June 23, 2004

FUMING

I went to LGF this morning and started reading over a bowl of cereal. At the fifth post down, I froze with the spoon halfway to my mouth and let out a nice loud godammit. They killed Kim Seon-Il. I'm not surprised, but now I'm mad as hell. Fuming mad. How many more heads do they have to hack off before the rest of the world gets mad too?

My "bring it on" yesterday was just the start. Every day, I get angrier and angrier, and it only steels my resolve.

MORE TO GROK:

I hope Amritas is wrong, but his words ring true in my ears:

I wish I could say I was surprised, but I know what barbarians can do. I also wish his death will not be in vain, but I know what the Left wants to do.


Posted by: Sarah at 03:09 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 143 words, total size 1 kb.

1 How many more heads do they have to hack off before the rest of the world gets mad too? It's anger in general that concerns me. Consider this thought experiment: Say that we get rid of all of the world's terrorists tomorrow by making them disappear. That's is... just make them vanish. Terrorists are humans; they have relatives and friends. Some even have children. Would these left-behinds feel anger at us? Would that anger be enough to turn them into terrorists as well? I use the word "vanish" because it's the cleanest way to get rid of someone; no blood, violence, or death seen. Yet even in this wholly unrealistic scenario, it doesn't take a genius to know that it was us who did it. There will be directed anger; that anger is a force for terrorism to continue. Like you and others, I know that getting rid of terrorism means more than just physically stopping terrorists. Complex problems require multifaceted solutions. For example, part of our being in Iraq is to rebuild the place. Some will say that if we show we are there to help, we can quell anger against us. Can we do enough constructive things in the terrorists' world to decrease the number of terrorists? What lies before us is a sophisticated, evolving force balance equation for which we are unsure of the inputs, the coefficients, or even the terms. Worse still, efforts to discover the values change the values. It's Heisenberg's uncertainty principle at its worst. No, I'm not saying the thing is too hard for us to solve. In fact, the length of time we may take to solve it is all the more reason to start now. I just wonder where these efforts will lead us... if things will get much worse before they improve. Fine fine fine: I state the obvious, I speculate, I use obscure analogies, and I propose no solutions. I don't deny it, and I expect no acknowledgement from you or anyone else. All I say is this: you're angry, and anger is a motivator that can be harnessed to whatever end you choose; it (at least partially) caused you to post this entry. What else will you do with your anger? And when the world is angry, what should the world do with this powerful force?

Posted by: cjstevens at June 23, 2004 06:08 AM (fDuiT)

2 I don't think you'll ever hear Mrs. Grok extolling the virtues of strapping a bomb to yourself and blowing up a disco because she is angry. Yet, that is what the opposition is doing. It isn't really relevent whether or not Sarah posts while angry, or because she is angry. What is relevent are the posts. This is a discussion, and an honest one. That is the difference, and it should be our goal. This is how the feelings of anger, humiliation, helplessness, or whatever is used to justify murdering innocents should be dealt with. By open admission of the feelings, the cause for the feelings, and attempting to fix the problems that are the cause. Not in justifying a murderous doctrine of conquest. The main elements that allow this? Open education, open press, and all freedoms in general. That is what is needed, and thats how you fix the problems. The world needs to promote this in all reaches. Everywhere that freedom does not exist, it needs to be aggressively pursued by those that have the power to pursue freedom. Vacillating and standing back and letting dictators control regions of the world that would be messy to clean up can no longer stand. The forces of hate and murder have to be defeated, they have chosen their course, we have to accept that and give them the end they deserve, before they give you the end they have decided for you, and I.

Posted by: John at June 23, 2004 06:47 AM (crTpS)

3 Absolutely right, John. We cannot continue on the path that brought us 9/11. Something must change. We have no control over the environment people like this live in, yet reap the bitterness. **Crown Prince Abdullah blamed Israel for the execution. Speaking to Saudi television, he said, "Zionism is behind it. It has become clear now. It has become clear to us. I don't say, I mean... It is not 100 percent, but 95 percent that the Zionist hands are behind what happened."** How do you reconcile anger driven by something like this when there are people here who feel the same as Abdullah?

Posted by: Mike at June 23, 2004 07:44 AM (MqNKC)

4 For what it's worth, Hussain al-Shahristani (a member of the newly-formed Iraq Pugwash group) gave his thoughts on the upcoming elections back at the end of April. Some may say that his words are ironic given that he was held by Saddam for 10 years, but I say it's just further illustration that it can be a gray world out there. Also, a spot (note: Windows Media Audio) on the seedlings of Linux in Iraq warms my tech-geek heart.

Posted by: cjstevens at June 23, 2004 08:43 AM (fDuiT)

5 Just out of curiosity, what is it that you think "the Left wants to do"?

Posted by: Doug Gillett at June 23, 2004 10:53 AM (jd34Q)

6 CJ- I bet if Nick Berg, Paul Johnson, or Kim Sun-Il were one of your relatives, you'd be damn angry. My question is, how can you detach yourself emotionally and not become angry at the unjustifiable actions that have been committed against us? "Some will say that if we show we are there to help, we can quell anger against us. Can we do enough constructive things in the terrorists' world to decrease the number of terrorists?" I learned a long time ago that you cannot rationalize an irrational person (or group of people).

Posted by: bushlover at June 24, 2004 03:00 PM (2RAa2)

7 My question is, how can you detach yourself emotionally and not become angry at the unjustifiable actions that have been committed against us? Of course I'd be damn angry if someone close to me was taken from me in general, and especially in such a manner as this. The point I'm trying to make is, what are we going to do with that anger? I learned a long time ago that you cannot rationalize an irrational person (or group of people). That's why the situation is so dangerous and unpredictable. Again, that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to solve things. I just point out is that if these people are truly irrational, we have no idea what's going to happen next.

Posted by: cjstevens at June 24, 2004 03:49 PM (fDuiT)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
48kb generated in CPU 0.04, elapsed 0.1181 seconds.
54 queries taking 0.0976 seconds, 173 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.