Here are excerpts from editorials in newspapers around the world:

The Corriere della Sera, Milan, Italy, on military intervention in Afghanistan:

Within the next two months, there will probably be war in Afghanistan. Not the asymmetrical war between a conventional military force and guerrilla warfare, but a traditional one between two armies. On one hand, the Taliban — launching an offensive against NATO troops — on the other hand, NATO commands that already have planned their own offensive against the Taliban. There, military planners are preparing their moves to respond to the enemy. In Rome, our political leaders are preparing their words to keep a divided coalition together.

Until now, they said that our contingent was deployed in Afghanistan as a "peace force." It was not using weapons, even if it had them. Adhering to the same rules of engagement in real war and under a unified command will be difficult, or at least little consistent with other NATO forces that fight with guns.

The Independent, London, on ocean fishing>

The madness of the overfishing of our oceans shows no signs of abating. A research paper presented at the American Association for the Advancement of Science in San Francisco yesterday shows that, as fish stocks in coastal waters become more and more depleted, trawlers are moving further out to sea. ...

Fishing fleets are also wrecking marine biodiversity in the areas in which they operate. Bottom trawling is responsible for the loss of more than 95 percent of the coral from deep-sea reefs. The dragnets of the trawlers destroy in the space of a few hours pristine ecosystems that have often taken thousands of years to grow. In the process, the homes of countless rare species are lost. The destruction of the coral also destroys a valuable natural record of the earth's changing climate. This is ecological vandalism.

What makes this rape of the seas even more outrageous is that our governments are subsidising the process. The desire of governments to support their fishing communities is understandable. But it makes no sense to sponsor overfishing. There is only one sane course of action: the subsidies should end, bottom trawling should be outlawed and a system of strict international regulation for high seas fisheries must be established.

The warnings of what will happen otherwise are unequivocal. According to a major scientific study last year there will be virtually nothing left to fish from the seas by the middle of the century if current fishing trends continue. We are at risk of wiping out one of mankind's oldest sources of food and doing untold damage to one of our planet's fundamental ecosystems.

The Tribune, Kokomo, Indiana, on rescued climberB>

The three climbers rescued from Mount Hood Monday received a lot of attention this week and, we suspect, little sympathy. Though its 11,239-foot peak is considered quite accessible by experienced climbers, it can be dangerous, particularly in the winter months.

In December, three mountaineers died on Oregon's tallest peak after getting trapped by a snowstorm. And more than 35 have died on Mount Hood in the last 25 years.

Rescues of stranded climbers can be dangerous, as well. In May 2002, the safest time to scale the mountain, a rescue helicopter crashed trying to reach six mountaineers.

Many folks are suggesting climbers be charged for their rescues. It's unseemly, even un-American, to weigh costs before running to the aid of a person in peril.

Many historians say this country was founded on Judeo-Christian values. We can't think of a more Christian value than to offer assistance to someone who probably doesn't deserve such assistance.