EVERY War is "Our War"

I say that EVERY War is "Our War," and that we have both a moral and a self-serving imperative to care about every conflict everywhere in the world. That certainly does NOT mean that we should send Americans or military supplies to every conflict, and in most cases that is exactly what we should NOT do. The response to each conflict needs to be completely customized, but ignoring the conflicts and pretending they don't exist is never the right thing to do.

The best we can hope for in a conflict is to use our influence to bring about a quick and just peace. The worst we can do is to provide military support to the "wrong" side, the self-serving aggressor, as in the case of Israel assaulting Gazans. Let's look at some examples:

The civil war in Sudan, as one example, pits two cruel and self-serving adversary groups against each other (which is typical of most civil wars in Africa and around the world at the moment). Certainly neither group deserves US support. Both groups oppose humanitarian aid being sent to Sudan. But that doesn't mean that there's nothing we could do. Outside players including UAE, Libya Russia, Egypt & Iran, are sending military equipment to one side or the other in Sudan, purely for their own self-serving interest, and not out of principal or humanitarian interest. The US could and should use its geopolitical influence to interrupt the flow of military equipment to both sides. Also, we should be ready at a moment's notice to send massive humanitarian aid as soon as the situation on the ground allows it.

MY Thoughts on the Near-Future World in which AI & Robots Do Most of the Work

 In MY opinion, it is inevitable that AI & Robots will perform most of the world's work relatively soon - not in my lifetime, but in my grandchildren's. 

1) Available technology has never been suppressed for long, and never will be. Progress is inevitable.

2) The core breakthroughs to enable an AI/Robot-driven world have already been made. What remains is (lots of) refinement, and implementation.

*I* see two very different ways in which our AI/Robot future could play out in society as human labor is no longer needed to perform the world's mind-numbing and repetitive but essential tasks:

1) The widespread availability of AI & Robots COULD be the catalyst for a social revolution that ushers in a society in which the fruits of AI/Robot production are shared by ALL people, with EVERYONE receiving at least enough for a comfortable life. Think #UBI (Universal Basic Income) as the first step in this direction.

2) In the absence of a social revolution that embraces human equality and sharing, *I* see catastrophe awaiting in widespread AI/Robot adoption. AI/Robots *WILL* mostly eliminate the need for human labor to perform mind-numbing and repetitive but essential tasks, so most people *WILL* become "unemployed." Without a sharing of that new-found wealth:

 a) Most people would become destitute.
 b) The oligarchs would become even more obscenely wealthy in the short term
        as they no longer needed to pay wages, BUT...
 c) Oligarchs need CUSTOMERS as well as producers. AI/Robots can build a car, for example,
        but they don't BUY cars - so the whole system falls apart.
 d) ALSO, Destitute people become desperate and take ACTION, SO IMO, the social revolution will happen later if not sooner, and if delayed too long might not be a peaceful revolution.

What would people DO with themselves if they didn't have to labor at mind-numbing and repetitive tasks? Write poetry (as John Quincy Adams suggested), hike the Appalachian Trail, study (science, history, literature, a thousand other things), spend time with their grandchildren and their grandparents. It is tragic that humanity has been all-consumed with "work" for so long that we even need to ask what we could do without "work."