The Black September War
Thursday, November 22, 2001
Sections
Alt.Mail
Special Reports
This page will present a selection of mail on this subject, sometimes with replies. You will have to forgive me if the formatting is not always correct. I have four hundred emails on this subject, and I cannot possible publish them all, or comment to all those I do publish.
See also the REACTIONS page, which is more mail, largely unsorted and uncommented, but still only representative.
- St Onge: Have we been defeated?
- Talin: on naming the war
- Schmitt: Way Over The Top
- Bingley: From England
- Air travel baggage
- Is Pakistan the Enemy?
- A Southernor speaks
- Culture War
- Andy Baker: Pournelle needs to learn history
- Chad Parish: another view
- Braxton Cook: A former marine speaks
- Paul Hardy: Pournelle as wanker
- The Libertarian Dilemma
- The Guardian: A contrarian view
- Ed Hume: what's next?
- An Afghani Speaks: what we must do
- The IRS enters the fray
- The Empire in Bosnia
- Kabul the wrong city
- Cook: A different kind of monument
- Did they Celebrate in Palestine?
- Steve Stirling on Empire, with a short reply
- Talin: some new thoughts
- Joel Rosenberg on what to do
- Clausewitz and what we can do
- Mr. X on Security
- Peace or truce?
- And from MIT: you silly Americans
- Racansky on reforming the militia
- Isolation? And biowar.
- And links
- And links
- It was all an American Plot
- October 21, 2001
- November 2, 2001
- November 22, 2001
From: Stephen M. St. Onge saintonge@hotmail.com
Subject: Our defeat in the non-war against terrorism
Dear Jerry:
For two interesting pov in re Tuesday's mass murders, see: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,34342,00.html
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20010913.html
In the first, Steve Millow point out that the killers picked the correct stories to crash the planes. I'd thought that they'd goofed by not hitting the base. Wrong.
Turns out there was asbestos insulation on the girders through floor 63. It would have taken about four hours for fires there to bring the buildings down. Luck, or good planning?
In the second, "Bob Cringley" points out that most of the responses to the event will be because those responders want to do them, not because they will help.
Which brings up the main point: we have already defeated ourselves, I fear.
Your plan for responding to the attack is, imao, 90% correct.
We should declare war on Afghanistan and its govt., and wait 24 hours for them to surrender unconditionally. Then, after they don't, we should nuke Kabul. One Hiroshima/Nagasaki sized bomb on the center of the government complex. Then, destroy every military facility, airport, bridge, water treatment plant, and other piece of civilized infrastructure in the country. Sow our Kabul monument with salt AND radioactive waste. And over the ruins, pictures of the WTC, burning, and the legend "You made a mistake."
We should specifically prefer nukes to iron bombs. Hundreds of fire and H.E. raids on Nippon did not break its will to resist. Two fission bombs did.
Second, letters of marquee and reprisal should be issued en blanc for the leaders of the Taliban, Bin Laden, and any future terrorist attacking the U.S., authorizing the theft of their assets and a tax free reward for each confirmed assassination. Standing orders should be issued to our theater commanders that if they believe any of the people in that list are in a given place, they MUST immediately attack it, using whatever weapons are necessary to kill them. Specifically, if the word goes out that one of them is in the basement of an orphanage, they are ordered to use whatever weapon will kill anyone in that basement, and to Hell with the bystanders.
Thirdly, as you said, flatten the spots in Nablus, Gaza, and wherever else they celebrated the attack.
Lastly, tell the world we'll start out by treating any future terrorist harboring state this way, but if that doesn't work, we're prepared to play really rough. 'Do not throw baggies of shit at an armed man. Do not stand next to someone who throws baggies of shit at an armed man,' indeed.
That's what we SHOULD do, but it's not what we will do. We are going to wimp out. All you have to do is listen to our "leaders." Notice what they aren't saying:
'You murders who did this are the walking dead. We never stop hunting you, we will never give you sanctuary. And when we find you, will kill you.' They don't have the stones. They may call it an 'act of war,' but they will not make war in return.
I hate to say it, I am trembling with rage and weeping in fury as I type this, but I think it's over. Our country is finished, and the scum will win, because they are not afraid to fight, and we are.
On September 11th, I learned what it was like to be a USAmerican on Dec. 7th, 1941. Now I know what it was like to be an Englishman on Nov. 11th, 1918 -- a man whose country was once a great power.
Sadly, Stephen
I think perhaps you underestimate the resolve of this president. Congress has given him imperial powers. I think you will find he will use them a bit better than you fear. Precisely how I do not know. But I think despair the wrong emotion just now.
Actually, a columnist (I don't know who) has come up with a name which I think is very fitting: The Twilight War. (As distinct from the "cold war" and the wars that preceded it.)
Like the Cold War, the twilight war will be long...and slow...and perhaps frustrating to those who would prefer a lightning strike response. And it's true that Americans aren't good at fighting long protracted engagements, because they have short attention spans and soon forget - but in this case, the terrorists have made a grave strategic error. They have made it so that we *can't* forget. Anyone who looks at the NY skyline for the next 20 years will remember what happened there.
-- Talin "I am life's flame, respect my name, Explorati, Inc. my fire is red, my heart is gold. http://www.explorati.com Thy dreams can be, believe in me, http://www.sylvantech.com/~talin if you will let my wings unfold!" -- Heather Alexander
Indeed
Geez! I'm the guy who suggested, quite seriously, exterminating the families of the perpetrators as a future deterrent, and even I am utterly apalled at your notion of displacing, shooting, or incinerating, indiscriminately, the street partiers we saw in Gaza and elsewhere. ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND? These are a bunch of only somewhat deluded individuals who *really have been* unjustly discriminated against by Israel and the West! A bunch of *kids*! Smoking them would afford them a level of credibility that even *I* could support! Forgodssake, man! Find a balance! What I suggested was a set of procedures I would willingly go to Hell for, if only we had a sane outcome. What you are suggesting is just outrageously immoral. It's WRONG! Surgical strikes and measured insanity leveled against precise targets is one thing, but wholesale dismissal of an entire set of peoples and their IMHO objectively sane collective response is quite another. I'm very disappointed. I'm praying that I misread you. Shit, man!.... Pete.
-- - Nobody moves very much in a Hanna Barbera cartoon! - Zorak - "I refuse to geez." - Prschmitt at home dot com http://www.geocities.com/prschmitt/
Thank you.
Mr. Schmitt has more to say, which I may post below, but the language is not temperate.
This is the first time I've read your page, I found it while trying to get the latest information about the disaster over there. I'm from England and as you may know we're having a three minutes silence in about 15 minutes. So this tragedy is on my mind at the moment, it's not really been off my mind since it happened.
I have strong views on how this situation should be handled (stronger actually than I'd like to admit). But I think this is definitely a case of hope for peace, but prepare for WAR!
I see the pictures on out news channels and I still can't believe such a thing happened. Not to belittle the tragedy, but it looks for all the world like a film set from Volcano. I think that a disaster of this magnitude just can not fit into the human mind.
Anyway must go, the cease work starts in 8 minutes from now. I just wanted to let your country know that this country will support your government in whatever action it deems necessary. I personally served in the Royal Air Force for 9 nine years and have still got 4 years of my 6 years reserve to go and I would willingly go back to help sort this problem out.
I hope you have time to reply to this.
Thanks
C. Peter Bingley SureFax Systems Engineer Cable & Wireless Global
This is my work email so please reply to petebingley@cwcom.net
Thank you.
We have seen such horrendous images and though it moves every heart at the loss of innocent lives .. the perpetrators would feel happy that they have achieved or atleast near the goal.
As a frequent flier myself and having visited US several years back, the laxity at US airports is seen to be believed. This may be a thing of the past now, but one way to prevent this happening is to impress on airlines to increase the baggage allowance and say no to Cabin Baggage other than travel documents and cash and travelers cheques.
Put this out and guess the world would become a safer place to live in.
Ramesh
It would and it will probably happen, but I mourn our freedoms. We live in a dangerous world, and we may not be able to do as we like; but how much liberty do we trade for security?
Hi Jerry! I've always been a big fan, yada yada, and I've been reading your page recently, and I thought I'd make the following comments, although I don't think I want to make these public:
But on to the main matter at hand:
The really distressing thing that seems to be going on right now is that the mainstream media is leaving out in their analysis some important details. While they're not censored, there are some basic facts that seem to be conspicuous by their absense from the discussion.
Basically, where the Taliban came from: they are basically a creation of Pakistan's military, and without both material support and Pakistani ground troops fighting for them in Afghanistan, they wouldn't be in control of Pakistan. And as I heard someone earlier say about the terrorists themselves, you have to admire their operational art. They've succeeded where the Soviet Union failed: they have effectively defeated most of the Mujaheddin, and installed a system over the Afghan people that does what would be acts of war against the Afghan people, of the sort that cause massive suffering and death: the denial, for instance, of medical care to half their population. And the media in the West pretends that the Mujaheddin are still in control, despite the fact that the lion's share of kicking out the Soviets was done by the forces now in the Northern Front. How they managed that bit of propaganda I'll never know.
This has a lot of bearing on the current crisis:
* If we continue to pretend that Afghanistan is run from Kabul instead of Islamabad, and then go on to retaliate against _them_, we will be committing a grave injustice, punishing an innocent people, and finally being complicit with the people who helped support the terrorist act in hurting the Afghans more.
* Pakistan has a nuclear deterrent force. Going to war with them will be a very risky proposition, and may entail massive casualties, among both the military force we send and whatever civilians get targeted at home.
* I'd much rather have a bitter victory than a bitter defeat. NOT going to war with them may merely mean going to war with them at a later date. No doubt their equivalents to their national labs are working on more physics packages as I write this email. We are woefully unprepared for the sort of war this entails, but what would be better: doing it now, or waiting until they have more physics packages?
* Precisely how many real options do we have in this case? Pretending that "Afghanistan" is responsible and ignoring Pakistan's probable complicity will probably be very bad in the long run, as they will have more physics packages ready for their next venture, not to mention the sort of encouragement the next group of terrorists will feel.
* As a final aside, I study the martial arts. I really do feel that if the passengers on the first three planes had ignored the "do what the terrorist says" mentality we instill people with, and been prepared to take responsibility for the situation, Global War could have been averted. I can see no way, other than a suicidal ostrich strategy, that it can be avoided now. One vital thing a Republic was better at than the Empire will be, is in getting people to fight for themselves. We've discouraged that idea over the last few decades, and here are the results.
