In hindsight, it is pretty ironic that whichever side you're on, with the good guys or bad, when it comes to the killing business, engineers rule the roost.

I haven't received any salary offers from such organizations, but I wonder if their range differs from the mundane. Maybe it's the virgins, but who would be dumb enough to fall for that? After all, a few weeks in heaven and that program is all over!

That just brings to mind a slightly funny thought. You know, that familiar office cubicle sign around these places : "Will work for beer"? Well, back in the mountains of Afghanistan, I wonder if it's "Will work for virgins"

I think it should be pretty obvious why. After all, if you want to bring down a building, who better to plan it than a civil structural engineer? Likewise, if you want to make homemade guns and ammunition, who would be better at it than a mechanical engineer, and if you want to poison a reservoir or release a cloud of toxic gas over a city, who better to pull it off than an environmental engineer?

@DVader1000 : I completely agree there although theoretically, any kind of engineer could partake in planning explosions and killings. But to get back on topic, it's ironic to see that the very job specializations that are behind the smooth functioning of a peaceful society...are also seen in these kind of violent and religiously driven counter-cultures. It's almost like the privilege of carrying out unscrupulous jihad on important worldwide targets is extended to a few who have technical degrees. The majority of young men and women who are too poor to go to school, leave along go to college..are given smaller assignments at home or abroad. Afterall, it doesn't require an engineering degree to strap yourself with bombs and blow up at a public place. The common thread that links all these individuals who are ready to "take on the job" is that they are brainwashed to think like fighters, killers or 'martyrs'. I find it sad that engineers, who are usually trained through rigorous education to exercise rational and scientific thought, enroll for these utterly irrational crusades.

Maybe too many engineers remain sympathetic to religious ideas. I have noticed that a few creationists are engineers. Perhaps from being designers themselves, they are suckers for the theological argument from design? Just a speculation I have had for some time.

Sure and I have nothing against engineers who are religious and may hold a zeal in some aspects of their faith. But at what point do you lose your head and use your job skills to kill innocents for the political and religious crusade? I believe that such an action from 'engineers' is a violation of all known engineering codes of ethics. Its clearly a disgrace to the profession as a whole. (If I were an engineering professor , a chill would run down my spine if I knew someone I had taught went on to plan a terrorist attack somewhere. )

Heartily agreed!

"I completely agree there although theoretically, any kind of engineer could partake in planning explosions and killings."

That's exactly the point I'm trying to get at: the reason why so many major terrorists are engineers is because they are specifically recruited asthey possess the very skills needed to ensure that society runs smoothly either or to plunge it into chaos.

That makes me want to take a step back and think about the the word "recruit". Are men and women who can plan bombings being really recruited by radical organizations, or are they turning themselves in, backed up by some mindset and worldview? This Nigerian chap who studied Mechanical Engineering in the UK would have had a serious agenda in his mind when he told his wealthy parents that he wanted to continue education towards a second degree in Yemen. Obviously, before that point, he already knew why he was right and others wrong.

That brings us to the point of the word "passion". Any engineer must have a passion that drives him to create something using scientific principles. That's where the idea of good and bad is diluted. Passion can be good or bad. Its really tough to say which is good or bad. In the usual sense of the profession, engineers work towards a salary and some recognition and social status in and outside the job. The so called engineers who join hands with radical religious organizations don't care about wealth and social status. They are ready to die for a cause.

It must a colossal task to bring an individual to agree to provide not only his engineering skill set but also to give up his life for something. That makes me want to think that these people are solidly driven. The evil is perhaps not in them, but in the kind of cultural upbringing and instruction that other higher ups impart to them. Its really hard to fathom indeed..

The "unknown" Ron is the power of 'higher ups' to spin the information.

It seems not that hard to totally dupe a population into supporting a totally flawed position and gain unilateral consent for 'desperate measures', totally insane to those with an unjaundiced view of both sides.

We may think we have the dispassionate data, and the internet is a big 'anti-censorship' 'anti spin' tool, but the commercializing is 'massaging' what comes up on page 1, and not many go past that, and many think it is 'all true'.

But: Do we investigate our employer or client 'position' and goals? Do we investigate who covertly owns/runs/finances or even he who overtly provides our stipends? Do we know who or what they are lobbing where?

What are the engineers choices if the end is to connive a spin that enables a corporate belief system advantageous in an 'upcoming conflict'?

Be that the commercial competition, or another Nation, or both.

Bear in mind every conflict has 'turned out to be' connived out of re-spun megalomania.

What 'conditioning' exists that leads to statements like "the US cannot be denied lithium by some jumped-up piss-ant 3^rd world country"?

