George Friedman
“If you must wound someone, it is better to kill him.”
I’ve encountered some version of this missive throughout the course of my career. And like any good quote, this one’s precise origin is unimportant, but its meaning is instructive: If you need to hurt your enemy, hurt them so badly that they can’t or won’t seek revenge. An unfatal wound, conversely, is the worst course of action because it would fail to end the conflict and would almost certainly provoke a response, which could be immediate or delivered at a time most harmful to the original attacker. The original attacker might retaliate in kind, responding at the worst possible time to inflict the most pain on the original victim. In the long run, an unfatal wound would engender extreme actions from both sides, resulting in action that is much more serious than the original wound. Both sides would content themselves by preparing for the next round and causing more wounds that accelerate violence without bringing it to a close. In all this, rage fuels more suffering and more wounds. Rather than a missive of malice, the quote argues that killing the enemy is both kinder and more effective than wounding them – kinder in that killing one enemy early on obviates the need for future, wider conflict. The original attacker wins, the loser dies, and resentments are forestalled.
No comments:
Post a Comment