Thank god our enemies are so very much less efficient at it than we, at least for the present.
timber
Let's keep them that way.
Our government spends enough on new war machines, and I'm sure our R&D far exceeds any other countries GNP. c.i.
I digress ... Asherman, I was fascinated by the outside site linked in your signature. Thank you. I'm curious about something in the name of the website ... do you know of The Reverend Mother Helen Gaius Mohaim and The Way? A formidable sisterhood, indeed.
timber
c.i., the Annual CTOM, or Cost to Operate and Maintain, a single US Aircraft Carrier Battlegroup exceeds the GNP of a number of respecttable nations. In peacetime. Expenses should be assumed rather higher contemporaneously.
timber
Mohaim is the Internet name of an Australian astronamer. She very kindly made her site available to a group whose original gathering site went belly-up a few years ago. Mohaim is very bright, I need to try getting her and Pat (another Aussie of that old crowd) over here.
As for Mother Mohaim -- no connection that I know of.
Ahhhh ... fine then. No matter. The Mohaim I mention is a relatively major character from Herbert's Dune saga. No doubt the originators of that website are Dune fans. We're a pernicious, ubiquitous lot, you know.
timber
I really don't like the Cato institute. But the above is not a bad argument at all. It would seem folly to pretend that the situation now is what it was during either world war. Thus, it's surely prudent to hash out what present rules of war ought to look like.
But...two points of caution are relevant here. First, such reformulations ought not to be occurring in private. This involves all of us as part of the human community and it is in respect of that human community that these rules gain their moral grounding...it ought not to be a matter for just military nor state department officials.
Second, let's acknowledge that where laws are in place, that is exactly because humans have proven that they sometimes will act destructively, and need constraints. It is hubris to assume one's own state might be above the mess of human failing. It is surely also prudent and morally incumbent for all of us to keep an eye on this sort of thing and to speak up when we are anxious.
blatham wrote:It is hubris to assume one's own state might be above the mess of human failing. It is surely also prudent and morally incumbent for all of us to keep an eye on this sort of thing and to speak up when we are anxious.
That certainly bears repeating.
timber
Oh yes, being blood-thirsty baby killers ain't cheap. What was the cost to the United States on 911? If the DPRK miscalculates by detonating nuclear devices over Okinawa, and Tokyo, what would the cost be? If the PRC was not restrained by the Pacific Fleet, how would we calculate the loss of Taiwan?
Cicero and some others say they aren't afraid of Saddam, and don't feel threatened by the thought that he has weapons that could kill millions. After all, Iraq is a long ways off. Saddam might hate us, but hasn't the reach to kill folks in California, or Montreal. They seem pretty sure that Saddam wouldn't sell, or give nerve gas or biologicals to Al Queda to use wherever they wish. Saddam isn't really a threat to anyone outside the region. Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and others don't seem too hot for forcibly disarming Iraq, so why should we? Israel would like Iraq disarmed, but if Israel disappeared perhaps the Middle-East would become a new Garden of Eden where the sheep might lie down confidently beside the lion. The United States doesn't depend upon Iraqi oil, so if Europe and Japan have to suffer it's no skin off our noses.
The inspectors haven't found more than a trace of the large stockpile of prohibited weapons that Iraq is known to have possessed at the end of the Gulf War. So maybe they don't exist. What are the odds do you think?
What would the cost be if some of Saddam's non-existent (LOL) weapons happened to pop in New York, or Washington, or London, or Paris, or Berlin, or Los Angeles, or, or, or.... ???
Nah, if we only reduce our military to the point where no one in the world feels intimidated by our might, we will be left alone. The devil will be thrown from the White House, a new left-wing administration will come to power and the whole nation will prosper. Without the evil combination that has swindled itself into power, every child will be above average and the poor will live in mansions. Prices will plummet, and wages will rise. The wealthy will be stripped of their ill-gotten gains.
Shucks, I've almost convinced myself to go out and demonstrate.
Asherman, As long as the inspectors are there, Saddam is not going to use or sell any of his WMD. Why end the inspections while Saddam hides them? We can play that game too! For all I care, we can stay there till eternity or hell freezes over - whichever occurs first. He's contained, isn't he? What should I/we be scared of? c.i.
It's really very informative to follow this thread.
Interesting re. different views is the debate of America's journalists debate pending war, too, since most of us get our 'knowledge' via media:
America's Journalists Debate Pending War
Walter
That's a great piece...thank you. Some notable bits...
- from George Will a "long, stately march to what is in essence an optional war." Has anyone else noticed how George loves to go on long, stately marches...destination, cliche.
- Neville Schell, dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at the University of California at Berkeley. "Where is the debate, aside from the occasional Op-Ed piece? There is timidity at appearing unpatriotic." Well, yes, perception and I have noted this.
- the one thing that "can be laid at the doorstep of all papers is a tendency to take the leaks at face value," says The New York Times' Keller. "It would be nice to see a little more awareness in those stories of how much stagecraft is involved." razzle dazzle 'em.
- "Maybe they have been a little bit lax in covering the antiwar movement. There's a tendency to slough it off and treat it as a sideshow." Certainly not encouraged by the administration who would prefer vital open discussion on valid points of view different from their own, like the chap my daughter and I were listening to last week who referred to the protestors as "patchouli-soaked nut jobs".
If there is a war, Reeves is pessimistic about how the media will perform. "We'll cover only what they let us see," he says, adding that the U.S government will put a positive spin on everything. If the truth eventually comes out, Reeves adds, it will be "too late," as when it was learned the Patriot missiles that supposedly performed so well in the Gulf War didn't intercept very many Scud missiles after all. Well, duh, just maybe.
-With boomers in charge, the tendency is to assume the government is lying and go from there."The few Gen-Xers out there, I hope, will be willing to look at war against Iraq through their own lens without that baggage." This is my favorite. The logic, and compelling it is, points out how helpful amnesia is in effective governance.
Walter,
Interesting link regarding journalists reactions.
The most prominent impression I get from all of them (left & right) is wonder at the all-to-evident shallowness of their views and analysis, and the equally breathtaking self-centeredness that pervades all they say.
This war is about the security of Israel. Bush and his neo conservative zionist oil-opoly administration are determined to reshape the world according to their tastes. The American elite will be protected from the downside; everyone else will suffer.
Some here have questioned links between Saddam and Bin Laden. The following link is to a long article on the topic by noted the noted military commentator, Steven E. Hughes.
"The Saddam Hussein/Bin Laden Connection"
Iran Watch, is a site that many of the commentators here might find interesting. There are many links to sources both for and against taking a tough stand against Saddam's Iraq.
The shallow and self-centered SOTU gets an equal reaction of shallow and self-centered commentary from the Press. That's not too curious.
Ash
What's steven hughes noted for?
Dont you mean iraqwatch btw?
OBL and Saddam hate each other's guts. Most people know this, and can see through these rather pathetic attempts to link the two.
Steve...Osama "bin Forgotten" as Senator Byron Dorgan loves to say!
For what it's worth---- it seems the polarization is now razor thin and the trenches are getting deeper on this thread.
