[extropy-chat] Protect ourselves to prevent a return tothemiddle ages

[Keith Henson]

At 12:53 AM 2/10/2006 -0800, J. Andrew Rogers wrote:

>On Feb 9, 2006, at 11:50 PM, spike wrote:
> > This situation is far too serious to even notice
> > the neener-neener factor, ja.  What concerns me
> > is that Europe Incorporated will suddenly realize
> > the folly of allowing its military force to become
> > as weak as it appears to be.
>
>
>This problem is not at the level of military conflict.  Whatever the
>US military has gotten itself into, it can easily handle, unrealistic
>expectations notwithstanding.  The only real question is whether or
>not people have learned the lesson of history that the appeasement of
>evil, particularly when it is vulnerable, almost never pays off in
>the long term.
>
>With respect to European militaries specifically, they can deliver a
>significant sting in their own territories but lack the ability to
>project (given their tribal history, many have argued that this is a
>good thing).  If European countries ever decided to alter the
>landscape of their own countries they are quite capable of it, as
>history shows.  Europe has always managed to find its brass when it
>mattered on many, many occasions.  The current culture probably does
>not care too much about their historical battles to the death with
>Islam but they have a long history of dealing with such threats (c.f.
>Jan Sobieski).  Militant Islam has to be very careful about pushing
>the backs of the Europeans against the wall if they want to prevail;
>any parity in military capability that existed in the Middle Ages has
>long since passed, and Europeans can be famously ruthless and brutish
>when it comes to the survival of their tribes.  Push come to shove, I
>know who I'll put my money on.

Agree.

>The degradation problem with the European militaries, in short, is
>Pax Americana.  To shore up their sagging economies, they have
>drastically cut military expenditures and redirected funds to
>underfunded social entitlements.  It is educational to put a
>historical context to it.  The long term historical military
>maintenance expenditure during times of non-conflict has been around
>4% of GDP, plus or minus a bit.  Europeans and many other "safe"
>countries are now spending far less than that, particularly in the
>last 15 years since the fall of the Soviet Union and as the European
>economies have started to stagnate.
>
>It would probably surprise most people to know that the US averaged
>something like 7% of GDP on military expenditures during the 20th
>century -- that is how the US bought its advantage in military
>technology, particularly after getting caught with its pants down
>(again) in the second world war.  Current US military expenditures
>are far less, and are at peace time levels by any historical
>standard.  The US is cashing in on the dividend of technological
>advances paid for in the 20th century.  To put a different spin on
>it, the US could double its military expenditures and still be in its
>historical range of "normal" for the US; those who think the US
>military capability is stretched are lacking historical context.
>
>Militant Islam is counting on the modern West not fighting back.
>They are not stupid; they know that their success depends on never
>having to face the war-fighting capability of the Europeans and their
>diaspora.  I would add that this will never be a problem for the
>western hemisphere in the way that it will be for the eastern
>hemisphere.  Islam cannot hoof its way into the western hemisphere,
>nor does it have meaningful foothold here; it is a much harder
>target.  The only dog the US really has in this fight is the impact
>on the world economy if it does not use its military prowess and
>geopolitical power to rein in the threat.  The threat to Europe and
>European politics is far more dire, as is in evidence.  The ball is
>really in the court of the EU.  If Europe takes a strong stand
>against militant Islam it is game over for the jihadis; what remains
>to be seen is if that will actually happen, and the jihadis are
>obviously counting against it.
>
>By my own estimation, the jihadis played their cards too early in
>Europe if they wanted a good shot at success.  Perhaps 10-20 years
>too early.  Europe can control this situation, if they want to.

You are assuming rational thinking prevailing.  I don't think it will.

My argument is that the mechanisms that are turned on by working up to war 
depress the ability to think rationally.

20 page paper if you ask for it.

Keith Henson