Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday September 25 2015, @07:59AM   Printer-friendly
from the sounds-like-my-childhood dept.

Bruce Schneier has written an article about Living in a Code Yellow World:

In 1989, handgun expert Jeff Cooper invented something called the Color Code to describe what he called the "combat mind-set." Here is his summary:

In White you are unprepared and unready to take lethal action. If you are attacked in White you will probably die unless your adversary is totally inept.

In Yellow you bring yourself to the understanding that your life may be in danger and that you may have to do something about it.

In Orange you have determined upon a specific adversary and are prepared to take action which may result in his death, but you are not in a lethal mode.

In Red you are in a lethal mode and will shoot if circumstances warrant.

Cooper talked about remaining in Code Yellow over time, but he didn't write about its psychological toll. It's significant. Our brains can't be on that alert level constantly. We need downtime. We need to relax. This is why we have friends around whom we can let our guard down and homes where we can close our doors to outsiders. We only want to visit Yellowland occasionally.

Since 9/11, the US has increasingly become Yellowland, a place where we assume danger is imminent. It's damaging to us individually and as a society.

He continues:

Those of us fortunate enough to live in a Code White society are much better served acting like we do. This is something we need to learn at all levels, from our personal interactions to our national policy. Since the terrorist attacks of 9/11, many of our counterterrorism policies have helped convince people they're not safe, and that they need to be in a constant state of readiness. We need our leaders to lead us out of Yellowland, not to perpetuate it.

What are my fellow Soylentil's views on Bruce Schneier's assessment?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by janrinok on Friday September 25 2015, @09:39AM

    by janrinok (52) on Friday September 25 2015, @09:39AM (#241405) Journal

    To the military this is almost a basic rule - you cannot keep combat troops at a state of high readiness indefinitely. They have to have a 'down' time where they can rest and recuperate - this can be achieved by periods away from the front during long conflicts, rotating troops between combat and other duties at set intervals, or even providing relaxation while giving useful training by adventure training exercises which are designed to enhance the individual's skills in a benign (combat-wise) environment e.g. skiing, expeditions etc

    While most people do take holidays, the US is considered by many others to be very bad at making sure individuals take their full entitlement, without being 'on-call' or having other responsibilities*. This is further coupled by many taking their holidays in the same 'code Yellow' environment. The surroundings might change, but there is still the consideration that the terrorist can strike at any time in any place. A holiday should be just that - a period with NO professional responsibilities whatsoever. In Europe I believe it is more a case of being aware but getting on with life. To do anything else implies that the terrorist has won - he has affected your quality of life such that you might eventually settle for peace at any price, even by giving in to his demands.

    We can do little to change the terrorist threat level in the short term. What is required, therefore, is the ability for life to continue as normal despite the threat. The UK had 25 years or so of a real and deadly terrorist threat, but people tended to continue their lives despite this. Even now in Europe, everyone is aware that there _is_ a threat but there is also the acceptance that the chances of it directly affecting oneself are so small that it isn't worth worrying about in the daily scheme of things.

    As far as I can tell, you only get one chance at life - make the most of it.

    * If you think that you are indispensable, then your company is taking an unacceptable risk. What happens if you die of natural causes tomorrow? The chances of this happening are probably higher than the risk of being killed by a terrorist plot.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Friday September 25 2015, @10:45AM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) on Friday September 25 2015, @10:45AM (#241425) Homepage Journal

    Now you're talking a language I can relate to. All that "code yellow", straight out of DHS propaganda nonsense. Talk of needing protection makes me contemptuous of the whole thing. And, with all the talk and propaganda, people at large aren't even aware of the things that matter.

    "Down time" is at home. Off of your own property, one should always be alert. Strange how conditioning works though. They're telling poeple to be alert, but not to do anything. Phhhtt. Again, I can't relate. I was taught to "do something, right or wrong". Call the cops? People call the cops over asinine bullshit - like two kids walking a mile or so from the park to their own home. Yeah, call the cops.

    I simply don't understand the world in which I've found myself. Maybe I was abducted by aliens . . .

    --
    Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 25 2015, @06:51PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 25 2015, @06:51PM (#241612)

      "Down time" is at home. Off of your own property, one should always be alert.

      Yeah, right, especially if you rent. Or are homeless. Or are one of those "citizen of the world" types who think we should not have a property qualification to vote! Ha! al Harb much, do we?