Thanks for the comments on vengeance.

Like I said, I have to give a talk on the anniversary of 9-11 and revenge. No matter what one thinks about who did it, one has to recognize that it was blood-thirst revenge that drove American policy for years thereafter. The Republicans played it for all it was worth -- and then some.

I'll not comment on the continuing aspect of the 9-11 hit, as some here might find that "obsessive" and we would not want that. I will say that the comments section here has taught me that people from the far, far left to the far, far right are all the same in wanting revenge for the smallest perceived slight.

I asked myself why were so many here desirous of vengeance to the point of being consumed. The answer came to me by remembering a chapter in Raymond M. Smullyan's book The Tao is Silent in which he something like:

There is one ethical philosophy which might be characterized as “letting things go their own way, not interfering, not imposing one’s will on nature, letting things happen of their own accord, not trying to reform the world, not trying to ‘improve’ the world, but simply accepting things as they come.” Such a philosophy is, I believe, called “quietism.” This philosophy is intensely irritating to many people called “activists” who believe this is the worse course possible and is in fact responsible for most of the evils in the world. They would say that the last thing we should do is to let things go their own way; if we do that, things will go terribly! It is up to us to prevent the bad things in the world from happening! I cannot think of any philosophy more irritating to some than quietism! Indeed, many will say that quietism is the perfect philosophy for the “purely selfish individual who has everything he wants in life and to hell with the others!”

In opposition to the activists, the quietist quietly points out (or sometimes actively points out) that the trouble with activism is that people who go forth trying to “improve” the world — even those with the best intentions (at least on a conscious level!)—usually “bungle” matters, and only succeed in making things even worse than they already are. The quietist reminds us, for example, that revolutions often establish even worse tyrannies than they overthrow.

It is not my function here to take sides in the quietism-activism controversy. I admit that my personal bias is towards the quietists—I trust them more than I do the activists. But I do not believe that most efforts to improve the world are “bungling” rather than helpful. Some are bungling, and some are helpful, and I do not have enough statistical data to decide which are preponderant. But, as I said, my sympathies lie more with the quietist. However, if a quietist advocates quietism, if he tells an activist that he shouldn’t be active, ...

The above is from an essay that was not in the book but I am sure this part is almost word for word.

He is close to the divide between libertarians and the failed policies of both the left and the right. Very close. (damn bunglers!)

Smullyan is an interesting character. Mathematician, logician, philosopher, concert pianist, magician, speaker, and writer: and even wrote two books of chess puzzles during his twenties when he claims he was just loafing!

We are in agreement.

I would probably bet on Israel being the one to nuke Iran though, rather than the USA. But, time will tell.

I must go read now; I'll check on the 9-11 situation in the morning.

By the way; anyone have a great quote on revenge? I have to give a talk on the subject Friday and am looking for a great opening line.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=7995188

Even ABC has run a piece on the debt, asking if the mountain of debt is our next crisis. It is becoming a world wide topic; with even the UN calling for a new world currency to replace the discredited dollar. We admit to around 12 Trillion in debt, while the true figure is something like 100 Trillion if honest accounting methods are used. China is selling dollars -- blame them?

Now, with all the above we factor in that we are fighting in three countries already. (covertly in Iran, but let us leave that one out for the day) So how can war "save" us in any way? Even the economically ignorant Americans can see that wars are damn expensive and we have no money.

I hope you are not suggesting that we would destroy the world in a nuclear holocaust before we would allow ourselves to dissolve into many little new nations or something.

Are you? (I had not thought of that before)