Phil Fraering pgf@globalreach.net
You raise questions I have not time to answer, but you do understand that the Pentagon is as aware of the Pakistani situation as you or I.
Had those passengers who had chosen to register weapons and obtain a certificate of competence -- to be blunt, people like me -- been armed those planes would not have crashed into those buildings. But armed citizens are no longer an option.
Had every off duty police and military officer been carrying a sidearm it is likely those planes would not have crashed into the World Trade Center. This is more politically feasible for an empire.
Dear Sirs:
Just some thoughts; take it or leave it. As a Southerner, I have never had anything in common with the Northern States. I have always considered it a separate nation. It is not ignorance that drives that Statement, but a carefully construction education and attention to heritage. I consider myself a Virginian and when someone asks me where I am from; I always respond, "I am a Virginian." However, I have been very proud of the courage and honor that those men displayed in the City of New York. I will happily fight by there side in defense of our Nation.
Thomas Jefferson believed strongly that we should not be heavily involved in foreign affairs, if at all. But many argue that after WWII, it became our responsibility to be the world's "peace maker." I find this ludicrous.
Keith Blanford
Indeed.
Dr Pournelle,
As I was coming in to work this morning, the person I was driving with was on a road passing close by the Pentagon. As I looked, I noted the area where the airplane hit, and also saw that the parking lot and other areas were filled with vehicles and tents supporting the recovery/disaster workers. High up on a light pole in the South Parking lot was a McDonalds' sign. I think we are going to make it through this mess pretty good afterall. It may seem silly, but seeing that tickled me. In all the devastation and heartwrenching work there for all concerned, someone has kept a sense of balance.
Norris Price
The culture wars. I recall the long lines at the MacDonald's in Moscow and the utter disapproval of the Soviets...
If you knew a tiny bit about the history of the Middle East in the last 100 years you might be tempted to refrain from advocating genocide on even more innocent people.
I always hesitate to use the word 'evil' but it was all that sprang to my mind after reading your horrible rant.
Yours sadly,
Andy Baker
Andy Baker [andybak@btinternet.com]
Non-pacifist, Non-Islamic Humanist who reads history and politics before voicing opinions
Clearly you either cannot or do not read, since genocide is precisely what I have spoken against to the consternation of a number of my friends who want to kill them all and let God sort them out.
As to history, I suspect I may have read almost as much as you.
I respectfully suggest we sow a salt of radiocobalt-60, rather than sodium chloride.
I have forwarded your whattodo web address to my friends, under the heading "The best idea I have ever heard in my life."
Chad Parish
-------------- Gold is for the mistress -- silver for the maid Copper for the craftsman cunning at his trade. "Good!," said the Baron, sitting in his hall, "But Iron -- Cold Iron -- is master of them all!" --Rudyard Kipling
Well, thank you. Kipling's Cold Iron is a good one to read. So is the Grave of A Hundred Heads.
I am a former Marine Corps Gunnery Sergeant. I now work as an electronics consultant to the U.S. Marines.
I have been reading the comments of those writing to you, and your responses, since the horrible events of Tuesday morning. Through it all, I have seen very little space given to the lives we are thinking of throwing away.
Perhaps it is my daily contact with these fine young men and women that is giving me this perspective or perhaps it is the certain knowledge that my son, an American soldier stationed in Germany with his wife and four month old child, will be one of the ones asked to defend the American Empire. In contemplating salting the soil of Nablus and Gaza, I cannot forget it will be mixed with the blood of American servicemen, perhaps my son's. Having walked many times among the white pillars of liberty at Arlington National Cemetery, I only ask that we consider very carefully what we do in the coming days, weeks, and months.
During the last few days, I have watched the Marines around me go about their daily routine. I have talked several times on the phone with my son. All are prepared, even eager, to avenge this barbaric act. But can we avenge it? Dragging Bin Laden before a judge will not do it. The wound is too deep for a court. Will the millions of lives in Afghanistan be enough? How will we know when vengeance has been achieved? What should we use as our gauge - lives or territory?
You should see their eyes, Dr. Pournelle. There is fear there, but there is more steel. There is bravado and sick jokes, all the while they are picturing themselves performing unspeakable acts or having unspeakable things done to them. They are seeing their own possible futures, and there is nothing more terrifying.
Just before lunch, I found a young corporal creating his will on a laptop computer. He was sitting cross-legged on the floor with the computer resting in his lap, but he was not looking at the display. He was quietly watching his fingers slowly press the shift key. He repeated this several times, then held his fingers close to his face. He studied each one as they moved as though he had never considered the wonder of it before. He probably had not. He was terribly embarrassed when he found I was watching him. Marines should not wonder about such things. Statesmen and writers should.
It is doubtful we can change the course of this train. We have allowed others to build the tracks and now we must ride it to the end. Hopefully, President Bush has adjusted the throttle so we at least have a chance of slowing down before the tracks run out.
Thanks for reading this.
Braxton S. Cook
Btw, so much for solidarity - http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,34372,00.html
Sam Judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from poor judgment.
Precisely. Whatever we do we should not throw more lives away. After watching the President in the Cathedral and hearing the Battle Hymn I have some confidence that our leaders know that too.
Deus lo volt.
I popped down to http://www.jerrypournelle.com/war/whattodo.html, not believing the sniggers about you.
After the initial knee-jerk responses, most people have had two days to allow a little rationality into their lives. You, however, have spent two days festering. You want to flatten any islamic country you think has ever slighted you. In the same way most people are innocent of most things in the US, so are most people in most other countries.
While you're waiting for the factories to be built for your iron bombs, why don't you pop down to the local mosque and spit on people? Might make you feel better.
You, Sir, are a wanker.
Paul Hardy.
Paul Hardy [phardy@gol.com]
I am not sure what a wanker is. Can someone enlighten me? I presume Mr. Hardy can read, but perhaps his comprehension leaves something to be desired, since I do not see where I advocated flattening any Islamic country. Although those that actually believe in the perpetual war against the unbelievers may become candidates.
As to iron bombs, the alternative are nuclear, chemical, and biological; so perhaps a wanker is one who doesn't want to use nukes? I fear I still don't know.
From Tom Brown concerning my proposal for monuments:
That is the funniest thing I have read in ages. Long live black comedy.
Which is closer to the truth if for no other reason than that of course what I suggested, only partly tongue in cheek, will not be done.
What we will do is harder to fathom. Nothing? That seems unsatisfactory. Detectives and intelligence agents and the courts and endless appeals? That will end the judicial system as we know it, as the people demand that something be done. Nuclear destruction? I don't know what a wanker is, but nuclear weapons are not toys. Fortunately we won't do that.
Fire cruise missiles at anything we like? We DID that. It did not have desirable results except possibly to distract the population from Monica Lewinsky. Occupy Kabul, Nablus, Damascus, Baghdad, Gaza, and all the places that harbor terrorism? Really? The cost in blood, ours and theirs, will be far higher than my wankerish monuments.
So what do we do? Probably not what I suggested; but better that than many of the alternatives I have heard. Certainly something must be done. I prefer that the goals be defined in advance so that when it is done it is done. If it were done, it were best it be done quickly -- and finally -- and definitively.
Else we have nothing but an endless curtailment of liberties.
Wanker indeed.
No, it won't be fun for Mr. Browne. Not least because his analysis is basically correct. He (and I and other Libertarians) really DO want a Republic ("Defenders only of our own", etc). I say "Basically" because I do not agree with his choice of words such as "innocent". Rather, I take issue with our need to be involved with foreign adventures which do not directly, tangibly affect our national interest. "Guilty" or "Innocent" isn't the point. Bosnia being a good example, just one of many.
That being said, I believe we DO need to make a real effort to punish the terrorists, and those who harbor them. And I think many if not most Libertarians would agree.
After that, my preference would be to become a Republic (as you define it)--preferably a Libertarian one.
Best,
John B. Andrews
PS: Is there a book you could recommend which deals with the Empire vs Republic question, as you use those terms? Thanks --
I fear there is no single book. I did an anthology called Republic and Empire once that had both fiction and essays. The works of Bertrand de Jouvenal are useful. And there are always Cicero and Plutarch.
For more about Browne see reactions.
This can stand for what will be a rash of such.
Dr. Pournelle:
This is the first contrarian article I have seen on the attacks. I am curious about your view.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,551036,00.html
Bart Leahy Orlando, FL http://bartacus.blogspot.com/
What should I say? There is much truth in that, but it is presented in the wrong way. Yes, Americans have blundered into much of this. The Clinton bombardments, widely seen at the time as "wagging the dog", generated a lot of hate, possibly deserved, but you may blame the American media for not getting a national debate going. And the idiocy of the Congress, impeaching the President over matters that, yes, did involve perjury, but still were traceable to illicit sex -- instead of abuse of power, namely, breaking things and killing people using the Armed Forces without any consent of Congress.
We are hated, sometimes justifiably, sometimes not. It is the price of empire. The price of being the guardian of liberties other than our own is often much of our own liberty. That isn't emotion it is logic. It is truth. It is truth many do not want accept.
There is no magic. We cannot wish things to be. And military forces break things and kill people, they do not build nation.
For a reader reaction see the reactions page
It seems to me that the first American campaign in this war will be an invasion of Afghanistan from Pakistan. That actually makes a certain sense: the Taliban have driven our allies the Mujaheddin into the north, and have recently assassinated the Mujaheddin leader. If our forces drive the Taliban to cover, then the other Afghanis will have a chance to win (I think it is telling that the Taliban's kind of Islam has so turned off some Afghanis--especially those in refugee camps outside Afghanistan--that they are turning away from their religion).
And while our men are there, they might have a few moments to spare for making monuments.
Certainly the monument idea is more humane than, say, evicting the Palestinians from their homes and sending them from Israel, which is another response.
I like Shimon Peres' idea of dividing the world into the equivalent of smoking and nonsmoking sections.
However, there must be a response that makes it clear to those who harbor terrorists that harboring terrorists is an act of war. Crafting a response that makes leaders pay without sowing more dragons' teeth is of course the delicate difficulty of statecraft set before our leadership (and by "our leadership" I mean the leadership of all civilized nations).
Ed Hume.
I don't know how to accomplish all that. The more I think, the more my monument notion becomes as good as any other I have heard. It was a thought experiment, but I am not sure I have a better.
But do we want a desolation as a monument?
And we have done this letter before but it needs to be read several times:
Subject: A view from Afghanistan
A sobering essay forwarded by a UC Berkeley professor:
Dear Friends,
The following was sent to me by my friend Tamim Ansary. Tamim is an Afghani-American writer. He is also one of the most brilliant people I know in this life. When he writes, I read. When he talks, I listen. Here is his take on Afghanistan and the whole mess we are in. -Gary T.
