| Monday
December 2, 2002 First, I have to do some serious
work on Burning Tower. Then the December column has to be done. I have to
get a machine shipped off to Duke University for use in image comparisons.
And over the weekend I had some conversations with David Weber, and I'm
being a bit inspired to put together a new Hornblower in Space Opera set
probably in the time of the First Empire; although I have some ideas for a
story called "Lisabetta" that would take place in the "no
FTL" universe I put together that includes Birth of Fire and the
Laurie Jo Hansen/Aeneas Mackenzie stories. Which might in fact make a
rather interesting space adventure series set in the future of about 80
years from now.
Which is to say, I have work to get done, and it's going to take up a
good bit of time, leaving me a bit less for this place unless there's
something important to write.
A Policy for America
We had panels at the LASCON that included a discussion of Republic vs.
Empire. It's astonishing how many of my old friends have become warhawks.
And it may be that we have gone so far in marching the king's men up the
hill that we have to do something with them other than march back down
again.
Deposing Saddam Hussein will be no great problem. What we do after that
is something else again. We will have two clients, either of which we
could use to defeat Iraq; alas, if we use one we really alienate the
other. The Turkish Army isn't going to appreciate an independent Kurdistan
on Turkey's southern border. The Kurds aren't going to want to overthrow
Saddam for us without the promise of independence --- and won't be happy
if we use the Turks to do the job.
Meaning we may have to put an appreciable army over there because we
don't have clients we can rely on. After which we will have to govern. And
governing a place with that much oil is going to be a difficult task, with
great temptations, and splendid opportunities for corruption.
Rome's republic began its sharp decline after the Second Punic War
when Rome inherited Sicily and Sardinia, two rich provinces that were
never intended to be incorporated into the Republic and thus never to have
citizenship. This meant they were governed by officials appointed in Rome
and responsible to Rome, not to the people they governed; and they were
rich provinces, and the tax farming was good and lucrative and being
governor was worth competing for and ---
Meanwhile, the stern old Good Government types stood ready to prosecute
any politician (of the opposite party) who had profited in any way from
being part of the government. Many of the prosecutions were justified in
that they were certainly violations of the laws, but at the same time the
laws were stricter than the morality and ethics of the governing class,
and enforcement was largely done on political motivations. Perhaps nothing
of that sort can ever happen here.
Eventually popular political figures appealed directly to the people
against the court systems. Some of those popular figures were military as
well as civilian politicians. Perhaps nothing of that sort can ever happen
here.
And perhaps it is not too hard to see the future.
What Must Be Done
People keep asking me what I would do were I in charge.
Ideally I would bring our troops home, shore up the Navy, tell the
world "We are the friends of liberty everywhere, but the guardians
only of our own," and disentangle the United States from the disputes
in Europe, the Balkans, Korea, the Middle East, and generally everywhere.
At the same time I would take the money at present paid in subsidies to
clients and allies and others -- some $4 billion a year to Israel and more
than $2 billion a year to Egypt, for a start -- and put that into
developing energy independence programs.
I would develop and deploy light water nuclear reactors on the grounds
that the fuel is nearly free: we have at least 15,000 surplus warheads,
each with 2 to 4 kilograms of 90% enriched fissionables (fuel grade is
about 10% enriched) so the expensive part of making nuclear fuel is a sunk
cost: we may as well get some good out of it, since we ought to get rid of
those warheads anyway. I would put money into X projects to develop
cheap access to space: over the long haul, solar power from orbit and
orbital industries can be environmentally benign while very economically
effective, given only reasonably cheap access to space.
Regarding access to space: airlines operate at about 3 to 5 times fuel
costs. It takes about the same amount of fuel to get a pound to orbit as
it does to fly it to Australia from the US. Rockets are not really less
efficient than jet engines (they have to carry their oxidants, but they
experience far less drag over the course of their flight because they
aren't in the atmosphere very long). There is no reason why getting to
orbit need be much more expensive than a first class ticket to Australia.
