From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V16 #375 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Monday, October 22 2007 Volume 16 : Number 375 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer [2fs ] Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer [Sebastian Hagedorn ] Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer [kevin ] Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer [kevin ] Re: train wreck - van halen out of tune [2fs ] Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer [kevin ] Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer [Rex ] Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer [2fs ] To The Lobsterman Or Whoever ["Stacked Crooked" ] Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer [Benjamin Lukoff ] Re: train wreck - van halen out of tune [Jeff Dwarf ] utterly unrelated to Tom Lehrer, the Shins, the Patriots, or math [2fs ] Re: Package Shipped to You from Yep Roc Records ["John B. Jones" ] Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer [Benjamin Lukoff ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 08:26:17 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer About that subject line: The Shins and Tom Lehrer - great Americans all! - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 16:04:25 +0200 From: Sebastian Hagedorn Subject: Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer - --On 22. Oktober 2007 08:25:26 -0500 2fs wrote: > Anyway, I'm curious what non-Americans think of all this hoo-hah - given > that we have so many of them here... FWIW, I agree with most that you've written. Being German (and older than, say, 30) I have more issues with patriotism in general than most people. I root for our national teams in sports (which is more than some leftists do - - some are *against* Germany out of principle), but that's about it. Young Germans seem to feel differently. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 12:34:02 EDT From: HwyCDRrev@aol.com Subject: train wreck - van halen out of tune train wreck - van halen out of tune _http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mjx_GjyXCs4_ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mjx_GjyXCs4) ************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:04:44 -0400 From: lep Subject: Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer 2fs says: > > i disagree with the sort of "all nations sin" kind of thinking. well, > > not that they all don't sin, but that they all sin sort of equally. i > > mean, right now i'm working with two professors who left their home > > countries in order to have the freedom to pursue their studies (the > > professor i assist had to, smuggle the draft of his ph.d. thesis when > > he left his country of birth.) they've been more than welcome to > > return home, but, oddly enough, they choose to stay here. well, wait a > > second...out of four CS professors who've taught me in my masters > > program, actually _none_ are originally from this country. > > But insofar as they have that freedom, as a principle it's supposed to be > extended to everyone - not just to US citizens. well, yes, that would nice. i don't think patriotism precludes that. > The problem arises when, for many people, "patriotism" is used as a means to > prop up a belief that Americans are just better than other people solely > because they were born in America. a lot of people are stupid. which is kind of where i started with this. i can use the "christian values" analogy. just because many people espousing to have "christian values" have pretty much the opposite doesn't mean i don't appreciate a good christian when i run into one. > > one can form preferences, e.g. yes, i think freedom is better than > > non-freedom. > > > Agreed. > > But what does that have to do with patriotism? > > That sounds facetious, but really, it isn't. In some ways, and concerning > some areas of freedom, the US has a good record. In others, it does not. We > have one of the highest (if not the highest) rates of infant mortality among > Western nations, for example. How "free" is someone when they can't get > medical care? Etc. obviously there are problems. i don't mean to say there aren't. there are huge problems - it's kind of the nature of humanity. but i'd rather live in a country that e.g. allows me to practice whatever religion or non-religion i choose to, that lets (hell, pays) girls study math, that lets me leave if i wish to than a lot of the other options, even with the health-care situation. > If I am for freedom, that does not mean I have to be for freedom *as an > American*. I'm for freedom *as a human being.