Would the Engineer wanting lithium, agree/disagree?

Can he 'un-engineer' the 'next step' in the Vital Resource War?

Or has his utterance provided the Vital "Recruit" spin for megalomaniacs?

I look forward to your thoughts.

Kz

Dear Ron George,

I think you are trying to 'plumb the un-fathomable' with this line; but it is fascinating anyway. Let us for a moment try a little dis-entanglement.

Consider the opportunistic element which is always present in one form or another. In a rich nation arms race you have unlimited resource allocation with the best brains available(plus a helping of industrial espionage) working on developing technology. Engineers obviously abound in this scenario and are presumably 'happy' with their source of salary etc. Look at the historical evidence in the run-up to WW2. There was plenty of evidence of what was going on in the factories on the Ruhr; high grade steel for locomotive tyres or armour plate for battle ships looks much the same in the foundry!

Then you get the creative genius; RJ Mitchell or Barnes Wallace, both clearly thinking out of the box and capable of devising some inspiring pieces of kit, which ultimately had an impact of the prosecution of the conflict.

All these facets were combined under the stress of warfare to produce state-of-the-art materiel which demanded the engineer to fully participate at every level.

This directive would be simultaneously happening in Germany,Russia ,Japan, USA etc.

This state of activity continued forward through the 'Cold War' era and became largely bipolar in orientation. The advent of solid state electronics gave the munitions world a whole new sense of focus and as we always say ''you can't put the genii back into the bottle''.

Fast forward to the last decade of the last century and the emergence of larger scale terrorism. We should think again about the raw material used C4, Semtex etc.Widely used and easily obtained with a potency previously unavailable to the man-in-the-street, thereby confering an unprecedented power to groups with such missions in mind.

The latest types of binary explosives are the outcome of 'High school/College/Uni' lab type experimentation which when allied to the micro-electronics available,over the counter, today provides copious scope for causing us mayhem a-plenty.

We as responsible and caring individuals can only observe this on-going trend, whilst seeing our freedom to travel easily and conveniently being eroded by the activities of these people.

We are therefore witnessing ,first hand, a personalised form of civil disruption which without the technology now so readily available could not have occurred even 50 years ago. Terrorism counter measures are painfully invasive and far from fool-proof so as always the advantage rests with the subversant element

The big question is what can be done to suppress the effectiveness of this type of activity and therefore render it impotent. Any ideas?

Motivation of the individuals is clearly the driving force and as we know that tendency is largely a preserve of the post adolescent phase,(don't know of any examples of geriatric bombers as yet).

But before we run away with the idea that this is only in the preserve of these fanatic factions we should remember how countless millions have died in the last century, driven, wooed or just brain trained into self sacrifice for causes which they perhaps thought they knew but rarely if ever fully understood.

We are priviledged to know more today than any of our antecedents; are we using that knowledge to best effect, if not,then what should we change?

Thanks for listening, and a Happier New Year.

Massey.

Agree.

In addition, most the training of engineers usually includes project management. Obviously a valuable asset when planning and coordinating an operation.

The thing that puzzles me is why they would waste these valuable people as suicide bombers instead of using someone else for the operation and preserving the valuable engineering resource for planning and enabling further operations?

"why they would waste these valuable people" Given their actual success rate?

Dear Ron,

To "engineer" means to make it happen.

The 'morality' of the outcome is largely outside the 'task' and ever open to interpretation and misuse/abuse.

Every weapon has been engineered - bow and arrow to Manhattan Project and offspring since.

Just about every engineered 'non-weapon' has been utilized as a killing device including credit card, appliance chord and Biro.

That some engineers would 'knowingly' produce/contribute to 'killing' is only a mystery to those who 'not yet faced with the choices'.

I.e. put a good enough pitch to you and you would engineer the Uzi, AK 47, plastic land mine, or 'death ray'.

Would you be "ashamed" to accept a Nobel Prize?

Are you "ashamed" that Hitler's "colossal financial support" of engineering got the US to the Moon?

Was Barns-Wallace unaware of the civilian outcome?

Were the fire bombers of Dresden and Tokyo?

However, I have to observe within engineering there is a type of kudos driven personality that will do anything, and say anything, for any minuscule recognition.

But fortunately, like my 'nemesis in his own mind' - Voldemort - these folk tend to be complete crap at understanding how anything works.

That they attain a degree is more of a disgrace to Engineering than any "terrible outcome" based in political leverage, judged in 20-20 hindsight by 'the other side', or reconfigured by 'our side' after the required effect has been engineered.

