Michael S. Lorrey wrote,
> Exercising restraint in the face of danger is actually more brave than just
> blazing away. However, each has its place. I would not want a bunny lover in
> command of a SEAL unit, for example. Elite combat unit members should be
> who have no compunctions about shooting who they are told to shoot, when they
> are told to shoot them, with no compunctions or remorse. I would be worried
> about having such a person in the White House, on the other hand. 80% of the
> military, and 95% of the general population I would not trust to watch my back
> in combat. The nuclear button is such an abstraction from actual killing that
> is rather a testament to how restrained most people are that they can be
> with the trigger. I am not worried about missile crews pushing the button, I
> worried about them NOT pushing the button when it is needed.
It seems to me you have an adroit and accurate perception of what it takes for a
military unit to function effectively (as "the species' immune system" as it
were). Looking at it in this way, it seems we have a use for military force.
Then again, perhaps we can transcend violence. What do you think?
Men should delight in being called chickens.
After all, farmers generally allow one rooster for ten hens.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:15 MDT