Dear Gary and whoever else is on this email thread:
I've been hearing a lot of talk about "bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age." Ronn Owens, on KGO Talk Radio today, allowed that this would mean killing innocent people, people who had nothing to do with this atrocity, but "we're at war, we have to accept collateral damage. What else can we do?" Minutes later I heard some TV pundit discussing whether we "have the belly to do what must be done."
And I thought about the issues being raised especially hard because I am from Afghanistan, and even though I've lived here for 35 years I've never lost track of what's going on there. So I want to tell anyone who will listen how it all looks from where I'm standing.
I speak as one who hates the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden. There is no doubt in my mind that these people were responsible for the atrocity in New York. I agree that something must be done about those monsters.
But the Taliban and Ben Laden are not Afghanistan. They're not even the government of Afghanistan. The Taliban are a cult of ignorant psychotics who took over Afghanistan in 1997. Bin Laden is a political criminal with a plan. When you think Taliban, think Nazis. When you think Bin Laden, think Hitler. And when you think "the people of Afghanistan" think "the Jews in the concentration camps." It's not only that the Afghan people had nothing to do with this atrocity. They were the first victims of the perpetrators. They would exult if someone would come in there, take out the Taliban and clear out the rats nest of international thugs holed up in their country.
Some say, why don't the Afghans rise up and overthrow the Taliban? The answer is, they're starved, exhausted, hurt, incapacitated, suffering. A few years ago, the United Nations estimated that there are 500,000 disabled orphans in Afghanistan--a country with no economy, no food. There are millions of widows. And the Taliban has been burying these widows alive in mass graves. The soil is littered with land mines, the farms were all destroyed by the Soviets. These are a few of the reasons why the Afghan people have not overthrown the Taliban.
We come now to the question of bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age. Trouble is, that's been done. The Soviets took care of it already. Make the Afghans suffer? They're already suffering. Level their houses? Done. Turn their schools into piles of rubble? Done. Eradicate their hospitals? Done. Destroy their infrastructure? Cut them off from medicine and health care? Too late. Someone already did all that.
New bombs would only stir the rubble of earlier bombs. Would they at least get the Taliban? Not likely. In today's Afghanistan, only the Taliban eat, only they have the means to move around. They'd slip away and hide. Maybe the bombs would get some of those disabled orphans, they don't move too fast, they don't even have wheelchairs. But flying over Kabul and dropping bombs wouldn't really be a strike against the criminals who did this horrific thing. Actually it would only be making common cause with the Taliban--by raping once again the people they've been raping all this time
So what else is there? What can be done, then? Let me now speak with true fear and trembling. The only way to get Bin Laden is to go in there with ground troops. When people speak of "having the belly to do what needs to be done" they're thinking in terms of having the belly to kill as many as needed. Having the belly to overcome any moral qualms about killing innocent people. Let's pull our heads out of the sand. What's actually on the table is Americans dying. And not just because some Americans would die fighting their way through Afghanistan to Bin Laden's hideout. It's much bigger than that folks. Because to get any troops to Afghanistan, we'd have to go through Pakistan. Would they let us? Not likely. The conquest of Pakistan would have to be first. Will other Muslim nations just stand by? You see where I'm going. We're flirting with a world war between Islam and the West.
And guess what: that's Bin Laden's program. That's exactly what he wants. That's why he did this. Read his speeches and statements. It's all right there. He really believes Islam would beat the west. It might seem ridiculous, but he figures if he can polarize the world into Islam and the West, he's got a billion soldiers. If the west wreaks a holocaust in those lands, that's a billion people with nothing left to lose, that's even better from Bin Laden's point of view. He's probably wrong, in the end the west would win, whatever that would mean, but the war would last for years and millions would die, not just theirs but ours. Who has the belly for that? Bin Laden does. Anyone else?
Tamim Ansary
Which means we must be smart, not merely ruthless.
Bureaucrats, it seems, like the poor, will always be with us.
From OpinionJournal.com ( http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=95001148 )
The IRS Gets Tough on Terror The Internal Revenue Service issues a directive (link in PDF format) extending deadlines for taxpayers affected by the atrocity. "Taxpayers who believe they are entitled to relief under this directive should mark 'September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack' in red ink on the top of their return and other documents submitted to the IRS."
Not everyone is eligible, however. The IRS stipulates: "The perpetrators of the attack, and anyone aiding the attack, will not qualify for relief under this notice."
The address linked to in the piece is
Carey Gage
Send in the IRS and the BATF. That will do it...
You've raised some interesting points in the whole republic vs. empire discussion. One thing I noted was the statement that we'd have to start finding, and appointing proconsuls to the conquered territories, to tell them who was and wasn't acceptable.
I hate to say it, but we've already been doing that in Bosnia for ~ 3 years. NATO has the authority to disqualify any candidate for office in either the Muslim-Croat confederation or the Serbian side of things. Biljana Plavsic, for example, became Prime Minister of the Serb half after her predecessor was ordered out of office by NATO's representative on the ground, despite the fact that she was already under indictment at the time by the Hague War Crimes Tribunal. You might note that she's also the only indictee of the court to be granted bail, and the right to return to Serbia/et al pending trial.
Charles Prael
Well I did not know the details but I am not astonished. There will be a great deal more of that in times to come. Do you know of any experts we can send? Kissinger, perhaps?
=================
Monday, September 17, 2001
An interesting and thought-provoking article. I'm not sure I will agree when I've thought it through but that's not the point is it?
One comment, you should suggest bulldozing Kandahar rather than Kabul. Bullozing in Kabul would imply that the Taliban are the legitimate government of Afghanistan or that Kabul is their center of power, they are not. They are a regional fanatic sect that has conquered most of the country by force, their home base is Kandahar and that is where any monument would have to be.
Cheers, Nic
And indeed I agree. Thank you.
And now an intriguing suggestion:
A few thoughts on your monuments at Kabul, Nablus, Gaza, etc. How about putting solar energy collecting platforms in geosynchronous orbits over these cities? Move all the people out and build microwave collection stations where their homes used to be. Convert the solar energy on the space platforms to microwaves and broadcast that down to earth. Use the microwave energy to heat large reservoirs of sea water. Use the steam to turn turbines for electrical power and condense the water for drinking, farming, etc.
The microwaves being sent down would be invisible, so we would need some way to mark where it is so that planes would not fly into it. Circle the entire facility with lasers, one for each person that died. Imagine this pillar of multi-colored light rising from the ground all the way to a geostationary satellite. Imagine 5000+ fountains of fresh water gushing from artistic fountains and spreading out to green fields surrounding these stations. Imagine the factories that would move here for the cheap energy. Imagine the jobs created.
Of course, this is all thought experiment. No one would ever build such a thing, right?
Braxton S. Cook
The details need working out, and we do not want to reward those who opposed the US; but free solar power to those who used to be our enemies might be a very fitting monument indeed, if done carefully. For more thoughts on this see the What To Do page.
Claim: News footage of Palestinians celebrating the attacks was old or faked
RUMOR: "I've received several copies of a message alleging that CNN is using 1991 footage of celebrating Palestinians and passing it off as 2001 footage of Palestinians supposedly celebrating the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon."
STATUS: False. Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat wouldn't be on record as condemning such demonstrations if they hadn't happened, besides which they were also documented by news outlets other than CNN. Eason Jordan, CNN's chief news executive, called the rumors "baseless and ridiculous" and says the footage in question was shot by a Reuters crew in East Jerusalem on Tuesday.
Statement by CNN Executive, Jim Romanesko's Media News
Arab Street Cheers, Govts Lament U.S. Attacks Reuters
Palestinian Officials Quash Pictures of Arab Celebrations, Fox News
AP Protests Threats to Cameraman, Associated Press
Valerie Milewski
Thank you.
Thought you might be interested in this one.....
"On a day of national mourning and prayer, a Boca
Raton [Fla.] company had its managers confiscate some American flags from
employees' cubicles, saying other workers might find them offensive,"
the Palm Beach Post reports. Inside
Politics -- The Washington Times
Karl
"Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for Western Civilization as it commits suicide." James Burnham
Something for the Black September War file:
Someone pointed out that Bin Laden didn't attack Canada. This is, of course, because Canada is a protectorate of the US and can afford the luxury of an offend-nobody foreign policy, or no foreign policy. The US does the dirty work, and Canada and Sweden and Switzerland etc., reap the benefits.
To function effectively, the international system requires a hegemon -- a power of last resort, someone who mobilizes the system to punish the more flagrant predators, puts down pirates, keeps the monetary mechanism ticking, and so forth.
In the period between the fall of Napoleon and 1914, this was Britain's role.
The British Empire made no attempt to annex the world -- until the other European powers got into the colonial game seriously in the 1880's, it didn't even really try to annex territory in the non-European world, except where local circumstances made it inescapable or where British settlers had pushed in.
What it did do -- through the Royal Navy and a small professional army -- was act almost literally as a global policeman; burning out nests of slavers, hanging pirates, making the obstinate foes of progress open their doors, and fighting the small "savage wars of peace".
Doubtless the Dervishes of the Mahdi would have made terrorist attacks on London in the 1890's, if they'd had the capacity.
After 1918, the British couldn't fill this world-wide role any more. The US could, but refused to do so.
The result was a 20-year series of disasters, beginning with the triumph of the Bolsheviks in Russia, going on from there through competitive devaluations, tariff wars, the Great Depression, the Japanese attempt to conquer East Asia, and culminating in Hitler and the Second World War, which nearly wrecked Western civilization.
Fortunately, after 1945 the US didn't attempt to get back to pre-1914 style "normalacy" -- actually a state of blissfully unacknowledged dependence on the British Empire.
Since then things have gone, on the whole, well. We faced down and destroyed Communism and the Soviet Union; the world economy has gone from strength to strength. Particularly since 1989, we've been living in a Golden Age.
The moral of this story is that any attempt to abdicate from the role of world hegemon will not produce peaceful isolation.
It would mean another round of disastrous attempts at autarky -- disastrous for the US as well, which is no longer a self-sufficient nation of farmers -- with universal poverty, regional warlordism, and the rise of new lunatic ideologies aiming at global conquest.
Joat Simeon (Steve Stirling)
It is certainly the case that if we are to do imperialism we must do it right. I question whether we are the kind of people who can do it right: whether we will or can transform ourselves into good Imperialists.
"Never did he dream that his bullet's scream went far, far, wide of the mark
and lodged in the heart of his native land as she stumbled and sinned in the dark."
