Just a funny little prayer to start my day.
—-
Let the ideas of Sun Tzu and Machiavelli protect me eternally from the inevitable clashes of individual interests clearly manifested for instance, by a negligent-yet so defensive colleague who passes the buck unto me or unto others in my department anytime the shit hits the fan.

That I should not be blinded by any feel-good phraseologies such as “a second family”, “camaraderie” and “harmony” uttered by no less than the shrewd hypocrites who themselves are the pioneers of corporate politics.

Let their false teeth signify unto me that their smile is not genuine, and that I should be ready to be stabbed at the back. After all, it’s good to err on the side of minor paranoia or wariness than to deny this absolute reality that everyone at work are really businessmen with business underpinnings on virtues such as loyalty and friendship.

I must not forget that my enemies’ individual interest hereinafter referred to as INTEREST is convertible to cash, but as man goes on the hierarchy of his or her needs, the INTEREST may involve obsession and vanity. “Bahala’g di ma-promote, basta mu-sikat therefore ako siya i-report” or “Na-ibog ko niya, hala ako siya ipiton using my powers ug tantrums sa tiguwang dalaga”. LOL.

That the negativity of these views of mine be transformed into a motivation to excel at work and avoid work lapses thereby forcing the fault-finders to invent things and thus kill their own conscience.

That if ever I forgot to wear my helmet, the spirit of motocross heroes remind me to race on the track, not on the streets. My death or injury would sound victory for my detractors, who haven’t defeated me yet in the arena of corporate politics, thanks to the never-ending guidance from Machiavelli and Sun Tzu.

Amen,

VPA

1. He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight.
2. He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces.
3. He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout the all the ranks.
4. He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared.
5. He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by his sovereign.

“Victory lies in the knowledge of these five points.” Sun Tzu

By Don Corder

Perhaps the most infamous poster child for the Zionist and otherworld opposition to having an informed public would be Marie-Antoinette a queen of France. She was the wife of Louis XVI. Louis XVI who was beheaded on January 21, 1793. She was beheaded on October 16, 1793; and was 38. Their son was thrown in prison and pitifully treated; he died at ten in prison; some call him “Louis XVII”.

Professor Robert Faurisson (born January 25, 1929 in Shepperton, Surrey) was esteemed by many to be a respected scholar, yet in September 1989; he was beaten severely by unknown assailants who called themselves “The Sons of the Memory of the Jews.” [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Faurisson]

Faurisson was a Holocaust revisionist who denied the claims and openly stated that the Holocaust was a hoax arising out of a deliberate tool to advance the interest of Jews at the expense of other peoples. Consequently, under the Gayssot Act, a French statute passed in 1990 that prohibited Holocaust denial. [http://www.vho.org/aaargh/engl/FaurisArch/RF051109.html]

January 24, 2005, the UN General Assembly commemorated the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Nazi concentration camps. Following this session, a UN resolution was drafted to designate January 27 as the International Day of Commemoration in Memory of the Victims of the Holocaust. It was through a sleight of hand that the Israeli delegation succeeded in getting this resolution passed and shortly thereafter revisionist Ernst Zündel was handed over by the United States to Canada, then by Canada to Germany where he is now serving a seven year sentence because he took the time to think for himself. [http://www.vho.org/aaargh/engl/FaurisArch/RF051117.html]

“All propaganda has to be popular and has to adapt its spiritual level to the perception of the least intelligent of those towards whom it intends to direct itself.” – Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (“My Struggle”), Vol. I. According to Robert Faurisson, “They know that to lose the ‘Holocaust’ is to lose the sword and the shield of Israel as well as a formidable instrument of political and financial blackmail.” Genius of the global propaganda machines employed to maintain Israeli power and Palestinian nightmares, can be distilled from what is made available in ordinary sales classes and marketing literature.

It does not matter Richard Lynn, Professor Emeritus University of Ulster, December 5, 2005 states, “I’ve checked out the six volumes of Churchill’s Second World War and the statement is quite correct – not a single mention of Nazi ‘gas chambers,’ a ‘genocide’ of the Jews, or of ’six million’ Jewish victims of the war.” What is important here is recognizing the power of the Holocaust to invoke emotions sufficient enough to move us to a buying decision. Following the example of Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s Minister of Propaganda, in Der Angriff (The Assault) in 1934 all media, entertainment, handbills and now the Internet are all singularly tasked to the shaping of public opinion. Thus, we embrace, buy into and defend with ‘American Taxpayer Dollars’ Israel’s right to global domination.

Timeless wisdom of Sun Tzu can be a light guiding us into realization of a Palestinian dream if we meticulously consider, “Now the general who wins a battle makes many calculations in his temple where the battle is fought. The general who loses a battle makes but few calculations beforehand.  Thus do many calculations lead to victory, and few calculations to defeat: how much more no calculation at all!  It is by attention to this point that I can foresee who is likely to win or lose.” So, let us here and now therefore consider these as we prepare for warfare in Cyberspace.

