Has Jim wised up yet?
It seems as if all of my life many people have been waiting for me to “wise up”. What one can infer from when they are implying that Jim’s view or understanding of certain local, national and international political situations is lacking in any semblance of intelligence. It is often the opinion that Jim “does not think” and thus does not appreciate what is necessary in the real world. “Of course, everyone hates the “necessity” of using violence, but really, Jim do you not realize there are really bad dictators, terrorists and others who must be shown that their behavior will not be tolerated. If you would just think instead of reacting you would know your Pollyanna response is not realistic.” Although there are many versions of this admonition or attempt to educate me, the basic message is always the same.
The very sad and tragic events in France this weekend provided another opportunity for friends to have some hope that I would finally see the light. The pronouncement by the French government that “this is war” was heard throughout the world and surely by the “terrorists”. The fact that France and other countries are already engaged in going after and killing those they have identified as the enemy is somehow not an act of war because it is the response to the behavior of the terrorists. The problem is, of course, that the so called terrorists are claiming to be responding to a long history of violence and an attempt to force them to behave in a way which is consistent with what civilized people know is the right way to act.
Neither “side” seems to have any concept that the other side will respond to violence with violence which will result in more violence which . . . Of course, one side has martyrs eager to die so that they can join the God of their understanding and the other side has those who are more than willing to risk their lives for the good of their cause and country. The difference somehow eludes me, but then I have not “wised up”.
On Monday, November 16 I was reading the Saint Petersburg’s edition of the Tampa Tribune. Howard Altman had a column or an article on page 1 of the Metro section entitled “Drones ready for leap into a new age”. His article was about an upcoming conference in Berlin “geared toward the unmanned aerial systems of the future. He quoted Skip Parish, as saying, “They’ll be smaller, fly in swarms and will soon be firing lasers, says Parish, a Sarasota inventor and drone technology innovator. Parish will lead a panel at NATO’s Concept Development and Experimentation Conference, which kicks off today at the Swissotel in Berlin. ..The theme of the seminar Parish will attend is “Unmanned Autonomous Systems Counter-measures.” Fortunately the participants are to discuss the “operational, legal, ethical, trust aspects associated with the development, implementation and use of such capabilities in support of today’s and tomorrow’s conduct of warfare…”
“There are three issues that must be resolved as we expand our use of robotic and autonomous systems (RAS) in military operations … “ (For the purpose of this discussion discussing the three issues Parish will address is not important since none of them concern whether or not new forms of violence will lead to long term peace.
Apparently, as near as this poor limited mind of mine can figure out, autonomous in reference to drones refers to drones which will not have a pilot sitting in some remote setting far away “piloting” it. It or they would be pre-programed. Some are asking “what happens when a machine goes rogue” …Or if there is a glitch in the software.” Obviously these are important questions. It seems to me that other questions must be raised and perhaps could be raised at this and other conferences on issues related to we humans destroying each other. These questions should, in my opinion, include:
· Has or is violence likely to lead to long-term peace?
· What happens when some person or organization figures out how to hack into the drone system so that it turns on the one(s) who sent it? Do we really not think that is not going to happen? What is the lead-time between use of a new secure system and the ability to hack into it?
· What is the long-term price for long distance warfare? Long distance warfare has, of course, been in use since the first capability to shoot or bomb from an airplane or to use any other weapons which prevented one from having to deal with the fact that one is killing others just like them. There is a very good reason that soldiers do not like to find family photos in the pockets of someone they just killed. That is the same reason why we invent labels for Tom and Bob and Joan and Irwin and Jack. It is much easier to kill a Jap, a Kraut, the Viet Kong, Charlie, an insurgent, a terrorist or a gook.
· What is to prevent the interference of various radio waves when there are an incalculable number being used for all manner of devises including drones for transporting goods and equipment?
· Do we kill off all boy and girl babies whom “we” determine are a potential enemy? One is reminded of past times, to wit,” Then Pharaoh gave this order to all his people: "Every Hebrew boy that is born you must throw into the Nile, but let every girl live." (Exodus 2:22)?
· Given that the new neighbor is developed via the internet, how is it possible to kill off everyone in that neighbor?
I am also again reminded of the admonition contained in the New Testament (Luke 6:22), “How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.” Of course this in turn reminds me that I had best be more attuned to the ways in which I deceive myself or the ways I critique others so that I do not have to look at the ways in which I continue to judge, punish, or blame others. Mercy! It seems so much easier to focus on those stupid people who think more violence is the best way respond to violence or those who are waiting for Jim to wise up.
So, once again, it turns out that “those people” who think I am a Pollyanna, emotional reactor are just mirrors for how I judge or dismiss those who disagree with me. Hamm,,, Indeed, perhaps Jim does need to wise up!
