USA: Terrorism in the U.S.

Utopian Status of America

Originally publish in the Utopian Status of America volume 1, issue 2, Fall 2001

9/11

We used to have enemies that were easy to identify: they were Germans, Japanese, or Russians, they looked differently, they talked differently, they wore uniforms and were part of countries we could hate. But that time is gone. While we can still have enemies like Iraq, we now have far more enemies in fanatics and terrorists. Some, like Timothy McVeigh, are domestic. Others, like Osama Bin Laden, are Middle Eastern. Certainly some are European or Asian, as well. What do they all have in common? Nothing but an utter disrespect for human life. So how do we combat an enemy that doesn’t seem to exist, that is normally an invisible part of the world’s societies? Should we nuke the Middle East? Should we arrest anybody that disagrees with the United States or threatens us in any way? No, those kind of extreme actions turn us into terrorists.

Certainly we can increase our defenses, and perhaps be better prepared. Anybody who has flown into London knows that they take airport security  far more seriously than we do, but is  that really the solution? I think we need to look at why we are a target. We aren’t the richest country in the world, but we are rich; we aren’t the freest country in the world, but we are free; we aren’t the biggest country in the world, but we are big. So what is it about the United States of America that makes people hate us? It basically boils down to the old saying, ‘the squeaky wheel gets the grease.’ As the remaining superpower, we have taken it upon ourselves to lead the charge on so many issues that affect others: not just politically, but commercially, in entertainment, and basically in how people think. We are molding the world in our image, and that threatens people who think differently than we do.

Very few Americans know what it’s like to be a militant Muslim, or Jew, or Catholic, or Protestant. We have no idea of the mindset that allows somebody to take innocent lives in the name of religion or homeland, especially the concept of terrorists who are willing to die themselves. We need to understand these groups, and to do so, we need to acknowledge them and listen to them. Far too many times we will do what we think is right only to enrage the people we thought we were helping, simply because we didn’t pay attention to their real needs. Many of the Afghani terrorists are soldiers trained by the United States to be terrorists against the Russians. Perhaps that training and “help” we offered was shortsighted, or even dangerous. We are the annoying friend who tries to help, but often messes things up, only we can’t be shooed away, we continue to try and help, and make enemies in the process. We should not stop helping those who request it, but forcing our help on uncooperative peoples is never in our best interest.

We cannot predict terrorism, nor can we stop most terrorist acts. Surprise is terrorism’s ally and we can only react to an act of terrorism. Our best defense is to be proactive, preventing others from becoming our enemies, and severely punishing those who have. Active intelligence gathering to find and monitor those who may act against us can also be very effective. Is terrorism our fault? Absolutely not. Though, If we ignore it, it won’t go away, therefore, it’s our responsibility to put an end to it. The war on drugs was a bust, but then, drugs were never at war with us, maybe we can make the war on terrorism a little more successful.

I hope everyone has a place in their heart for all of the innocent people, the men, women, and children, the Christians, Jews, Muslims, and others, who have been killed in terrorist attacks, not just here, but all over the world, may they rest in peace.

 

“Fighting terrorism is like being a goalkeeper. You can make a hundred brilliant saves but the only shot that people remember is the one that gets past you.” – Paul Wilkinson

Comments off

September 11th

9/11

Today is the 7th anniversary of the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001. As it turns out, as I’ve been posting articles from the Utopian Status of America, the next articles to post are from Fall 2001, and many relate directly to these terrorist attack. I will be posting several of these today. This is the brief article I added to the last page of the Fall 2001 newsletter:

Our Morbid Curiosity

Why are we so interested in death? We have almost no interest in people being born, but are almost always interested people dying. Our morbidity certainly stems from our fear of death. It is unfortunate that this leads us to a rather pessimistic life, always considering the end, only occasionally considering the beginning. Perhaps, if we stopped spending time worrying about our destination, we could enjoy the ride a little more.

