Replies

Illinois firearms & Second Ammendment ping list. If you'd like to be added or removed, please FRMail me.

============================

Posted by Alas Babylon! in 1999 (too old to ping), thought it was worth reading again for the New Year.

thanks for reposting that.

Whoever wrote it, it was well done.

“And who, may I ask, was George Mason?”

Funny thing is, I graduated from George Mason High School, and George Mason University.

Thanks!! I missed it in 1999.

Excellent. Thanks for the ping.

What an excellent post -- I copied it and sent it to my personal email list.

I almost had a heart attack, though, when I was scrolling down and say the words "Alas Babylon." This book is one of my old favorites! I recently found a copy in a used bookstore for a quarter and re-read it. A few days ago, I sent the following email to a few military friends on my personal email list and am taking the liberty to post it here and ask for your input.

Here's my email:

The retired admiral in Pat Frank's futuristic novel (which deals with the years following WWIII), entitled "Alas Babylon" (1959), attempts to record for future historians how America got to WWIII as he may be one of the very few left alive who knew, militarily, what went on – the inside story. He "set it all out factually" and recorded "the arguments between the big carrier admirals...atomic seaplane admirals...ICBM generals...pentomic division generals...heavy bomber generals and manned missile generals." This character felt America had "finally achieved what we thought was a balanced establishment." I think he's talking about mutually assured destruction or the balance of power. YES???

The admiral, frustrated, ends up tossing his record because:

"'...I confused the tactical with the strategic...Once both sides had maximum capability in hydrogen weapons and efficient means of delivering them there was no sane alternative to peace. Every maxim of war was archaic. The rules of Clausewitz, Mahan, all of them were obsolete as the Code Duello. War was no longer an instrument of national policy, only an instrument for national suicide. War itself was obsolete. So my [record] deals with tactical palavers of no real importance. We might as well have been playing on the rug with lead soldiers...most of us sensed this truth, but we could not accept it...no matter how well we understood the truth it was necessary that the Kremlin understand it, too. It takes two to make a peace but only one to make a war. So all we could do, while vowing not to strike first, was line up our lead soldiers...The answer was not in the Pentagon, or even the White House. I'm looking elsewhere. One place, here.' He tapped Gibbon."

This book is one of my old favorites (found a copy at Salvation Army recently). Re-reading it, there were some liberal sentiments, but I'd say those sentiments were real liberalism vs. the socialistic/communistic PC we've got today. Also, the main characters are mostly military, including wives of military, and the world they re-build after "The Day" follows a traditional, conservative, Constitutional pattern, including punishment by death (guns play an important, necessary role, which no one disputes).

Anyway, I don't understand the admiral's words and I really want to and wonder what you think. Can you help me understand? (I do love this: "It takes two to make a peace but only one to make a war.")

Thanks for any help you can give.

End copy of my email.

I know that going off subject is annoying to some, but you can just imagine how surprised I was to see Alas Babylon in your post! Any input you or other FReepers reading this can give me is greatly appreciated.

Thanks again for a great post. It's so sad what is happening to our precious Constitution across the board, especially the 2nd Amd, but the recent attack on the 4th Amd is downright frightening.

thought it was worth reading again for the New Year.

... and an excellent read it was, thank you.