Borrowing from the work of Dr. Ralph Nadler author of Breakthrough Thinking, “The Purposes Principle holds that there is never a single purpose in planning or problem solving. Identifying the initial purpose is really only the beginning. Scrutiny and creative thinking reveals a whole hierarchy of purposes that expand the scope of the problem and increases the number of possible solutions. Asking the question “What is the purpose of this purpose?” represents the heart of this principle.” Let me propose that defining and finding ways to bring the Palestinian dreams for their homeland to fruition, be made the achievement of our guiding purpose.

I came to realize certain truths in reality that betrayed evidence of my sometimes naïve fantasies. The Palestinian nightmare does not always allow time and leisure for excursions into the areas of contemplating the beauty of a utopian state inasmuch as they are busy dodging drones, bullets and arrests. So, we who support them can lend our own dreams for now to the cause and understand the reluctance of those Palestinians living here in America, being fearful for the lives of their family over there. Hence, we might herein more seriously consider the experiment of a purposeful society as defined in a speech by the American president Franklin D. Roosevelt, as it being our initial model.

FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT: In our day certain economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. A second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all regardless of station, or race, or creed. Among these are: The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines throughout the nation. The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation. The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living. The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom, freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad.

The right of every family to a decent home. The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health. The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident and unemployment. The right to a good education. All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward in the implementation of these rights to new goals of human happiness and well-being. For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.

Let us not base our Cyber Initiatives upon only our pain but rather let us sell to the world the vision for our children; and the world will engage us. Let us endeavor to employ the heart of a people who live on the global grassroots level, may they realize that even authoritarian governments will bow to the will of the people, politicians check public opinion polls daily and the United Nations will hear our voices. Let us take up the weapon of our warfare skillfully and assert our own agenda as we remember the words of the esteemed sage, “Therefore the clever combatant imposes his will on the enemy, but does not allow the enemy’s will to be imposed on him.”

Let us rally with the UN General Assembly in their endorsement of the Goldstone Report as being the focus of our immediate objective. From the Goldstone venue we have the ability to demand “No Credible Goldstone Investigations No International Day of Commemoration in Memory of the Victims of the Holocaust.” Hence, we pierce the heart of the serpent behind the foot across our collective necks, through organized initiatives within the domains of social networks and Internet technologies, beginning with linking our diverse networks onto this article.

Bishop Don Corder

Don Corder is presiding bishop for Spirit of Life International Believers Fellowship and Senior Pastor of the Pillar of Truth Ministries. Mr. Corder is a published author, grassroots organizer and community activist, in addition to his work in urban and international development as a business consultant and entrepreneur.

Email: Corder.Donald@yahoo.com

Sun Tzu refers to “method and discipline” as the fifth constant, which refers to two separate things.

First, there is the process by which the organization is managed; this includes logistics, the science of getting resources from where they are gathered to where they are needed most, in addition to the process of communicating instructions and receiving feedback to manage the organization effectively.

Second, there is discipline, which is how the people are managed. For this, I will proceed directly to the passage that follows.

“In which army is there greater constancy, both in reward and punishment?”

Our modern world holds a common saying that reads: “No good deed shall go unpunished.” When an organization not only lets good behavior go unrewarded, but in effect, rewards bad behavior by its employees and managers, the effect is cancerous, crippling operations by removing the incentive for the rank and file to report problems up the chain of command, act on their own initiative to mitigate or eliminate problems before they become critical, and creating long-term resentment against the commander or executive’s leadership. This is a poor way to handle an organization.

As with taxes, punishing good behavior will result in less of it; rewarding good behavior will result in more of it. However, both rewards and punishments must be seen as consistent, or they will not be considered fair. A leader who is strict, but fair, will be respected where one who is indulgent or biased will not be. Even if a leader is loved, because he is liberal with rewards, a lack of consistency in enforcing his rules and punishing violations thereof will lead to contempt, and the organization can then be compared to a group of spoiled children, unfit for any practical purpose.

However, should a leader treat his subordinates with respect, rewarding the behavior he wishes to encourage with benevolence, sincerity, wisdom, and above all, consistency, he will not only be respected, but trusted and admired. This is a certain path to victory.

“The Commander stands for the virtues of wisdom, sincerity, benevolence, courage, and strictness.”

Those accustomed to believing Machiavelli’s “The Prince” was the only work on strategy read in older times may find these words surprising; worse, they may assume such words to be hypocritical nonsense. However, Sun Tzu was quite serious: how a Commander, or one acting in a similar capacity, treats his enemies, should not have any bearing on how he treats those he counts as subordinates, peers, allies, and sovereigns.

