New York Times on the Web Forums
Technology has always found its greatest consumer in a nation's
war and defense efforts. Since the last attempts at a "Star Wars"
defense system, has technology changed considerably enough to make
the latest Missile Defense initiatives more successful? Can such an
application of science be successful? Is a militarized space
inevitable, necessary or impossible?
Read Debates, a
new Web-only feature culled from Readers' Opinions, published every
(845 previous messages)
- 09:49pm Mar 26, 2002 EST (#846
Man is (putting it gently) "a little lower than the angels" - and
a recounting of how military training goes, says something about how
special the training is, and yet also how the training connects to
assumptions about human instinct that work reliably enough for
armies. People trained this way live in a "special" culture -- built
for fighting to the death -- built for killing.
Here is a recounting, not at all sentimental, about military
training, with an emphasis on training for enlisted ranks.
THE 'EATHEN by Rudyard Kipling http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@@.ee7b085/18
This is a special pattern of behavior, well established in nation
states -- that requires management.
Nations need militaries, and that may always be so - - but if
military values and patterns are emphasized too much - it is
dangerous. Militaries make war, not peace.
In a world where technical missile defense is unworkable - we
have to deal with military realities. Including the reality that we
have to keep control of people built not to question - but to act -
and risk -- and kill.
- 09:59pm Mar 26, 2002 EST (#847
It has often happened, historically, that militaries have been
able to condition large numbers of people to stand and die for their
countries - - often under practically suicidal circumstances -- and
often enough, under circumstances where soldiers, including
volunteers, have KNOWN that they were going to die -- and fought
At the same time, soldiers who fight and die do so "for a cause"
-- and psychologists say that cause is not hate -- though the
soldiers may hate. They stand, fight, and die "for their country" as
they understand it.
That's brutal enough - but it does have a limited element of
hope. Soldiers, when their country asks them to stop fighting,
almost always stop fighting. The idea that the Middle East is full
of "uncontrollable, inhuman hate" is simply wrong. I think peace in
the Middle East is possible -- with some third force intervention
for some while. -- It would take a negotiated peace that the
populations and leaders would settle for, and some peacekeeping
forces for a time. But I think it ought to be able to stick.
- 10:01pm Mar 26, 2002 EST (#848
I think such a peace would be very much in the interest of
practically everybody involved -- and could be made to be in the
interests of the peacekeepers, as well.
- 10:09pm Mar 26, 2002 EST (#849
Following through :
People live within
bounded environments, they have a sense of place and understanding.
Today the boundaries are global ... all the above have become
available to the traveller .. the boundary is the globe, the world.
- an animal marks it's boundary
- cities have walls
- outposts are guarded
- tribes have a cultural boundary
- Dukes and Lords had county boundaries
- Kingdoms have natural boundaries
- Empires have shifing boundaries
- Continents have natural boundaries
The outer frontier is SPACE ... a newish concept ... space is
Just as, when, the horse took man into new environments god was,
for convenience, packaged and sent skywards - there is understanding
that sky is everywhere.
Terror from the sky is 'everywhere' terror.
The concept of sky frontier is new - yet potentionally
- 10:10pm Mar 26, 2002 EST (#850
"What would you think about peacekeeping troops in the Middle
East ? "
About the same i think of a peacekeeping troops anywere else.
What is a chance the Aspirin will cure the cancer? Show me an
example where it helped on a long run. And where have you seen
absolutly neutral peacekeeper force. But, even if you have one, I
don't believe the problem can be solved untill the nations involved
believe it's solved. They will not bend to the rules of peacekeeping
army. And those peacekeepers will have either to go home, stay with
a closed eyes or enter the gorilla war against a foreign nation on
foreign territory - the neo-colonial affair all over again.
Make your choice.
- 10:15pm Mar 26, 2002 EST (#851
$7million barrels of oil per day - RUSSIA - world leading
Saudi second, and, biggest exporter.
Russia has 'few' controls over it's own producers, has some
control over pipe line, not tankers ... Saudi perviously
'The Saudi's are playing checkers with a group of 'master chess
men' ' (USA radio PBS)
Saudi - faces increased economic hardship (?)
- 10:17pm Mar 26, 2002 EST (#852
Quote : 'Human life is precious' GWBush
New York Times on the Web Forums