Although, I have just read that Nelson Mandela was discharged from the hospital, within the past day or so I was thinking about 3 world figures, around the same age, who had been hospitalized. Nelson Mandela, 94; Mikhail Kalashnikov ("Father of the AK-47."), 93, and G.H.W.Bush, 88, the youngster of the set.
No doubt it would take a French existentialist playwright of the 40's or 50's to pen the drama of their conversations on the ward.
What is more intriguing to me is to contemplate these men and their lives and ask the question: Given the relative range of freedom these men experienced in their lives, how does their respective contribution to world history stand up?
I know the least about Kalishnakov: "According to popular legend, Kalashnikov began designing weapons after having trouble with the rifles the Soviet Red Army was using during World War II."
Well, the Red Army suffered incredible losses in WWII, so I guess he was addressing a problem.
Nelson Mandela was in prison for 27 years. He became the President of South Africa, in the first entirely democratic election there.
41? He received the best this country had to offer. It is true, he served in the military, in contrast to many war-thirsting conservatives. He "liberated" Kuwait. A mostly wealthy Arab oil country. Some say "honorably" did not dislodge Saddam Hussein. Others say he abandoned the Shiites and led to their slaughter under Saddam.
And we all know how the family grudges came up, later, when his pup was set aloose.
To whit: More Nelson Mandelas, fewer Kalishnikovs, and no more Bushes.