To be wise is not to constantly seek to impress others with one’s wisdom; it is to speak with the words that are necessary. To be sincere is not to reveal all of one’s secrets; it is to be truthful with what one does say. To be benevolent is not to be soft; it is to act in the best interests of others in the long run, rather than for short-term gain. To be brave is not to be reckless; it is to discard useless fear and hesitation to take advantage of the critical moment. To be strict is not to be cruel; it is to ensure that one’s instructions are obeyed, so that the Commander’s words are treated with respect and not contempt, and for the organization to function effectively.

Those who are deficient in these virtues are not guaranteed to fail. However, they are making implementing their strategies more difficult by sowing doubt and dissent. Only by building trust, communicating effectively, and having a well-founded reputation that inspires respect, can a leader truly use his organization in a dynamic and effective manner.

Above all, the Commander should separate war from peace and never conflate the two. His enemies should know how he treats his friends, and his friends should know how he treats his enemies; in this manner, his friends will not want to become his enemies, yet his enemies, will wish to become his friends.

“Earth comprises distances, great and small; danger and security; open ground and narrow passes; the chances of life and death.”

And so, “Earth” represents the terrain.

“Earth” represents the details of the environment that may change greatly, even over a short distance. Ignorance of these details courts disaster.

When real estate agents speak of the three factors affecting the value of a piece of land as “location, location, location,” they are speaking of “the Earth.” When Chinese house hunters recoil in horror at a property because a street is aimed directly at the front of the house perpendicular to that which runs in front of the house, thus bringing evil directly to the front door according to feng shui, this is a consideration of “the Earth.” However, this does not mean physical terrain alone.

There is a different kind of terrain: the human terrain. Humans vary greatly from place to place, and even from individual to individual; it is in-depth knowledge of the differentiations between people, their thinking processes, their actions, and their deeper human nature, that provides the strategist with a great advantage.  Everyone can see what is on the surface; the strategist looks deeper to see what is intangible, invisible to the naked eye.

Thus does the strategist find advantage where others do not.

“Heaven signifies day and night, cold and heat, times and seasons.” Thus, Heaven signifies the broader environment of a conflict, regardless of the nature of that conflict.

Some say that Napoleon studied Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War” extensively in developing his military strategies. However, if this is so, Napoleon blinded himself to the constant of Heaven when he invaded Russia in ignorance of the seasons, and was thus defeated by the Russian winter far more than any battlefield setback up to that point. This is one aspect of Heaven.

However, for the modern American businessman, the fiscal year, S.E.C. filing schedules, the filing of taxes, and public disclosure laws, are every bit as important and ever-present as the seasons and the phases of the moon. This is the broader legal environment within which a corporation exists.  Ignorance of Heaven is simply not acceptable.

Each strategist is responsible for understanding the context of his or her battlefield. Let each of us meditate on what constitutes our broader environment, and how we may take this into account as we conduct our business.

One of the more fundamental concepts in Sun Tzu is “The Moral Law,” one of the Five Constants of warfare, as translated by Lionel Giles in 1910. Regardless of the label we use for it, Sun Tzu’s definition serves well: “The Moral Law causes the people to be in complete accord with their ruler, so that they will follow him regardless of their lives, undismayed by any danger.” Thus, “The Moral Law” is the unifying cause that unites a nation, an army, or a corporation; it is, in a more military sense, the mission. In business, this is what constitutes the content of the mission statement to all stakeholders.

Sun Tzu’s concept of generalship is public service, albeit for a ruler who, in his day, was a king, and thus a law unto himself. Nonetheless, the same core principle holds: a nation with a stronger reason to fight and more vibrant leadership has an advantage in war. This advantage is far from absolute; it is merely one of five constants Sun Tzu writes of. However, its importance cannot be dismissed.

In American history, various self-appointed missions have come and gone. One of the more notable ones in war was that expressed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in his “Day of Infamy” speech; he laid out to the nation a great cause justified any hardship and any sacrifice in obtaining what was considered to be righteous vengeance against Japan, in addition to full war against Japan’s ally,  Germany, in ending further threats to American soil. What matters here is that the American people were heavily motivated by the idea behind American involvement in the war, now that the war had been brought to America (from their layman’s perspective).

The Moral Law is unity of purpose. Unity of purpose, in turn, provides the motivation for those participating in the organization to act, to follow orders, to obey regulations, and to further the interests of the leader. It is the foundation of organized action. Its importance must not be dismissed.

Friday

I come thru Like Kung Fu
Humble your whole 1,2 1,2
Mic check, rap you like a jumpsuit
on the beat like a gumshoe

Old enough to be your uncle
Still find a way to punk you
The shit you been spitting is uncouth
I bruise you like plum fruit

Your dumb dude
I do what you can’t un do
Make art out of war, come at you with Sun Tzu
Beat me? i know you’d love to

But I’m deep in the chest
like the game of chess
heart beat to the beat of the art that i’ve been blessed
with
eccentric yes but
electric like Tesla
knock a jock off his fucking Vespa
order spaghetti then rob the whole Rest-
raunt
Vision The Kid Ridiculous, what else ya want?

