[at-l] (OT) Bombies, a Secret War, and Really Big Stone Jars

Sat Jan 5 11:27:50 CST 2008

Many years ago I noted that with each decision we make comes what I refer to
as a cluster of 'default decisions'. For example when my wife and I decided
to have a child we also decided to be awakened in the middle of the night
for weeks or months for feedings, diaper changes, etc. When we decided to
get a dog we also decided to spend hours walking the dog, spend hundreds of
dollars on food and vet care, etc. In neither case did we give a great deal
of thought to those 'default decisions' that accompanied the conscious
decisions to have a child and get a dog but we made those decisions none the
less.

The same is true regarding decisions made on the national level and the
'default decisions' that are part of the conscious ones are not always as
fully considered by the voters or our leaders as they ought. Too often, like
the desire for a warm puppy, they are made in moments of high emotion with
little or no consideration of the ripple effect of our actions. Perhaps the
best thing we can take from this thread is to resolve, particularly in this
election year, to give more thought to the choices that lie before us and
less to the fever of the moment.

On Jan 5, 2008 11:30 AM, David Addleton <dfaddleton at gmail.com> wrote:

> I didn't mean to suggest USA had ICBMs in WWII or used them vs the
> Japanese
>
> On Jan 5, 2008 11:24 AM, David Addleton <dfaddleton at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In our country, the United State of America, the decision to make war
> > theoretically lies with congress; foreign affairs is the province of the
> > president. But the cynics observe that war is just diplomacy by other means.
> >
> >
> > The constitutional framers separated these functions in hopes it would
> > make the USA a less bellicose nation. The framers failed, imho, because the
> > USA goes to war at about the pace of once a decade, for reasons hidden from
> > the public and for reasons stated to the public and often these reasons
> > conflict.
> >
> > Americans ignore many wars they've fought, thinking they're too
> > short-lived or inconsequential to consider in their histories: exhibit A:
> > "America's Wars: a Complete History" at History Central on the web:
> > http://mail.google.com/mail/#inbox/1174981bdef804d9
> >
> > Ignored in the "complete history" are the multitude of the wars against
> > the aboriginal peoples, wars that began before the USA became a nation and
> > continued unabated from its founding until the civil war; after the civil
> > war, the wars against the aboriginies resumed. Not listed: the war vs Mexico
> > to annex land for a railroad; the "cold" war that flared up in secret in
> > many times and places into a hot confrontation that may or may not have made
> > the headlines; military actions vs Panama and a caribbean island whose name
> > I've forgotten; the "war" on drugs which has affected primarily the northern
> > parts of south america; a failed effort vs Iran to rescue diplomatic
> > hostages; the Mayaguez incident vs cambodia; the secret proxy war vs the
> > soviet union in afghanistan, and the proxy wars vs the muslim countries
> > using Israeli soldiers, the Balkan Wars of the 1980s and 1990s, to name only
> > those that immediately come to mind . .
> >
> > Whether word wide or limited in scope, the decision to go to war has
> > always involved consequences unintended by those who made the decision to
> > use violent diplomacy, and among them are the generational consequences that
> > follow from unexploded ordinance and the memories of the innocent bystanders
> > and the participants . . .
> >
> > For better or worse, the United States IS a bellicose nation and is
> > viewed by the rest of the world as a bellicose nation for good and sound
> > reasons, reasons which are AT LEAST as good and sound as the reasons given
> > for the USA going to war in the first place. I will never forget what I
> > heard many times as a teenager growing up in south asia: "you don't know
> > what terrorism really is: its growing up and living with the knowledge that
> > a nation you cannot reach can destroy you without ever setting a human foot
> > within your borders; that the USA has not used its atomic tipped ICBMs since
> > WWII does not mean it won't use them again: it is the only nation that has
> > ever used such weapons of mass destruction and it may use them again
> > whenever it chooses." Reminding the speakers of the cuban missle crisis did
> > not seem to affect the speaker's opinions.
> >
> > Reminding american voters of what presidential politics means about our
> > nation making war likewise does not seem to affect peoples' opinions in this
> > country . . .
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  On Jan 5, 2008 9:58 AM, <Bror8588 at aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > >   In a message dated 2008-01-05 08:30:45 Eastern Standard Time,
> > > rcli4 at comcast.net writes:
> > >
> > > You forgot to tell how this was a main supply route that the loas govt
> > > rpeatedly promised to close.  The supplies brought in by this route were
> > > used to try to kill me.  Sorry if I don't fell sorry for the sons a bitches.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > What happened in the past is based upon War decisions but a new
> > > generation of children must live with the continuing danger in the now.  War
> > > is something that governments decide is necessary for one reason or
> > > another.  As soldiers (or any military connection) do what they are ordered
> > > to do people are wounded and killed and the land gets scorched or left
> > > fallow with bombs and mines waiting for whomever will tread upon them.
> > > Little children of 2008 should not suffer from decisions made in 1968 or
> > > 1975 or whenever; the government -- USA or Laotian or the United Nations --
> > > should address this situation (should have a long time ago) and clear the
> > > land of dangerous implements.  The people of today should not suffer from
> > > the decisions of yesterday.
> > >
> > > I can understand the anger and the righteousness that comes from
> > > having been a participant in a War from decades past and having to fight
> > > against phantoms and invisible forces (those not directly the enemy but
> > > certainly were and aided our sworn enemy at that time).  It is true that the
> > > area was a source of destructive supply, the aim of which was to harm our
> > > troops, and the tactics of that time probably needed to be efficient in
> > > obstructing said aid, but now we live in a time when the destruction
> > > continues long after the battles are done.
> > >
> > > After WW II in the Pacific there were those who hated the Japanese for
> > > a long time because of what they experienced in fighting the war that Japan
> > > instigated.  The Japanese were defeated and a system of occupation formed a
> > > nation that today has a strong economy and the people of Japan express their
> > > success in American markets, and in the world economy are fairly well off.
> > > The aid given to the Japanese after the War was the right thing to do.  What
> > > was left in the aftermath of the Vietnam War was a tragedy and continues to
> > > be a tragedy.
> > >
> > > Little children should not suffer the consequences of government
> > > decisions from decades past.
> > >
> > > Jack Wahlberg (AKA Skylander)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------
> > > Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape<http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489>in the new year.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > at-l mailing list
> > > at-l at backcountry.net
> > > http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> at-l mailing list
> at-l at backcountry.net
> http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l
>
>

-- 
Jim Bullard
http://jims-ramblings.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.backcountry.net/pipermail/at-l/attachments/20080105/d812b5da/attachment.html 