Saving Soldiers as well as Jihadis

We see in the news today the ultimatum given by China to Pakistan regarding China's need for land. Many people are unaware that China's dams are capable of depriving Pakistan of precious drinking water from the Indus River.

Pakistan needs water, China needs farmland.

First, I want to say, independent of my ethnic background, that this is a good deal for the world as a whole.

As most people know, India was divided into three countries when it gained its independence from Great Britain after WWII. Pakistan and East Pakistan (modern day Bangladesh) were created, and mass migration ensued on religious grounds. Muslims within India were given the opportunity to leave the newly formed Hindu-majority India, into Muslim Pakistan and Bangladesh.

During the Cold War with the Soviet Union, India was closer to Russia, and Pakistan was closer to the United States.

In the post-cold War period, however, Pakistan became a hotbed for training of "jihadis", or Muslim religious soldiers.

Recently, China has been accused within their mainland and also in places like the Philippines of committing genocide of Muslims. This has been concurrent with Israel's war with Palestinians in Jerusalem.

Today, the issue is not just young brainwashed pakistani kids, but kids from every country who were raised for war and hatred of perceived enemies. The first step towards peace is to stop training our young boys for war and hatred, which go hand in hand.

Here in the Homeland of the United States, many returning men, including myself, have been intensely evaluated and investigated regarding their activities during the tumultuous times of the past four years.

Even though I hadn't even left the city, many people I knew from the other side of town didn't even realize I was still alive.

The intensity of the hatred centered on the war over Jerusalem. Ner the Mexican border, the confluence of the war in Jerusalem, the battle over the border wall, and the conflict with China, would lead even the casual observer to notice an overall bias and possible ethnic cleansing against brown-skinned people, such as myself, worldwide.

Some, like collaborators of ethnic cleansing eras throughout history, in order to survive, cooperated in the killing of their own peoples.

The only comment I would make here, in reflection back upon there recent times, is to consider whether life itself is so precious, especially with death and destruction everywhere, such as to make it worthwhile to participate in the killing of relatives, close or distant.

I surmise that almost always, some price is paid to such "collaborators" to go along with the overall, unstoppable march of the times.

As you see by my writing this article on a computer, rather than the cell phone I had been working on, I've been readjusting and helping the community as a whole readjust to civilized life.

For those young men, of any country, who are still capable of being re-trained for civilian life, I am definitely a proponent of second chances.

We can all agree that China can assist us in eliminating jihadi boot camps in Pakistan, in the context of the recent Middle Eastern Peace treaties.

But we must also realize the equal danger of perpetuating war in the way we teach our children, men and women.

What we're seeing now are ongoing efforts to peace on the one hand, and the sharpening of the underlying religious and ethnic differences leading us to a war stance with China, on the other.

What I've read about our differences with China, as with all conflicts, involves continued high-stakes business disagreements.

As the world moversfurther into Space, Science, AI, and other forms of technological innovation, many of our future financial disputes involve these programs.

Between the United States and China, in the ares of business disputes, is a fundamental disagreement over which set of countries in best positioned to win a war over computers and technologies.

The United States, still reeling with ethnic strife, has not yet transformed itself into a society that values brains over brawn; it is likely that a battle purely over technological skill would go to those with more intelligent minds rather than bulkier bodies.

Yet, the problem is loyalty to underlying American institutions, which we can say are unchanging. For example our Constitution.

Perhaps the most defining quality of American, as long as America remains America, is our legal system.

So, it is not unreasonable, as American companies seek to recruit intellectual talent for this next wave of business conflict, that we should expect this talent to be at least loyal to our Constitution.

Of course, as my other articles might suggest, there are also other important considerations. But we must start somewhere.