From: CurtAdams@aol.com
Date: Wed Sep 18 2002 - 17:12:31 MDT
In a message dated 9/18/02 10:35:34, eugen@leitl.org writes:
>On Wed, 18 Sep 2002 CurtAdams@aol.com wrote:
>
>> The odd thing to me is that the Iraq thread isn't suitable. Iraq
>> is a pretty classic case of the kind of thing we worry about
>> vis-a-vis nanotech or advanced biotech. An entity with demonstrated
>
>Any sentence with Iraq and anything advanced in it (well, interrogation
>techniques, maybe) is an oxymoron.
Iraq isn't cutting-edge, sure, but technologies for the kinds of weapons
generating concern are anything but cutting-edge. Uranium enrichment and
fuel processing are 60 years old - out there with vacuum tube computers and
33 lp records. The techs for converting <random mammal>pox into neosmallpox
are only 20-30 years old, but are pretty much standard in any
publication-worthy microbio lab. Not nanotech, but strongly analogous.
>> tactics. What do you do? Yet the thread deteriorates into stereotyped
>> discussions of "US: good or bad".
>
>It's off-topic for the reason alone that it's being discussed everywhere.
Yeah, Iraq gets discussed everywhere. But the discussions are overwhelmingly
driven by these tribalistic conflict instincts and legalistic interpretations
of various international treaties. I would hope that in a list
hypothetically dominated by those who recognize the profound limitations and
inadequacies of both human instincts and modern governments the members would
actually have some useful stuff to say. But, no, it's just the same stuff.
Can't there be somewhere to go to
get intelligent discussion of an issue that could easily involve megadeaths,
alterations
to the international law system, and constitutional crises? Must the list
only discuss
"big picture" stuff so far out it's irrelevant to our current actions?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:08 MST