The thing to notice in your postulation is though the "masterminds" are engineers the people who walked up with the problem in need of a solution and a wad of cash, or dogma, are the 'actual masterminds of the end goal'.

All you really have is the Breaker Morant or William Calley equivalent, i.e. those who failed to cover their arses

Excellent response. GA.

Every weapon ever used beyond picking up a rock or a stick represents some degree of engineering thought: making use of Nature's raw materials and turning them into something with a specific useful purpose.

Once "progress" has been made to the point that further progress requires years of academic study and real world experience, then trained engineers are necessary, whether the task is building an IED out of a cellphone, or the latest "smart bomb" that can zero in on the bad guys with minimum collateral damage.

Don't forget that the terrorists view themselves as the underdogs taking on the Evil Empire. No one thinks of themselves as evil. This doesn't mean you have to sympathize and engage in moral relativism, but it never hurts to remember that your enemy sees himself as the good guy.

Back in the days of the cold war, I worked around an aircraft facility, and there were lots of bumper stickers that said, "Jet noise, the sound of freedom." It always made me wonder if at a similar plant in the Soviet Union, they had bumper stickers that said, "Jet noise, the sound of oppression." Nah, I don't think so.

The point being that engineers in the employ of radical Islam don't see themselves as evil any more than engineers working on USA DoD weapon systems see themselves as evil.

If you want to see evil, then look for the traitor, who sells out his own side building weapons for the enemy, or selling secrets to the enemy.

Here's a true story. Lots of background to get to it, though, in a largely history-ignorant society.

The Eastern Roman Empire lasted nearly a thousand years after the fall of the west, in 476 AD. It is a very good thing that it lasted that long, because it was a bulwark against Muslim expansion at a time when Christendom was going through a Dark Ages and could put up little resistance to Muslim onslaught. Consider that in the hundred years after the death of Mohammed (misery be upon him) in 632 AD, Muslims came boiling up out of Arabia and conquered everything from Egypt all across the southern shore of the Mediterranean, then crossed at the straits of Gibraltar, overran Spain and southern France until they were stopped at Tours in southern France by Charles Martel (The Hammer) in 732 AD. If it hadn't been for that stop, there would be no Islamic terrorists today, because they would have no one to terrorize; we would all be facing Mecca five times daily.

But the Muslims didn't only head west out of Arabia, they headed due north as well. There they encountered resistance from the Eastern Roman Empire, and while they were successful in conquering all of what we call the middle east, it took them awhile, and they didn't get Constantinople, the capital, now Istanbul, until 1453 AD.

They actually bypassed Constantinople, and overran the Balkans in the 1300s, and pressed on to the gates of Vienna, where they were defeated. Not once, twice, with the second time in the 1500s or 1600s. The country of Hungary was ruled by Turks for 150 years before the pestilence was evicted. The Balkans were subject to Muslim domination for 600 years, and are the poorest and most backwards part of Europe as a direct result.

The point being, that if it were not for Constantinople/Eastern Roman Empire the Muslims would have been at Vienna earlier, and in greater force, and Europe may not have been able to stop them, given the fractured feudal structure of Europe in the middle ages.

So Christendom, and the modern free world owe Constantinople a debt of gratitude for its very existence that cannot be repaid.

But back in 1453, a Hungarian cannon maker journeyed to Constantinople, which was surrounded and under siege by the Turkish potentate, Mohammed II. Constantinople had massive fortifications (walls) which were unbreachable throughout history. This cannon maker offered to build a cannon that could punch through the walls, for a price. He got his price and built the cannon.

The cannon exploded on its first use, killing the entire crew manning it. The Hungarian cannon maker was summarily executed.

But not for the right reasons. He had sold out his country, his faith, and his culture. History is replete with examples of human depravity, and I don't claim to have encyclopedic knowledge, but this man has to rank right up there among the worst.

emc_c

You have made a very good but obvious point, that both sides in this battle really think what they're doing is right in context of their beliefs and the kind of oppression they face.

But then the question is, where is this 'belief' coming from? Who is feeding it into their minds? Is it a mullah in a mosque, a politician on stage, a group of anchors in a newsroom? And what hidden agendas do all these people have? Are they mentally unstable? Is there an irrational frenzy that carries them forward? The promise of a six figure check or campaign support? The promise of virgins in heaven or legend status on earth as 'martyr' for religion?

I feel that in these times, the essence of being an engineer includes having a solid awareness of the environment around us and being able to exercise some critical judgement when it comes to studying the information about it. The geopolitical conditions around the world are a part and parcel of this environment, as they can't be two separate aspects.The challenge to understanding the environment is being able to get a grasp of the real history of it, in different regions of the world.And what would the world hope for more? Is it wars and dead bodies or genuine harmony among peoples?

