[mdlug-discuss] [mdlug] OT: Retro Computing

[Ingles, Raymond]

> From: Aaron Kulkis

> Michael Corral wrote:

>> Well, that's the sort of thing that happens when you invade someone
>> else's country. :\ An invasion based on lies, no less. You're no hero.

>> Just curious, Aaron, but have you killed any Iraqi women and children?

 Michael, I agree with the others that this was uncalled-for and rude.

 Moreover, I disagree with the substance of your statement. I agree that
invading Iraq was a *really* stupid idea with no good justification and a
lot of arguments against it, and moreover everything since the invasion
has borne that out.

 But the people who joined the military to serve and protect the country
don't get to choose what conflicts they join. (They have the right,
indeed the *duty*, to disobey illegal orders, of course. Being ordered
to deploy into Iraq is not such an order.) They explicitly agreed to
follow (legitimate) orders regardless of their personal opinions because
that's how a military *must* be run.

 And we need a military. I don't imagine that our rights and liberties
would survive even a month without our soldiers. I have a profound
respect for our military in general. (Note that I *do* demand the same
respect in return - the military needs civilians just as much as vice
versa. A body composed entirely of immune cells won't survive long.)

 They are (for the most part) doing the best they can in a thoroughly
untenable situation. There are exceptions - gross exceptions, like
Haditha - but those are not the norm. In general, I don't believe even
the officers who acted to cover up the massacre there are the norm.
(God, I hope not.)

 And I haven't seen any evidence that Aaron has participated in any such
crimes. I'm not too fond of Aaron's manner, debating tactics, or political
positions in general, but I sure as hell don't think he's a war
criminal.

 Note that some of the crimes committed in Iraq and Afghanistan *are*
systemic and the result of both deliberate malfeasance and gross
incompetance all the way up to the commander-in-chief, e.g. Abu Ghraib
and the related prison scandals.

> The American public is so thoroughly propagandized by the
> so-called "journalists" who, have admitted recently that
> they don't even care WHAT the truth is, as long as the story
> "fits the 'larger picture'"....

 I'm not even sure what quote you're referring to (cite, please?) but
let's just say I strongly doubt it comes from "journalists" in general.

> What's going on here is a proxy war between the U.S. and Iran,
> with moderate assistance to them from Syria.

 And, as I've stated before, we'd be waging approximately the same
war in Afghanistan now if we'd stuck around there and not given it up
for this little adventure in Iraq. The terrain (as you've pointed out)
is not as favorable but Afghanistan had several other practical
advantages that outweighed this:

 1. A local population that already wasn't terribly impressed with
    fundamentalist Islamic rule and was willing to try something else.

 2. Said local population had recent memories of the U.S. helping them
    against the Soviet incursion. We weren't exactly doing it out of the
    sheer goodness of our hearts, but we *were* on their side.

 3. We had direct, well-supported and internationally recognized moral
    authority to invade Afghanistan, given 9/11. We'd have had far more
    support in troops and materiel from our allies if we'd stayed in that
    country.

 4. The country's infrastructure was already in a shambles. This doesn't
    sound like an advantage until you realize that *any* improvements we
    could make would be positively regarded. Compare this with Iraq now,
    where the general standard of infrastructure is *well* below the state
    before we invaded.

 5. As a corollary to 4, the government organization was very limited,
    basically consisting of local warlords. Unlike insurgents, they tend
    to have a limited range of operations, and are more vulnerable to
    traditional military tactics. Plus, they can be bought or otherwise
    led into joining the new government.

 6. Hey, we might actually have captured Bin Laden! You know, the guy who
    actually *did* have something to do with 9/11?

> The quickest way to end the problems here in Baghdad and the
> rest of the ocuntry would be to put the Iranian government
> to work digging out of several hundred square miles of
> a capital turned to rubble.

 Then it wouldn't be just Iran supporting terrorism in Iraq. It'd be
*every single country in the region*, at *increased levels*. A smashing
idea! (Literally...)

> But virtually ALL of the remaining problems in the mideast trace
> back to Tehran...because that's where the money flows from.

 And how does the money collect in Tehran in the first place? Oh, yeah,
that's right: we consume well over 100 billion gallons of gasoline per
year...

 Read to the end of this for a more practical (and historically
successful) strategy:

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2006/08/27/no_win/?page=full

 Sincerely,

 Ray Ingles                                            (313) 227-2317

 "Improving our overall fuel efficiency by just 2.7 miles per gallon
  would completely eliminate our need for oil from the Persian Gulf."
      - Bill Maher, "When You Ride Alone You Ride With bin Laden"
The contents of this e-mail are intended for the named addressee only. It contains information that may be confidential. Unless you are the named addressee or an authorized designee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you received it in error please notify us immediately and then destroy it.