[ExI] Manning and Assange

[Keith Henson]

On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 5:00 AM,  Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at gmail.com> wrote:

snip

> Also note that the targeting video had a range display which shows us
> that the attack helicopters were over a mile away, well out of range
> of the targeted men.  Note in that regard the delay between the firing
> of the 30mm cannon -- you can hear it on the audio -- and the impact
> of the rounds, 3-4 seconds later.
>
> Finally, fog of war and all that, it's hard to see the subsequent
> targeting of the man with the van who stops to help one of the
> wounded, and is killed, as anything but criminal.  (Leaving out
> entirely the issue of the unseen kids in the van.)
>
> Regarding the legality of the invasion of Iraq: I am of the opinion
> that Bush/Cheney intended to remove Saddam even before 911 gave them
> the pretext, and that a close inspection of the laws appertaining --
> Sovereignty clause and UN Charter -- show the entire business to have
> been unlawful.  I would add that, in my view, the same legal basis for
> the assessing the criminal nature of the invasion itself also indicts
> every member of Congress who voted in favor of the AUMF and follow-on
> war funding, and for every member of the US Military who participated
> in the war (they take an oath to defend the Constitution, ie act
> lawfully).
>
> Finally, at long last, after Vietnam and now, years later Iraq,
> Afghanistan, and the GWOT, I am an old man (inner child
> notwithstanding).  I have come to the conclusion that the  law is
> overwhelmed by war and swept away.  Replaced by a frightening
> lawlessness that whispers the true nature of... leadership.
>
> Can we please begin to design a system of governance that serves the
> peace-desiring needs of regular people rather than the power-mad
> sociopathic impulses of the "leadership"?
>
> Best, Jeff Davis

Jeff, through the lens of evolutionary psychology, I think I
understand what causes wars and how to prevent them from happening.

Wars are the result of the build up of xenophobic memes, and that is
because humans have evolved to "turn up the gain" on such when they
detect a bleak future.  In the past, survival threats were almost
always from a shortage of food, and killing neighbors to take theirs
was the universally correct solution.

Here we differ from chimps in that chimps are *always* in war mode and
kill members of neighboring bands whenever they can.  With humans,
this depends on circumstances that flip a behavioral switch so
peaceful interactions between bands were possible.

It is *possible* episodic (rather than constant) war was part of the
evolution of concealed ovulation.  Young female chimps transfer to new
groups (and are accepted) when they are in visible estrous.  It has
probably been a long time since females of the line that led to humans
did that.

On this list I posted an analysis of why the psychological traits
leading to warfare (and the support of crazy leaders) were maintained.

Keeping war mode turned off is conceptually easy, just keep the income
per capita rising slightly or at least not declining and especially
don't let the future look bleak.

Implementing this prescription is much  harder.

I work on that (cheap energy) but there is little interest.  Perhaps
it is to many steps from the goal of reducing wars for people to
follow.

Keith