Musings

Hi Jacques,

It’s nice of you to answer me. Let me try just one more round, then I’ll leave it be so I don’t hog your blog.

Horowitz has a point that it is wrong for academic faculties to be overwhelmingly Democratic and liberal, as they are. This creates self-reinforcing biases. Even more odious is the frequent disruption of conservative speakers on campus. There have been MANY reports of this, and it is unacceptable. And there have been many stories of intimidation of conservative students in the classroom. Professors have a lot of power, and it should never be used to promote a political agenda. This DOES happen all too frequently

Also, there IS a strong tendency on campuses to blame the US first and to whitewash terrorism, by looking for ‘root causes’, which inevitably leads back to blaming the US for everything. A much more ominous recent trend on campuses is to blame Israel for terrorism over there. It is clear to me who is primarily to blame.

By the way, I voted for Kerry, because I felt the need to patch up relations with our allies. My views are all over the spectrum, and I consider each case on its merits. Conservatives also indulge in name calling and stupidity.

OK, that’s enough. I just made my points here because I can’t stand seeing smart physicists jumping on the PC bandwagon. It’s bad enough when they do it in the humanities departments, but you guys are supposed to be certifiably smart.

Another quick point on evolution, even though I said I’d shut up. Genesis is definitely a myth. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool. Now, intelligent design is simply out of the purview of science. Science can neither prove nor refute such notions as God, ID, etc. Therefore, it is entirely inappropriate to teach Intelligent Design in science classes. But a scientist need not reject such ideas in his private life in order to be a respectable scientist. So there is a difference with Genesis. A scientist who believes in Genesis is probably not a competent scientist, in my opinion. Thanks.

Saddam knew, yes…but how easy it would be for him to hand those weapons off to whatever terrorist group wandered up the road. It doesn’t need to be Al Qaeda, I understand that there is significant evidence that they were not allies and the only thing they shared was hatred for the US. But think. By doing this, Saddam would gain deniability, allowing him to do this again and again. And even one terrorist attack could cost thousands or even a million lives, as 9/11 so eloquently demonstrated.

I would also ask if the Iraqi people are really worse off now than under Saddam Hussein. I don’t know any numbers, and I don’t claim any sort of knowledgeable position to argue from, but Hussein killed an incredible number of people during his reign. Average that out over the years, and it can’t be much less than the numbers killed since the war began. Furthermore, consider every other war in history. It took many, many years to reunify Germany - although extenuating circumstances apply. Korea is still a messy situation, fifty years later. Japan took forever to climb out of its hole. I’m not saying that Iraq is another WWII, but rather just that it will take time, like the rebuilding period after any other war - and more so, because the resistance we face is very nearly unique to this war as far as I know. The only other major war with this type of guerilla resistance was Vietnam, although the country was much more difficult for US troops there. Thus the majority of the casualties would come after the end of major combat operations in any similar situation, and pretending otherwise is ridiculous.

Finally, consider that before the war, when Saddam terrorized his people, they had no recourse against him. They could not join an insurgency similar to the one we face today, because Saddam’s soldiers would simply wipe everybody out, with no concern for the collateral damage. Today, however, when the insurgency attacks, the people of Iraq can fight back. People will vote, defy the people who want to drag them back down into authoritarianism or into civil war. They can sign up to be police and help to protect each other. In Iraq, we have given the people the power to fight back - and that can only be an improvement from the days of Saddam Hussein. So are the Iraqi people worse off? I don’t think so, but feel free to convince me otherwise. As a teenager, my mind is malleable yet.

So both sides should remember the meaning of the word “norm.” However, I have seen no examples of people outside of government on either side with these theories, traits or beliefs.