Con el reciente caso de Víctor Ariza y la red de espionaje chilena que al parecer infiltró a la FAP (Fuerza Aérea del Perú) rescato algunas líneas de “El Arte de la Guerra” del estratega chino Sun Tzu, una obra considerada básica para comprender el funcionamiento de un ejército en campaña.

Por ejemplo, “Lo que se ha mencionado como información previa no puede obtenerse de los espíritus, ni de las divinidades, ni por la similitud de los acontecimientos pasados, ni de los cálculos. Es necesario conseguirlo con hombres que averiguen la situación del enemigo” (Es decir, de los espías).

“Se enumeran cinco clases de agentes secretos que se pueden emplear: los agentes indígenas, los interiores, los dobles, los desechables y los flotantes… Cuando estos cinco tipos de agentes están actuando a la vez sin que nadie conozca sus procedimientos se les llama “la divina red” y constituyen el tesoro más valioso de un soberano” (Porque nadie puede negar que contar con una red de espionaje bien constituida es una ventaja valiosísima en caso de potencial escenario de conflicto).

“Los agentes indígenas proceden del país enemigo… los agentes dobles son espías enemigos utilizados por nosotros” (Es decir, Víctor Ariza es un agente indígena, porque procede de nuestro país, y por lo tanto, siguiendo el criterio de Sun Tzu, sería visto como un agente indígena por parte de los chilenos. Cabe preguntarse, ¿por qué no se le convirtió en agente doble? Esto se puede explicar en el siguiente párrafo).

“Cuando el enemigo envía espías para fisgonear lo que hago y dejo de hacer (en este caso no envió a nadie, sino al parecer contrató a uno acá), los obsequio generosamente y los hago volver convertidos en agentes míos”. Se le pudo haber proporcionado información falsa en lugar de desmantelar la red de Ariza de una forma tan abrupta.

“Los agentes internos son funcionarios enemigos empleados por nosotros… entre los funcionarios hay hombres de mérito que han sido destituidos, hay otros que han sufrido castigo por haber cometido errores. Hay sicofantes y advenedizos que ambicionan la riqueza (como Ariza). Los hay que, injustificadamente, han sido relegados durante mucho tiempo a funciones inferiores, los que jamás han ascendido a puestos de responsabilidad y aquellos cuyo único deseo es aprovechar los períodos turbulentos para ampliar su poder personal… de todos estos, puedes investigar con discreción su situación material y cubrirlos de oro (o dólares) y de seda para ganároslo. A continuación puedes contar con ellos para iluminar una situación y conocerla tal y como se produce en su país y para informar acerca de sus planes contra vuestro país”.

Acá hay más párrafos interesantes, que prueban que desde hace ya varios siglos atrás se valoraba la importancia de contar con espías. Veamos.

“De todos los que en el ejército están cerca del comandante en jefe, nadie está más próximo que el agente secreto. De todas las retribuciones, ninguna tan generosa como la del agente secreto. De todas las cuestiones, ninguna tan confidencial como las operaciones secretas… Nunca ha existido lugar en el que el espionaje no haya sido utilizado“.

Acá hay otra que me gusta porque respalda mi idea de haber empleado a Ariza tras descubrir su red para pasar información falsa en lugar de exponerlo a los medios y a la opinión pública que ahora pide su cabeza.

“Es fundamental descubrir a los agentes del enemigo que vienen a espiar en tu contra y sobornarlos, a fin de que pasen a tu servicio. Dales instrucciones y ocúpate de ellos. Esta es la manera de reclutar y utilizar a los agentes dobles. A través de los agentes dobles, se pueden reclutar y emplear los agentes indígenas e internos”.

Y cierro el artículo con este párrafo:

“Por esta razón sólo el monarca sabio y el general que sepan utilizar como agentes a las personas más inteligentes tendrán la certeza de realizar grandes cosas. Las operaciones secretas son vitales en la guerra; de ellas dependerá el ejército para realizar cada uno de sus movimientos. UN EJÉRCITO SIN AGENTES SECRETOS ES COMO UN HOMBRE SIN OJOS NI OÍDOS“.

http://diegoarbulu.wordpress.com. Derechos reservados 2009.

In studying Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War,” I found one piece of advice to be particularly poignant:

“Regard your soldiers as your children, and they will follow you into the deepest valleys; look upon them as your own beloved sons, and they will stand by you even unto death.”

This principle has borne fruit throughout history. Those leaders in war who were regarded as sharing the dangers and sacrifices of the troops were particularly loved and respected by their troops. Some took this behavior to extremes; others simply made a point of showing solidarity with the rank and file.

Before getting carried away with this notion, let us read the next passage and understand both in proper context:

“If, however, you are indulgent, but unable to make your authority felt; kind-hearted, but unable to enforce your commands; and incapable, moreover, of quelling disorder: then your soldiers must be likened to spoilt children; they are uselsss for any practical purpose.”

