits of government mandates . Some reactionary e

nvironmentalists disparage the principles of `` risk analysis , '' `` property r

ights '' and `` unfunded mandates '' as an `` unholy trinity '' intended to gut 

the environment as we know it . But if lawmakers and the public are kept in the 

dark about real risks and costs , the country will continue to buy environmental

 protection of the wrong kinds and amounts . Common sense is also rooted in the 

Constitution . The Fifth Amendment promises that the government will not take pr

ivate property for public purposes without paying just compensation . This claus

e has been increasingly invoked by landowners prohibited from using their proper

ty by regulations designed to protect wetlands , species , beaches and green spa

ce . These are worthwhile public objectives . But if their cost is too much for 

the public 's coffers , why should private citizens foot the bill ? The final co

mmon-sense standard is a straightforward money question . Congress keeps passing

 laws that compel state and local governments to spend billions to comply with f

ederal mandates . Goals like safe drinking water and clean air are good and nece

ssary . But as Sen. John Glenn , D-Ohio , has said , Congress has an insatiable 

impulse to pass the buck but not the bucks . Governors and mayors just cannot af

ford these unfunded mandates without depriving their constituents of a lot of ot

her public services . If the federal money isn't there for the taking , which it

 isn't , then the minimum that good government can do is insist on a careful ord

ering of regulatory priorities . The more mandates , the higher the property , s

ewer and water taxes and these don't hit the rich hardest . Senior environmental

 officials in the Clinton administration are uncomfortable with the Democrat and

 Republican legislators who want to build these standards into law . This oldthi

nk will not wash in 1994 any more than it did in 1969 . Then , the National Envi

ronmental Policy Act ordered all federal decision-makers to consider environment

al impacts before any major action . Surely it is no less desirable that the maj

or impacts of environmental actions be considered just as carefully . The new en

vironmental realism will improve , not stifle , environmental protection if resu

lts are measured in terms of value received . No one really believes that the bi

llions of environmental dollars spent today are spent well enough .

 I recently attended a human-rights conference in Baghdad . When I told a friend

 that the Iraqi Federation of Women had invited me for this purpose , she smirke

d and , in a voice dripping with sarcasm , said , `` Human rights ? In Iraq ? ''

 No one can condone any of the human-rights violations by Iraq , such as the sup

pression of the Kurdish and Shiite peoples or the invasion of Kuwait . But there

 are other parts to this story , especially concerning the status of women . Ira

q , before its long war with Iran and during the brief two-year interlude before

 the Gulf War , was one of the most progressive Arab states on women 's rights .

 Women 's education , for example , benefited from the law on compulsory educati

on of 1976 , the national comprehensive literacy campaign of 1978 and the law of

 higher education and scientific research of 1987 . For 15 years , there was a c

lose association between Iraqi women and the organization I headed , the Women '

s Union of Greece . In 1979 , I visited many after-hours classes in elementary s

chools where women of all ages were learning to read and write . Thousands of yo

ung women were on government scholarships studying abroad , encouraged to enter 

any and all professions . The Iraqi women 's political rights included the follo

wing : the right to vote and hold parliamentary office and membership in politic

al parties , the right to membership in non-governmental organizations and assoc

iations , and the right to hold public-sector jobs . Compare this to women 's si

tuation in Saudi Arabia or Kuwait . Most of these rights were wiped out by the c

onditions created when the United States and its allies dropped 88,500 tons of b