Will we not think that way no matter what? I don't know.
I prefer a republic that minds its own business. But the worst thing possible is a bumbling empire, not determined to do what is necessary, taking half measures and court martialing its soldiers for doing what they were ordered to do, until the soldiers themselves take measures for their own safety from their own rulers. And that scenario I can write in my sleep.
Stirling on Falwell:
Dear Jerry:
Thing is, Falwell is rather obviously not enamored of the constitutional limitations either.
In fact, he seems to be very much our equivalent of the Taliban -- on a mission from God to purify everyone else, willy-nilly. Luckily, he doesn't have much of a following in that, or as history shows it would probably be necessary to kill him.
NB: I'm not a believer myself, but my ancestral Church doesn't think God engages in collective punishment, anyway -- "Shall not the Judge of all the earth judge justly?"
Yours, Steve Stirling
Shall He not indeed; but who is not in danger of that kind of Judgment?
Since armchair strategizing seems to be popular, I suppose I will try my hand at it.
First of all, I think it's important to recognize that there are really two different classes of states which support terrorism. First, there are states (or groups) in which there is a broad base of popular support, such as Iraq and Palestine; There are also states which have ruthlessly exploited and harmed their own people, such Afghanistan and Sudan.
I'm not sure what to do about the first case, but when we talk about "ending states that support terrorism" in the second case the answer is quite simple. We simply give the people in those states the tools needed to overthrow the existing regime and replace it with one of their choosing.
To quote what Newt Gingrich was saying the other day, the Taliban "...would not win a popularity contest...and are in the middle of a civil war." He also said that there are about 100,000 Afghans who would be willing to fight against the Taliban, and that all we need to do is give them money and arms (and I would add, military advisors.)
Of course, this has to be done carefully. Our strategy in the past has been that "the enemy of our enemy is our friend", but this policy has lead in the past to our creating monsters like Saddam Hussein, Noriega, and, well, the Taliban itself. So we need to be a little more careful about who we choose to give assistance to than we have in the past.
One way in which we can assure that our assistance does not go astray is to combine our promises of military assistance with an equal promise of economic assistance after the war. For example, it wouldn't cost too many billions to get our American auto manufacturers to build an auto plant on Afghan soil capable of pumping out Neons or Geos or whatever, as well as a few other bits of basic infrastructure. Happy Afghans who see an economic future for themselves and their families are far less likely to be interested in bombing other countries.
Compared to the cost of a war (both in money and lives) this strategy is dirt cheap, and IMHO far more effective.
Despite the fact that this strategy focuses more on help than harm, it is still a deterrent - if we turn around and say to Sudan "what happened to the Taliban can happen to you too" then that is a credible threat to their lives. The message is clear: You can be replaced.
If, on the other hand, what we do is merely bomb some cities, all we will have done is created a "Bin Laden League", even more widespread and entrenched than before. The whole point of Bin Laden's strategy is to get us to over-react in such an odious fashion that the moderate Muslims in the middle east will come over to his side.
-- Talin "I am life's flame, respect my name, Explorati, Inc. my fire is red, my heart is gold. http://www.explorati.com Thy dreams can be, believe in me, http://www.sylvantech.com/~talin if you will let my wings unfold!" -- Heather Alexander
What we must first do is determine what state of affairs we would like to have when we are done. Then we can see if what we do takes us toward or away from that. But that kind of strategic thinking is rare.
Then there is this from Joel Rosenberg
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=24533 Let's negotiate (a parody)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----
© 2001 WorldNetDaily.com
The attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon this week should illustrate to all Americans that it is time to break the cycle of violence between the U.S. and its disfranchised enemies in the world.
Here's my peace plan:
All lands West of the Mississippi should be designated as territories whose ultimate ownership is on the table for Final Status negotiations. As such, no further homes should be built in these territories, unless those homes are built by Arabs or people of the Muslim faith;
(SNIP) ...
I would suggest a special U.S. interests team be established to begin talks immediately. The team should be comprised of James Baker, Madeleine Albright, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Colin Powell. Powell must, however, be cautioned to turn down his harsh rhetoric of recent days. He has not been taking his own advice and has been counseling retaliation for the terrorist attacks. This is incomprehensible in light of his sound advice over the last year to Israel.
Do note this is a parody...
===
And from Steve Sailer
Afghans will betray each other for honor, money, or the pure fun of it. As Churchill said of the Pathans on the Afghan frontier, "Ever family cherished its vendetta, every clan, its feud... The life of the Pathan was thus full of interest."
After the disaster that befell the British invading army of 1842, the British scaled back their plans for Afghanistan and pursued a reasonably successful policy of bribery and punitive raids, with the occasional occupation of Kabul and Kandahar until a friendly Afghan could be placed in charge. Harboring pirates like bin Laden is the kind of offense for which the British Army used to lumber into Afghanistan, lay waste a few valleys to show they meant business, then offer rewards to any clan that would dispose of the troublesome chieftan for them.
One suggestion - when we go into Afghanistan, I'd like some Gurkhas on our side. -- Steve Sailer
Good advice on both points.
I am a longtime admirer and fan. Today I received something I felt worthy of your attention.
Keep up the great work!
Best regards,
Skip Neumayer
Dear friends and fellow Americans 14 September, 2001
Like everyone else in this great country, I am reeling from last week's attack on our sovereignty. But unlike some, I am not reeling from surprise. As a career soldier and a student and teacher of military history, I have a different perspective and I think you should hear it. This war will be won or lost by the American citizens, not diplomats, politicians or soldiers.
Let me briefly explain.
In spite of what the media, and even our own government is telling us, this
act was not committed by a group of mentally deranged fanatics. To dismiss them as such would be among the gravest of mistakes. This attack was committed by a ferocious, intelligent and dedicated adversary. Don't take this the wrong way. I don't admire these men and I deplore their tactics, but I respect their capabilities. The many parallels that have been made with the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor are apropos. Not only because
it was a brilliant sneak attack against a complacent America, but also because we may well be pulling our new adversaries out of caves 30 years after we think this war is over, just like my father's generation had to do with the formidable Japanese in the years following WW II.
These men hate the United States with all of their being, and we must not underestimate the power of their moral commitment. Napoleon, perhaps the world's greatest combination of soldier and statesman, stated "the moral is to the physical as three is to one." Patton thought the Frenchman underestimated its importance and said moral conviction was five times more important in battle than physical strength. Our enemies are willing - better said anxious -- to give their lives for their cause. How committed are we America? And for how long?
In addition to demonstrating great moral conviction, the recent attack demonstrated a mastery of some of the basic fundamentals of warfare taught to most military officers worldwide, namely simplicity, security and surprise. When I first heard rumors that some of these men may have been trained at our on Air War College, it made perfect sense to me. This was not a random act of violence, and we can expect the same sort of military competence to be displayed in the battle to come. This war will escalate, with a good portion of it happening right here in the good ol' U.S. of A. These men will not go easily into the night. They do not fear us. We must not fear them.
In spite of our overwhelming conventional strength as the world's only "superpower" (a truly silly term), we are the underdog in this fight. As you listen to the carefully scripted rhetoric designed to prepare us for the march for war, please realize that America is not equipped or seriously trained for the battle ahead. To be certain, our soldiers are much better than the enemy, and we have some excellent "counter-terrorist" organizations, but they are mostly trained for hostage rescues, airfield seizures, or the occasional "body snatch," (which may come in handy). We will be fighting a war of annihilation, because if their early efforts are any indication, our enemy is ready and willing to die to the last man. Eradicating the enemy will be costly and time consuming. They have already deployed their forces in as many as 20 countries, and are likely living the lives of everyday citizens. Simply put, our soldiers will be tasked with a search and destroy mission on multiple foreign landscapes, and the public must be patient and supportive until the strategy and tactics can be worked out.
For the most part, our military is still in the process of redefining itself and presided over by men and women who grew up with - and were promoted because they excelled in - Cold War doctrine, strategy and tactics. This will not be linear warfare, there will be no clear "centers of gravity"
to strike with high technology weapons. Our vast technological edge will certainly be helpful, but it will not be decisive. Perhaps the perfect metaphor for the coming battle was introduced by the terrorists themselves aboard the hijacked aircraft -- this will be a knife fight, and it will be won or lost by the ingenuity and will of citizens and soldiers, not by software or smart bombs. We must also be patient with our military leaders. Unlike Americans who are eager to put this messy time behind us, our adversaries have time on their side, and they will use it. They plan to fight a battle of attrition, hoping to drag the battle out until the American public loses its will to fight. This might be difficult to believe in this euphoric time of flag waving and patriotism, but it is generally acknowledged that America lacks the stomach for a long fight. We need only look as far back as Vietnam, when North Vietnamese General Vo Nguyen Giap (also a military history teacher) defeated the United States of America without ever winning a major tactical battle. American soldiers who marched to war cheered on by flag waving Americans in 1965 were reviled and spat upon less than three years later when they returned. Although we hope that Usama Bin Laden is no Giap, he is certain to understand and employ the concept. We can expect not only large doses of pain like the recent attacks, but! also less audacious "sand in the gears" tactics, ranging from livestock infestations to attacks at water supplies and power distribution facilities. These attacks are designed to hit us in our "comfort zone" forcing the aver age American to "pay more and play less" and eventually eroding our resolve. But it can only work if we let it. It is clear to me that the will of the American citizenry - you and I - is the center of gravity the enemy has targeted. It will be the fulcrum upon which victory or defeat will turn. He believes us to be soft, impatient, and self-centered. He may be right, but if so, we must change.
The Prussian general Carl von Clausewitz, (the most often quoted and least read military theorist in history), says that there is a "remarkable trinity of war" that is composed of the (1) will of the people, (2) the political leadership of the government, and (3) the chance and probability that plays out on the field of battle, in that order. Every American citizen was in the crosshairs of last Tuesday's attack, not just those that were unfortunate enough to be in the World Trade Center or Pentagon. The will of the American people will decide this war. If we are to win, it will be because we have what it takes to persevere through a few more hits, learn from our! mistakes, improvise, and adapt. If we can do that, we will eventually prevail. Everyone I've talked to In the past few days has shared a common frustration, saying in one form or another "I just wish I could do something!" You are already doing it. Just keep faith in America, and continue to support your President and military, and the outcome is certain. If we fail to do so, the outcome is equally certain.
God Bless America
Dr. Tony Kern, Lt Col, USAF (Ret)
Indeed.
September 21, 2001
You are certainly correct about the economic fundamentals of urban living. I will remain in NYC (or some other large city) for all the reasons you outlined.