* agreed. i only mean it in a way that people who founded this country did more than just pay lip service to the concept of "freedom." i certainly wouldn't be sitting around even thinking about this stuff if someone else (actually, many people) hadn't afforded me the "luxury" of doing so. the only reason i would invoke "america" is because there are a lot of places where such freedoms aren't allowed. > > > nations can be more or less functional...but "patriotism" often gets in > the > > > way of that effectiveness, insofar as it creates a privileged class over > and > > > above others). > > > > again, i'm a bit lost - why does it create a privileged class? > > > Because to many people who call themselves patriots, that means they will > automatically favor an American over everyone else. Pick up the newspaper, > and read about how many Americans have been killed in Iraq. How many Iraqis > have been killed? A hell of a lot more...but they don't count, because > they're not American. anyone can call himself a patriot. it doesn't make it true. > And of course there are many right now who'd argue, very vociferously, that > American citizens have all kinds of rights that non-citizens in the US do > not have. > > ** to quote an old friend: "what's the use of being the world's only > > remaining superpower if we can't stop a little ethnic cleansing?" > > First, to be clear: I'm not assuming you agree with that, but...a huge > problem is that so many Americans believe (a) we're exceptional and unique > in the world, even to the extent of believing we're blessed by God, and (b) > that uniqueness gives us power to do things that logic would suggest we > can't - such as, oh say, intervene in another nation's internal affairs, > blow things up and run people over with tanks in the middle of cities, and > then expect them to be grateful for it - cuz you know here's this > "democracy" thing we're insisting you use, unless of course you actually > claim to have any real sovereignty and demand that our mercenary soldiers > get the fuck out - then you've vastly overstepped your bounds, young man, > and must be punished. i actually think he made a good point. it's sort of tragic. but it's something i've spent some time thinking about. BTW, no, i don't agree with anything you just said. i'm kind of curious - do you think that there is ever any reason to interfere with the internal affairs of another nation? i actually have trouble with this, in the sense that for the most part, i believe people and nations should be left to handle their own affairs. but i can't say i'm pacifist. (and BTW, no, i'm not talking about iraq, more like WWII-era germany.) it's kind of confusing. xo lauren p.s. the more i think about the world, the more i love mathematics. - -- - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "People with opinions just go around bothering one another." - The Buddha ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:59:44 -0700 (GMT-07:00) From: kevin Subject: Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer >i'm not saying other people shouldn't be proud of >where they live. or should be. or of where they don't live. they >can do whatever the hell they want. well, maybe not. To come in out of left field, as usual, it amuses me no end that the same humans who will bore you to death with their mistaken historical assumption that America was founded as a "Christian nation" will segue seamlessly from that rant into one about how absolutely swole up with pride they are to be Americans, when even a minimal acquaintance with the historical teachings of Christianity will tell you that *pride* is a *sin*. One of the worst, in fact (there's a list). Somebody needs to pay more attention to walkin' it like they talkin' it, you ask me. np: Miles Davis / Get Up With It ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 11:06:52 -0700 (GMT-07:00) From: kevin Subject: Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer >the list activity is kind of slow, so i'll take this opportunity to >randomly confess that my least-favourite colours are orange (yuck) and >yellow (yuck). my favourite colour is, of course, green. Same here. Coincidence? Or conspiracy? >also, i'm thinking of a number between 1 and 100. 42? ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:08:23 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: train wreck - van halen out of tune On 10/22/07, HwyCDRrev@aol.com wrote: > > train wreck - van halen out of tune > > > _http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mjx_GjyXCs4_ > (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mjx_GjyXCs4) This isn't really a case of playing out of tune so much as it's a DAT at the wrong sample rate. I wrote about it, in fact (URL in .sig - see the entry titled "ouch") - but basically, unless they'd retuned the guitar and bass during the intro, there was no way to play in tune: the difference between the sample rates means the right notes are *between* the frets. If you listen, you can hear Eddie Van Halen trying to fret in tune w/the DAT...but it's essentially impossible. - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 11:14:56 -0700 (GMT-07:00) From: kevin Subject: Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer >As for Tom Lehrer, I'm glad to know that he is still kicking around. As I >just discovered in Wikipedia, he is almost 80 years old. My parents >bought "That Was the Year That Was" when it came out in 1965, and we wore >the grooves out of it (even though I didn't understand about 70% of its >content, it was one of my favorite records). And Nikolai Ivanovich Lobachevsky is his name - oi! ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 11:15:19 -0700 From: Rex Subject: Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer On 10/21/07, 2fs wrote: > > The best songs recorded for the > s/t album weren't on it - my copy is a compilation of all the tracks that > were floating around, iTunes exclusives, unreleased, yadda yadda - and I > can't even remember what's on the actual CD. Anyway, with one or two > exceptions I don't hate it as much as everyone did, mostly because the > whole > notion of "selling out" is kinda silly, plus Phair was never a purist in > that regard anyway. Well, the idea of "selling out" is silly, and I like a fair amount of "sell out" records. It's best to divorce the music from the commercial circumstances surrounding it, especially in the long term. That said, it's fair to say that when an artist decides to change what they do for commercial reasons, the resulting record is probably not going to reflect the qualities that attracted the artist's orginal fanbase, including, often "originality" or "uniqueness". So it's safe to say that a fair percentage of sellout albums are going to be bad, at least by the standards of the artist's longterm fans, right? And when the record takes on as a mission the creation of songs which have no meaning outside the context of an attempted breakthrough (as with the current Rilo Kiley), you have major problems. In particular with that Phair album, I don't mind the "sellout" production because, well, I don't recognize it (that is, it sounds pretty normal if uninspired to me, but I don't get mad about it sounding like every other pop record because I don't know what every other pop record sounds like). But the songs are weak, and too many of them are less "personal" than image-related press statements. And I'm sorry, but I will never stop being squicked out by the fact that she has that supposedly tender (but actually really bad) song to her child on the same record as "H.W.C." Conceding that parenting and sexuality do indeed coexist in an average person's reality, I can never stop thinking about that poor kid's future in college, when someone says, "Oh, Liz Phair is your mom? So that's you she wrote that song 'Little Digger' about, on that same record where she's naked on the cover and talks about how much she loves gism in her hair?" - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:23:38 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer On 10/22/07, lep wrote: > > > > anyone can call himself a patriot. it doesn't make it true. Okay, this is the nub of our disagreement. I'm saying the word "patriot" means what it usually means - that is, a "patriot" is what the majority of people (or just the most prominent and publicized) who call themselves patriots are. You're saying it's what _you_ want it to be (which is a subset of all the definitions people use for it). Exact same thing with "Christian," btw - which is why I've argued that people who aren't hypocritical, narrow-minded, gaybashers ought to find a new name for themselves, given the media predominance of the idjit kind. > > i'm kind of curious - do you think that there is ever any reason to > interfere with the internal affairs of another nation? > I"d say in many ways, "reason" is a lot less important than "probability." Even if the US were totally justified in invading Iraq and overthrowing Saddam, even if it truly intended to create the conditions under which a democracy could be created (you can't create a democracy from above any more than you can create volunteers at gunpoint), there's still the issue of whether that's likely. I mean, if a very well-intentioned Soviet Army had invaded the US to bring a socialist utopia to us, do you think we'd've just sat back and said, okay? No - there'd've been massive, armed rebellion (whether the government was decapitated or not), and a prolonged and bloody slog. A foreign power will always eventually give up in its attempts to dominate another people - the costs are too great, the benefits too few - whereas people will fight forever to retain their own homes. One reason this is more true now than it's been is that the cost, and the ability to obtain, powerful and massively destructive weapons have come within reach of nearly anyone. The Iraqi insurgents will continue to impose heavy losses upon US troops, and no amount of firepower or number of troops will stop it. Except, of course, if the US just decides to nuke the place to the ground. Many people just possibly might have moral reservations about such an action. (Too few of them in a position to actually do it, though.) - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 12:20:23 -0700 From: "Stacked Crooked" Subject: To The Lobsterman Or Whoever john, i really think you'd enjoy tonight's josh ritter show at the aladdin. sold out, i notice; but i'm sure you'd be able to find tix at craigslist. last night's show was phenomenal -- i was reminded of dan bern's autumn '97 tour, which is why i'm specifically recommending to jonesie. but after portland, they're heading down the coast. so make sure check 'em out, y'all! any who can't attend: i'll be torrenting my recording, at dime, as soon as i get it prepared. