Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id EAA26642 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-bounces@mmu.ac.uk); Wed, 3 Oct 2001 04:31:51 +0100 X-Originating-IP: [209.240.220.151] From: "Scott Chase" <ecphoric@hotmail.com> To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk Subject: Re: state of memes Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 23:26:40 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Message-ID: <F97xn2wNazchK4hse6z0000e5f3@hotmail.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Oct 2001 03:26:41.0114 (UTC) FILETIME=[37DAD3A0:01C14BBB] Sender: fmb-bounces@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>From: "Dace" <edace@earthlink.net>
>Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
>To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
>Subject: Re: state of memes
>Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 12:16:11 -0700
>
> > Hi Lawrence.
> >
> > I'm not sure if the excerpt from Chomsky really addresses the matter of
>why
> > the US and other countries wanted to have a war against Iraq. The
>segment
> > seems to suggest that stock prices might have been a motive, or that
> > territory was a motive. And the oil motive almost does not need to be
> > mentioned to be suspect, even if there is no clear reason why the US
>would
> > prefer to buy from Kuwait than from an expanded Iraq.
> >
> > Yet a far graver threat was posed by Iraq through its nuclear weapons
> > program. That weapons program was explicitly announced by Saddam Husein
> > himself during the Iran-Iraq war. A nuclear reactor capable of producing
> > fissile materials for atomic bombs was being built by a French company
>in
> > Iraq at the time. Iraq had been using chemical weapons against the
>Iranians,
> > but the Iranians were clearly afraid of the nuclear threat. So they
>tried
>to
> > attack Iraq's reactor from the air, but unsuccessfully. Then Hussein
>made
>a
> > mistake by announcing that the weapons to be produced were not for use
> > against Iran, but rather, for use against Israel. So Israel sent in a
> > squadron of advanced US fighter-bombers armed with "smart bombs" and
> > disguised as Jordanian aircraft. They then made short work of the Iraqi
> > reactor. But Iraq continued its efforts to build an atomic bomb. Whether
>you
> > want to call the weapons ideas "memes" or "thought contagions" or
>whatever,
> > the basic ideas behind nuclear weapons had clearly proliferated to Iraqi
> > weapons scientists even as the weapons themselves had not--at least not
>yet.
> >
> > After the invasion of Kuwait, Saddam Hussein even held up some
> > high-performance capacitors capable of dumping their charge very quickly
>into
> > the plastic explosives that initiate a fission bomb. Such capacitors
>would
> > have had very high capacitance, high voltage, low parasitic inductance,
>and
> > low parasitic resistance as a result of modern materials science
>advances.
> > Hussein was, in effect, threatening to use nuclear weapons against the
>United
> > States or any other country that might reverse his conquest of Kuwait.
> > According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists,
> > (http://www.bullatomsci.org/issues/1992/jf92/jf92.albright.html), the
>Gulf
> > War was therefore "the non-proliferation measure of last resort." By the
> > implications of that assessment, a negotiated withdrawal from Kuwait
>really
> > would have been a "nightmare scenario."
> >
> > Some might say that we should not worry if Iraq should become just
>another
> > member of the nuclear club. Yet each new "member," poses a very serious
>risk
> > to us all, especially if the country or organization is strongly
>oriented
> > toward initiating conquest and warfare. The problem is not so much that
>one
> > or two fission bombs would destroy a country such as the USA, although
>such
> > weapons would certainly put to shame all the present talk of "Ground
>Zero"
>at
> > the World Trade Center in New York. The real problem is that with just a
>few
> > atomic bombs, someone who is really determined to start a new empire
>could
> > smuggle fission bombs into some major cities of a country such as the
>USA
>or
> > Russia. Then they could use nuclear blackmail to attempt to extort an
>arsenal
> > of advanced hydrogen bombs. Along with millions of others, Noam Chomsky
>could
> > have been relieved of his electrons by the likes of Saddam Hussein.
> >
> > --Aaron Lynch
> >
> > http://www.thoughtcontagion.com
>
>Aaron,
>
>Your "thought contagion" site is the best discussion of memes I've seen yet
>(if you don't mind me using Dawkins' slippery term.) Thanks.
>
>I can't say much in favor of your analysis of American policy in the Middle
>East. It's silly to think that Iraq, had it possessed the requisite
>technology, would have considered launching a nuclear attack against the
>United States. Armed with 24 missiles, each containing up to 17
>independently maneuverable warheads, a single Trident submarine (of which
>we
>have 22) could have obliterated the country in minutes. Saddam wanted
>nukes
>because boys like toys. At no point would such weapons have offered him
>any
>leverage against the US.
>
>
Probably not the U.S., since Israel is much closer.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Oct 03 2001 - 04:37:07 BST