The US Military and the Myth That Humanity Is Predisposed to Violence

This is both true and also important.  It addresses the central issue regarding Islam.  Why do they choose to kill?  What is it about Islamic teaching in particular that produces suicide bombers in abundance?

 We need to solve this because it can open the door to outright Islamic collapse and a transition to a benign belief system.  Please recall that Christian fanaticism was totally a response to Islamic fanaticism.  Now we see Western fanaticism emerging in its own right again in response to Islamic fanaticism.  Just what can you describe recent police bloodymindedness as?

It is just not obvious.  How does Islam promote Bloodlust?

.

The US Military and the Myth That Humanity Is Predisposed to Violence 

Sunday, 13 September 2015 00:00 By Maria Santelli, 

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/32768-the-us-military-and-the-myth-that-humanity-is-predisposed-to-violence

We have this tragic misperception that humanity is predisposed to violence.

The truth is that humanity is predisposed to peace. The default position for humanity is that of conscientious objector to war and violence.

In our work at the Center on Conscience & War, this is proven to us daily, through our individual conscientious objectors. Science has proven it, too. This tendency for cooperation over competition is evident in daily life: on an average day, most people will witness countless acts of cooperation, kindness, and humanity towards one another, and not one act of violence or competition. And most of it is so commonplace, we barely even notice it. We take our nonviolence for granted.

And so does the news. What makes the news is violence, not cooperation. Particularly, on our local news programs, the top stories are the ones that depict street crimes and "home invasions." Seeing this interpersonal violence, I am convinced, leads us to believe that people are predisposed to acting violently toward one another. We all make decisions based on patterns we observe, and if the patterns we observe are highlighting violence, we are going to decide that humanity is violent.

How does this relate to war? If we believe that violence among humans is natural, we will believe that war is inevitable.

But violence is not natural. Our conscience tells us killing another human being is wrong. And it is the military that knows this better than anyone.

The military has taken notice that, over time, and through the history of war, the vast majority of individuals refuse to shoot to kill. That means, instead of firing directly at an "enemy," soldiers (used here to cover all members of the Armed Forces: soldiers, Marines, airmen and women, and sailors) would fire their weapons away from their "targets," or pretend to shoot. One investigation found - and these 0 Comments have been replicated - that in World War I only about 5% of people shot to kill; in World War II, about 15% of people shot to kill. By the US war in Vietnam, the rate at which soldiers were shooting to kill was found to be 90%. Today, that number could be even higher.

What happened? Training evolved to meet the military's goals.

There is a science of teaching soldiers to kill and it is called killology. It is the science of circumventing the conscience.

In order to get an otherwise psychologically healthy individual to kill, US military training has been developed to bypass the conscience and have the act of killing - the act of firing one's weapon with the intent to kill - become reflexive.

Our conscience knows that taking another human life is wrong. We don't want to do it; we know that it is the worst possible thing we could do. So the training has been developed to teach a soldier to kill without thinking, without filtering through the conscience.

When we take the time to think - to filter through the conscience - we make better decisions. And in the case of war and killing, the vast majority of us already have decided.

In fact, 99% of us have decided by default that we will not chose to kill. The military comprises less than 1% of the total US population. When you add veterans to that number, it still only creeps up to 7%, and some of them, of course, had been drafted; they didn't volunteer to join the military. And did volunteers join the military with a desire to kill, or for some other purpose?

In my experience, talking as I do to members of the military everyday, people that volunteer hold a sincere desire to serve and protect and to do something bigger than themselves. We call it "the service," after all. The people who join the military are some of the most beautiful, selfless, and loving people you could know. Sure, there are some cynical and self-serving reasons we could suggest for why people join the military, and there are real accounts of skinheads and other racists who were enlisting during the US invasion of Iraq, but that's not the rule. By and large, today's 1% joined the military out of a deep love and affection for humanity, not because they want to be killers.

And they suffer consequences for the same reasons. It is the same love for humanity and desire to serve, I believe, that causes them to experience deep trauma once their conscience processes the results of what they've done, the deaths and the pain they've been a part of. Military training dulls the conscience, but not forever. Very likely, the conscience is going to come back. We all can relate to that just through our normal experiences of life. If we have an argument with someone we love and don't handle ourselves well, it nags at us. Our conscience tells us we've done something wrong.

Now, put that on the scale a million times greater: killing someone or failing to prevent an egregious act in war. Even being trained to kill can and does cause trauma because it is so foreign from what our instincts tell us is right. This trauma, these wounds to the soul - moral injuries - are caused by transgressions against the conscience.

