The Mission
The task here is to decide whether all the equations you’ve done so far justify risking the happiness,health, and lives of those who depend on you. You’re actually already risking their lives. You may just not realize it. Take shooting practice, for example. Every time you send commandos off to practice shooting, you’re risking their well−being. The car can crash on the way to or from the range.There’s a possibility of hearing loss because of gunfire. A possibility of cancer because of the pulverized toxins from the fired rounds. A possibility of skin cancer from the sun. A possibility of shrapnel from exploding chambers. You may simply conclude that these risks are too low to be significant, no matter how serious a jagged piece of rifle barrel can be when, on that one day in a million, it’s jammed through someone’s lower intestine. In the end, you are willing to accept a small amount of risk that something very serious will happen in order to practice shooting.
What would justify accepting a large amount of risk? In 1980, the United States took such a risk and failed when dozens of commandos flew in across the desert in an attempt to rescue U.S. hostages in Iran. In 1943, Germany took such a risk and succeeded when dozens of commandos flew into a secure British mountaintop prison and freed Mussolini. In 1972, Germany took such a risk and failed when security forces failed to kill terrorists before several Olympic athletes were murdered. In 1989, Peru took such a risk and succeeded when security forces killed terrorists before embassy staffers were murdered.
How do you determine whether the odds are worthwhile? By comparing the potential risks of your actions with the potential risks of not acting. Several years ago, several SEALs and Special Forces commandos were inserted into the upper Amazon to monitor a border war between Ecuador and Peru. Several risks were inherent in the mission. Resupply missions flown by Army helicopters were dangerous, given the high altitude, poor weather, and small landing pads that were perched on the sides of mountains. Uncharted and forgotten land mines were hidden in the mud and along dirt trails. Battalions from both countries were filled with 16−year−olds with M−16 assault rifles who were not likely to distinguish between our camouflage and that of their enemies.
On the other hand, if the commando unit was not sent into the jungle, there was little hope that the outside world could verify what was happening in the conflict. Without verification of what was happening in the conflict, other countries could not broker a cease−fire. Without a cease−fire, there was little chance of a peace settlement. Both Ecuador and Peru would continue building up their militaries. Chile and Bolivia, alarmed at Peru’s military buildup, would increase their own military postures. Argentina, alarmed at Chile’s movements, would strengthen its forces as well. Then so would Brazil. A regional arms race would ensue, at the expense of regional trade agreements and regional democratization. There were no alternative missions that would be as effective but have less risk.
The Take−Away
There is a cost to not taking chances.
Jeff once worked with a company that badly needed more content for a Web site it was developing. Its current visitors were growing fickle. The time between visits was growing longer. The company narrowed down the choice to a provider of material that would not only retain the visitors, but also attract new browsers.
But the expense! It was strapped for cash. If it purchased the content it needed, it might not be able to purchase new servers if its secondhand ones went out. And it would need the new servers if the new content did its job. However, no matter how well new servers worked, they would be of no use if they didn’t have new content. There were risks involved in each proposition, but the potential reward was greater if the company put its money on content rather than reserving it for new servers.