[PREV - THE_AUTUMNAL_WEB] [TOP]
December 10, 2006
"The most persuasive piece of
rhetoric yet unleashed in SMEAR_THE_MESSENGER
this conflict has been the
daisy cutter bomb. It's the This, from the
only argument that much of man who declared
this clearly depraved culture Robert Fisk "racist".
actually respects."
He also called
-- Andrew Sullivan, Paul Krugman "shrill".
December 13, 2001
[ref] [ref]
(Note: as of November 2008, you
had to go back to the
But why would you expect web.archive.org for this. Now,
a bomb to work any better in December 2013, that link has
than the 9/11 attack did stopped working, but it's up at
on the United States? theatlantic.com. Legalities
breaking the web?)
Did that put the United
States in a concillatory
frame of mind? Ah, I think
I've got it.
They had in mind
cases where
bombing had "worked"
(by some definition
of "worked").
E.g. Kosovo.
This brings to mind
some remarks by Freeman
Dyson on the difference in
So it's a matter perception of the
of "fighting the effectiveness of bombing
last war" again. brought about by the
different experiences
Rather than, say, that England and
trying to study the United States
the problem, and had with it during
determine under World War II: arguably
what circumstances it "worked" in the
an opponent is Pacific theater and
likely to give-in was nearly useless
after being subjected in the European.
to bombardment.
And if you do
attempt to do
a study like
that, would
there be any
way to proceed
without trying UNDERSTAND_JUSTICE
to understand
your enemy?
My hypothesis:
It is not the force
of the explosions
that brings about
surrender, but the
absence of a sense
of moral force.
The side that knows in
their hearts that their
cause is not just is
the side that will lose.
Which is why "realpolitk"
is not realistic.
MORAL_VALUED
Morality matters.
--------
[NEXT - TAILSPIN]