I'd like to think engineers should be more involved in policy making but sadly it's not going that route as we like to dig holes and be in our own little world of gadgetry and other nuances. Maybe we don't have the kind of time required to do it. And maybe in this lack of time, we're more likely to be carried away by sound bites from the media and choosing this side or that without well-studied knowledge.

Nice post emc_c.

I am sadly not so fond of Mohammed myself.

From what I read in John Loftin's book The Big Story he and what followers he had, took to robbing travelers and merchants along the Silk Road for income.

This Road was from what I can tell prior to that a pretty good thing for people simply attempting to make a living from what they could make, carry, and trade.

For awhile there it appears that there was civilization flourishing along this route.

However much History repeats itself there does seem to me to be a correlation between the destruction of an era due to the attacks and robberies by Mohammed and his followers of those simply engaged in trade facilitated by the Silk Road, evidenced in the current destruction of its equivalent, the airways.

How find you my take on the situation?

There may well be no solution to the impasse between cultures and beliefs as long as one religious tract is considered by so many to be the final word.

While the US is not perfect, one thing it has going for it is that when some laws are determined to not work out, they get changed.

I may well approve of fights over traffic safety, regardless of motivations some regard as "perfect" come from the writings of one particular writer, though I did get cranky here on this forum with someone who attempted to rewrite what I wrote, that I thought was more perfect than their rewrite.

All I can hope for is that those like me who simply want to work and provide for their families and loved ones will leave their books at home, and work to maintain civility on the travel routes that benefit them, as much as they do me.

Let me say at the outset that I am not affiliated with any Religion.

This is largely due to studying the original tenets and rejecting the 'modification' by 'lesser men' that commonly becomes a Religion or Sect or Church.

Most of this 'modification' is based in 'product differentiation', where the commonalities are obfuscated and the differences are stressed/created/colored.

At the root of Christianity, Judaism and Islam are Prophets working from the position of how to construct simple guidelines on how a society needs to value things in order to be sustainable. The "Rock of Abraham" is a fundamental link of these 3.

Of the Prophets works, those of Mohammad are the most complete and preserved.

This 'enables' such as "robbing travelers and merchants along the Silk Road for income" and 'dis-focus' on;

Mohammad was a Prince and 'privileged' until he's mid 30's. One day he realized that to Rule he needed some idea of how it worked outside the Palace. He put aside his identity, joined the masses, did as was needed, got the picture, wrote the 'how it should work' book.

How Jesus did his research up to age ~30 remains 'undocumented', (though JC did remark on casting stones)

But like all 3 major 'churches', 'additional interpretation' has (in my opinion) led to wholesale corruption of the Prophet's Principals.

To stay on a researchable example for many here, Jesus teachings are reported by Mathew, Mark, Luke and John. The reports are 'witness' and substantially in agreement.

Years After we have Paul (in Corinthians) and Timothy making wholesale authoritative presumptuous interpretations in direct conflict with JC's principals. (E.g. 1 Timothy 2:11 ~= Shafi'i school, note both are constructed on not Prophet direct)

The only distinction between attaching book 2 in Islam and Judaism is the Catholic Church 'revised and edited' it's book 1 to include the book 2 corruptions of convenience.

For what it's worth, in my opinion, there is no difference in what your are meant to take on board, between Buddha, Jesus, Mohammad, Moses, Krishna, Abraham. Within this process of definition, a number acknowledge/adopt the teachings of the others.

But if you want to sow disharmony, justify oppression, hate, murder, war, 'casting out' (wives or democratically elected governments), cow theft (resource acquisition), or in essence bypass any or all 'commandments' - see "book 2" (home page for megalomaniacs).

What I do not recall in any "book" is an engineer instigating a morality bypass.

I suggest this is because; to be sufficiently 'charismatic' to create a lemming like obeisance, you have to have no idea of 'alternate outcomes in social sustainability'.

I.e you have to be the Anti-ChristMohammadBuddhaetcetera, and an anti-engineer.

To re-engineer this: hold them to Book 1

To achieve this; know the difference between Prophets Tenet and Anti-Spun-Garbage.

Sorry, doesn't hold water. Was born in USA in 1950s, and as a product of the public school system, was always taught about both bombs being dropped.

The media have been wailing about Hiroshima and Nagasaki as long as I can remember. Ignoring the equally horrific fire bombings of Tokyo and Dresden. The idea that a US history major wouldn't know about the second A-bomb drop is incredible, in the literal sense of the word - unbelievable. In any case, whatever her problem, it was certainly NOT because of a concerted effort to hide that history.