Hundreds of thousands of veterans are struggling with this trauma, which is different than the trauma that is experienced by a rape survivor or a hijack survivor. It's not characterized by the hyper-vigilance or fear for one's life that we see in those cases. Moral injury is an inner conflict. The Marines did a study in 2011 that revealed that much of the trauma the service members were experiencing was about guilt and betrayal of conscience.

So, is humanity predisposed to violence? I don't think so. We've allowed ourselves to be deceived by not only the military industrial complex, which profits from war, of course, but also by all the major pillars of our society: our government, our schools, our media, and even our churches. They all tell us that violence is human nature. Even the peace movement falls victim to this myth. We think, "people who join the military are different from me. They can kill. I can't kill." Well, what I've learned, and what the evidence shows is that they can't kill either - not without consequences.

Between 22 and 35 veterans - depending on who is counting - and an average of one active duty service member are killing themselves every day.

Remember, veterans make up just 7% of the population, yet they represent 20% of the suicides in this country. That's a very telling and shameful number.

So what's a soldier of conscience to do? Too often, soldiers in crisis believe they have only two choices: violate their conscience or violate their orders. Of the two, violating their orders is a piece of cake. Maybe they'll get court martialed, go to jail, get busted down in rank, lose some pay. Maybe they'll get kicked out with a bad discharge. That's finite, that's measurable, it's manageable by most people.

But the violation of the conscience? We are just beginning to understand its consequences, and they can be immeasurable.

It's important that people know there is a third option: conscientious objection - a legal pathway through which one can apply for discharge by affirming our natural predisposition for peace, by affirming the power of conscience.

Researchers have discovered how tectonic plates first collided in one of the world's largest deep sea trenches. Scientists discover how tectonic plates collide One of the biggest questions yet to be answered about plate tectonics is how do subduction zones start? A subduction zone is a deep trough cut across the ocean floor. They form when two tectonic plates collide and one of the plates is pushed under another as they move towards each other, creating an ocean trench. When the tectonic plates collide the underlying plate is consumed into the Earth's mantle, creating a hot magma that erupts from volcanoes on the surface of the overlying plate. These volcanoes form a volcanic arc. The Izu-Bonin-Mariana Arc There are examples of this kind of natural occurrence all across the globe. One is the Izu-Bonin-Mariana Arc (IBM), an extinct arc bordering a trench zone south of Japan. In a new paper published in Nature Geoscience, a team of 30 scientists from across the globe travelled to the Philippine Sea during the summer of 2014 on a large drillship called the JOIDES Resolution operated by the International Ocean Discovery Programme, to drill into the crust of the IBM arc and to try to find out what had caused the plates to collide. Dr Sev Kender a Research Fellow in the School of Geography at The University of Nottingham, was one of the team of 30 who went out on the trip. Dr Kender says: "Plate tectonics and seafloor spreading was a ground-breaking theory discovered in the mid-20th-Century that explained much of geology, and started our modern discipline today. Before it there was no single accepted theory of why oceans and mountains formed, and why continents look like they used to be linked together. This latest discovery addresses one of the last links in the theory that explains how geology works – which is a really significant find." Leading models There are two leading models that exist to explain how subduction zones may start - 'spontaneous', where one side sinks because it is more dense, and 'induced' where the plates are forced together by pressure from other distant locations. These ideas are not easy to test, because the process cannot be observed happening today. Subduction zones are created over many millions of years, and the initiation period happened millions of years ago in most cases. One way to understand the process is when scientists drill a long borehole into the ocean crust on the overlying plate, to test the make-up and age of the crust and to see how it behaved before the subduction started. The problem with this method however, is that in the millions of years since the initiation, a large amount of sediment has piled up on top of the crust, obscuring it. Significant discovery Dr Kender said: "During our expedition to the IBM Arc, we successfully collected 1.5km of borehole through the overlying sediments and into the crust itself, dating the rocks with microscopic fossils and magnetic field reversals that took place throughout Earth's history. "We found the crust to be much younger than expected, a stunning discovery indicating that we needed to readjust our ideas of how the subduction zone formed. The crust has chemical characteristics indicating it was formed at the time the subduction zone started, rather than much earlier. The crust may have formed in an extensional setting through seafloor spreading, in some ways similar to that formed at mid-ocean ridges today, although in this case near the newly-formed subduction zone." Mid-ocean ridges, which are found in all ocean basins, are where fresh new oceanic crust is formed and are the opposite of subduction zones. There are numerous 'transform faults' near ridges today, enormous fractures through the crust that form due to the spreading plates interaction with the curvature of the earth. "One idea is that the subduction zone formed along a previous line of weakness in one of these fracture zones, although it is not proven. Our new records show that the initiation was probably 'spontaneous' rather than 'induced', as the crust was formed in an extensional setting and did not become uplifted before formation. This finding really takes us one step closer to discovering how plate tectonics really works." Co-author Kara Bogus of Texas A&M University's International Ocean Discovery Program (IODP), who served as the expedition project manager, adds: "This discovery is significant because one of the biggest questions remaining in plate tectonics is how subduction zones initiate. It's half the story in plate tectonics. We understand well the other half (how the plates move apart from each other and create new crust), but we are just beginning to understand this half. Overall, our results mean that we need to modify our subduction inception models." Author: Charlotte Anscombe | Source: University of Nottingham [September 09, 2015]