You are, unfortunately, probably also correct about our privacy. The measures taken in London didn't put a damper in IRA activity. Bear in mind, the IRA has practically won. The six counties will be incorporated into the Republic over the next decade or so. The IRA knew what they were doing. The Ulster Protestants with their Union Jacks and portraits of the Queen never had a clue. This gradual surrender process went hand-in-hand with a centralization of power away from Ulster (e.g. Stormont Parliament) to administrative circles in London. None of the defensive measures and surveillance techniques prevented PIRA from major attacks on London office buildings. The IRA was restrained primarily by their own PR considerations (in the Republic and the US) not whatever MI5 was doing.
My biggest fear is that most Americans (yourself evidently included) believe there is, in fact, a way to gain security and convenience by giving up privacy. This is an utterly bogus trade-off. All of the hijackers had multiple identity documents. Satisfying bureaucratic requirements for paper is not, will not be difficult for state-sponsored terrorists. It went largely unnoticed two weeks before the attack, but it is very significant that a former low-level NSA employee (USAF enlisted man) was indicted for selling codes to Libya. The NSA and CIA have been penetrated by hostile powers numerous times. The latter was almost wholly ineffective against the Soviet Union even as it was falling apart. These are precisley the sort of organizations to which ordinary citizens will be ceding authentic rights and liberties.
And many of the terrorists of the future will be US citizens with all the requisite ID cards and "rights." The real terrorists will arrange their lives to fall through the security cracks. Most Americans, having been conditioned to believe that even self-defense is something the must give up for "security," will be the losers.
I dare say you will have even more reason to regret this future direction than I will. As our "therapeutic" state expands even faster and further, Vdare contributors will find themselves under the microscope in a way that very, very few Arabs ever will.
Best Regards, Mr. X
I invite you all to think on this one.
We are often told that the word Islam means "peace". We seem to have gone from one extreme to the other. Now that Islam is no longer demonised, it seems it can do no wrong. Perhaps the truth is that the two opposing strands need to be held together, instead of dismissing one or the other. The reality of Islam is more complex. Islam actually means "submission" - not quite the same as "peace". Many horrific acts have been, and continue to be, perpetrated in the name of Islam, just as they have in the name of Christianity. But, unlike Islam, Christianity does not justify the use of all forms of violence. Islam does.
There have been reports that Muslims fear revenge attacks. In America and Britain, there have been stories of intimidation. Attacks on Muslims and on peace can never be justified, but the answer is not to forfeit justice or to ignore truth.
The contradictory reactions to the terrorist attacks - official condemnation at leadership level and support among many people - are an indication that Islam is not always "a religion of peace". There are so many Muslims rejoicing at the tragic loss of American lives and the humiliation of the American government that they cannot be dismissed as "a few extremists".
Sura 9, verse 5 of the Koran reads, "Then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them. And seize them, beleaguer them, And lie in wait for them, In every stratagem (of war)." The note that accompanies this verse in the respected A Yusuf Ali translation states that "when war becomes inevitable it must be pursued with vigour The fighting may take the form of slaughter, or capture, or siege, or ambush and other stratagems."
In the Muslim faith, the Koran is believed to be the very word of God, applying to all people, in all times, in all places. It is the source of the Muslim faith and the law that orders the Islamic way of life. Killing is not totally forbidden: in fact, it was through conquest that Islam spread. In Indonesia today, non-Muslims are offered a choice of conversion to Islam or death. The argument that the above verse was written to refer only to a particular time and people is not valid. The Koran is considered immutable - a fact that has been repeatedly employed to justify verses that are discriminatory toward women, such as the unequal inheritance shares given to women in line with Sura 4, verse 11.
The development of Shariah, Islamic law, created a society where non-Muslims lived as second-class citizens subject to and humiliated by numerous laws. Those who converted from Islam to another religion were killed, a practice that continues in Afghanistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia. Koran Sura 5, verse 85, which speaks of enmity between Muslims and non-Muslims, reads: "Strongest among men in enmity to the Believers wilt thou Find the Jews and Pagans."
I am no scholar of the Middle East, but it was always my impression that there could only be truce, never peace, with unbelievers. Turkey seems to have found a way to make peace and keep something like the Muslim religion, although the state is by law and by protection of the Army secular. As for the rest, the Shah was overthrown in part because of his secular views...
Clearly here is one that would not be sent absent anonymity even from MIT.
Why all the fuss from you silly Americans? You will lose more of your people today from cigarettes you smoke than you did on the Day of the Holy Retribution.
This year, you will lose more from automobile accidents, more from gun violence by the cowboys in your own streets, than you did when your buildings fell.
A paltry five or six thousand more, and you wail and cry and shout, "Why me?"
Why do you think yourselves so special?
Consider the people of Iraq, with a million dead from your aggressive war, and half a million more dead from your "sanctions", where children cannot find milk to drink. Consider the children of Palestine, the tens of thousands of them shot down for sport by your Zionist allies. Consider the thousands of Afghanis that were murdered by your Clinton in order to distract you from his sexual perversion. Consider, today, the starving children of Afghanistan who may have but a crust of bread to eat. Consider the martys of Chechnia, butchered by the tens of thousands at the hands of your Bush's friend Putin.
Are you somehow better than them? Should your cities be safe from the destruction that they suffer every day? Why?
You wail about a few thousand of your own people, as though that handful matters more than the masses that you have murdered. You killed hundreds of thousands at Dresden and at Hiroshima, and committed genocide against your own Indians. You murdered the Vietnamese by the millions. You starve the people of Cuba and make your neighbors in Mexico beg for the privilege to pick your potatoes while their women spread their legs for your ugly men. You support the suppression of the Chechens, the Palestinians, the Iraqis and the Pharsi, and permit a Jew to set his filthy foot on the Noble Sanctuary, while your airplanes fly over head to protect him.
Wail and moan, Americans. Wail and moan over your pitfully small losses, and seize the scissors of your airplane passengers, and continue to think yourselves special.
lcs Mixmaster Remailer [mix@anon.lcs.mit.edu]
I wonder if this is from student or faculty, and if student, scholarship or tuition paid? Actually I suspect am agent provocateur, and I think I can guess in whose service.
Monday September 23, 2001
Doug Jones ("Reactions" 20 Sept. 2001, http://www.jerrypournelle.com/war/reactions.html) called the heroes of Flight 93 "militia", and referred you to Randy Barnett's NATIONAL REVIEW column on the subject.
Several years ago, former senator Gary Hart (D-CO) wrote a book called THE MINUTEMAN: RESTORING AN ARMY OF THE PEOPLE. While I still haven't gotten around to reading it, Glenn Reynolds (http://instapundit.com/) wrote a review in the May 1999 issue of REASON, at http://www.reason.com/9905/bk.gr.it.html
One observation that Professor Renyolds makes in the first paragraph of his review is "that citizens used to relying on professionals for the defense of their liberties would come to take their freedom lightly."
After sending a copy of the FAA's Federal Air Marshal job notice (http://jobs.faa.gov/CIVIL_AVIATION_SECURITY.HTM) to one of my friends (an avid shooter, CCW permit holder, and genuine rocket scientist at Martin-Lockheed), he replied that it would be much more effective -- and just as important, more economical -- to allow private citizens who meet the qualifications for being a FAM to serve as "unpaid volunteer deputies," similar to the citizen-militia concept.
I would love to see that happen, for a variety of philosophical, practical, and selfish reasons. But the chances of private citizens being allowed to carry guns on planes are about zero, no matter how qualified they are.
As you have stated in your comments about Civil Defense, the "professionals" wouldn't want any competition (Mail, Sunday 23 Sept. 2001, http://www.jerrypournelle.com/mail/mail171.html ). Professor Reynolds notes that "the militia system foundered on the twin rocks of public apathy and elite dissatisfaction."
At this time, even pilots are not allowed to carry firearms. Rep. Ron Paul ( http://www.house.gov/paul/ ) has introduced HR 2986, which would allow pilots to carry firearms. Considering that many pilots are ex-military, and in their younger days were trusted with much more powerful weapons than a handgun (eg - M-61 20mm cannons, nuclear warheads, etc), it is sad statement that they have not been permitted to carry the most effective means for self-defense on the vessels they command.
One e-mail going around, attributed to an airline pilot of 21 years, states: "Is it dangerous for pilots to carry guns? No. Pilots are some of the most mentally, physically and psychologically tested people on earth. Additionally we are drug and alcohol tested all the time. We are highly educated, have a unique understanding of how mechanical things work, and have eye/hand coordination second to none. We are also required to undergo rigorous recurrent training and checkrides every nine months. (A great place for firearms requal.) There is no safer group of individuals to issue defensive firearms to." ( Captain Duane Shaw, but I cannot verify the source, since this was forwarded to me through a mailing list).
I don't know if the above is 100% accurate, but given the choice between an airline pilot and and a police officer -- both picked at random -- I have more trust in the pilot to carry a handgun, and not just in an airplane.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ref: "Reactions" http://www.jerrypournelle.com/war/reactions.html
Interesting take on Flight 93- the men who saved the day there were, by definition, militia. Re-arming the appropriate people aloft will do more to promote safety than any amount of preflight chicken delays, body searches, and intrusive questioning.
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-barnett091801.shtml
and also, a cogent plan for air security-
http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel091401.shtml
Food for thought.
-- Doug Jones, Rocket Plumber http://www.xcor.com
Saturday, October 6, 2001
Please keep your site up and running.
I once looked at your site occasionally (and at your Byte columns frequently) for your insight, and to refresh my memory as to the benefits of using a computer not dependent on Windows.
Lately, I have been reading it much more carefully as a supplement to the various news agencies.
If I might add a comment: we in the US have a problem illustrated with some clarity on September 11. The problem is not new, but it is now a priority that it was not before that date. However, dealing with terrorism is unlikely to involve the massive mobilization that occurred during the Second World War. Because the event got our attention, I believe that we need to consider how we might respond in ways other than those of direct action.
An isolationist foreign policy, or even a policy of less drastic engagement with the rest of the world is probably no longer possible, given the interdependence of the US and world economies. The US no longer produces all of the finished goods that it uses, and more importantly, no longer produces many of the components of the goods that it does produce. This means that the US is dependent on foreign trade to maintain its lifestyle.
Even worse, the US no longer controls the raw materials necessary for survival. If international trade collapsed entirely, people in the US might starve, not due to lack of food, but due to an inability to transport the food from the farms to the cities. Additional drilling is no more than an interim solution; the real problem is the US dependence on fossil fuels. A long-term solution would be the conversion of the US energy generation from the combustion of fossil fuels to alternative sources. My strong preference would be the use of solar power collected by satellites (as mentioned once or twice by you and others on this site), although solar power collected at ground locations would be a good starting point.