Anyone else only learn about Hiroshima, and not Nagasaki?

emc_c

I agree with you about the the story that the encountered US History Major selectively editing out the facts regarding the 2nd A-bomb used on Nagasaki is nothing but hog wash. I suspect that either she was not a US History Major, was lying, and full of bullshit, OR, she had some sort of political agenda and axe to grid....as in "Peace Nik" or something similar.

Hells Bells, even Japanese History Text books, even to this date, are extremely selective about their countries' involvement before, during and after WWII...and the Japanese Educational Powers-that-Be should be ashamed of themselves for purging the real history of the war......many Japanese born after the war have really no clue about the war and the atrocities it committed against civilians, POW's and Allied Soldiers.

Hell, as Elementary Schools kiddies growing up in 1960's America I learned about both of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki Atomic Bomb attacks...possibly as early as 2nd (?) or 3rd Grade (?). It was in our history books for crying out loud! If fact, I learned about both bombings even before entering the 1st grade all on my own....the local bank calendars that my parents used to receive every year depicted both bombings, amongst other important historical dates...and of course being an US Army brat I'd ask my mom and dad about the bombings. Neither parent withheld the details of those bombing or the history of WWII, the Korean War or the then ongoing War in Viet Nam.

Hello all,

A very thought provoking Blog going on here....very interesting!

God help us all if Al-Qaeda has managed to recruit Nuclear, Biological, Chemical, Engineers or even a Nuclear Physicist to do it's dirty work planning and carrying out an attack or attacks involving Weapons of Mass Destruction. Yes, somewhat ashamed that Engineers of any type are involved in terrorism.

Another chilling thought is actually close they and their cohorts the Taliband are physically close to the Pakistani Nuclear Weapon stockpiles, reportedly to include some 53 or so nuclear weapons! And it wouldn't surprise me in the least that in event they get any closer or are about to overrunning one of those Pakistani bases than the US DOD doesn't send in Delta Force and/or other Special Ops team(s) to capture and recover said "Specials". Ditto, in regards to some of our NATO partners and the Russians. With the Pakistani government so rife with corruption and religious fruitcakes it wouldn't be surprising if someone there ended up handing over a few "Specials" over to the Al-Qaeda just the same...

It's a truly dangerous world we live in today. IMHO, worse than what happened during the Cold War with 2 superpowers staring down the gun-sights at one another.....at least then you knew exactly who your enemies were, what they stood for, and where they were located.

Belief and knowledge can be two different things.

Some engineers do seem to fall into the trap of expecting people to make as much sense as applied sciences. Those religions and systems of law that attempt to make everything happen the same way, every time, as reliably as experiments that are replicatable may well appeal.

While you would think that the Napoleonic Code of Law would be superior due to simplicity on its face, it doesn't turn out that way when we look at how it seems to turn out in a State like LA. Other nations with black and white sorts of legal systems based in sometimes very strict moral tracks seem also to tend towards corruption.

As far as our times and this era, it is actually more dangerous politically than was the Cold War, which is defined as a Bi Polar Power Balance, as opposed to a Multi Polar Power Balance. This era is much more similar to the era preceding WWI, when much attempt was made to maintain power balances through complicated treaty agreements that failed, and actually led to a terrible conflict.

From what I have read from official sources, there's very little difference between terrorism and organized crime in the 21st century. They use the same MO to raise money, the only difference is for what end. Yes indeed, they have skilled personnel and access to the latest technology. Crime, like terror, is wearing a suit, employing engineers, looking respectable, the man down the hall. That's according to these reports 2004-2008 by the CISC (quite an interesting read). The engineering aspect is important when it comes to crime, because organized crime is getting access to the latest tech before it is available to the public, or to enforcement.

When you ask "Is Al-Qaeda and other radical Islamist organizations selectively handpicking people with technical backgrounds to plot, destroy, maim and kill?" CISC says we should ask "Is there anything in place, in my own company or organization, to prevent that from happening?" What measures could we reasonably take.

Hi Ron George.

Possession of an engineering degree is not a sign of professional ability, commitment or responsibility; it merely indicates a level of academic attainment. Therefore as a mature and presumably responsible engineer I feel there is no justification in drawing down unwarranted criticism upon the wider fraternity who feel repulsed by this aberration to the science of engineering.

The issue of what to do to restore confidence to society and to deter more franatics from adopting this MO is the real challenge. It seems that we will have to endure this facet of modern life for some time to come as the supply of raw materials both chemical and human seems virtually limitless.

As others have commented the possibilities for escalation using ever more hideous substances must be considered a real threat.

