isbn: 9781849043243 is written by a man (or team*) who prefer the idea of security over progress.** The first chapter although baldy written summary of the book attempts gets to see the logic as to why a bunch of ‘non violent’*** Afghanistan citizenry decided to ambush with guns the author and vip’s after building some infrastructure (my blog) for doing something wrong.
While the author decides to eventually give up on the blame game it does expose the wolly american army logic.
Anyhow urban warfare is the name of the game and as urban warfare is not an easy thing to find, or be recorded and examples of Somalia, and terrorist attack events are the main points to make his point that anything technology post 1900 in year is bad for civilians.
The trouble with the terrorists example is that usually there is a state sponsor somewhere, Israelis [jews] hate Palestinians, (my blog) Pakistanis hate Indians and the author chooses to see attacks like these as individual rather than declarations of war even though i probably would have a a bit a hunt trying to purchase thirty (30) assault guns without a friendly state like Pakistan ‘helping’ out with transport as well.
It should also be said that in Somalia the americans decided to work with the warlords over government bodies, so if nice places are the idea the author is pretty much screwed before he started.
States can also export crime (my blog) which the author admits with his Los Angeles to Honduras which has [or had a] mortality problem from another state. I see again why he uses the individual rather than state as blame instrument. No mention of northern ireland (my blog) either, so consider it incomplete or a propaganda tool.
There is some academic content to the ‘no we did not cause the problem’ and the rebuilding of Pairs, although artillery**** positions for destroying large chunks of Paris (that is in France) seem a little extreme but then if the security theater (my blog) industry think that’s fine then you get an idea about the people who think its a good idea.
Labels and classifications also come into this
- people have to happy with a installed dictator via the cia who was not of there choice
- dissent is wrong
- telephones are bad
- wiser people know better than you
The usual suspects also get listed wikileaks,anonymous,internet and it feels as if this is a an attempt to counter them as they must be bad for governments. Although the author does admit it is pessimistic he points to certain groups of society who might change things although they automatically clash with point 1 if talking about Argentina when in Junta era.
Another point is that while winning the war might be good for one side it the losing side has better relationships with the people did they not get stronger as might be the case in the Lebanon. Moderate or extreme views can also be ‘adjusted’ over time so the ‘we dont talk to them’ mantra might soften, or have to.
Civilized might be an noble aim but it feels like a lesson in how to control the masses. That seems to mean censorship and google and others might fall for being on the wrong side.
4/5 bananas. An interesting if flawed text that ignores the american politics of ‘with us or against us’ .
* a team is indicated ** no silicon valley, or mobile phones thank you *** compared to the default evil pastuns **** bombs