Read more at: http://archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot.ca/2015/09/scientists-discover-how-tectonic-plates.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+TheArchaeologyNewsNetwork+(The+Archaeology+News+Network)#.VfX36LWM4Uo
Follow us: @ArchaeoNewsNet on Twitter | groups/thearchaeologynewsnetwork/ on Facebook

Scientists discover how tectonic plates collide Posted by TANN Breakingnews, Earth Science, Geology, Palaeontology 2:00 PM Researchers have discovered how tectonic plates first collided in one of the world's largest deep sea trenches. Scientists discover how tectonic plates collide One of the biggest questions yet to be answered about plate tectonics is how do subduction zones start? A subduction zone is a deep trough cut across the ocean floor. They form when two tectonic plates collide and one of the plates is pushed under another as they move towards each other, creating an ocean trench. When the tectonic plates collide the underlying plate is consumed into the Earth's mantle, creating a hot magma that erupts from volcanoes on the surface of the overlying plate. These volcanoes form a volcanic arc. The Izu-Bonin-Mariana Arc There are examples of this kind of natural occurrence all across the globe. One is the Izu-Bonin-Mariana Arc (IBM), an extinct arc bordering a trench zone south of Japan. In a new paper published in Nature Geoscience, a team of 30 scientists from across the globe travelled to the Philippine Sea during the summer of 2014 on a large drillship called the JOIDES Resolution operated by the International Ocean Discovery Programme, to drill into the crust of the IBM arc and to try to find out what had caused the plates to collide. Dr Sev Kender a Research Fellow in the School of Geography at The University of Nottingham, was one of the team of 30 who went out on the trip. Dr Kender says: "Plate tectonics and seafloor spreading was a ground-breaking theory discovered in the mid-20th-Century that explained much of geology, and started our modern discipline today. Before it there was no single accepted theory of why oceans and mountains formed, and why continents look like they used to be linked together. This latest discovery addresses one of the last links in the theory that explains how geology works – which is a really significant find." Leading models There are two leading models that exist to explain how subduction zones may start - 'spontaneous', where one side sinks because it is more dense, and 'induced' where the plates are forced together by pressure from other distant locations. These ideas are not easy to test, because the process cannot be observed happening today. Subduction zones are created over many millions of years, and the initiation period happened millions of years ago in most cases. One way to understand the process is when scientists drill a long borehole into the ocean crust on the overlying plate, to test the make-up and age of the crust and to see how it behaved before the subduction started. The problem with this method however, is that in the millions of years since the initiation, a large amount of sediment has piled up on top of the crust, obscuring it. Significant discovery Dr Kender said: "During our expedition to the IBM Arc, we successfully collected 1.5km of borehole through the overlying sediments and into the crust itself, dating the rocks with microscopic fossils and magnetic field reversals that took place throughout Earth's history. "We found the crust to be much younger than expected, a stunning discovery indicating that we needed to readjust our ideas of how the subduction zone formed. The crust has chemical characteristics indicating it was formed at the time the subduction zone started, rather than much earlier. The crust may have formed in an extensional setting through seafloor spreading, in some ways similar to that formed at mid-ocean ridges today, although in this case near the newly-formed subduction zone." Mid-ocean ridges, which are found in all ocean basins, are where fresh new oceanic crust is formed and are the opposite of subduction zones. There are numerous 'transform faults' near ridges today, enormous fractures through the crust that form due to the spreading plates interaction with the curvature of the earth. "One idea is that the subduction zone formed along a previous line of weakness in one of these fracture zones, although it is not proven. Our new records show that the initiation was probably 'spontaneous' rather than 'induced', as the crust was formed in an extensional setting and did not become uplifted before formation. This finding really takes us one step closer to discovering how plate tectonics really works." Co-author Kara Bogus of Texas A&M University's International Ocean Discovery Program (IODP), who served as the expedition project manager, adds: "This discovery is significant because one of the biggest questions remaining in plate tectonics is how subduction zones initiate. It's half the story in plate tectonics. We understand well the other half (how the plates move apart from each other and create new crust), but we are just beginning to understand this half. Overall, our results mean that we need to modify our subduction inception models."