(Of course that means savable and reusable space ships, not expendables.)
Given costs of that magnitude, solar power satellites become quite cost
efficient -- their major cost has all always been the cost of getting to
orbit. Space industries including mining and fabrication on the Moon become feasible given
airline levels of costs to orbit.
None of this is science fiction or even all that hard. There is no new
science needed. There is engineering development needed, and some of it is
tricky. Rocket engine designs are mostly engineering but there is also a
bit of the black art to them in determining chamber flows and combustion
stabilities and the like -- but what that really means is you have to
build things and fly them because we don't have either the inputs or
computing power to do third decimal point accuracy simulations, and
most of what is needed in rocket science is third decimal accuracy.
(Example: A
700,000 pound Gross Liftoff Weight [GLOW] rocket will be 90% fuel and
oxidant; of the remaining 70,000 pounds, about 90% will be structure and
tankage and plumbing and shrouds and life support and reserve fuel and
other stuff. The remaining 7,000 pounds is payload, but note that this is
down in the 3rd decimal place, and there's a real difference between a
payload of 700 pounds and one of 15,000 pounds -- and the best calculations
we have can't narrow it more than that, and some show that it won't have a
payload at all [won't quite reach orbit]. You have to build and fly things
to find out what payloads you will get, and how to nickel and dime those
up by redesigning structures and making things lighter.)
This is what X
programs are for, and we ought to have several of them going. Of course we
don't, and NASA doesn't want any.
In any event, while I trust the American Military, understand that what
the military is good at is breaking things and killing people. I trust our
engineers more than our diplomats, and I think money invested in energy
independence better spent than money invested in conquests -- and
healthier for the republic. Conquests feed imperial ambitions.
Not Ideal
We are not in an ideal situation, and there is considerable history,
including not only 911 but our response to it, and the perceptions of
others. We cannot look like fools. We must not make empty promises or
threats.
So: were I in charge I would begin the campaign for new energy
technologies and emphasize that new policy while beginning to stand down from
adventures that make people hate us (as opposed to hating their
neighbors).
I would make it clear that in future we will behave like a republic,
not like the World Empire. We have some continuing obligations, but we
will try in future to reduce those, not expand our entangling alliances
and overseas commitments. We are the friends of liberty everywhere, but we
are the guardians only of our own. Our people may be horrified at the way
you live, but we will not send our soldiers to impose our ways on you.
I would tell the world that we will protect our citizens, and some of
them will undoubtedly try to persuade you to live in ways you do not like.
That is their affair so long as they don't use force. You may forbid them
entry to your lands, but if they come in peace you must let them leave in
peace if you don't like their examples or their missionary efforts. But so
long as you do that, you may have your silly -- even disgusting -- customs
and practices.
But whether I'd invade Iraq as a demonstration of our resolve I do not
know. My foreign policy would be to make it very clear to the ruling class
of every nation on Earth: "If you harbor the enemies of the
people of the United States and allow them to use your nation to plan and
stage attacks on the American people, you will be replaced; your protests
that those who follow you will be worse are uninteresting. We have the
same message for them, too."
The Afghan campaign was a beginning at propagating that salutary
message. It may be that an Iraqi campaign will be needed to drive the
point home. On the other hand, it may not be: we may also teach the lesson
that "If you do comply with our wishes and make it clear that you
neither want to nor can harm the people of the United States, we will
leave you alone no matter how great a villain you are." And that may
be what the current Administration has in mind. I am certain Colin Powell
believes it.
So there we are. But whatever we do about Iraq, it is criminal that we
are not pouring out the funds needed to reduce our dependence on that part
of the world. We have the technology for energy independence over, if not
my lifetime, certainly over yours. Why don't we start?
For a continued discussion see:
Discussion and Disagreement
This takes you to a lined thread that includes considerable discussion of
this topic.
TOP
Current Mail |
CLICK HERE for
a Special Request. 