The collapse of international trade seems unlikely, but it is not totally beyond the realm of possibility. As an example: The threat of a biological warfare attack seems far more likely than the use of a ballistic missile. Even more than in the attack on the WTC, the home address of a biological warfare would be difficult to determine, while the launch-point of a missile should be detected directly by US satellite monitors. I suspect that the use of biological weapons by the terrorists would be a spectacularly bad idea; the US health care system has its flaws, but it is far superior to those of less developed countries (Muslim or otherwise), whose citizens are more likely to be affected. Unfortunately, the terrorists are not necessarily rational, and might use effective agents without considering the end result. A widespread epidemic might inspire the type of panic that would prevent the movement of shipping and aircraft in an effort to prevent further spread of the epidemic.
How likely is a successful biowar attack? I am not directly involved in biological warfare in any way. I am a biochemist; my semi-informed opinion is that developing an effective agent would be difficult (I lack the information to evaluate the possibility of stealing one or on how effective preexisting agents are). I also suspect that distributing one successfully would be difficult, but not impossible.
My recommendation is some careful thought as to how we can reduce our dependence on finite fossil fuel resources. I would also suggest increasing funding in basic biomedical research to assist in dealing with biological warfare (this suggestion involves some direct self-interest!).
Mark Brandt, Ph.D. My opinions are my own, but I give them away freely to anyone who fails to flee fast enough.
Thanks for the kind words. I think we will not retreat into hemispheric independence, but I am not convinced we should not. I do know that if we are going to be seriously involved overseas we have to develop some energy independence -- solar power satellites perhaps -- and a lot better and larger navy.
Empire has a logic. If we are to be The Empire we have to start tooling up for that job.
Biological warfare is not as easy as many suppose: but if someone had a good supply of smallpox -- and it would not take all that much -- the vaccination process is known so the agents who vector it would not get it, and it is damned contagious: releasing it here and there, NOW, before we can vaccinate the health care workers and police and firemen and students and people who get together -- a major convention would be a good place -- could be a real disaster.
There are ways to cope with biowar, and presumably we are taking them. Let's hope so.
Dear Dr. Pournelle, I saw the letter from Dr. Brandt in War Mail. I have, over the past couple of days, gathered some links to information on biological warfare. After the Biological Weapons Convention was signed the USA destroyed its bio-weapons. The USSR was supposed to. I imagine that you are as shocked as I am to discover that the USSR cheated on a non-verifiable treaty. From what I've been reading the public health people in the west *we're* shocked. The USSR manufactuerd smallpox by the ton, and didn't have great inventory control, or security.
The public health system in this country is in bad shape. Over the past few decades it has largely been privatized, and there is no slack to handle an epidemic. During last winter's flu season several hospitals in the area came very close to closing their doors because of the patient load. It wasn't a particularly bad flu season. We can't handle a flu epidemic, much less a bio-terrorism event.
Here are the links:
Richard Preston (the author of "The Hot Zone"),writing in the New Yorker, on smallpox. This is good to read if you're getting too much sleep. www.cryptome.org/smallpox-wmd.htm
The Johns Hopkins University Center for Civilian Biodefense Studies. The "Dark Skies" wargame report is interesting to look at. http://www.hopkins-biodefense.org/pages/center/approach.html http://www.hopkins-biodefense.org/pages/agents/agentsmallpox.html
CDC reports on a smallpox attack scenario: www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol5no4/otoole.htm www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol5no4/bardi.htm
CDC bioterrorism pages, the images of smallpox are good to look at if you're trying to lose weight. http://www.bt.cdc.gov/ http://www.bt.cdc.gov/Agent/Smallpox/Smallpox.asp http://www.bt.cdc.gov/Agent/Smallpox/SmallpoxImages.asp
Kit Case kitcase@home.com
Thanks
And see this:
< http://www.strategypage.com/fyeo/qndguide/default.asp?target=urbang.htm
> -- --- Harry Erwin, PhD, Senior Lecturer of Computing, University of Sunderland. Computational neuroscientist modeling bat bioacoustics and behavior. <http://www.cet.sunderland.ac.uk/~cs0her/index.html>
Monday 8 October 2001
The great thing is to keep your nerve.
Then there is this sort of thing. This is a forwarded message. UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS before you read it and understand it is internally inconsistent. It's here to show what you will be seeing shortly from certain elements:
INFORMATION OVERVIEW ON SEPT 11 ATTACKS
PLEASE NETWORK
These are EXTRACTS only - follow links to complete articles and statements.
---------------------
"U.S. GOVERNMENT PRIOR KNOWLEDGE OF EMERGENCY". by Sherman H. Skolnick 09/11/01. 'AMERICA'S REICHSTAG FIRE'
Extract: < The most massive so-called "terrorist" attacks on U.S. soil since the Oklahoma City bombings of 1995, were known, a week ahead of time, by the American CIA. Among the foreign intelligence agencies who penetrated the plots were the French CIA and Israel's The Mossad, units of both often working with one another. Foreign intelligence sources confirm the validity of this story. And they state that they informed the U.S. secret police who absolutely failed, neglected, and outright refused to take action as to known prior specifics of which the top-level of the CIA were informed in advance. >
http://www.skolnicksreport.com/pkem.html http://www.world-action.co.uk/reichstag.html
--------------------
TWIN W.T.C. TOWERS DID NOT FALL FIRST!! Rumor Mill News Read Only Forum
Extract: < The video clip only lasted a few seconds and evidently it was only played once. Some of you saw it and I did, too. It distinctly and irrefutably showed a major explosion to the left of the twin WTC towers. A thick, dense cloud of debris billowing up into the air fifty stories high while the towers to the right are on fire, but still standing. >
http://www.rumormillnews.net/cgi-bin/config.pl?read=11721 http://www.world-action.co.uk/towers.html
---------------------
AIR FORCE INTEL SOURCE: "PRO-BUSH GOVERNMENT FACTIONS ABSOLUTELY BEHIND TUESDAY'S MASS DEVASTATION".
Extract: < INTERVIEWER: Is it true that our government knew what was going to happen? INTEL SOURCE: You could say that. Actually there are certain (pause) groups in our government who pretty much ran the whole show. INTERVIEWER: Are you saying that there was cooperation and collaboration between elements of our government and the perpetrators? INTEL SOURCE: NO. WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT THESE GROUPS (WITHIN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT - TV) WERE THE PERPETRATORS OF THE ACTION, RIGHT DOWN THE LINE FROM TOP TO BOTTOM. >
http://www.konformist.com/911/newshawk2.htm http://www.world-action.co.uk/intel.html
---------------------
EXPLOSIVES PLANTED IN TOWERS, NEW MEXICO TECH EXPERT SAYS
Extract: < ROMERO SAID THAT IF HIS SCENARIO IS CORRECT, THE DIVERSIONARY ATTACK WOULD HAVE BEEN THE COLLISION OF THE PLANES INTO THE TOWERS >
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/albu.htm http://www.world-action.co.uk/explosives.html
---------------------
INTERVIEW WITH HUFFMAN AVIATION CASTS DOUBT ON OFFICIAL STORY
Extract: < Israel: But wouldn't what they did require sophistication?
Dekkers: Yeah, they went to that school, I have heard the name, they call it a jet center for simulator training, there is no way - this is not my opinion. My opinion is I don't think it is possible. I have spoken to many captains from the airlines and they say there is no way what the planes did they could have done that. They changed altitude. They changed speed. They changed direction. They had to know about the equipment to do what they had to do and there is no way that could have been done. >
http://emperors-clothes.com/interviews/dekkers.htm http://www.world-action.co.uk/precision.html
--------------------
U.S. MILITARY SECRET TERRORIST PLANS
Extract: < "We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington," said one document reportedly prepared by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," the document says. "Casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of indignation......... We could sink a boatload of Cubans en route to Florida (real or simulated). ... We could foster attempts on lives of Cubans in the United States, even to the extent of wounding in instances to be widely publicized," the document says. Another idea was to shoot down a CIA plane designed to replicate a passenger flight and announce that Cuban forces shot it down. >
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/apfn/message/16755 http://www.world-action.co.uk/terrorist.html
------------------------
U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT SPONSORS TRAINING OF WOULD-BE TERRORISTS by Al Martin
Extract: < "UPDATE - WORLD TRADE CENTER BOMBING - SEPTEMBER 11, 2001: A SPECIAL STATE DEPARTMENT INTERNAL SECURITY TEAM FROM THE POLITICAL LIABILITY CONTROL OFFICE WAS INSERTED QUICKLY AFTER THE INCIDENT INTO THE REDSTONE ARSENAL IN HUNTSVILLE ALABAMA. THE DEMOLITION SCHOOL HAS BEEN SHUT DOWN, AND THEY ARE SHREDDING DOCUMENTS AS WE SPEAK. AS A MATTER OF FACT THEY HAVE MADE AN EMERGENCY REQUEST TO THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FOR MORE SHREDDERS." >
http://www.almartinraw.com/column33.html http://www.world-action.co.uk/sponsors.html
-----------------------
RUSSIAN AIR FORCE CHIEF SAYS OFFICIAL 9-11 STORY IMPOSSIBLE
Extract: < “As soon as something like that happens here, I am reported about that right away and in a minute we are all up...... Generally it is impossible to carry out an act of terror on the scenario which was used in the USA yesterday.” >
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/navy.htm http://www.world-action.co.uk/russian.html
----------------------
LETTER FROM RAMALLAH - ISRAEL IS POUNDING US EVEN AS I WRITE
Extract: < I am writing to you now to the sound of Israel's "Defense Forces" pounding the living daylights out of my hometown Ramallah. As the whole world is too busy paying tributes to the victims of terror attacks in NYC and DC, Israel has had a field day in terror attacks of their own on us here. Since the attacks in the US, the Israelis have taken their assaults on Palestinians to new heights. >
http://www.world-action.co.uk/ramallah.html
---------------------
ATTACK ON AMERICA - BY DR LEONARD HOROWITZ Author of 'Death In The Air - Globalism, Terrorism and Toxic Warfare.