Are the recent wars a contributory factor in this process? Yes and beyond the present conflicts lie even more unpalatable ones.

Energy is high on the current agenda but just round the corner is a much nastier spectre World wide food shortage etc. The challenge for the engineer will ultimately be in solving the sustainability question for mankind as a whole, in the meantime we will have to endure this current phase of anti-social activities by a tiny minority of misguided individuals.

A Happy and Safer New Year to you ( and the rest of the CR4 community).

Massey.

Possession of an engineering degree is academic but a big piece in the kind of soft (or even hard) skills needed towards practicing right? Sure, there are plenty of other things that it doesn't teach you and that will come through a lifetime of experience. Agreed there.

I'd hate to think in this manner, but if x number of people died everyday in terrorist attacks, as we've been seeing over the past decade and beyond in many parts of the world, how is it affecting the population problem? The only kind of sustainability in war is death, destruction, poverty and suffering. I just hope engineers on both sides of the fight realize what they are contributing to. I hope they don't dilute the subtle moralities and ethics involved in engineering when they sit down to do the calcs that will destroy a building or a nation, or put a plane and its passengers down.

This young Nigerian man was not much of an engineer. If he had been at all competent he would have succeded in his mission....

One wag opined that it might have been... excitement... at his imminent introduction to the seventy-two virgins which might have "gotten in the way" of the proper operation of the device. Of course, that simply makes your case: good engineering requires proper operation of equipment under all foreseeable and probable circumstances...

emc_c

In other words, are you talking about the Law of the 6 P's? Ahhhhh, 'tis one of my favorites that I used throughout my career as a commisioned Officer in the US Army.....and as a civilian Engineer ever since.

"Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance"!!!

Let's say you want to blow up something important just to bug that really testy superpower down the street, and you need technical help because these days the world is pretty complicated place. Would you select your dupes from the ranks of engineers, or hire the likes of this guy?

True Eu, but in the old days engineers had to sit outside offices of bureaucrats for weeks to years, begging for 'interest' in the next machine gun, or "A-bomb", from the likes of your Award Winning friend, then having achieved the 'technical advantage' - most (like Einstein) - were horrified at the 'next use' devised by said Friend.

Circa '82, I met an American college student history major on the "bullet train" traveling from Tokyo to Nagoya. She was headed to Hiroshima to study the 'dropping of the bomb', and her knowledge kept me in thrall for the entire trip.

As a parting comment at Nagoya, I asked if she was heading to Nagasaki next. She asked why I would think that. I said 'the second bomb' - she said 'there was only 1 bomb', door closed, her train left.

This turned out to be "the truth" so far as US texts then told it.

The problems of including bomb 2 being;

A. the minimum days it would take from bomb 1 for surrender to be processed in the Japanese system was known.

B. bomb 2 was up-scheduled to be under that.

C. a 'virgin' target of no military/strategic value was,

D. chosen for the bowl like geography (and bomb 2 air-burst specs).

Terrorism is a broad brush.

Who is what is entirely from POV.

"Suicide Fanatic" "Divine Wind" "Medal of Honor" "Victoria Cross"

The irony is; 100's of years American/European Foreign Policy and such as the CIA/KGB bright ideas are an engineer free zone.

The opposition has learned the process, tactics, pragmatic values and spotted the Achilles heel.

It also has a significant recruitment advantage whilst the Powers are in denial of their own history of terrorism, as no "full and frank truth" enables/results in, building of greater and greater lies.

Releasing only "made unusable" documents after 50 years is now the norm. It naively gives full reign to the version by the folk it was done to. Why do 'educated' middle east student hate the West? Local truth is now what actually happened. Now add no sign of admission/facts/remorse in the West for the acts.

An additional advantage is Engineers don't study religion or history - you can tell them any version of events leading to the necessity of the task, and likely they will glaze over until the 'getting it done' part comes along.

Bomb 2 is just one in hundreds? in my travels that caused me to think "why on earth would they think that?"

_{Sorry Eu if this is all a bit sardonic verses your humor, but it's the natural outcome of waving a "typical politicians values" near me.}

Ron,

You didn't mention your shame at knowing how to drive a car, at knowing how to read and write, at being skilled at math, at being comfortable with technology, at knowing how to buy and use an airline ticket, nor any number of other traits you have in common with all the terrorists you mentioned. So why Engineering? How's that special?

You have an engineering degree, and so does world-renowned terrorist "A. L. Qaeda." Does that make you a terrorist-by-association simply because he has a sheepskin much like yours, possibly from the same university?

Does Al's having an engineering degree imply that the field of Engineering itself a spawning ground for terrorist ideals?

