New York Times on the Web Forums Science
Russian military leaders have expressed concern about US plans
for a national missile defense system. Will defense technology be
limited by possibilities for a strategic imbalance? Is this just SDI
all over again?
(7556 previous messages)
- 09:30pm Jul 28, 2001 EST (#7557
The issues involved in getting to emotional peace , and
the importance of doing so, were the subject of a thread Dawn Riley
and I ran, with a great deal of participation from others, on
Guardian Talk .
That thread, Emotional Peace in the Middle East , was
featured in the Guardian's Middle East Special Section
from October 10, 2000 to early April 2001. The thread started as
" We are in an impasse that is just as
dangerous as it looks in the Middle East. It looks like an
emotional crisis, and whatever else it may be, it is surely just
that. . . . . .
" . . . for peace, some psychological warfare
injuries need to be acknowledged, and healed.
" The physical compromises necessary for peace
are now, after much effort, largely in place.
" The emotional healing is absolutely
necessary, too. It needs to be begun. . . . . We are looking at
emotional problems, that are no accident, but that are at least as
dangerous as they look.
" They need to be adressed. Only the
truth, only a situation where "everybody is reading from the same
page" can possibly work here. The situation is too desperate and
too complicated for anything else."
The issues involved with moving the world away from nuclear
terror, and towards more stable and reasonable security
relatinships, involve some emotional issues, too. It seems to me
that it is entirely impractical to sweep them under the rug.
Almarst , and the Russians, have considerable anger, and
some of it seems to me to be well founded.
But although dealing with such issues may sometimes be dealt with
on a "no fault" basis - as honest differences of opinion, sometimes
it cannot be.
Almast has made that clear again and again on this thread,
for some good reasons.
- 09:32pm Jul 28, 2001 EST (#7558
For example, the GUARDIAN reported on August 18, 2000 http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a399d43976bee.html
that Serb killings, which the Western press said were up to 100,000
dead -- were under 3000. (set out in THE KOSVO FRAUD - WILL THEY
EVER ADMIT IT? http://126.96.36.199/justin/j082100.html
Numbers matter in military decision making, and the disparity
between 3,000 and 100,000 is glaring.
It is vital, if the world is to run decently for us to do a
MUCH better job of establishing facts than we have done. And a
less corrupt job.
The obligation to determine facts, where the facts matter, should
be morally forcing in proportion to the importance of the
actions that will be based on those facts.
The question "How do you check?" should be asked much more
frequently and effectively.
For all the problems of a new medium, and the diversity of
voices, the internet is making this more possible than it used to
For voices see http://www.nytimes.com/books/specials/audio-complete.html
and especially the audio interview of Michael Lewis by
Bill Goldstein , on Next: The Future Just Happened
with NYTimes.com books editor Bill Goldstein. . . . "There are
so many roles in society whose prestige and power is tied to
privileged access to information," Lewis says in the
interview, "a privilege that is going to vanish in the near
future." (because of the internet) http://www.nytimes.com/books/01/07/29/lifetimes/lewis-audio.html
For PEACE, we need to be more open, and better informed. Lies are
dangerous. Deceptions are dangerous. And mistakes are dangerous.
The goodness of a body of ideas can be judged in terms of
context, and also the fit with other contexts that, for logical
reasons, have to fit together. . . . . The beauty, and ugliness, of
a theory can be judged, in terms of the context it was built for,
and other contexts, including the context provided by data not
Maybe we ought not to reject conspiracy theories -- which CAN
make a lot of sense, and which, as a matter of history, DO explain a
great deal. Maybe, by doing so, we shortchange ourselves, and the
whole world. Maybe we ought to test such theories for beauty -- to
fit with facts --- and take plenty of care to see that the facts fit
- 09:33pm Jul 28, 2001 EST (#7559
More needs to be said to do justice to almarst's posts. .
7/27/01 10:58pm . . MD7530 almarst-2001
7/27/01 11:13pm ... MD7532 almarst-2001
7/27/01 11:33pm ... MD7534 almarst-2001
7/27/01 11:37pm ... MD7536 almarst-2001
Back in the morning.
New York Times on the Web Forums Science