One piece of the THS future is underway

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Owen Smith

Getting over it is not the same as forgetting it ever happened.

Saying "It was 60 years ago! We've gotten over it, why can't you!" seems insensitive to our victims, remarkably naive about history, politics and Iranian cultural values, and completely lacks any admission of guilt. The latter is worrisome because if we can't admit that we made a mistake with Operation Boot/Ajax how are we going to be able to recognize that we might be making the same mistake with some current foreign adventure? There's an obvious parallel there with recent events in that with Operation Ajax the US trusted intelligence from the UK that turned out to be extremely dubious later. Maybe it's good to remember what happens when you don't verify your allies sources before you engage in a potentially dangerous international adventure.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk

I'm not seeing animosity, I'm seeing your typical social blindness and assumption that you see things more rationally than everyone else. Members of the same social group ARE more likely to help one another than people who are not in the same social group. That is the rational analysis. You're being irrational if you think otherwise.



Sure, but you were making a much broader and more sweeping statement than just "it's silly to think the Navy will better at doing space stuff than the AF just because you're in the Navy.". If that's all you want to talk about, then speak in specifics.

At the species level, it is quite rational. But at the individual level, it often isn't in one's best interests to automatically side with such a member. And certainly not in the best interests of understanding the situations factually.

We all have our blind spots. But refusing to call one a blind spot and lauding it as some advantage that never hinders oneself is an even bigger blind spot, in my opinion.
Yes, my social "blindness" is most of the time a disadvantage. I'll be the first to say that. But normal humans' instinctive clique-y social grouping is sometimes very much a disadvantage as well.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by Owen Smith

And governments wonder why many of us think Edward Snowden did a good thing.

Now that's a political powder keg of an issue, if ever I read one.
But without getting into specifics, I think we can all agree that no one should be allowed to keep secrets without any oversight or periodic unveiling.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Maybe it's good to remember what happens when you don't verify your allies sources before you engage in a potentially dangerous international adventure.

Originally Posted by Owen Smith

And governments wonder why many of us think Edward Snowden did a good thing.

That seems like something of a non-sequitur -- as sir_pudding's comment basically implies "it's good to spy on your allies".

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

At the species level, it is quite rational. But at the individual level, it often isn't in one's best interests to automatically side with such a member. And certainly not in the best interests of understanding the situations factually.

We all have our blind spots. But refusing to call one a blind spot and lauding it as some advantage that never hinders oneself is an even bigger blind spot, in my opinion.

Point me to a post in this thread that has said this.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Anthony

That seems like something of a non-sequitur -- as sir_pudding's comment basically implies "it's good to spy on your allies".

I'd have said "Trust but verify". It's also a non sequitor because it doesn't really address my specific objections to his insistence that people "should just get over" stuff that happened decades ago.

[jeff_wilson]

Originally Posted by Anthony

sir_pudding's comment basically implies "it's good to spy on your allies".

"It's better to get a second spy report before starting a war."

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by Anthony

That seems like something of a non-sequitur -- as sir_pudding's comment basically implies "it's good to spy on your allies".

Not really. It outright states "verify your sources," but there's nothing in there that implies that should be by spying on your sources as opposed to asking to see their work when they provide you with intel that you're going to depend on to make major policy decisions.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

At the species level, it is quite rational. But at the individual level, it often isn't in one's best interests to automatically side with such a member. And certainly not in the best interests of understanding the situations factually.

I for one am capable of being a trustworthy member of a group while still maintaining my ability to think rationally and analyze the group's behavior from an external viewpoint. I'm not always an idiot.

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I for one am capable of being a trustworthy member of a group while still maintaining my ability to think rationally and analyze the group's behavior from an external viewpoint. I'm not always an idiot.

Tuesdays and Sundays. Those are the designated idiot days, all jarheads know this.