| Thursday,
September 13, 2001 In a couple of hours I will create a new
page for the war traffic mail; there is just too much mail, some of it
excellent, some of it illustrative, and it needs organizing better than I
can do in the mail format.
The letter from Canada was first published in about 1973 during the
Viet Nam era before the US aerospace industry lost its dominance due to
factors worth discussing at another time. The author was Gordon Sinclair
who died in 1983. Sinclair was "the Canadian Andy
Rooney."
The bin Ladin arrested story may not be confirmed.
Kit Case sends the following:
Before and after views of the WTC and Pentagon.
http://www.spaceimaging.com/newsroom/attack_gallery.htm#wtc_post
which is self explanatory.
We are reacting stupidly: airport security measures that have little to
do with preventing future hijackings. That is not intelligent.
Tom Brosz has a suggestion: bin Ladin must have assets in banks. The US
should issue letters of marque and reprisal to hackers. Internet pirates
with a national commission...
Surely his financial holdings have left a trail.
Regarding the nuke them all, God will know his own reaction:
Will a million Afghans and Sudanese be enough, or should we go for six
million? That number has a ring to it.
Gonna buy me a pistol just as long as your
arm,
gonna kill everybody ever done me
harm...
For myself I prefer killing known enemies. I would prefer that those
who do not do me harm have no reason to hate or fear me, lest they,
although obviously not as wise and clever as I am, cotton on to the idea
of preventive measures involving high tech stuff like rabbit fever and
botulin and anthrax and foot and mouth disease.
I really would prefer that those who should fear me do so; but I have
no reason to want everyone to hate me enough that giving their lives to
harm me seems a good bargain.
I have to go get a haircut. Installed the final release of XP
Professional last night. It has drivers that W 2000 doesn't have. More
another time.
I will create new pages. The obvious topics are:
Retaliation and Vengeance
Prevention: Liberty vs. Security
I will entertain suggestions for others.
Note that Liberty vs. Security is itself part of the much larger question
of republic vs. empire. Republics can afford far more liberty because they
need far less security. Republics are not generally targets for this kind of
attack. Wealth republics need defense or they don't last, but the defense
needs to be of a different kind. Empires seek to impose their will -- their
notion of good, to protect the weak and make humble the proud; liberte,
egalite, fraternite! -- far from their own borders. They thereby generate
enemies, and must be protected from them. This requires security, and that
requires a surrender of liberties.
I have tried to make the above analysis as neutral as possible given my
known preference for republic. But make no mistake: my ancestors
were good imperialists. My family came to this country as servants of
Napoleon Bonaparte, Emperor of the French, and many of my relatives fought
for him. I am in agreement with the sentiment that it is good that war is
so terrible lest we grow to love it too much. Please do not, as a few
silly people, have, ascribe to me a pacifism I do not have. I would not
have taken pleasure in wading in the blood of the innocent to the Holy Sepulcher,
but my ancestors were there with Robert of Normandy.
What liberties will we surrender for security; and what do we gain by
doing so? These are large and important questions.
The other question, what shall we do in retaliation and vengeance, is
related: what is the appropriate response of a republic? Understand:
a republic holds the entire people of the enemy to be the enemy. They have
chosen the wrong friends and they tolerate the wrong government. They are
afraid of their masters: perhaps they should fear us more when their
masters order them to attack.
The response to Germany and Japan was their utter defeat and
reconstruction under the proconsuls MacArthur and Lucius Clay. These were
entirely appropriate responses. Do not provoke the American people to war,
for you will survive it -- the message to their leaders. Do not
follow when your leaders provoke the American people to war, for you will
regret it -- the message to followers.
And now we can discuss specifics.
I have begun to do so on another
page.
Dr. Pournelle:
Do you know of a memorial fund directed specifically
to the heirs of Flight 93? I plan to donate the proceeds from my club's
next shooting match to victims' relief and would prefer to direct it to
the heirs of the only combatants on our side thus far. We run in
accordance with the IDPA (International Defensive Pistol Association www.IDPA.com
) format and consider that to be the most appropriate use of our funds.
Jim Watson
I know of none, yet.
BEWARE OF SCAMS. Vultures are already cruising
the Internet looking for DONATIONS in the name of various peoples. The
American RED CROSS is legitimate. But know to whom you are sending money.
AND NOTE (from Alex):
"AS OF 1340 HOURS PDT 10/13/01, NO repeat NO official request has
been made for equipment of this sort via the American Red Cross National
office. NO such request is present in the logistic queue for the ARC, as
per queries made through local chapters.
I am sure that good people are making their best attempts to be
helpful, and it's to be admired. However, it is EXTREMELY important that
ALL requests for such resources be placed OFFICIALLY, if they are to be
handled through the Red Cross. UNofficial requests, and people helping
other people, are to be admired and lauded, but that should NOT impede the
official requests."
Amazon has set up a page to accept donations to the American Red
Cross Disaster Relief Fund:
< http://www.amazon.com/paypage/PKAXFNQH7EKCX
>
And good sense from Will Christian:
Dear Mr. Pournelle, and others...
I keep hearing various officials and media figures
gravely intoning that we need to make sure we've found the precise
terrorists responsible for the WTC assaults before we strike. Why on earth
should we be worried about attacking the "wrong" terrorists?
Isn't killing ANY terrorist demonstrably good? Why wait?
To which I agree completely. The message should be like Niven's Law:
"Do not throw Baggies of shit at an armed man. Do not stand next to a
fool who is throwing Baggies of shit at an armed man."
Or as I like to say, choose your friends wisely.
For we hold in all disaster, as the Gods themselves have said, a man
must stand by his master, till one or the other is dead.
And we hold that true of our enemies even if they do not.
I understand that the Taliban now refuses to extradite bin Laden. This
should be considered an act of war.
NEW PAGE ON THE BLACK SEPTEMBER
WAR
TOP
|
