I guess what bothers me about articles like this one by Amir Taheri is that it matches what we’re seeing in briefs I’ve linked to previously (courtesy Lex but I can’t get to it on the cell phone). It matches open source.
And the people who will read it are already convinced; the people who need convincing will not read it, or refuse to accept it.
I used to say about mine and antisubmarine warfare that people only got serious about it after the second flaming datum. Put another way, people tend to put up the new stop sign only after the fatal accident.
With nuclear weapons it is not necessarily prudent to listen to someone’s words and public intentions only after a flaming datum.
You have a solution? Is there one with no deaths that works, or merely multiple bad choices where “optimum” means “sucks the least”?
2 Responses to “Whistling In The Hurricane”
Trackback URL for Whistling In The Hurricane: