Re: "the species' immune system"

From: J. R. Molloy (
Date: Wed Oct 04 2000 - 19:57:13 MDT

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?

--J. R.

Men should delight in being called chickens.
After all, farmers generally allow one rooster for ten hens.
--Giovanni Boccaccio

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:15 MDT