Of course, we should bear in mind that the ancient Chinese idea of how to treat children is very much in line with “spare the rod and spoil the child”; however, Sun Tzu was, particularly by the standards of the ancient world, a humanitarian who regarded proper treatment as an advantage rather than a sign of weakness. Even so, Sun Tzu was a practical man mindful of reality; to be kind but soft is fatal to leadership in any organization.

Placed in the context of a modern busienss organization, these words may seem strange. Yet these words were no less strange in ancient times. The difference between a general and his men seemed as great as that between the earth and the sky; many argue that the difference between a Fortune 500 C.E.O. and a front line factory worker is of a similar breadth. It is also not particularly the point.

A father does not treat his sons well because he is their brother. A father looks after his sons because he has greater power and authority than they do, and thus, a greater responsibility to them, and greater control over himself; he chooses whether or not to make the extra effort. Thus it is with a businessman; there is no power that will force him to look after his employees’ interests. That is precisely why such behavior is respected and admired. Common is the leader who ignores the needs of those that follow him; rare is the leader who takes the time to ask himself, what ails those I am responsible for? What can I do to help them?

Though a manager can be too concerned with the superficial and not enough about the bottom line, similar to a “player’s coach” in basketball who lets millionaire players walk all over him more often than not, the wise leader looks after his charges by looking at the big picture; by taking responsibility for the overall success of the organization. False economy is not a viable long-term option; indulgences that harm the organization and lead to long-term failure are not in the best interests of employees, even if the employees themselves believe otherwise. No one said being a parent was easy.

Above all, trust can only be built by a combination of humanity and consistency. By ensuring that your instructions are followed, all while demonstrating through deed that you are concerned for the welfare of all and not just yourself, you ensure that you are not only liked, but respected. This is not done through verbal tantrums or making your nickname “Chainsaw”; it can only be accomplished by making sound decisions, persistently following up, and building a truthful expectation that you will act in the best interests of those impacted directly by your decisions.

This is a certain path to victory.

Here’s  long post I put on my first strategy blog. Read it if you like. Comments are welcome.

Well this was supposed to be embedded audio. For some reason, that’s not working.

But this link should.

So, first things first: what’s your level of familiarity with Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War”?

On EduFire, at http://edufire.com/jbedu, I offer  Sun Tzu: The Art of War courses. (“Learn & Master “The Art of War”) The PowerPoint series for this was recently completed and will likely become an eBook at some point. I’m told that my classes are not dry. This is a high compliment, considering the nature of the material.  So far as I know, such courses are unique on the Internet, though I offer them as an introduction to the book; it’s not the end of the story.

Donald Corder

A method in mighty military madness

November 19, 2009

Israeli PM was photographed touring a German-made submarine that can launch missiles carrying nuclear warheads as Netanyahu simultaneously threatens war with Iran

‘Political will to comment horror was in effect its own brand of genius during the time of war,’ paraphrasing Marlon Brando in his 1979 ‘Apocalypse Now’ role as Green Beret Colonel, Walter Kurtz, whose army has crossed the border into Cambodia and is conducting hit-and-run missions against the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese Army (NVA). Justice Richard Goldstone’s Report ‘Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict’ documents and declares to the world Israel does indeed have the political will to relentlessly follow Colonel Kurtz’s logic in their pursuit of an agenda reaching back to the Israeli land grabs in the Ottoman ruled Palestine in the 1880’s. While the exceptionally high level of political consciousness of the Jewish Yishuv united around acquiring the entirety of Palestine as their single national purpose by the end of 1947. The Zionist social institutions and infrastructure were converted into a shadow government that intermingled with powerful world leaders and garnered global financing from the Jewish Diaspora. See pages 16 – 17 “The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem” by Benny Morris.

Crimes against humanity were thereafter employed by Israel’s mass expulsion of Palestinian refugees and subsequent convening of the Lausanne Conference in Switzerland to pressure Israel to stop its ethnic cleansing and accept UN Resolutions 181 (Partition of Palestine) and 194 (right of return of Palestinian refugees) although the resolutions were refused by Israel and never formally endorsed by the UN Security Council. The Israeli Declaration of Independence was unilaterally announced on 14 May 1948 (5 Iyar, 5708). Zionist ideology was thereafter hastened in the wake of the probable outcome of the 1967 Six Day War; when the United States provided nuclear capability supplied to Israel was scheduled for a doomsday deployment scenario by the Nation of Israel against the planet.

