Posted on 12/31/2004 12:56:16 PM PST by West Coast Conservative
INEVITABLY, confronted with a tragedy of unimaginable scale, the human mind looks for someone to blame. In the Dark Ages, disasters were ascribed to the wrath of God. Now, in an odd inversion that we like to think of as progress, they are adduced as evidence of no God.
In the absence of a deity to decry or appease when the earth moves in such devastating fashion, humankind reaches for the next best thing - worldly authority. Authority should have known it was coming. Authority didn't do enough to prevent it. Authority was too preoccupied with its own nefarious priorities to care.
There is plenty of authority to blame for the devastation caused by the Sumatran earthquake this week. Governments in Bangkok, Jakarta and Colombo will shoulder some of it. Governments farther afield will be inculpated for the poverty of their response. Media organisations will be attacked for being too callous and too mawkish. Unsurprisingly, perhaps the most inviting target is the US.
In the past three days I have been impressed by the originality of the latest critiques of the evil Americans. The earthquake and tsunami apparently had something to do with global warming, environmentalists say, caused of course by greedy American motorists. Then there was the rumour that the US military base at Diego Garcia was forewarned of the impending disaster and presumably because of some CIA-approved plot to undermine Islamic movements in Indonesia and Thailand did nothing about it.
To be fair, even the most animated America-hater, though, baulks at the idea of blaming George W. Bush for the destruction and death in southern Asia. But the US is blamed for not responding generously enough to help the victims of the catastrophe. A UN official this week derided Washington's contribution as stingy.
It is a label that fits the general image abroad of greedy, self-absorbed Americans. They neither know nor care much about the woes of the rest of the world, do they? Did the tsunami even get a look-in on US TV news between the holiday schmalz and the football games, I have been sneeringly asked once or twice this week by contemptuous British friends.
The answer is yes, it did. News coverage of the event has been extensive, and for the most part intelligent and mercifully free of the sort of parochialism about holidaymakers that characterises so much of the European press accounts. There have been some lapses -- the New York newspaper that carried on its front page the Manhattan supermodel's harrowing tale of survival as her boyfriend was swept away by a tidal wave. There has perhaps been a little too much "what if it happened here?" alarmist self-absorption.
But for the most part Americans have watched a sobering, heartbreaking tale of unimagined calamity unfold halfway across the world. You get a sense of the heterogeneity of this country when something such as this happens. Every newspaper in every big city has been carrying stories about local Sri Lankan, Indonesian, Thai and Malaysian communities traumatised by the long-distance search for relatives and friends.
Further, in financial terms, it is not at all clear that the US is shirking its responsibilities, pledging an initial $US35 million ($45.1million) in aid, with the prospect of much more to come, and offering military assistance. You can be sure that the private US response will be even more impressive. Don't misunderstand me. I am not suggesting that Americans are any more generous than anyone else -- simply that they, too, are moved to mercy by the plight of others.
But even as we seek to apportion blame when catastrophe strikes, we are gripped too by a kind of fatalism. We stand in awe of nature and feel helpless before its apparently insuperable power. The rising death toll in Southeast Asia seems to mock our pretensions to progress. We may have been to the moon, eradicated smallpox and created eBay, we think, but when the tectonic plates move we are no more secure than were the barefoot citizens of Pompeii.
Yet the truth is not so grim. For centuries, steady progress has been made in the struggle to limit the effects of natural disasters. Last year, an earthquake that measured 6.6 on the Richter scale killed more than 40,000 people in the Iranian city of Bam. In 1989, a more powerful earthquake struck outside San Francisco. The death toll was fewer than 100. Of course there were demographic and geologic differences that contributed to the disparity. Of course there will never be a fail-safe protection against the most destructive efforts of nature. But it is within our reach to build systems that can mitigate their effects.
Years of scientific effort and technological investment have given the world seismic sensors; early warning systems; buildings that can bounce up and down on stilts buried deep in the earth; flood barriers and other techniques. We can discern the outlines of a strategy for preventing, or at least limiting future disasters.
As we contemplate nature's fearful capacity for destruction and our apparent helplessness, we should not forget the greater tragedy that is humankind's potential for self-destruction. It was humanity, not nature, that killed tens of millions in the wars and genocides of the 20th century. Even as we master techniques to protect us from the earth's violence, we perfect new, more effective means of delivering our own.
Envy unrelentingly eats away at the rest of the world.
Again...
I am in the middle of a heated argument with a leftist relative that is heavily involved with moveon.org. She is claiming (and the organization is to send out email to the effect) that the quake was due in part to the bombing that went on in Iraq.
I'm just gobstruck at her seriousness in blaming the administration for the deaths.
Any tidbits of facts or factoids fellow Freepers can lay on me to hit her with (regarding how ridiculous this is) are MUCH appreciated.
It was John F'n sKerry's fault for not being elected. Had he been President-Elect he could have signed an official proclomation forbidding such natural occurring foolishness...
" the quake was due in part to the bombing that went on in Iraq. "
This IS an Onion joke, right?
"Any tidbits of facts or factoids fellow Freepers can lay on me to hit her with (regarding how ridiculous this is) are MUCH appreciated."
Yeah - you're wasting your time. Buy her a roll of tin foil and move on.
I don't know what to say - her comment shows an unfathomable level of stupidity. I guess you could explain tetonic plate theory to her. also tell her the quake had the power in the area of 1 million a-bombs; had the US actually used this many nuclear weapons there would be far more effects right now than the tsunami. But good luck debating with someone who's hatred is so blinding that she'll believe such utter nonsense.
also I really hope it's true that moveon.org makes a public statement blaming BUsh for the quake. It will make them look so ridiculous to the public and will significantly set back their cause.
Tell her that if we detonated every single nuclear weapon extant in the world today in a fault line in the ocean it wouldn't raise a ripple in comparison. The amount of energy required to create such a tsunami is simply astronomical in magnitude. Far beyond the capabilities of any evil SUV driving human beings.
Yield of every bombed dropped on Iraq : less than 100 kilotons.
Your friend is a complete idiot.
IT'S TRUE...ssshhhhh! PLEASE DON'T LET ANYONE ELSE FIND OUT! HERE IS A LINK TO THE TRUTH ABOUT...THE 'BOOMERANG BOMB'
I can't wait until they send the e-mail. Let those who have a bit of sanity be aware of how crazy they are.
I bet they will argue that Japan has more earthquakes, etc., is the result of Atomic Bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki...
Thank you very muuch for posting this.
If there was even the remotest chance that human beings could trigger an earthquake along major subduction zones, we would be doing so on a regular basis.
Geolologists and geophysicists have been looking for ways to relieve the stress along fault lines for a long time in small, controlled earthquakes to prevent the "big one". There just is no way for us puny earthlings to do that.
What often triggers earthquakes in faults with high stress is the infiltration of water (a lubricant) after a rainy period. Explosive force on the surface will be mostly directed upward and outward, not down into the earth. That's why explosives are ineffective to trigger earthquakes.
Thanks. This will be part of my response. Much welcomed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.