Interview with CIA+NSA Director Micheal HaydenDear Laura,
Your interview (on "The Current") with Michael Hayden certainly got my attention. Wow!
Hayden says: Let's have more collateral damage! The USA needs to be more aggressive on the battlefield! I reply: USA bombs and drones all look so clinical from afar. For the poor bastards on the ground, not so much. One man's militarism is another woman's terrorism. Hayden motivates 10 terrorists for every one that he kills! The only way that Hayden's brute force view of the world will prevail is if he takes it to the level of trumping Trump. To succeed his way, Hayden would have to kill every Muslim on the planet.
Hayden has the gall to favourably compare himself with Edward Snowden. The basis of Hayden's high self-esteem rests on his remaining in the USA as compared to Snowden who fled. I reply: Hayden broke a just law. Snowden broke an evil law. The fact that both Obama and Hayden favour evil laws simply confirms that the once admirable USA has sucked itself into a moral cesspit.
As for "Snowden not staying to face the consequences", I am reminded what David Hilbert (greatest mathematician of his time) said when someone blamed Galileo for having failed to stand up for his convictions. Hilbert replied "But he was not an idiot. Only an idiot could believe that scientific truth needs martyrdom: that may be necessary in religion, but scientific results prove themselves in due time".
I expect that "The Current" will give Edward Snowden the right of reply. Please send me an email when it is arranged; I will wait with bated breath.
Hayden is walking, talking proof that military intelligence is an oxymoron. He makes mockery of military morality.
I am always dismayed by the analyses that are promulgated by the CBC (and other mainstream media outlets) regarding the presently sad circumstances of the world.
My own analysis is totally different. The only framework for knowledge that makes sense to me is the scientific framework. Religion, economics, militarism/terrorism and politics are all types of animal behaviour. They are a subset of biology.
Many ecologists have contributed knowledge to help us understand these things. As an scientist, I begin with an appreciation of important works by: Paul and Anne Ehrlich, Edward O. Wilson and Paul Colinvaux. Paul Colinvaux's 1980 book, "Fates of Nations: A Biological Theory for History", stands out as being the most directly useful work for analysing the present state of the world.
Basically, it all boils down to the interplay of human ingenuity that expands the availability of resources and thereby the means for human animals to have a satisfying life vs the tendency for population growth to crowd increasing numbers of people into ways of living that are less satisfying.
We now live in a time where the benefits of ingenuity and available resources have largely saturated and the world has become overcrowded by continued population growth. Young men (and increasingly women) will get up to no good when nations no longer have the means to provide satisfying ways for them to live.
The mistake that political/social/media/economist/religious "leaders" make is to assume that growth can continue indefinitely. It can't. Investment for growth will be rewarded when growth is readily achievable. Unfortunately, democracies and dictatorships around the world have continued to invest for growth for a long time after it had become obvious to any clear thinker that growth is saturating. So long as overpopulation is denied, things will get worse.
Syria was a stable dictatorship when oil production was increasing faster than the rapidly-growing population. When oil production stalled and rapid population growth continued, Syria became an unstable dictatorship.
A similar analysis applies to Egypt. Once Egypt exported oil. Egyptian population grew very fast. Now Egypt imports oil and has far more people than it knows what to do with. The long-term dictatorship was toppled, only to be replaced by an elected theocracy, only to be replaced by a military dictatorship. Whatever happens next, I don't know, the Egyptian people are remarkable but how much can they tolerate?
The issue is not religion. It's overpopulation. Religion is just a handy way to gather together young men who cannot find a satisfying niche to live in.