Read more at: http://archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot.ca/2015/09/scientists-discover-how-tectonic-plates.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+TheArchaeologyNewsNetwork+(The+Archaeology+News+Network)#.VfX36LWM4Uo
Follow us: @ArchaeoNewsNet on Twitter | groups/thearchaeologynewsnetwork/ on Facebook

Scientists discover how tectonic plates collide Posted by TANN Breakingnews, Earth Science, Geology, Palaeontology 2:00 PM Researchers have discovered how tectonic plates first collided in one of the world's largest deep sea trenches. Scientists discover how tectonic plates collide One of the biggest questions yet to be answered about plate tectonics is how do subduction zones start? A subduction zone is a deep trough cut across the ocean floor. They form when two tectonic plates collide and one of the plates is pushed under another as they move towards each other, creating an ocean trench. When the tectonic plates collide the underlying plate is consumed into the Earth's mantle, creating a hot magma that erupts from volcanoes on the surface of the overlying plate. These volcanoes form a volcanic arc. The Izu-Bonin-Mariana Arc There are examples of this kind of natural occurrence all across the globe. One is the Izu-Bonin-Mariana Arc (IBM), an extinct arc bordering a trench zone south of Japan. In a new paper published in Nature Geoscience, a team of 30 scientists from across the globe travelled to the Philippine Sea during the summer of 2014 on a large drillship called the JOIDES Resolution operated by the International Ocean Discovery Programme, to drill into the crust of the IBM arc and to try to find out what had caused the plates to collide. Dr Sev Kender a Research Fellow in the School of Geography at The University of Nottingham, was one of the team of 30 who went out on the trip. Dr Kender says: "Plate tectonics and seafloor spreading was a ground-breaking theory discovered in the mid-20th-Century that explained much of geology, and started our modern discipline today. Before it there was no single accepted theory of why oceans and mountains formed, and why continents look like they used to be linked together. This latest discovery addresses one of the last links in the theory that explains how geology works – which is a really significant find." Leading models There are two leading models that exist to explain how subduction zones may start - 'spontaneous', where one side sinks because it is more dense, and 'induced' where the plates are forced together by pressure from other distant locations. These ideas are not easy to test, because the process cannot be observed happening today. Subduction zones are created over many millions of years, and the initiation period happened millions of years ago in most cases. One way to understand the process is when scientists drill a long borehole into the ocean crust on the overlying plate, to test the make-up and age of the crust and to see how it behaved before the subduction started. The problem with this method however, is that in the millions of years since the initiation, a large amount of sediment has piled up on top of the crust, obscuring it. Significant discovery Dr Kender said: "During our expedition to the IBM Arc, we successfully collected 1.5km of borehole through the overlying sediments and into the crust itself, dating the rocks with microscopic fossils and magnetic field reversals that took place throughout Earth's history. "We found the crust to be much younger than expected, a stunning discovery indicating that we needed to readjust our ideas of how the subduction zone formed. The crust has chemical characteristics indicating it was formed at the time the subduction zone started, rather than much earlier. The crust may have formed in an extensional setting through seafloor spreading, in some ways similar to that formed at mid-ocean ridges today, although in this case near the newly-formed subduction zone." Mid-ocean ridges, which are found in all ocean basins, are where fresh new oceanic crust is formed and are the opposite of subduction zones. There are numerous 'transform faults' near ridges today, enormous fractures through the crust that form due to the spreading plates interaction with the curvature of the earth. "One idea is that the subduction zone formed along a previous line of weakness in one of these fracture zones, although it is not proven. Our new records show that the initiation was probably 'spontaneous' rather than 'induced', as the crust was formed in an extensional setting and did not become uplifted before formation. This finding really takes us one step closer to discovering how plate tectonics really works." Co-author Kara Bogus of Texas A&M University's International Ocean Discovery Program (IODP), who served as the expedition project manager, adds: "This discovery is significant because one of the biggest questions remaining in plate tectonics is how subduction zones initiate. It's half the story in plate tectonics. We understand well the other half (how the plates move apart from each other and create new crust), but we are just beginning to understand this half. Overall, our results mean that we need to modify our subduction inception models."

Read more at: http://archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot.ca/2015/09/scientists-discover-how-tectonic-plates.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+TheArchaeologyNewsNetwork+(The+Archaeology+News+Network)#.VfX36LWM4Uo
Follow us: @ArchaeoNewsNet on Twitter | groups/thearchaeologynewsnetwork/ on Facebook