Extract: < DIAGNOSING THE MEDIA SPIN What do I mean by media spin? Did you know that our government's and media's alleged greatest nemesis, said to be responsible for most terrorist attacks against the United States - Osama bin Laden - took his direction and money from the CIA for at least eight years. (See story at http://www.msnbc.com/news/190144.asp#BODY) This also implicates, by association, multinational corporations and the British Oligarchy's MI6. According to previous MI6 officer, Dr. John Coleman, in his precisely detailed and documented book, "Conspirators' Hierarchy: The Story of the Committee of 300," the CIA is largely subordinate to British intelligence agencies, multi-national corporations, and even the Royal family. Through the MI6 and numerous oligarchy-controlled "think tanks," Coleman explains, America's propaganda mills --major news networks and agencies--churn out foul fabrications that few recognize as propaganda. >
http://www.tetrahedron.org/news/attack_on_america.html http://www.world-action.co.uk/horowitz.html
-------------------------
ANOTHER TERRORIST GROUP - WHO HAS HAD MANY DECADES OF RAINING DESTRUCTION ONTO INNOCENT CIVILIAN POPULATIONS - AND WHO HAD FAR MORE ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS WITHIN THE USA NECESSARY TO COMPLETELY CARRY OUT THE INTRICATE OPERATIONS OF SEPTEMBER 11TH: THE HIDDEN CABAL WITHIN THE US GOVERNMENT.
The people who make the huge and disastrous mistakes in the name of 'The United States' are only few in number and are NOT the PEOPLE of the USA, but have wheedled their conspiring way into almost all areas of American government. They wage their own war against the world, and the citizens of their own country. A few hundred years ago it was overtly Britain, Spain, Germany, Holland, etc. who set about world domination. In the 20th century the controllers of the USA, from around 1960, decided to fight their own battle for world domination, in which everyone of us is dispensable. This is, no doubt, completely backed from London.
Extract: < BIOLOGICAL WARFARE? TRY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The United States has a long history of experimentation, on unwitting human subjects, which goes back to the beginning of this century. Both private firms and the military have used unknowing human populations to test various theories. However, the extent to which human experimentation has been a part of the U.S. Biological Weapons programs will probably never be known. The following examples are taken from information declassified in 1977, and from other private source accounts. Several involve incidents which are still of unknown origins and which cannot be fully explained. > (CUT)
DETAILS HERE OF ATROCIOUS GERM-WARFARE TESTING ON THE PEOPLE OF THE USA PERPETRATED BY THE HIDDEN USA GOVERNMENT:
http://www.world-action.co.uk/biological.html http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/experimentation.html http://home.earthlink.net/~bkonop/GermIncidents2.html
IF WE LOOK BACK AT ACTUAL FACTS, THERE IS NO GREATER TERRORIST GROUP IN THE WORLD THAN THE HIDDEN GOVERNMENT OF THE USA.
--------------------
8,000,000 WORLD DEAD BY USA TERROR GROUP:
'SHOCKED & HORRIFIED' - By LARRY MOSQUEDA Ph.D.
Extract: < Like all Americans, on Tuesday, 9-11, I was shocked and horrified to watch the WTC Twin Towers attacked by hijacked planes and collapse, resulting in the deaths of perhaps up to 10,000 innocent people. I had not been that shocked and horrified since January 16, 1991, when then President Bush attacked Baghdad, and the rest of Iraq and began killing 200,000 people during that "war" (slaughter). This includes the infamous "highway of death" in the last days of the slaughter when U.S. pilots literally shot in the back retreating Iraqi civilians and soldiers. I continue to be horrified by the sanctions on Iraq, which have resulted in the death of over 1,000,000 Iraqis, including over 500,000 children, about whom former Secretary of State Madeline Allbright has stated, their deaths "are worth the cost". >
http://www.world-action.co.uk/horrified.html
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
FURTHER IMPORTANT INFORMATION:
SPRING 2001: BUSH TALKED OF TERRORISM WAR http://www.world-action.co.uk/spanish.html
WHO'S TRULY BEHIND THE ATTACK ON AMERICA http://www.konformist.com/911/jimmarrs.htm
BUSH/GLOBAL ELITE BEHIND MASSIVE, UNPRECEDENTED 'TERRORIST' ATTACKS, ANALYSIS REVEALS http://www.konformist.com/911/newshawk1.htm
THE NEW WAR-LD ORDER (AMERICA'S NEW WAR) http://www.sauderzone.com/samizdat2.htm
'EVIDENCE' AGAINST OSAMA CALLED 'A STRING OF CONJECTURES' http://www.rense.com/general14/evidenceagainst.htm
------------------------
STRATEGIC DECEPTION DESK: http://www.ecologynews.com/cuenews43updates.html
A COMPENDIUM OF SUPPRESSED INFORMATION
------------------------
There are MANY more articles and information revealing massive deception, lies and cover-up involved in the tragic and outrageous events of September 11th, 2001.
PLEASE NETWORK - NOW
"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter" - Martin Luther King
FIGHT BACK FOR TRUTH: http://www.world-action.co.uk
And thus will it ever be in a free land. Mill called these people monuments to our freedom
And for a different view:
Hi,
There is a passage in the book 'A Vietcong Memoir' by Truong Nhu Tang I thought you might find interesting: "The continuing B-52 strikes were another Ally in the effort. To the Cambodian villagers, these bombings brought an incomprehensible terror, precipitating the more militant into the ranks of the Khmer Rouge and leaving the rest increasingly sympathetic toward the Americans' enemies".
Can you see the point coming here? If Bush wishes to end terrorism in the world he is going about it exactly the wrong way. Bombing poor and frightened people who lack both food and the equipment to listen to media other than that of the Taliban is only going to increase support for Bin Laden and the Taliban. It might also interest you to note that the average ration in the Vietcong and Khmer Rouge was 20 kilos of rice a month, whereas those living in their villages and towns continued to lead almost normal lives, and certainly were better fed. In Afghanistan the reverse is true, the Taliban own the food stores, while the population starve. How many will join the army merely to survive the winter?
Tang also has another point to make about waging war on American troops. This concerns the peculiar blindness Americans have when it comes to seeing war as an exercise in out fighting your opponents not merely militarily, but also in the diplomatic and propaganda fields. The Vietcong and PRG by all accounts ran rings around Henry Kissenger on the diplomatic front, and you only need to watch the archive footage of the demonstrations on American soil against the war to see how well they did at propaganda. But it seems they have not learnt from past mistakes, and instead of attempting to win the hearts and minds of the Afghans, you have decided to bomb them. Did it not occur to you that invading with troops first might be more effective? True, this approach would undoubtedly lead to more casualties, but a troop on the ground is far more capable when it comes to addressing the needs of the non combatants he should meet than a pilot at 20,000 feet. The population of Afghanistan by and large did not like the Taliban, but you have failed to capitalise on that fact.
As regards "Bombing them back to the stone age", I think the cartoon in the guardian a while back where generals discuss "Bombing them forward into the renaissance" adequately sums up the foolishness of this stratagem. In just under a week, you have destroyed the whole of the county's infrastructure, who is going to rebuild it afterwards? Or is it a case that you are just going to leave a country full of starving people, seething with resentment over their treatment by an unjust imperialist power? This would not surprise me. Ah, and while we are on the subject, exactly who is going to rule Afghanistan after the Taliban are deposed? The Northern Alliance, who stand accused of as many massacres as the Taliban? Or some unknown puppet government under the charge of the US, as happened in South Vietnam after they threw out the French colonialists. Either sound like extremely bad plans to me, perhaps you might suggest something better, because Bush sure has no plans.
Those are my views on your government's plans which you seem to endorse, but you don't seem to have considered the wider consequences of your actions. By forcing Pakistan into an uneasy alliance under threat of violence, you have effectively destabalised a Nuclear power. If they are forced to accept a regime in Afghanistan that is pro-India (as the Northern Alliance are) there will be a revolution, and the government that emerges on the other side will be nowhere near as moderate as the one we have today. Perhaps something to chew on when you consider advocating further military action.
I have read your column in Byte for a long time, but you never before struck me as a fool. Over this war issue it seems you can see no further than the end of your own nose. The choice of anyone who thinks rationally is to rethink the whole concept of aid to the developing world, no more handouts and no more loans to carry out major infrastucture projects. Aid should be given freely to those who need it, to conduct work that will make the people profitable and educated in their own right, not as a supply of labour to a western country. Once there is a thriving middle class in a country, they will make up their own minds as to who should rule them. Military action is for those with limited imagination.
I beg you to reconsider what you say as regards the war, and indeed about the morality of empire. Thanks, C.Davies.
"High moral standards are an evil plot by the coal industry to sell more units at Christmas" -C.Davies
[Homepage] http://www.cdavies.org/ [e-mail] c.davies@cdavies.org [e-mail, urgent] root@cdavies.org [IRC, ICQ] cdavies[dot]org
If you want to aid people you have the opportunity. You apparently want others to do so whether they want to or not.
My own views don't seem to have got across to you. I don't want an Empire. As I said the first week, I want to establish monuments that will make it clear that it is not in the interest of ANY ruling elite to allow people under their jurisdiction to attack the United States. I am willing to add to my monuments some solar power receptors so there is a carrot as well as a very ugly stick, but I want that ugly stick: I want people to realize that it costs to attack the US.
Beyond that I want OUT of those areas. This is not likely to happen. We are not likely to choose Republic. We are likely to choose Empire.
But Empire has its logic and its prices. You don't seem to like that, but there is little to be done.
I am willing to be the friend of liberty everywhere but the guardian only of our own. I do not see that happening.
If recognizing the reality of the requirements of empire makes me a fool, add me to the list. Add Machiavelli as well, and Mosca, and Parkinson, and Burnham, and for that matter Cicero...
On this score:
Four names came to my mind Dresden, Hamburg, Hiroshima, Nagasaki. US is not the only place that has suffered something unpleasant. In fact compared to these cities you have had a marginal number of dead and suffering.
These mostly facts do not take anything away from the sorrow of people who lost relatives or friends or the terrorism of killing 6000 people.
It takes away from the common american attitude that something unique has happened in New York. Killing (in this respect) innocent civilians happened so often in the last century that the fast demolishing of the twin towers is a minor mishap although a spectacular one.
It were Americans that started the chain of events leading to The Taleban. Human interactive phenomena seem to be so complicated that you had better not to meddle there too much. In the case of Americans it often (maybe more so than elsewhere) seems to be a case of: "If you even don't know that you don't know, you are in very deep trouble". To be truthful I don't see other politicians in other countries doing much better. There might be a small anomaly to that rule in areas where city culture is very old but seldom and only slightly above noise level.
To put it coldly it was fortunate that it happened in USA. At the moment I don't see any other country capable and willing to do something about an incident like Black September. And something has to be done about Bin-Laden, the sooner the better.
