From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Sat Feb 22 2003 - 21:00:33 MST
Hubert writes
> > You have to know, when you see yourself start writing
> > like this, knowingly advocating greater pain and
> > suffering, that something is out of kilter. Yes,
> > I do appreciate that from your point of view, there
> > are *ABSOLUTELY* no reasons whatsoever to invade Iraq,
> > and so from your point of view we are all raving mad.
> > (Is this true, or not? Or am I reading too much into
> > what *you* are saying, now?) But that's what it sounds
> > like.
>
> I knew it would get me that far when I decided not to
> leave the field to the war supporters of this list.
> I knew exactly that I would be transformed into the
> same kind of dragon myself who I was fighting against.
Well, I must say you're being a very reasonable and engaging
dragon. Or hawk, whatever.
> But I can bear these complementary poles, It is an excellent
> exercise for the unity of psychological opposite pairs you
> [we] will probably have to bear as a transhuman entity.
Well, each to his own, and many people wish to *express*
themselves in many ways here. And as outrageous as some
of it sounds to others, we have to keep the physical
reality in mind: no one here is suffering as a result,
and it's highly unlikely that anyone in the world is
suffering as a result of what is said here. So even
if someone said that he wished all the war-protestors
taken out and shot, it's a far cry from anyone getting
even a bad headache.
> I put on the shoe that Mike Lorrey threw at us war
> opponents*? So I tried to come up with an equivalent
> of the pain of the poor American soldiers and Iraqi
> civilians, he and the other hawks are willing to
> accept.
Yes, it cannot be wrong to recall the moral costs of
making a decisive move, such as giving the final
go-ahead for an invasion in which many will die.
Eisenhower, Bush, Hitler, and Saddam all have that
in common. One can only hope that leaders of the
present and future do keep this reality in mind.
> I am aware of this with every word I write, but
> I have it under control... It is my drastic way
> of saying "wake up!" to those who accept 300.000
> dead and one million refugees and a lot of more
> misery in Iraq.
Yes, but of course your opposite numbers can
always answer back about the future casualties
they extrapolate if action is *not* taken.
> Actually I would never turn on this future Buddha machine
> of all encompassing sympathy with the wounded.
Yes, that's what always happens to me too. After
I've read about some grisly murders---like the
snipers who killed so many in Washington D.C.,
I allow myself to think of the way I would leave
the killers in solitary confinement for a few
years, and when they are least expecting it, a
bullet comes from nowhere and smashes a kneecap.
But I'm sure that if I were really in charge of
the prisoners, I wouldn't have it done.
> But there are moments when I wished I had the
> guts to do it to my own body-mind-continuum
> to experience what war suffering really means.
You're braver than I! Seeing vivid depictions
on TV is about as much as I can stand. Yet, as
you fully realize, the reality is so much worse.
Not only must we imagine the deaths themselves
of, maybe 100,000 Iraqis, but recall the pain
that their loved ones are going to experience.
Always think of 100,000 funerals to get the
clearest picture.
So we hawks are thinking of the future atomic-
blasted cities, which are certain no matter what
happens. We only believe that those attacks, with
their MILLIONS of casualties, can perhaps be
delayed a few years, or will be fewer altogether.
> Isn't it strange: while writing down my fantasies
> about this side effect of an uploading machine,
> I had to think about you and Rafal musing on capital
> punishment a couple of months ago, how it was *me*
> who got infuriated by your kind of sarcasm.
Sarcasm? Was it that some scenarios that we were
mentally considering were too grisly, or in bad
taste? I don't remember.
> I think I remember that you demanded freedom
> of thinking and writing about all the funny
> things you wanted to impose on people who were
> sentenced to death.
I do recall that Rafal and I would certainly look
into making prisons less comfortable than now. We
probably are interesting in providing greater
deterrence.
> Well, now I am on a similar level of writing here.
Hmm. Seems different. You are talking about a real
war, about to happen, and he and I were discussing
hypothetical scenarios. (In the first place, were
either he or I placed in charge of prisons, we would
be quite professional about studying the way they're
run now, and we'd listen very carefully to the
professionals and their arguments before deciding.)
So your concerns are more immediate.
> I am aware of it but I do not regret it. It only
> shows me what already the *prospect* of a war is
> doing to the mind of an originally peaceful man.
> It's a shame and you can blame me for this. That's
> okay. I don't have anything to lose.
Not truly lose anything, no. But your speech was
hyperbolic, and, since you admit that you don't
really approve of any of us experiencing the real,
frightful agonies of the wounded, your speech was
exaggerated. Which, of course, you realize.
> This is a crucial moment of world history and
> I will not shut up.
You are still entertaining, somehow, the suspicion
that someone wishes you'd shut up. Not in any way!
Well..., at least not most of us ;-) I think that
even your severest critics would actually be disappointed
if you didn't give them a target for their own thoughts
and feelings!
> Call it *aggressive pacifism* or *pacifimania* or
> whatever you want. My family name is my life's program.
>
> Hubert Mania
Okay, just don't start hitting anyone over the head
with those peace placards! 8^D
Lee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Feb 22 2003 - 20:56:39 MST