From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Sat Mar 15 2003 - 23:09:55 GMT
Dear Sam,
I argued 9 Feb 2003 23:03:55 +0100:
'Much more inspections -as France has proposed-, backed (yes) by UN (not
mainly USA) forces is the way to go now, I think. Keeping a closer watch on
the Iraq regime might even be used to ensure that the imports which are
allowed benefit the population (as intended) and not only the regime. To
help the regime accept (by playing
on their pretence to be serving the interests of the population) the
sanctions could be gradually lifted (lessening the suffering of the
population) the more external checks the regime accepts on its operation.'
You replied 3 Mar 2003 12:02:32 -0000:
'I think that a) inspections are not the issue and b) there is a good
humanitarian case for intervention (as with Kosovo). However, were it the
case that this was done via UN forces, led by determined UN leadership, and
with consequent massive reinvestment etc, that would undoubtedly be better
than the present proposal. I just don't think it is an option - perhaps it
is something which grass roots pressure could make into an option in the
(very) long run, but it isn't available now.'
If you mean that the issue is whether Saddam Hussein, as a dictator that
maltreats the people he rules, should be removed from power, increased
inspections that limit his space for maneuver ARE part of the issue, if
outright removing him from power by external military force entails too many
risks for the Iraqi people, for the rest of the region and for the world as
a whole.
There is a good humanitarian case for intervention by a kind of global
police force in Iraq, in North-Korea and in lots of other countries where
people are structurally maltreated by their governments or where their
governments are not able or willing to protect them against maltreatment by
other forces. There is NO good humanitarian case under present or ideal
international law for intervention in these countries by the US. The US
simply doesn't fit the job description of a good global policeman, because
of its commitment to use its power mainly where its national interests lie.
'Humanitarian' intervention by the US (and consequent strengthening of the
pattern that the US does as it pleases) may well postpone the prospect of a
democratic global government with global policing power.
A democratic global government with global policing power IS an option
available to Bush now. He could pass over the supreme command of US forces
to Kofi Annan requiring democratisation of the UN in return. Getting
agreement on democratisation (voting power relative to population sizes,
gradual raising of requirements for representativeness of governments if
they want to be have a vote) in UN, World Bank, International Monetary Fund
etc. might prove to be much easier than blackmailing Security Council
members into sanctioning the wars the US wants to fight to protect its own
interests.
Our views on Christianity indeed appear to be bridgeable. Your understanding
of the doctrine of the Fall as I understand it is - approximately (-; - that
we are forced to choose between bad and worse. You already confessed that
lack of faith might keep you from trying ways out of such deadlocks. In
MoQish: it's just static PATTERNS we are talking about, not absolute
determination, that forces us. Trust God, trust DQ, be open to it, and other
options will show themselves.
I only understand 'grace' in the expression 'the grace of God as shown in
the life of ...' in Quaker eulogies for the deceased, probably because 'sin'
is for me (indeed) only a matter of over-identification with static patterns
of value. I don't know how that relates to your '100% Protestant
understanding' of 'grace'.
I agree that 'we need to feed our social level static patterns just as much
as we need to feed our biological level static patterns, even if fourth
level insights change their shape (and motivation).'
Just as fourth level insights teach us that we can feed our biological level
patterns of value in better ways than with junk food, they also teach me
that I can feed my social level patterns of value in better ways than with
blind following of whoever imposes himself as leader and DQ insights teach
me that I can feed my intellectual level patterns of value in better ways
than with myth, ritual, magic and other low quality intellectual (!)
symbolism.
You also wrote 3 Mar 2003 12:02:32 -0000:
'Are you claiming that there is an equivalence between 'new' and 'quality',
such that the new is necessarily good? If so, I think there is quite a big
disagreement lurking here....'
No, I claimed that 'dynamic' can be recognized by 'new'. Every experience
(not only new experience) is quality.
You wrote 10 Feb 2003 11:00:10 -0000:
'You might say that this is too hypothetical and unrealistic, so let us
change to a very real situation: was Todd Beamer right to lead a revolt of
the hijacked passengers against the terrorists who had seized control of the
Philadelphia flight on September 11? I think that he was - indeed I find his
story to be tremendously moving, and one that reveals a difference between
the social quality of the typical US citizen and the typical UK or European
citizen which is shaming to the latter. But that may be an ignorant
comment.'
After having read around on the web about what probably happened during this
'flight 93', I think Todd Beamer was right to lead a revolt against those
terrorists, but maybe not to choose a violent way of revolting. I don't see
why a typical European citizen would have acted differently than the typical
US citizen in a comparable situation.
On board of that flight were -it seems- three hijackers. Two, armed with
knifes, killed the pilots and took over their places. The third, with a bomb
strapped around its waist, stayed in the cabin with the passengers,
threathening to explode the plane if they didn't stay seated. They weren't
prevented to phone with the outside world, however, and learned about the
other three planes who had been flown into the World Trade Center and into
the Pentagon. After the shock of having seen cold-blooded murder had
subsided and they (some?) had assessed that they had nothing to lose, some
decided to try to stop the hijackers. That possibly induced the hijacker to
explode the plain, but there are also rumours that the plane was shot down
by an US army fighter plane.
I think that in any plane (either European or American) in which passengers
were in the same situation, in which some had the same information that
their plane would probably be used as a bomb and in which they were not
prevented from spreading that information, quite a few passengers would have
decided to do something against that prospect at the risk of being killed
earlier. If my wife wouldn't have been in the same plane to prevent me, I
would probably have been one of them. I would probably have tried to
convince my fellow revolters to try to communicate with the hijackers in
order to convince them that their goal (using the plane as a bomb) was
unattainable (given the fact that they wouldn't be able to prevent -with
only knifes- a dedicated group of passengers to explode that bomb before
they reached their target) and that they could as well give up (or explode
that bomb immediately). If these hijackers were really intent on using that
plane as a bomb (and not exploding it before) relatively non-violent methods
might be successful to disarm them (risking some hurt by knifes) if a group
of say 5 relatively able-bodied passengers would choose to do so. (A larger
group wouldn't be much use in the limited walking space in a normal
commercial plane.) Having had some years of aikido training and thus not
being too afraid to face people with knifes, I might have been of some use
to such a group (even if others might have been more qualified).
With friendly greetings,
Wim
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 15 2003 - 23:08:57 GMT