Throwing Stones

This past week, I have had to explain to my son why there are nasty people in the world who want to throw things at other countries. It is not an easy conversation to have and one I really don't enjoy. I have limited my explanation so my son likens any threat to something akin to the canon ball launchers he has with his Imaginext play castle. After all, he is only six and really isn't ready for the full horror of what inter-continental ballistic missiles are capable of. That is really what his schooling is for.
In the past week, words have been used which no one would want to hear used in media news broadcasts. Words such as nuclear and strike have been used in the same sentence along with anti-missile and defence. During the 70's and 80's the use of such words would have sent a chill through the population and prompted the circulation of 'protect and survive' leaflets. Since those days, freedom of information means that we now know how futile any form of advice would be and it is now accepted that there would be little or no protection from a nuclear exchange.
Just how much of this is just words? I suspect rather a lot. I listened with interest to a piece on this morning's Broadcasting House where we heard that domestic television news in North Korea barely mentions any kind of crisis and places more importance on the publication of a book about 'The Great Leader' and an exhibition of photography. If North Korea are building up to war then it would appear the populous is blissfully unaware. So is it all a show? Quite possibly. After all, they have done it on numerous occasions before. What is more dangerous than the 'crisis' in relations is the talk about nuclear war. This can lead to misunderstandings and mistakes. A game of threats is not one to be playing when those involved have the means to trigger a conflict from which there would be no return.
This last week, if nothing else, has been a stark reminder of how quickly international affairs can deteriorate to a point whereby we begin talking about the use of nuclear weapons.
I keep hearing in the media whether we should be worried. I don't think so. The retaliation to anything fired at us would be massive. What we should be worried about is the wider effect of any military action between North and South Korea. The inevitable involvement of the US and military build up in the region would not be tolerated by China, as they have made clear, and would risk it adopting a defencive stance. Any accidents or mistakes could easily result in a far wider conflict developing, and it's this that should worry us.

It feels wrong to celebrate...

It does feel somewhat wrong to be preparing to celebrate Christmas when their are 27 shattered families and relatives on the other side of the Atlantic, their lives devastated.
Many would say that life has to go on. I suppose they are right, but for the families involved, they must be feeling their world has come to an end.
I listened last night to BBC Radio 5's Stephen Nolan Show. It's a phone in discussion programme and the main topic was the tragedy in Connecticut. I normally listen to just a few minutes, depending on the subject, but last night I felt compelled to stay with the programme until 1am.
A couple of the calls were from the area affected. One was from an English teacher who worked at a school in a neighbouring state. He talked about how school teachers and children are trained for situations such as those seen on Friday. The training is mandatory and as he explained what he would have done in a similar situation, he began to break down. His thoughts had turned to the children in his charge and the realisation that it could easily have been his class that had been lost.
Another call was from a father in the UK. He simply could not understand how it could be right for a member of the public to have access to weapons normally seen only in the military. He too broke down and sobbed as he tried to articulate his feelings, the anger clear in his broken voice. The weapons used by the lone gunman on Friday are designed to cause maximum damage and injury. They are death machines and can be found in use by the Navy and those serving in Afghanistan. Why, he asked, are such weapons so widely available? 'There has to be something seriously wrong with a country that allows this'. How right he is.
Something that dis stick in my mind was a quite from a law official in the US who informed us that there are in use in the US more than one gun per head of the population. That is a huge number of weapons, all of which are in use. Is it any wonder tragedies like this occur?
As more detail emerges, so too we will hopefully begin to answer the big question, 'why?'. The police have announced they have found evidence that shines a light on this question and may go some way to provide a motive for the gunman to have done what he did. This will be of no consolation to the parents of those killed, but may in some way help to prevent something like this ever happening again. It may help those in contact with children and young adults to recognise the signs before it is too late. It is more likely than not that the signs were there. They may have manifested themselves in odd behaviour, a reluctance to mix with others or a hatred for teachers or figures of authority. It is possible these things could have been pushed aside and put down to the actions of a normal adolescent, finding his place in society. It's likely we will never know.
It would be so wrong for nothing of any real good to come from this tragedy. There has to be progress on all fronts, progress in restricting gun ownership and the penalties for illegally using firearms and progress in understanding how and why young men are driven to commit such acts.