Rabbi Yitzhak Shapiro heads the Od Yosef Chai Yeshiva in the Yitzhar Jewish settlement according to his book “The King’s Torah”, even babies and children can be killed if they pose a threat to Israel. While in what was deemed a ‘method in mighty military madness’ Israeli PM was photographed touring a German-made submarine that can launch missiles carrying nuclear warheads as Netanyahu simultaneously threatens war with Iran and is suspected in the destabilization of Pakistan. Support of the madness is reflected throughout the social and political fabric rampant against the Nation of Palestine when seventy-three percent (73%) of Israeli conscripts volunteer to serve in Israeli combat units, giving rise to a 10-year-high in personnel, reports Yediot Aharonot. Inasmuch as there is no public “beef” with the Taiwanese government and Israel we can quietly speculate the annual $2.7 billion US dollars directed into the Israeli coffers is designed for the efficient and systematic murder of Arabs and Muslims living in the region and protection of the global oil interests.

Next area of global confrontation for the Nation of Palestine will be the International Criminal Court, which even now is being politically mapped by the United States http://www.khaleejtimes.com/. Middle East Online published the US Military has identified Internet Social Networks as a modern day forum for the facilitation and advancement of military agendas. Subsequently, the torrent waged against the credibility and truthfulness of the Goldstone report was meticulously carried out as witnessed by the article ‘Leyden Communications Helps Israel On UN Goldstone Report’ http://www.pressreleasepoint.com/. The Goldstone Report represents the highest and most prestigious leverage of the Palestinian initiative throughout their 60 years of oppression and genocide. Without any reservation or doubt such is clearly understood by both Israel and the United States of America’s leadership.

Furthermore, Israel’s purchase of Internet Domains employed to deflect and impede informed opinions worldwide, employed along with Israel’s sophisticated use of Facebook, search engines and similar webpage themes served to squash almost anything remotely critical of Israel in what little information was made available to the American public: http://www.israelnewsagency.com/. Sun Tzu said:  Whoever is first in the field and awaits the coming of the enemy, will be fresh for the fight; whoever is second in the field and has to hasten to battle will arrive exhausted.

It seems that the lessons and power of the media employed by Hitler against the Jews has been an education well learned and embraced in this century by the “Chickens who have come home to roost!” Although this provides a formidable challenge for those who are desirous of a level playing field, equity and some utopian sense of fairness, we must understand that this is about domination and power. So, the Arab nations must somehow find the necessary stuff to cooperatively pool their resources to combat this in the UN General Assembly, the cyber-space of our collective minds and in the complex of courts made available to sovereign nations, NGO’s and monies available by the Gulf Cooperation Council financial war coffers.

Palestinian resistance must surely see they cannot overcome Israel through direct confrontational stages of traditional war. President Bush has declared that this is a global war on terror and borrowing from the infamous line of Michael Corleone in Godfather II, “If history has shown us anything, it shows us that you can kill anybody.” I am reminded of the question raised during the 1960’s civil rights era in the United States, “..who should we follow, Martin Luther King or Malcolm X.” Forthcoming was a response along the lines, “There are many roads to freedom and they all must be traveled.” I now conclude the Palestinians do not need more martyrs, rather what is required is wise and cunning leadership with intestinal fortitude coupled with vision.

Ideology of Sun Tzu finds expression in the Palestinian resistance when we first realize “The art of war is of vital importance to the State. It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin.  Hence it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected.” The Israeli oppressor of the Nation of Palestine did also murder Jesus Christ and declared they had done God a service; committed genocide throughout the 20^th Century and savagely holds on until this day, to madness and power. We must all thoughtfully reflect and consider that we are not dealing with a reasonable nation and consequently shift our attention to more profitable lines of deliberation and assertiveness.

What lies at issue are the public relations deceptions perpetuated by the Zionist media that, “Lest we forget” they are going to shove 60 more years of their nobility under duress message across the airwaves, [http://intifada-palestine.com]. Neither the Palestinian peoples nor their supporters to my knowledge have published the picture of what a free sovereign Palestine would look like. Why do we not follow the lead of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad when he spoke before the United Nations about governance that reflects the highest aims of Islam, “… men should pursue to be governed by the spiritual laws set forth within the context of the highest aims in the lives of men to be: “Peoples, driven by their divine nature, intrinsically seek good, virtue, perfection, and beauty. Relying on our peoples, we can take giant steps towards reform and pave the road for human perfection.” Let this be the Nation of Palestine’s’ message to the world lest we forget all war is deception.”

Bishop Don Corder

Don Corder is presiding bishop for Spirit of Life International Believers Fellowship and Senior Pastor of the Pillar of Truth Ministries. Mr. Corder is a published author, grassroots organizer and community activist, in addition to his work in urban and international development as a business consultant and entrepreneur.

Email: Corder.Donald@yahoo.com

Este impresionante libro escrito hace miles de años es una guía vital para comprender el mundo de la guerra, pero mas especificamente el mundo de la estrategia de la guerra, los preceptos de Sun Tzu los podemos aplicar de manera muy eficaz a los negocios, lo que nos ayudara a resaltar de entre los demás y a saber aprovechar mejor los recursos que tenemos a nuestro alrededor.

