How I learned NOT to love the bomb....
I have this couchsurfing friend who is in the Turkish military. He recently asked me if I would edit an article that he has been trying to submit to a scientific journal but it keeps getting returned with a note that the grammar/English needs to be improved. The article was all about a new way to calculate and coordinate when an air-born bomb would detonate...
Uggh! It was really hard for me to read!
It was not so much because I don't understand physics
(which I don't really)
but more because I hate the idea of bombs.
I understand the idea that if bombs are have a lower margin of error then, in theory, there will be less civilian casualties... but that's bullshit! Governments target areas where they know that civilians will be killed no matter how close their bombs get to their intended victims.
People in war used to have to see their victims across the field, or dying right before their very eyes. I would hope that kind of proximity would change a person-- hopefully in a way that deters them from killing in the future. I know people come home from war and when they have seen combat on the ground they are more likely to have PTSD and I'm sorry that they suffer for our country. Well, I'm only kind of sorry...
Most people would think that PTSD would be a bad thing but I don't! I think it is good that people are affected by the severity of war. The alternative is that people are disconnected from the atrocities of war. With bombs, for instance, a pilot cannot help but be detached from the death he or she causes. Now they even have remote controlled aircraft so the pilot isn't even in any kind of danger. How can they possibly develop the kind of empathy needed to divert the mass destruction that a war without personal, individual consequences will surely bring?!
Reading this paper made me think about how I hate our reckless leaders -- they just send off planes to drop bombs with a flick of the wrist. If they had to send soldiers on the ground I think they would not be as eager. Leaders can risk civilian lives in other countries but don't have to feel the very personal consequences of death and loss at home. Oh sure, there are some military casualties, but certainly not in comparison to the civilian casualties caused by our military.
I kinda feel the same way about individuals owning guns. If someone had to kill another person with their bare hands, or some other weapon that made them really face the pain they were inflicting on another human being, to really feel it, I would hope that it would make it harder for them to do it.
Maybe my vision, that a world without bombs and guns would lead to peace, is also just bullshit.
In any case, the paper was still an interesting read.
It did make me wonder though
if my friend ever feels like Oppenheimer.
I had to divert my review of his paper to investigate the Manhattan Project
I found that Oppenheimer was quite the eccentric fellow
lots of lusty scandal
I highly recommend the Wikipedia article on him
when you have the time
and the inclination.
This is how I spent at least 4 hours this evening ---
editing someone else's writing
instead of my own ... does that even make any sense?
And I'm too tired now to work on anything that I was actually supposed to do and
I just hope I don't have nightmares of death and destruction
I wonder what Oppenheimer dreamt about
maybe he dreamt about the bomb too
i guess it's time for me to stop worrying...