Does Al's choice to be an engineer AND a terrorist have anything at all to do with your choice of profession? Anything whatsoever?

If it's shame you want to feel, you might as well feel shame at being Human. We have a terrible track record.

Relax. All I implied was that it is shameful for me to note that people with engineering degrees are planning to blow up buildings and airplanes. These people are a disgrace to engineers, and doing a disservice to all those hard working professors and teachers who taught them.

But I have also come to realize that war in all forms drives a tremendous impetus to engineer systems, whether for good or bad. If you read about the history of production and manufacturing in the United States, you'll note that a majority of advances we made were due to direct or indirect funding from the military. I'm talking about ductape, radar, airplanes, automated manufacturing, the atomic bomb... there's a host of things in there. War also creates jobs. Like it or hate it, it drives the economy. People with presence of mind know that the backers and lobbyists of wars in the United States know this truth.

Bottomline is, I don't know where to draw the line of good and bad. Its perhaps equally shameful to be on both sides. Humankind is its own worst enemy on planet earth, as it turns out. I think we'll all end up killing each other way before global warming eats up the planet.

I wouldn't have put RADAR in there but GA to you for both Q and A.

My bad if I said the Unites States is the inventor of the radar. But the early uses for radar was not exactly for peaceful purposes, apart from meteorology. Infact, the whole impetus for the development of the radar was WWII. Some say it was the success of radar development that the Allies won the war. Alternatively, it was the war that helped spur the development of the radar. I read somewhere that the word "target" became popular in the military when they started employing the radar more and more for military missions. I wonder if its true, but won't be surprised if it is. Thanks for the rating on my previous opinion.

While in England, Scottish physicist Robert Watson-Watt developed RADAR. He was awarded (and reluctantly accepted) a British patent for his invention in April, 1935.

No sweat Ron - good thought are good thoughts.

In my understanding, as told by tech's involved, to a young me: Radar actually came out of someone in UK trying to crack the early warning problem, noting that the TV transmissions were "ghosting" with/by aircraft (as well as a bunch of other stuff)

John Logie Baird - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

UK gov then declared it classified and basically put JLB on ice for the duration of the war.

Haven't had time to read the link.

Some above may be not right in some details

But I'd agree the development was greatly war driven, as is casting about for any idea greatly accelerated.

However, the guy's 'on any side' who dedicate their inventiveness to creation of more effective killing methods - throughout 'peace' for glory and profit, to my mind, are not much different to A. L. Q.

Maxim comes to mind.

First World War.com - Encyclopedia - Maxim Machine Gun

Isn't the internet on that list as well?

Free debate, such as we enjoy with others around the world, is one of the key values of democratic societies. What a coup, the end result of developing it!

Technologies that advance human freedoms and safeguard these freedoms against terrorism, are the sort of bloodless means of victory that the most skillful military strategists may well understand.

Ron explains: "All I implied was that it is shameful for me to note that people with engineering degrees are planning to blow up buildings and airplanes. These people are a disgrace to engineers, and doing a disservice to all those hard working professors and teachers who taught them."

Sure they're a disgrace, and it is they who should feel the shame. But dismay and shame are two distinctly different things, at least in my mind; hence my post. Perhaps it is your sense of dismay at the situation that your original post actually intended to convey?

As for the title, "The Terrorism And Engineering Link," presumes there is one. You could also suggest "The Terrorism And Biped-Mammal Link" and probably a billion others, too, all perfectly legitimate and equally meaningless.

I think you can be dismayed and be ashamed of someone else's actions at the same time. One need not always be exclusive of the other. The Nigerian boy's parents can be dismayed and ashamed that their son got instructions from terrorists to blow up a plane and chose to carry it out against their wishes. His teachers at the Engineering University maybe shocked and a little ashamed that he graduated from the school which led to this fact being then highlighted in the press, in countless papers. Its not impossible.

I think it may be time for you to take a chill pill. Don't get me wrong. Lets not try to hijack this discussion to what the title of it should or should not have been like. A majority of people had no problems with it, so I'm not sure why you're getting so worked up about. Either way, I'm grateful for all the replies.

And for the record, you're the first person I know of who used "legitimate" and "meaningless" in the same sentence, one beside the other, to describe the same thing. How can something reasonable be meaningless?

Sure they're a disgrace, and it is they who should feel the shame.

Agreed.

Never mind other people's shame: consider dismay and apply problem solving skills.

What would we say about the "Anti-terrorism strategy and Engineering" link

Hi artsmith,

Whilst I'm all for communication would this link not become the Terrorists info channel? Unless of course it could be ''engineered'' to produce self destructive devices!

