Where is the technology?

I don't know how to exactly phrase this but here is my best shot. Back before the War on Terrorism started, I would hear all the time how the government was X amount of years ahead of everything in technology and we consumers would just get a trickle down effect of this technology. But ever since the war in Iraq, I have been wondering, Where is this technology?

If the government is really 20 years ahead of the people, then where is it? I don't see the point in being ahead of the curve if you're not gonna use it. And you could argue that the US is just hiding what it has and I can kinda see that but......all this 'advanced tech' has gotten us is faulty intel and precision bombings on civilian targets.

My question is, is the government really more advanced than they let on or are all these rumors just trying to get people to hate the government even more?

Originally posted by Morphene
I don't know how to exactly phrase this but here is my best shot. Back before the War on Terrorism started, I would hear all the time how the government was X amount of years ahead of everything in technology and we consumers would just get a trickle down effect of this technology. But ever since the war in Iraq, I have been wondering, Where is this technology?

If the government is really 20 years ahead of the people, then where is it? I don't see the point in being ahead of the curve if you're not gonna use it. And you could argue that the US is just hiding what it has and I can kinda see that but......all this 'advanced tech' has gotten us is faulty intel and precision bombings on civilian targets.

My question is, is the government really more advanced than they let on or are all these rumors just trying to get people to hate the government even more?

No they are not more advanced than any one ; other than an other military and only then in the strictest conventional sence. If they can use military force against military force that superiority can be applied. Security is an abstract concept and if people 'believe' they are stronger or better off ,with more advanced weapons, the more secure they 'feel', real or not.

There is a paradox about German rearmament between WW-I and WW-II. The more military power they aquired the less secure they became, since their advesaries had to rearm. The more that happened the more the Germans realised that 'defense' was not enough. In order to be secure they had to attack those who threatened them. The more that happened the more those groups rearmed and formed alliances. The more that happened the more the Germans realised they may have to end up fighting more and more enemies.

Trouble is the growth of military power is a double edged sword. The more military power a adminstration has the more it may 'choose' to use military force to solve its problems. Few people are able to 'see' 'second and third order consequences of an action before they intiate it. Once you start a military adventure, you may not be able to control just were it goes or ends up. Your not any more secure especially if you are foolish enough to actualy use that force.

Sun Tzu said it best. "The best victory is the one you don't have to fight". So in that sence the "Cold War" was an example of a 'best' victory, since 'we' won with out have to fight that war. Are the Americans any more secure since they invaded Iraq? They have started something and have no idea where its going to end up.

]

[edit on 9-4-2006 by psteel]