Written November 16, 2015
It seems as if all of my life many people have been waiting for me to “wise up”. What one can infer from when they are implying that Jim’s view or understanding of certain local, national and international political situations is lacking in any semblance of intelligence. It is often the opinion that Jim “does not think” and thus does not appreciate what is necessary in the real world. “Of course, everyone hates the “necessity” of using violence, but really, Jim do you not realize there are really bad dictators, terrorists and others who must be shown that their behavior will not be tolerated. If you would just think instead of reacting you would know your Pollyanna response is not realistic.” Although there are many versions of this admonition or attempt to educate me, the basic message is always the same.
The very sad and tragic events in France this weekend provided another opportunity for friends to have some hope that I would finally see the light. The pronouncement by the French government that “this is war” was heard throughout the world and surely by the “terrorists”. The fact that France and other countries are already engaged in going after and killing those they have identified as the enemy is somehow not an act of war because it is the response to the behavior of the terrorists. The problem is, of course, that the so called terrorists are claiming to be responding to a long history of violence and an attempt to force them to behave in a way which is consistent with what civilized people know is the right way to act.
Neither “side” seems to have any concept that the other side will respond to violence with violence which will result in more violence which . . . Of course, one side has martyrs eager to die so that they can join the God of their understanding and the other side has those who are more than willing to risk their lives for the good of their cause and country. The difference somehow eludes me, but then I have not “wised up”.
On Monday, November 16 I was reading the Saint Petersburg’s edition of the Tampa Tribune. Howard Altman had a column or an article on page 1 of the Metro section entitled “Drones ready for leap into a new age”. His article was about an upcoming conference in Berlin “geared toward the unmanned aerial systems of the future. He quoted Skip Parish, as saying, “They’ll be smaller, fly in swarms and will soon be firing lasers, says Parish, a Sarasota inventor and drone technology innovator. Parish will lead a panel at NATO’s Concept Development and Experimentation Conference, which kicks off today at the Swissotel in Berlin. ..The theme of the seminar Parish will attend is “Unmanned Autonomous Systems Counter-measures.” Fortunately the participants are to discuss the “operational, legal, ethical, trust aspects associated with the development, implementation and use of such capabilities in support of today’s and tomorrow’s conduct of warfare…”
“There are three issues that must be resolved as we expand our use of robotic and autonomous systems (RAS) in military operations … “ (For the purpose of this discussion discussing the three issues Parish will address is not important since none of them concern whether or not new forms of violence will lead to long term peace.
Apparently, as near as this poor limited mind of mine can figure out, autonomous in reference to drones refers to drones which will not have a pilot sitting in some remote setting far away “piloting” it. It or they would be pre-programed. Some are asking “what happens when a machine goes rogue” …Or if there is a glitch in the software.” Obviously these are important questions. It seems to me that other questions must be raised and perhaps could be raised at this and other conferences on issues related to we humans destroying each other. These questions should, in my opinion, include:
· Has or is violence likely to lead to long-term peace?
· What happens when some person or organization figures out how to hack into the drone system so that it turns on the one(s) who sent it? Do we really not think that is not going to happen? What is the lead-time between use of a new secure system and the ability to hack into it?
· What is the long-term price for long distance warfare? Long distance warfare has, of course, been in use since the first capability to shoot or bomb from an airplane or to use any other weapons which prevented one from having to deal with the fact that one is killing others just like them. There is a very good reason that soldiers do not like to find family photos in the pockets of someone they just killed. That is the same reason why we invent labels for Tom and Bob and Joan and Irwin and Jack. It is much easier to kill a Jap, a Kraut, the Viet Kong, Charlie, an insurgent, a terrorist or a gook.
· What is to prevent the interference of various radio waves when there are an incalculable number being used for all manner of devises including drones for transporting goods and equipment?
· Do we kill off all boy and girl babies whom “we” determine are a potential enemy? One is reminded of past times, to wit,” Then Pharaoh gave this order to all his people: "Every Hebrew boy that is born you must throw into the Nile, but let every girl live." (Exodus 2:22)?
· Given that the new neighbor is developed via the internet, how is it possible to kill off everyone in that neighbor?
I am also again reminded of the admonition contained in the New Testament (Luke 6:22), “How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.” Of course this in turn reminds me that I had best be more attuned to the ways in which I deceive myself or the ways I critique others so that I do not have to look at the ways in which I continue to judge, punish, or blame others. Mercy! It seems so much easier to focus on those stupid people who think more violence is the best way respond to violence or those who are waiting for Jim to wise up.
So, once again, it turns out that “those people” who think I am a Pollyanna, emotional reactor are just mirrors for how I judge or dismiss those who disagree with me. Hamm,,, Indeed, perhaps Jim does need to wise up!
Written November 16, 2015
RSS Feed