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 12:37:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Benjamin Lukoff Subject: Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, 2fs wrote: > On 10/22/07, lep wrote: > > > > anyone can call himself a patriot. it doesn't make it true. > > Okay, this is the nub of our disagreement. I'm saying the word "patriot" > means what it usually means - that is, a "patriot" is what the majority of > people (or just the most prominent and publicized) who call themselves > patriots are. You're saying it's what _you_ want it to be (which is a subset > of all the definitions people use for it). I was just going to post that it seemed this was boiling down to a semantic disagreement. > Exact same thing with "Christian," btw - which is why I've argued that > people who aren't hypocritical, narrow-minded, gaybashers ought to find a > new name for themselves, given the media predominance of the idjit kind. But I'm sure they don't want to feel forced into giving up a term by which they've identified themselves for so long. Similarly, why give "patriot" over to those behind the Patriot Act? What happened to reclaiming terms :) > > i'm kind of curious - do you think that there is ever any reason to > > interfere with the internal affairs of another nation? > > I"d say in many ways, "reason" is a lot less important than "probability." > Even if the US were totally justified in invading Iraq and overthrowing > Saddam, even if it truly intended to create the conditions under which a > democracy could be created (you can't create a democracy from above any more > than you can create volunteers at gunpoint), there's still the issue of > whether that's likely. I mean, if a very well-intentioned Soviet Army had > invaded the US to bring a socialist utopia to us, do you think we'd've just > sat back and said, okay? No - there'd've been massive, armed rebellion > (whether the government was decapitated or not), and a prolonged and bloody > slog. A foreign power will always eventually give up in its attempts to > dominate another people - the costs are too great, the benefits too few - Well...depends on how long "eventually" is. Last time I checked the Russians had been in power in Siberia for a couple hundred years at least and don't show any signs of going anywhere. But you didn't answer her original question. I think the answer must be yes...merely because an affair is "internal" doesn't mean, I think, that we should defer to that country's better judgement. I know I'm about to prove Godwin's law true, but....Hitler. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 12:32:46 -0700 (PDT) From: Jeff Dwarf Subject: Re: train wreck - van halen out of tune 2fs wrote: > On 10/22/07, HwyCDRrev@aol.com wrote: > > train wreck - van halen out of tune > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mjx_GjyXCs4 > > This isn't really a case of playing out of tune so much as it's a > DAT at the wrong sample rate. I wrote about it, in fact (URL > in .sig - see the entry titled "ouch") - but basically, unless > they'd retuned the guitar and bass during the intro, there was no > way to play in tune: the difference between > the sample rates means the right notes are *between* the frets. The thing I find most astonishing is, after a verse or so of seeing they can't compensate for the DAT/computer, why not just stop, tell the audience "Crap, the keyboard loop is at the wrong pitch rate, let's see if we can get that fixed," and then just moved on with the setlist (or if it's the end of the final encore, pull another song out of your ass while the crew tries to fix it). If you can't get things fixed, apologize for not being able to get "Jump" in for them or just play it without the kbds. It's not like anyone hadn't already figured out the keyboards on "Jump" were probably a loop, since they didn't see anyone on stage playing keyboards. It's rock'n'roll, equipment failures happen. > If you listen, you can hear Eddie Van Halen trying to fret in tune > w/the DAT...but it's essentially impossible. "I'm not tempted to write a song about George W. Bush. I couldn't figure out what sort of song I would write. That's the problem: I don't want to satirize George Bush and his puppeteers, I want to vaporize them." -- Tom Lehrer . Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 14:35:12 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: utterly unrelated to Tom Lehrer, the Shins, the Patriots, or math I seem to recall some folks here talking about putting their iTunes library on an external hard drive. How well does that work for you? Any problems, advice, etc.? Any recommendations as to which drive to buy? (I'm a lowly PC-using scum, for now) - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 12:50:44 -0700 (GMT-07:00) From: kevin Subject: Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer >Okay, this is the nub of our disagreement. I'm saying the word "patriot" >means what it usually means - that is, a "patriot" is what the majority of >people (or just the most prominent and publicized) who call themselves >patriots are. You're saying it's what _you_ want it to be (which is a subset >of all the definitions people use for it). This is getting to be fun, now! - we're heading into the territory Wittgenstein was exploring with his talks about "language games" - kind of stuff with enough mental grit you can ckew on it forever. >Exact same thing with "Christian," btw - which is why I've argued that >people who aren't hypocritical, narrow-minded, gaybashers ought to find a >new name for themselves, given the media predominance of the idjit kind. There's a technical term, not in general currency these days, for most of the Americans calling themselves Christians - and that term is "heretics." From a strictly orthodox perspective, anyway - which I tend to sympathize with though I don't practice it. >> i'm kind of curious - do you think that there is ever any reason to >> interfere with the internal affairs of another nation? There's plenty of reasons but mighty few that are defensible in any ethical or legal sense. Certainly W's aren't. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 12:32:15 -0700 From: "John B. Jones" Subject: Re: Package Shipped to You from Yep Roc Records Anyone else get this message? I'm trying to decide if it would be worth it to pre-order or if I should just wait for release date and go to my local (soon to be REAP) rekkid store. On 10/19/07, 2fs wrote: > > Looks like they're beginning to ship... > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > > On 19 Oct 2007 16:41:24 -0400, "Redeye Distribution Mail Notification" > said: > > Dear Music Lover- > > > > A package was shipped to you from 11spot.com in partnership with Redeye > > Distribution and Yep Roc Records on 10/19/2007 via U.S. Postal Service > > First-Class to the following address: > > > > Jeffrey Norman > > -- > > ...Jeff Norman > > The Architectural Dance Society > http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 15:07:20 -0500 From: 2fs Subject: Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer On 10/22/07, Benjamin Lukoff wrote: > > > > > Exact same thing with "Christian," btw - which is why I've argued that > > people who aren't hypocritical, narrow-minded, gaybashers ought to find > a > > new name for themselves, given the media predominance of the idjit kind. > > But I'm sure they don't want to feel forced into giving up a term by which > they've identified themselves for so long. Similarly, why give "patriot" > over to those behind the Patriot Act? What happened to reclaiming terms :) That's a good point. Amusingly, it comes down to another idiolect question: personally, I'm just not invested enough in the term or concept "patriot" to want to fight over it. Or rather, to want to fight *for* it. > > i'm kind of curious - do you think that there is ever any reason to > > > interfere with the internal affairs of another nation? > > > > I"d say in many ways, "reason" is a lot less important than > "probability." > > Even if the US were totally justified in invading Iraq and overthrowing > > Saddam, even if it truly intended to create the conditions under which a > > democracy could be created (you can't create a democracy from above any > more > > than you can create volunteers at gunpoint), there's still the issue of > > whether that's likely. I mean, if a very well-intentioned Soviet Army > had > > invaded the US to bring a socialist utopia to us, do you think we'd've > just > > sat back and said, okay? No - there'd've been massive, armed rebellion > > (whether the government was decapitated or not), and a prolonged and > bloody > > slog. A foreign power will always eventually give up in its attempts to > > dominate another people - the costs are too great, the benefits too few > - > > Well...depends on how long "eventually" is. Last time I checked the > Russians had been in power in Siberia for a couple hundred years at least > and don't show any signs of going anywhere. You'll pardon what might be my ignorance...but I wasn't aware Siberia was ever a sovereign nation, or that there was a massive, indigenous movement to throw off the Russian yoke. Maybe there is. I do think that this situation has changed dramatically only in the last, say, twenty-thirty years - and that has to do with the weapons situation: both nuclear and things like IEDs shift the balance to a weird place where a resistance is unlikely to simply be disappeared. Or rather, unlikely for the US or most Western nations to do so - since, as I said, it might be possible just to nuke them out of existence. Some nations would be willing to do that; so far, I don't think we are. (And certainly, even if our leaders are, our people aren't.) But you didn't answer her original question. I think the answer must be > yes...merely because an affair