Comments off

Fuel economy should not be measured in MPG

“The metric system is a tool of the Devil. My car gets 40 Rods to the Hogshead, and that’s the way I likes it!”
- Grandpa Abe Simpson

Most of us in the US don’t measure fuel consumption in Rods to the Hogshead, but the units we do use don’t make a lot more sense. We currently use Miles per Gallon (MPG), where Europe and Canada measure in Liters per 100km. While the European standard is in metric, which we still won’t accept, and measures per 100km, rather than per one km, there is a distinct advantage to the idea of measuring fuel in volume per distance, rather than distance per volume.

Before I get too technical and lose many of you (too late? oops), here is the quick and dirty problem with MPG. If you actually look at the amount of fuel burned, you would see that the decrease in fuel usage between 15 and 20 MPG is much greater than that between 35 and 40 MPG despite the fact that they are both an improvement of 5 MPG.

So let’s look some graphs, maybe that will help. This first graph shows a plot of MPG to GPM from 0 MPG to 100 MPG. What you can plainly see is that the drop in fuel usage per MPG is much greater at the bottom of the scale than it is at the top of the scale.

GPM large scale

Here is a graph that shows the same data, but is scaled to show the MPG range we most of us currently see in our cars:

GPM small scale

While the difference is not so obvious in this graph, it is still present.

There is an automotive X Prize out there to build a mass production 100MPG car. The problem with this is that it’s really not as big a jump to get to 100MPG as it seems.

If a truck gets 12.5MPG, it burns 0.08 gallons for each mile driven.
If an average car gets 25MPG, it burns 0.04 gallons per mile.
If a hybrid gets 50MPG, it burns 0.02 gallons per mile.
If an X-prize winner gets 100MPG, it would burn 0.01 gallons per mile.

So, doubling the mileage in for each car (12.5 -> 25 -> 50 -> 100) does not save the same amount of gas. The average cars saves 0.04 gallons per mile over the truck, but the hybrid only saves 0.02 gallons per mile over the average car, and the X-prize winner would save only 0.01 gallons per mile over the hybrid. In fact, the X-prize winner only saves 0.03 gallons per mile of the average car, a difference of 75 MPG, while the average car saves 0.04 over the truck, a difference of only 12.5 MPG.

So why do we use MPG rather than GPM? I suspect its because bigger is better. As fuel economy increases so does MPG. The higher the number, the better the economy. But thinking in economy is also inherently backwards. What we should be doing is thinking in fuel usage. That’s what really matters, right?

And for those interested, Grandpa’s car uses a lot of gas at 504 gallons per mile. By comparison, my smartcar is averaging 40 MPG which converts to:

0.025 GPM
4.9 l / 100km
800,000 Rods to the Hogshead

Comments (1)

Unusual Hotrod

Notice anything odd about this hotrod?

Odd Hotrod

Those are not velocity stacks, that, in fact, is the exhaust. This hotrod was spotted at the Wings and Wheels show in Osceola, WI this past weekend.

Odd Hotrod Odd Hotrod Odd Hotrod

Eight carbs, with the intake and exhaust ports reversed. I doubt there is any real advantage to this, but it sure is cool

Comments off

1964 1/2 Ford Mustang Estate Station Wagon

I don’t know much about this car other than that it was at the Wings and Wheels show in Osceola, WI this past weekend. It was listed as a prototype and is really, really cool!

1964 Mustang Station Wagon

1964 Mustang Station Wagon 1964 Mustang Station Wagon 1964 Mustang Station Wagon 1964 Mustang Station Wagon 1964 Mustang Station Wagon 1964 Mustang Station Wagon 1964 Mustang Station Wagon 1964 Mustang Station Wagon 

If anybody knows more about this car, please let me know because Google is blissfully ignorant on it’s existence.

Comments (2)

« Previous Page« Previous entries « Previous Page · Next Page » Next entries »Next Page »