Quote:
Originally Posted by Dazrin
I totally agree here. When the circumstances were unknown it was good. As soon as we found out what happened it was like "what's the big deal?" Yes, it was a tragedy but this much of one? No, I don't buy that.
|
I saw that a bit differently, again, maybe because of my work. I thought the issue wasn’t that the woman and child died, but why they died. Their deaths were 100% avoidable, had proper military and intelligence protocols and procedures been observed.
Whenever you are dealing with life and death situations (police, mental health, emergency medicine, firefighters etc) there are mandatory protocols and procedures that are part of a formal risk management system. Rigorous training on them are a critical component of professional training. Practioners are licensed, and regulated, and held accountable in terms of following those procedures.
For example, we understand that tradegy happens, and people will be lost in the emergency room. (Or war, etc.). But it’s unacceptable if someone is lost because the doctor was too drunk to perform the correct procedure.
If the incompetence is system wide, because the hospital administrator knowlingly hires completely unqualified medical staff so he can get a cut on the side, it should be an outrage. That’s what Quinn and a faction within Whitehall were doing.
An exchange that really struck me was between Toby and a Horst in Berlin, when Horst told him Quinn was trying to get Horst’s boss to informally invest in the private corp. “Information collected and disseminated in the private sphere only. Unadulterated. Untouched by government hands.” I read that as being outside the formal risk management system, and completely outside any public accoutability.
Sorry for the long diatribe. I worked within a completely different sphere, but which has similar risk management protocols and procedures. So this book just happened to grab me I guess. I won’t make a habit of ranting
