Frustrated

I am frustrated.

I realize that I have been doing rather horribly as far as posting goes. I have gotten in a bit of a funk and not really been in that much of a writing mood. Also, I would prefer my posts be at least somewhat credible and more than just emotionally charged junk. I think there are a lot of folks who make a lot of money out there selling semi-truths and dealing in rhetoric. I wouldn't want it even if I was a desired commodity (which obviously I am not). My lack of bona fides makes me feel inadequate when it comes to having an opinion on anything.

I am frustrated. I am frustrated at the inability of people to get outside of their own heads. I am frustrated that people are unwilling to learn from history. I am frustrated that the only history a lot of people out there are interested in is some idealized and mythological dream past where everybody held hands and pranced about flying old glory and singing "Yankee Doodle" and having a time of it.

I am not an intentional cynic. I am some ways feel myself forced to cynicism. I would rather be considered a realist and honest seeker of truth. The problem is, for some people, there is no reality beyond a reality that is based on in many cases nothing tangible at all, and there is no truth beyond their often narrowly acquired truth.

I am not talking philosophy or religion here (although I do believe that some peoples' concept of "religious truth" does limit their receptiveness to the possibility of a worldview or perception that falls outside their understanding of said concept). I mean garbage like only conservatives are patriots and the only real America is somewhere in the "middle" (whatever that means) or the frozen tundras of Mooslaska (yes, I realize this could be viewed as a generalization of the type I am deriding, but I feel the need to make it clear I am not actually questioning the validity or patriotism or Americanism in general terms of anybody falling in these geographical parameters).

I am frustrated today cause I hear people talking about the issues of collateral damage in Afghanistan and pushing for a more bloody policy against the terrorists or insurgents or whatever you want to call them, and I have two questions.

The first question I want to ask is how many children these individuals have shot in the face. That is kind of harsh and graphic, but that is my point. Or perhaps how many children being shot in the face is acceptable. I can tell you that the proportion of the Afghan population that would be categorized as children is extremely high, so children are likely to comprise a fairly significant percentage of all collateral. Women, who in many cases are below children in social status and are equally defenseless also comprise high levels of collateral. People for some reason think it is okay to kill random people with bombs. For some reason the fact that it is impersonal and the collateral so unavoidable make it okay. But the end result is really no different from shooting people in the face. I suppose one could make the argument that by killing people over there we are saving lives over here. I have all kinds of issues with that idea that I may get into some other time, but... This is an ideological argument so, you know, whatever.

The second question I have is why people do not study history. The Soviets used much more heavy-handed methods in their fight against the Mujahideen, and look how successful they were. I am not saying we are the Soviets. I am not saying that the current insurgents are anti-Soviet Mujahideen, except, there is the nasty and unfortunate facts that many of the important people behind what is going on in Afghanistan are the same "freedom fighters" who fought the Soviets, and while we are definitely not the Soviets, and I think our motives and hopes for Afghanistan are generally much more benevolent, the people we are fighting see us much the same. Actually, I think they respect the Soviets a little more, because they were much more ruthless. Regardless, the lesson from history, is conducting military operations without concern for civilian casualties is not an effective strategy for Afghanistan. It did not work for the Soviets. If we were foolish enough to pursue such a policy, it would not work for us. Now, it is true that we backed the Mujihadeen, and that was a key component of their ability to defeat the Soviets. Some would argue that is a significant factor I suppose. My response would be that there are all sorts of people out there who will back the Taliban and everybody else against us.

Anyway. These are just my thoughts on the matter. I believe them sound, but hey, like I said, no bona fides.

Whatever.

I love my country. I love its people. I believe it is the greatest nation on Earth. I do not, however, believe that makes me better than anybody who was not blessed or privileged or whatever to be born here or somehow have managed to immigrate legally. I also do not believe that other nations should not be great. I believe that America's greatness should benefit her people. I also believe that America's greatness should benefit all of humanity.

I suppose the most critical argument among the Left and Right and everybody in between could be expressed in the question: What makes America great? The answer to that question I believe would fairly accurately reflect the sometimes violent differences of ideologies.

Anyway,

Peace, be you blue or red or left or right or completely apathetic.