From: Michael M. Butler (mmb@spies.com)
Date: Sun Jun 08 2003 - 12:51:16 MDT
(My .sig, while partly inspired by Dr. Brin, is in fact my own; not there
as a brag, but as a nag :) )
On Sun, 8 Jun 2003 00:25:59 EDT, <Spudboy100@aol.com> wrote:
> MMB said:
> <<I don't think this situation has a tidy solution; nor a quick one,
> apart from the Albigensian approach ("Kill them all; God will know his
> own", in the apocryphal wording). This is grievous.>>
>
> My sense is that this policy is not kin to some medieval monk's view of
> the world and human interaction.
The apocryphal quote in question was alleged to be from someone empowered
with a general's authority.
The CIC of the US is a devout Christian.
While I don't make a great deal out of this, the way a lot of Euro press
and some on this list do, I think it's no exaggeration to say that if one
believes one is doing God's will, certain thoughts can come to mind that
are not available to agnostics or atheists. "God forgive me for the death
of innocents" being one; the above being a hypertrophied version of that.
> Rather, this is a cold-blooded analysis of what our opponents say, and
> seem to believe, and act upon. Denial of civilizational differences will
> not stand the light of day. Its not simply what we or you, MMB want, it
> what the other fellows tell each other, as Claude Shannon, said decades
> ago.
I decline at present to frame a point-for-point response to your triple
(not double) post. However:
You seem to think I think things I do not.
One heuristic of mine is "The problem is '"the" problem is...'".
One way to unpack this is, "The tendency of people to boil complex
situations down to mind-sized chunks by excluding things until there's just
one thing that needs doing creates problems--often by jumping to a
conclusion; and this fact is frequently the problem that I judge to be the
biggest problem-creating factor in human situations, myself."
I do agree that a war between cultures (or civilizations, if you will)
might be ensuing. I do prefer (many parts of) mine, and would take
personal, possibly violent, action to defend same--but there the issue
becomes slightly more complex than a "THE PROBLEM" analysis can cover.
There is a "wicked" (intractable) element here, in that "dissuasion"
actions can act in the opposite direction of "persuasion" actions, and vice
versa. Does "culture war" trump such concerns? Maybe. Sometimes. For those
who already get what I'm saying, skip past the next marked segment for my
concluding remarks.
<Exegesis=PARTIAL>
My *cold-blooded* analysis of regrettable factors include:
-If NO military action is taken when called for, grievous.
-If military action is/was taken and bystanders become more polarized,
grievous.
-If grasping abusive shortsighted people subjugate others, grievous--
whether they're thug-protected corporations or simple gun-bearing thugs.
-If Iraq collapses into Shi'ite Shariya, grievous.
-If the actions taken by the US contribute to instability, grievous.
-If the US uses such instability to justify further incursions ("Hey, look,
we tried, but them camel jockeys just aren't ready for anything but
subjugaton...") with a further net bad effect, grievous.
-If those who claim to speak for the US continue to spin, oversimplify and
misrepresent things, grievous.
-If the media continue to pump up the US population as easily spooked
fragile victims, grievous.
</Exegesis>
That a thing might be inevitable doesn't make it a happy thing. And they
might still play happy music at the end. I'm not handwringing here. One can
grieve with a rifle in one's hands.
> In this respect, this conflict is just like WW3, also known as the Cold
> War.
Optimist.
MMB
-- I am not here to have an argument. I am here as part of a civilization. Sometimes I forget.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jun 08 2003 - 13:01:55 MDT