USS Kitty Hawk

Ok… I have to run to go see Tatsumi so this will be fast, I am just
going to put up here a compilation of my posts to various mailing lists today on
the topic of war. They may be slightly out of context because I simply cannot
reproduce here the words of others on those lists due to list rules.

I hope you find something interesting in them, and best of luck to those
people serving in our armed forces.

By the way thank you so much to those who have sent me email,
I’ll comment on it more thoroughly tomorrow.

posted Wed 3/19/2003 10:48 AM

[ … about the past relationship between the US and [[wp:iraq]] … ]

Were some mistakes made in US policy in the past? Maybe. I don’t know what
the real constraints on policy were.

Is it unfortunate that at various times supporting tyrants and bad guys is
necessary? Yup.

Does that mean we shouldn’t pull the trigger on them when we get the chance
or when it is expedient? Hell no.

The US is far and away one of the most moral powers that has been on the
planet. We are not perfect and we do our share of harm – but by ignorance and
design at times – but we do vastly more harm than good. Overall the planet
owes us their collective ass – twice.

No, we aren’t perfect. But I am not going to get all weepy about how "bad"
we are in the pursuit of an impossibility; the myth of perfect consistency or
morality of action in the geopolitical arena.

It’s too bad it came to this, but in the end as I see it some simple facts
remain:

1. This guy is dangerous to the US
2. This guy will NEVER shut down his programs
3. The UN lacks the will to take action

When I add that up I get a fairly easy answer. Take him out. And if he is
shooting at me with weapons I sold him a few years ago that sucks – but I
>still< need to take him out.

Whats the alternative? Never fight a war with anyone we might have done
business with in the past? Buy some guns from the US and be immune forever?
Hell no 🙂

It’s too bad the UN won’t go along with it, and it’s too bad that there
will be political flack.

In short, it’s just too bad.

The best thing now is do the job. Do it hard. Do it fast. Do it without
distraction.

posted Wed 3/19/2003 1:17 PM

[ .. reacting to the idea that [[wp:Saddam]] would comply with disarmament
to stay in power … ]

No, his dreams are bigger than that. If that was his dream – rape girls,
torture and kill those who oppose him then he would have simply remained a US
ally.

He has shown that he has an interest outside his own borders. He wants to
become and continue to be a player on the world stage and a powerful force in
his region. He has done this in direct knowledge of the possible consequences.

He knows what others know – if you can flop your way out of the ocean of
the little people and grow the lung that is possession of effective [[wp:WMD]]
capability you become a DRAMATICALLY more influential actor on the world
scene… you evolve into someone that must be taken seriously.

In short, you get to sit at the adults table.

In his mind and others it is worth the risk. And in the face of a UN so
crippled by politics and infighting that they will refuse to take action to
prevent it there is every reason to believe you’ll manage it.

And someday they will.

The trick for the moment is to prevent WMD capability from becoming
dramatically more effective in the hands of our sworn enemies and contain what
already exists until we have the ability to render them moot.

The solution in the nuke arena is significantly better satellites
surveillance and orbiting missile/laser platforms. The old "Thor" system would
have done nicely… hopefully it is coming back until lasers get better.

For BioChem the answer is unfortunately further away. We can soon knock
down the missiles that might pose a threat but a hand carry is much harder to
stop – fortunately advances in nanotech and genetic manipulation will begin to
be of value.

We need to hold place like Iraq back, and mitigate the threat of China and
Korea (N) until we get a chance to do what we do best – innovate until the
gamer itself is fundamentally changed and having WMD and missile delivery
systems is no longer enough to force your way to prominence.

[ … on the usefulness of making changes to the [[wp:UN]] security council
.. ]

It might… but the UN will forever be a sideshow – never the place real
things get done. In the end nations will not subsume their sovereignty to the
UN… and the big players will never allow the UN to become so strong it can
force the issue.

That’s as it should be. I will not leave the foreign policy of the US to
the leader of a non US governmental body.

[ … about the war itself … ]

This war will be fundamentally over in 72 hours. It might take a long time
for their corpse to stop twitching… and the post war phase may take YEARS…
but the beauty of being a superpower is that you simply can make vast armies
go away.

This is a lesson to remember and continue to strive for… to make the US
so powerful, so superior that if and when we chose violence that there is no
doubt as to the outcome.

It must be ever thus.

Wed 3/19/2003 3:57 PM

[ … on the idea that our military might is useless in the face of "19 men
with box cutters" … ]

Harldy. The ability to hijack and slam 747’s around is of little or no
strategic consequence ultimately. They can do damage, they can sow terror –
but they cannot force a large nation to defeat with such things –  they
simply do not pack the destructive ability.

You won’t stop an army with hijacked planes.

You won’t destroy an industrialized nation’s ability to wage war with them.

You won’t destroy a large nation’s ability to continue to have a
government.

In the end, you can do only a few things with such attacks:

1. You can sow terror and create fear in the population, fear that may well
   affect their ability to think correctly. You will create in them fear of
   such power you may well cause internal movements to attempt to appease and
   pacify you.
2. You can destroy lives and kill people.
3. When attacking a large nation with a real military and a strong national
   will, such attacks invite retaliation with REAL destructive force.

Let’s not confuse terror with actual danger to national survival.

For instance during the London blitz the explosive force of those 747’s was
delivered hundreds of times a night – every single night – for months.

Yet, England fought on.

Those 19 men with box cutters can awaken a conflict – they can only bring
about a "victory" If we allow our fear to outweigh what we must do.