Para leer el libro completo haga click aquí

Este impresionante libro escrito hace miles de años es una guía vital para comprender el mundo de la guerra, pero mas especificamente el mundo de la estrategia de la guerra, los preceptos de Sun Tzu los podemos aplicar de manera muy eficaz a los negocios, lo que nos ayudara a resaltar de entre los demás y a saber aprovechar mejor los recursos que tenemos a nuestro alrededor.

Para leer el libro completo haga click aquí

Sun Tzun kuuluisa sitaatti “voittava soturi voittaa ensin ja taistelee sitten, kun taas häviäjäsoturit menevät ensin taisteluun ja yrittävät voittaa sen” kertoo olennaisimman voittamisesta. Voittaminen on kahden yhtä tärkeän vaiheen yhdistelmä – voittaminen on sekä prosessi että lopputulos. Voittaja rakentaa voittamisen tilan oppimis-, harjoittelu- ja valmentautumisprosessissaan ja suorituksessa pelkästään antaa voittamisen tilan täyttyä – Törmäsen Antin sanoin “antaa voittamisen tapahtua”. (Toivottavasti Antin valmentama joukkue oivaltaa tämän viisauden mahdollisimman pian!)

Törmäsin mielenkiintoiseen valmennusguruun, Matti Vestmaniin. Matti on erikoistunut painonnostoon. Hän on valmentanut tyttärensä Katarinan huipulle lajissa ja auttanut monia urheilijoita menestymään harjoittelussaan. Matti kiteytti ylläolevan viisauden fyysiselle tasolle. Hän sanoi “aloitan harjoittelun onnistuneen noston lopputuloksesta ja lähden siitä rakentamaan itse suoritusta”. Sitten Matti näytti painonnoston kaksi perusasentoa, joista toinen päätyi nostoon, jossa jalat olivat kyykkyasennossa ja toisessa ne saksasivat. Ymmärsin heti mitä Matti tarkoitti. Hän muodosti valmennettavalle selkeän fyysisen vision siitä, minkälaiseen asentoon täytyy hakeutua prosessin kautta, jotta voittava lopputulos syntyy.

Aloin tietysti heti soveltaa ajatusta laulamiseen. Minkälaisia tuntemuksia minulla on kun upea saundi syttyy, minkälainen on vartalon asento kun laulu sujuu niin kuin haluan sen sujuvan. Miltä tuntuu kun olen voinut välittää ihmisille sen mikä omassa sydämessäni ja sielussani soi. Ja niin edelleen. Sitten kokeilin ja totta tosiaan – saman tien sain harjoitteluuni lisää intoa ja laulaminen parani merkittävästi.

Mielikuvaharjoittelussa tätä on opastettu tekemään kautta aikojen, mutta fyysisessä harjoittelussa se tahtoo unohtua. Siitäkö johtunee se, että monet kokevat henkisen ja fyysisen harjoittelun kahdeksi erilliseksi asiaksi? Matti Vestmanin opeilla ne yhdistyvät.

Jos olisin jääkiekkovalmentaja ja harjoittaisin maalintekotilanteita jonkun kuvion kautta, pyytäisin pelaajia ensin luomaan kuvan siitä että maali on syntynyt ja vasta sitten käynnistämään harjoituksen. Vaikka harjoitus ei tuottaisi heti tulosta niin pyytäisin heitä jatkamaan siten, että aina “valmistaa maalin” ensin ja sitten harjoittelee – näin ‘voita ensin’ asenteesta tulisi rutiiniosa harjoitusta. Maalivahtia pyytäisin tietysti lähtemään onnistuneesta torjunnasta. Pelaajana harjoittelisin yksin siten, että lähtisin harjoituksessa liikkeelle siitä fyysisestä liikkeestä ja asennosta, jossa maali syntyi – kokeilisin erilaisia. Näin uskoisin, että voittaminen siirtyy kehoon ja maaleja alkaisi syntyä enemmän.

Käänteisen valmentautumisen etu on tehokkuuden lisääntyminen, monet turhat vaiheet saattavat  jäädä pois kun lopputulos on paremmin tiedossa. Kirjassani esitän toiminnan ja oppimisen yhdistävän prosessimallin. Siinä huippusuoritus tulee ensin. Eli ensin on pyrittävä huippusuoritukseen, sen jälkeen sitä voidaan alkaa kehittää laadullisesti jolloin huippusuorituksen intensiteetti ja laajuus paranevat. Kausiluontoisessa toiminnassa tämä tarkoittaisi sitä, että huippusuoritus haetaan mahdollisimman nopeasti kauden alussa, jotta “loppupeleissä” ollaan voitu harjoittaa suoritus laadullisesti ja tehollisesti parhaaseen mahdolliseen tilaan – tällöin täytetään sitä tilaa, joka alkukaudesta valmistettiin, voittamisen tilaa.