Massey.

I was thinking about detection technology, countermeasures and so on, where public awareness of a threat is a benefit to us, and a risk to the purveyors of harm. I think it's reasonable for engineers in a public forum, dismayed/ashamed to see engineering applied for hate crime and harm, to discuss in general terms or specific cases the measures that could be taken to thwart terrorist threats. What technology do we need in place, to stop explosive smuggling, IED's, or any other weapons of terror.

If that's the "Terrorist info channel" I must be in the wrong place.

Dear artsmith,

Bang on Sir!

Now we could bring untoward intellectual power to solving the problem. CR4 a force for the good of mankind.

I am not being facetious.

Massey.

You are making the assumption that the people involved were engineers first and "terrorists" second. In the majority of cases, the individuals were recruited young and their technical training provided (or paid for) by "an organisation" after their "religious training". It is much harder for the average "Engineer in Society" lecture to replace already ingrained dogma than it is for it to awake a previously unused or sympathetic opinion.

Thus, in many cases, "fanatics" are sent to learn the skills they need to contribute fully to the crusade they now believe in totally, having been bainwashed with the campaign message and taught how to avoid truly to listen to another's POV, in case it changes the implanted thoughts.

You may think it is equally strange that trained pilots could fly a loaded plane into a building - the 9/11 "pilots" were trained after "volunteering" for the job, a means to an end.

Kz has covered most of the rest of what I would say - engineers do it for their own side (most of the time). I faced this question at age 18, when I started work in the defence industry. Protecting my society was my justification - after all it was DE-fence, wasn't it ??! We wouldn't start a war or attack anyone. would we ??!

The comments on religion are spot on too. I remember working that one out aged about 12, when I read about the tenents of Buddism (there's a theory that JC studied Buddism). It is a truism that the later a text is written, the less it will have to do with the original ideas of that movement. Christianity is misnamed, since the majority of its teachings come not from the records of what JC said but from dogma doctrine laid down by Saul/Paul (the turncoat), much of which is contray to the teachings of JC as recorded. Should be called Paulians.

Example: JC welcomed the company of women, taught them and listened to them. Paul states women should shut up and be subject to their husbands. Which one does the Church adhere to (until recently) ?

Result: over 2000 years of oppression of women; the death of huge numbers of women throughout the Dark Ages on trumped up witchcraft charges; and the loss of vast amounts of accumulated knowledge leading to more deaths. The pre-Christian societies valued the women's contributions and gave them far more status than the Christian societies that followed.

Funny how we've only just worked out that the biggest factor in removing poverty and its attendants is the education and emancipation of the womenfolk.

/rant off

Got a little carried away there...still it's relevant since Islam has a less than enlightened attitude to women, based more on the Suris than the Qu'ran.

Not carried away ER. True. I'd leave out the 'more' in "based more on the Suris than the Qu'ran" and the Saul/Paul previous is spot-on in so so so many ways.

GA

"Mechanical engineers build missiles.

Civil engineers build targets".

Obviously oversimplified.

Engineering is basically neutral.

Weapons technology spins off into valuable peace time products and techniques. An example would be integrated circuits. Computing got it's main initial impetus from defense, as did the internet.

Peaceful engineering can be adapted to destroy eg bursting the dams in the Ruhr. The dams had an industrial and water supply use. When burst they unleashed considerable destruction. (I'm sure you can think of better examples, but it's past my bedtime).

In all the soul searching over the fact that engineers seem to have played an inordinately large role in terrorism, remember that the world is also a better place because of engineers.

Who enabled the large scale production of cheap fertilizers which allow most of the world to be fed?

Who built the dams that enable people all over the world to have safe water for personal use, agriculture and industry (thus providing work)?

Who built reasonable quality roads to allow ready transport thereby enabling goods to shift from areas of surplus to areas of scarcity?

Who solved the problems of making antibiotics cheaply enough for the world's periodic plagues to be virtually eliminated?

The list could be extended enormously, but will suffice to tell us we can be proud of what our profession has contributed to the world's welfare.

Media and politicians will dwell on the negatives (a tiny proportion of engineers have used their knowledge to further terrorism). Let's not lose sight of the bigger picture that we are the reason the world can sustain it's present population without too much problem and we are needed to solve the problems of the future.

Sceptic nails it. GA. Engineers, like everyone else except the ruling classes in totalitarian societies, do what customers need. In a moral, capitalistic society, engineers build useful items that make lives better. They also build weapons to protect said moral societies from the immoral command and control totalitarians. In societies driven by religious fanaticism and hate, engineers will foucus more heavily on destruction.

emc_c