From: Eugen Leitl (eugen@leitl.org)
Date: Thu Sep 12 2002 - 15:17:30 MDT
On Thu, 12 Sep 2002 Dehede011@aol.com wrote:
> You are right. After Pearl Harbor there weren't any easy solutions
> just as this time there are no easy solutions -- however there are solutions
Actually, there were very simple solutions. This is world war, let's bomb
the crap out of the (easily identifyable on the physical layer) aggressor.
The challenges were economical, political, logistical, tactical, and those
involving death-dealing R&D. Not trivial in any aspect, but the shape of
the initial decision itself setting the machinery into action was very
clear indeed.
The one thing making the current situation difficult, this is guerilla
warfare occuring in a globally open society. The scale is negligible so
far. About the scale of Pearl Harbour (look at the numbers, not the
symbolic value). It's important to not use a flamethrower for surgery
gear.
> as we demonstrated against the Japanese. There is no reason in the world to
> sit in hopeless resignation and cry "woe is me."
I don't remember me proposing anyone should play the abandoned kitten
routine (meow). However, while this not being my field, I clearly wouldn't
suggest bombing the crap out of some other country (like, hmm, say,
Iraq?).
Long-term solution would be to kick fossils for energy source, and to stop
meddling in the producer countries, short-term to improve domestic
security (not the cargo cult freedom-slashing going on now), and to launch
global PR programs. Maybe to let Israel fight their own fights henceforth.
Pulling back in general. Let the world police themselves, and suffer the
consequences.
There's more, but none of this involves dropping bombs. I.e., there are
straightforward solutions not involving the 500 lb gorilla thing, yet with
a much better ROI.
> After Pearl Harbor we mobilized to an extent that most folks cannot
> imagine today. We also shut this country completely down insofar as allowing
> enemy agents to even wiggle. As a boy, we could not have any ball that
Easy enough to repeat today, just lock up every Muslim in camps for
protective custody. And scrape that pesky Constution, too. It's only in
the way.
> contained an airbladder as the rubber was required for the war effort, there
> was no chewing gum for the same reason. We saved our drippings from our
> frying pans and donated that to the war effort. We planted Victory Gardens
This is not a war. No identifyable geopolitical entity has declared war on
the U.S. Using tit-for-tat tactics on socities guerillas are using for
bases is not new. It has been used by Germany in WWII on a large scale,
and it did result in some major bad mojo. The hate is still there, if you
look for it.
> all over this country to ease the job of feeding the men in the service.
> Many women would not date a civilian man unless they knew him and knew what
> his story was. And, Eugen that was only the small efforts I can remember,
> there was much more.
I couldn't help being exposed to 14 years of postwar propaganda in a
country which was hit much more cruelly by the last world war. Both my
grandfathers were participating, one dead in combat, the other a veteran.
Apart from that no casualties due to famine, diseases, air raids, or
concentration camps. We were truly lucky, in comparison to most others.
Your descriptions sound really cute in comparison.
> But, this opponent in my opinion is only an international pirate.
> Sometimes pirates got strong enough to take over a weak country and civilized
> countries had to send their Navies or Armies to sort them out. That is all
> we are called on to do this time. I doubt there will even be a draft.
On which island is this pirate's base? Which vessels are in this pirate's
fleet?
> You said, "I guess this means you intend to nuke the entire Muslim
> world, including these Muslims at home? Hint: whoever did it doesn't have
> convenient unerasable "666" glyphs engraved on their foreheads."
> Eugen, please don't attempt to insinuate words into my mouth. That is
I don't. I just extrapolated the logic of your current strategy into the
ridiculous. I.e. showing where youre heading with that kind of strategy,
if you really want this to succeed. If there wasn't any political fallout,
holocaust would be in fact your best bet.
> beneath the standards of the kind of people on this list. If you will
> refrain from doing that we will all think better of you.
Thanks for your consideration. I don't want to inflame, just to amuse.
> You also said, "When lots of people die, it's always a tragedy." Yes,
> used in that sense it is a tragedy but tragedy is also being used to blur the
> distinction that we had a deliberate act of war committed against us. It was
Not a war. Terrorist action.
> only one of a long string of such acts, although admittedly it did kill the
> most people.
> You wrote, "I believe the guys who said that would have said anything
> furthering their agenda. In fact I believe they did just that." Do I
> understand you correctly, you are admitting that bin Laden's forces committed
> that act of war against us and then described it as an act of war? I can't
No. The tiny radical group can only profit from you seeing this as war,
and lashing out against whole socities. Hitting innocents results in
polarization, fuelling the hate which funnels the radical movement. They
want you to bomb the crap out of as many Muslims as possible. This
directly swells their ranks.
That's the reason they said it's a war.
> imagine how under the circumstances bin Laden's forces thought describing the
> destruction of the WTC as an act of war would advance some cause of theirs.
> It was an act of war, they had previously declared war on us and committed
> other acts of war against us -- they only used the appropriate word in my
> opinion.
There are about three orders of magnitude difference in terms of
casualties between what would qualify as a war. It was just an extremely
successfull terrorist action. Tracing down those responsible and
assassinating them is adequate. Removing the vulnerabilities in homeland
is adequate, as long no major freedoms get slashed.
Launching a war is not adequate.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:59 MST