He might have gambled on the idea that "they" win and can that way bring down western civilization. He might have thought to polarize the conflict between 'Islam' and 'Others' up to a level where a world war like situation could be created. So far world wars have been won by industrial power and I wonder how B-L hasn't realized what the total western war industrial capability is or if he saw that maybe he counted on the will not to fight, maybe we'll see.
Hopefully we wouldn't have to live in these interesting times.
Tapio Manner Vantaa Finland
It is a view not likely to be popular here...
And from Joel Rosenberg
On to politics . . .
I'm for Empire. Not because I think it's a good choice, but because I think it's the less bad choice for Americans. We've just had yet another reminder that you can't let malicious kids juggle sharp knives in the lifeboat, and there's more sharp knives all the time -- like the Islamic Bomb that Pakistan has, say -- and more people who are far worse than clumsy, malicious kids. Solution Unsatisfactory? Sure. But only by comparison.
Speech for George W. (not that he'll make it):
"My fellow Americans, it's time for some plain truths. 'Security procedures' won't make us secure. We're not going to hire a couple of hundred thousand new Air Marshalls to put a pair on every domestic airline flight; we're not going to hire millions of new Border Patrolmen to link arms from the Augusta, Maine, to Olympia, Washington, from San Diego to Matamoros, and then increase the Coast Guard by a couple of orders of magnitude to guard our shores. We can't get safety by packing our airports with National Guard MPs, or continuing to restrict the rights of Americans to go about their lives withour government interference, and we're not going to play that game, not any more.
"What we are going to do is take responsibility, assign blame, and punish. It's going to be dangerous for people to commit violence against the US, and it's going to be dangerous for states to not do their level best to be damn sure that it doesn't happen from their territory. We have the weapons, and we have the will to do that. You could ask the Taliban about that now, and you'll be able to ask others shortly.
"As of now, nuclear weapons are prohibited to any country that doesn't already have them -- me, I'd like to see the Russians and the Chinese give them up, but I'm not holding my breath -- unless it's a stable democracy. We decide which is which, and we're going to enforce it. I'm not going to lose an American city to a nuclear attack if there's something I can do about it, so I want a missile defense, too.
"We're not going to let people like Saddam Hussein have nuclear or bioweapons to use against us, directly or through cut-outs -- on that, more in a moment.
"But it doesn't stop there. We need to take responsibility, as individuals, for our own personal safety, and that of our neighbors and families. Just as we need to respect the other rights embodied -- not granted, but acknowledged -- in rest of the Bill of Rights, we need to respect the 2nd Amendment right of the people to keep and bear arms for their own and their common defense.
"Which is why I'm submitting to Congress a bill that will establish a national handgun carry permit, using the same strict standards of qualification and training that we use in Texas, and will be valid nationwide, most particularly including Washington DC. Frankly, I don't think we're going to have to use guns to defend ourselves against foreign terrorists -- but I'm not going to hide behind my Secret Service protection and tell other Americans that they're denied the means to defend themselves from attackers -- domestic or foreign.
"In the interim -- until Congress passes that bill -- the Office of Homeland Defense will be accepting pardon petitions for any adult, nonfelon -- save for those who have been adjudged to be mentally incompetent -- who is accused of the crime of carrying a handgun, and those pardons will be issued by me, as a matter of course, until either I leave office, or until the national carry bill is passed. I encourage those who think that mandatory training and a permitting process will make life safer than it now is in Vermont -- which requires neither -- to call their Congressman and support the National Carry Bill.
"I know that that won't mean that the streets will run with blood any more in Los Angeles than they have in Houston, and I do want to remind American citizens who choose to carry handguns for their own protection that they are not immune from prosecution for misuse of firearms. You have the right to defend yourself; you have the responsibility to do so responsibly.
"But there are those who have used power irresponsibly, and against the US and its people. We can't be the world's policeman, although we can and will defend both our trustworthy allies, and ourselves, and we can certainly punish those who have chosen to be our enemies. We're finishing with the Taliban and Osama bin Laden, but that was the easy part. The battle agains terrorism goes on. The governments that have looked the other way while their financial systems were used to fund bin Laden and the Taliban had best sit up and take notice how we deal with Iraq, because Iraq is next.
"Now, there's some real question as to whether Saddam Hussein's Iraq was involved in Black Tuesday, but no real question that they were involved in the previous World Trade Center bombing, as well as many other attacks against the US.
"We're done with that. Iraq, just to take that example, will not have the nuclear weapons that they're developing, or the chemical weapons that they have developed and used -- against Iraqi people, and which we have no doubt that they will use against us. The state of Iraq has forty-eight hours to open every square inch of their territory to US -- not UN -- inspectors, or we will solve their weapons problem for them by dropping tactical nuclear weapons on every site that we believe is or may be a weapons development facility. I encourage the Iraqi people to move out of the way, because I don't think that their leaders are going to believe me . . .
" . . . and because the clock started ticking the moment I started this speech."
------------------------------------- There's a widow in sleepy Chester Who weeps for her only son; There's a grave on the Pabeng River, A grave that the Burmans shun; And there's Subadar Prag Tewarri Who tells how the work was done.
I doubt we will ever hear that speech. I doubt in fact that America has the stomach for Empire. Or that we will recruit and deploy the Legions that will be required.
If we do, I hope the Legions never learn the dread secret, that Emperors can be made in places other than Rome.
Jerry-
Thought both of these pieces would add to the discussion on your website.
Thanks for the good work..
Robin Whitson
rdwhitson@txis.net
I was at a UNC lecture the other day where they played a video of Oliver North during the Iran-Contra deals during the Reagan administration. I was only 14 back then but was surprised by this particular clip. There was Ollie in front of God and Country getting the third degree.
But what he said stunned me. He was being drilled by some senator I didn't recognize who asked him; 'Did you not recently spend close to $60,000 for a home security system?'
Oliver replied, 'Yes I did sir.'
The senator continued, trying to get a laugh out of the audience, 'Isn't this just a little excessive?'
'No sir,' continued Oliver.
'No. And why not?'
'Because the life of my family and I were threatened.'
'Threatened? By who.'
'By a terrorist, sir.'
'Terrorist? What terrorist could possibly scare you that much?'
'His name is Osama bin Laden.'
At this point the senator tried to repeat the name, but couldn't pronounce it, which most people back then probably couldn't. A couple of people laughed at the attempt. Then the senator continued.
'Why are you so afraid of this man?'
'Because sir, he is the most evil person alive that I know of.'
'And what do you recommend we do about him?'
'If it were me I would recommend an assassin team be formed to eliminate him and his men from the face of the earth.'
The senator disagreed with this approach and that was all they showed of the clip.
It's scary when you think 15 years ago the government was aware of Osama bin Laden and his potential threat to the security of the world. I guess like all great tyrants they start small but if left untended spread like the virus they truly are.
= Part Two: OUR MILITARY
Washington, DC 19 August 2001 Quote from Vice President Dick Cheney:
"On my way to work last week, I stopped behind a purple Geo Metro with my least favorite bumper sticker ever plastered across the back. It read: "It'll be a great day when schools have all the money they need and the Air Force has to have a bake sale to buy a bomber."
At that moment, I realized who the most undervalued and under-appreciated segment of society is. And it isn't teachers. Teachers, I believe, rank second on that list. Heading the list are the men and women of the armed forces, who, throughout history, have protected our country from the Hitlers and Stalins - they who would have had our white children marching to the school bus in jackboots and our minority children locked up in laboratories and labor camps.
The U.S. military-the most powerful and influential group of people in the world, hands-down-gets an awfully bad rap these days. Many Americans seem to think that simply because the communist Soviet Union no longer exists, the world is as safe as Beaver Cleaver's neighborhood.
This, of course, ignores three facts: 1) Dozens of countries have nuclear weapons that could take out millions of people with the turn of a key. 2) Leaders of several countries (e.g. North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Lebanon and perhaps China and Russia) would love to see the U.S. and its people blown to pieces and, most importantly; 3) The U.S. has the greatest collection of human, economic, natural and technological resources anywhere on Earth, making it the greatest natural target for military aggression.
Though some would like to fashion the U.S. of the 21st Century as a flowery feel-good fantasy where war and violence are mere after thoughts of a time gone by, that can never be the case. As bad as our crime and drug problems are, we're still considered the jewel of the planet by the half of the world that has yet to make its first phone call.
In ancient Greece, the people of Athens were unparalleled world leaders in art, philosophy and technology. Their rivals in Sparta were not.
Instead, the Spartans built massive, well-trained armies. When the two countries fought, who won? Sparta. And, guess who lost their entire civilization because they didn't think it was important to build an appropriate army? Athens!
Right now, the U.S. has the best of Athens and Sparta: we are the most cultured and most well-defended country in the world. As we continue to lower our defenses by devaluing the military, we open ourselves wider and wider to a takeover.
A takeover of the U.S.? Ridiculous, one might say. But why does it seem so unlikely? Because the power and protection of the U.S. military has been so overwhelming in the last century that Americans have been free to enjoy a comfort level unlike any in the world. We all take it for granted that we will never be invaded by another country, but few other countries can afford to be so sure of themselves.
It's not only Americans who can go to bed feeling safe. Children everywhere from Israel to England, from Brazil to Japan know that, if their country is attacked, the U.S. will be there to help.
On TV, the military is often represented by stiff, buttoned-down generals or the occasional drill sergeant. In reality, things are much different.
The men and women of the armed forces are, in most ways, just like everyone else: they are mechanics, pilots, cooks, photographers, engineers, secretaries and X-ray technicians. They work from 8 to 5 and then come home to their families.
The one difference comes when the U.S. or any of its allies is threatened by a foreign power. In that case, military people pack up and ship out, off to fight -- and many times die-so the rest of the country, including teachers, can continue their lives without interruption.
Teachers mold young minds into intelligent, independent people, and they should be admired for the job they do; however, I don't know any teachers who are required to catch bullets and swallow shrapnel if so ordered by the principal.
So, old-fashioned as it may seem, I'm happy to give my taxes to the military and tell the tots and teachers to fire up the oven if they want extra dough. Make muffins, cookies and candy and be happy you're allowed to. Because, as the old saying goes, if it wasn't for the U.S. military, we'd all be speaking German now."
It is easy to take liberty for granted, when you have never had it taken from you. -- Dick Cheney
Indeed.
Don't know whether this URL is amongst your war pages. I just came across it.
It is an analysis of the Soviet campaign in Afghanistan
http://www.bdg.minsk.by/cegi/N2/Afg/Waraf.htm
Lance Wilmer
Professional Surveyor Magazine Frederick MD 21702
Thanks!
g