is "internal" doesn't mean, I think, that > we should defer to that country's better judgement. I know I'm about to > prove Godwin's law true, but....Hitler. Leaving aside the Hitler thing, I think my answer was in the form of *how* to answer the question - which is to say, there's no pre-given answer. Which I suppose means there might be a yes - but I think it's increasingly rare. Which is also why I think it's increasingly important that nations learn to prevent the situations that might lead to atrocities. It is, as we are seeing, exceedingly difficult to stop a war once it's started. But (to anticipate one interpretation of what I just wrote) I don't think it's likely you can stop a war by means of an occupying army. It's likelier that will increase resentment - and the inevitable retributions and retaliation will heat up a formerly cold occupation pretty quickly. And notice how many of those antagonisms and resentments that do lead to atrocities have to do with...patriotism? (That, and religion - and the blend thereof that is various ethnic enthusiasms.) - -- ...Jeff Norman The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:28:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Benjamin Lukoff Subject: Re: the Shins and Tom lehrer On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, 2fs wrote: > On 10/22/07, Benjamin Lukoff wrote: > > > > But I'm sure they don't want to feel forced into giving up a term by which > > they've identified themselves for so long. Similarly, why give "patriot" > > over to those behind the Patriot Act? What happened to reclaiming terms :) > > That's a good point. Amusingly, it comes down to another idiolect question: > personally, I'm just not invested enough in the term or concept "patriot" to > want to fight over it. Or rather, to want to fight *for* it. Mmm, good point. I'm with you on "patriot," really...but if I were a Christian I don't think I'd want to abandon the term. > > > slog. A foreign power will always eventually give up in its attempts to > > > dominate another people - the costs are too great, the benefits too few > > Well...depends on how long "eventually" is. Last time I checked the > > Russians had been in power in Siberia for a couple hundred years at least > > and don't show any signs of going anywhere. > > You'll pardon what might be my ignorance...but I wasn't aware Siberia was > ever a sovereign nation, or that there was a massive, indigenous movement to > throw off the Russian yoke. > Maybe there is. Does it matter if they were ever a sovereign nation or not? Shouldn't what matters be that they are dominated--regardless of what their organization was beforehand? (Actually, now that I think of it, Tannu Tuva was an independent sovereign nation for a while. And there are plenty of Russian "republics" that could be considered homes to non-Russian peoples.) Also, does it matter if there was a massive movement or not? There's no massive movement of Native Americans to kick the whites out of the continent; doesn't mean they're not being dominated...and I don't think the white majority is going anywhere. > I do think that this situation has changed dramatically only in the last, > say, twenty-thirty years - and that has to do with the weapons situation: > both nuclear and things like IEDs shift the balance to a weird place where > a resistance is unlikely to simply be disappeared. Or rather, unlikely for > the US or most Western nations to do so - since, as I said, it might be > possible just to nuke them out of existence. Some nations would be willing > to do that; so far, I don't think we are. (And certainly, even if our > leaders are, our people aren't.) > > > But you didn't answer her original question. I think the answer must be > > yes...merely because an affair is "internal" doesn't mean, I think, that > > we should defer to that country's better judgement. I know I'm about to > > prove Godwin's law true, but....Hitler. > > > Leaving aside the Hitler thing, I think my answer was in the form of *how* > to answer the question - which is to say, there's no pre-given answer. Which > I suppose means there might be a yes - but I think it's increasingly rare. > > Which is also why I think it's increasingly important that nations learn to > prevent the situations that might lead to atrocities. It is, as we are > seeing, exceedingly difficult to stop a war once it's started. > > But (to anticipate one interpretation of what I just wrote) I don't think > it's likely you can stop a war by means of an occupying army. It's likelier > that will increase resentment - and the inevitable retributions and > retaliation will heat up a formerly cold occupation pretty quickly. > > And notice how many of those antagonisms and resentments that do lead to > atrocities have to do with...patriotism? (That, and religion - and the blend > thereof that is various ethnic enthusiasms.) > > > -- > > ...Jeff Norman > > The Architectural Dance Society > http://spanghew.blogspot.com ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V16 #375 ********************************