There are five dangerous faults which may affect a general:

1. Recklessness, which leads to destruction;
2. Cowardice, which leads to capture;
3. A hasty temper, which can be provoked by insults;
4. A delicacy of honor which is sensitive to shame;
5. Oversolicitude for his men, which exposes him to worry and trouble

This was one of the big takeaways I got from reading Sun Tzu’s classic, The Art of War.  Sun Tzu (722-481 BC) served as a general for the King of Wu and wrote this book regarding strategy and tactics in war over 2,000 years ago.  To this day, it remains at the forefront of military strategy and has even extended itself into politics and business.  Looking at these five “besetting sins of a general”, I try to apply it to my leadership skills to see where my challenge may be.  A couple of years ago, it probably would’ve been #3 – a hasty temper.  But now, I would say my challenge is probably in either #4 -delicacy of honor (aka pride) or #5 -oversolicitude for his men (aka excessively attentive).  

What’s your challenge as a general (aka leader)?

The other day, my father saw the book in my room and said in his Thai accent (so cute),

“Okay, I going to read it after you, na.  You know, that was written by Sun Tzu. Famous warrior in China. He tell how to win all the wars and all dat stuff in China.  Over 2,000 year ago you know?  Now everyone read it and learn from him.  You know dat?”

I know dat now, daddy!  It’s kind of cool seeing him get excited about it.  We have Chinese roots in my family and unfortunately have never gone to China. Supposedly our family descends from a warrior that protected the emperor of one of the last Chinese dynasties.  I wish we had a family tree from back then. Anyway, the book is pretty difficult to read at first because it’s written in very short phrases with lots of similes and metaphors (very common in Eastern cultures), which makes it a bit hard to follow at first.  But it’s only 13 chapters so it’s a fast read.  I really enjoyed the last chapter on The Use of Spies…I’ve always been intrigued by their mystery.  If you’re into that kind of stuff, you may want to check out the Spy Museum in D.C. to see some of the technology and tactics spies used over the decades.  I want to check out the National Museum of Crime and Punishment.

Who knows if he actually looked like this...

My friend had lent me this book with a three-book package filled with The Art of War, The Prince, and Instructions to His Generals. Now I’m in the middle of reading Machiavelli’s The Prince.  I really like these books because in a way they let me step into a time machine and see how war/life was from their perspective.  They also allow me to open my mind to understand what decisions our current politicians, soldiers, and other leaders may be confronting everyday. See, this is why I love riding the Metro.  I get to use every morning to read and have quiet time to myself and keep learning new things instead of dealing with watching the road or honking at the traffic or listening to obnoxious talk show hosts that shall remain unnamed while I’m in the PR industry LOL!

I’d also like to point out its title The Art of War as if it is something as subjective and beautiful as art.  The book is also interpreted though as the science of war because like science, these war strategies and tactics can be replicated like any science formula and prove to be successful.  However, I’d also like to think of it as art…something that takes passion, skill, movement, and design.  Speaking of war, I really want to see that movie Ninja Assassin.

I hope you get a chance to read these books, but if not, read something you want to learn more about.

“‘Show me what you read — and I’ll show you what you are.’   And, ‘You become what you think about.’  So read on and think about what you are and what character role you want to play, in what costume, on tomorrow’s world stage.”

Tim O'Reilly, Ray Ozzie

Tim O’Reilly created a bit of a stir last night in the tech world by writing a thoughtful essay entitled “The War for the Web.” He’ll be expanding on his thoughts in his keynote address today at the Web 2.0 Expo in New York. From the essay, here’s the core argument:

“[W]e’ve grown used to a world with one dominant search engine, one dominant online encyclopedia, one dominant online retailer, one dominant auction site, one dominant online classified site, and we’ve been readying ourselves for one dominant social network. But what happens when a company with one of these natural monopolies uses it to gain dominance in other, adjacent areas? I’ve been watching with a mixture of admiration and alarm as Google has taken their dominance in search and used it to take control of other, adjacent data-driven applications.

It could be that everyone will figure out how to play nicely with each other, and we’ll see a continuation of the interoperable web model we’ve enjoyed for the past two decades. But I’m betting that things are going to get ugly. We’re heading into a war for control of the web. And in the end, it’s more than that, it’s a war against the web as an interoperable platform. [emphasis added] Instead, we’re facing the prospect of Facebook as the platform, Apple as the platform, Google as the platform, Amazon as the platform, where big companies slug it out until one is king of the hill.

… P.S. One prediction: Microsoft will emerge as a champion of the open web platform, supporting interoperable web services from many independent players, much as IBM emerged as the leading enterprise backer of Linux.

The coda there, with the Microsoft prediction, is what fascinated me – so much so that I mentioned it on Twitter. Tim immmediately responded, “Thanks. I should write a followup explaining the logic that got me to the PS.”  While we wait for that, though, here’s my prediction – with a bit of inside knowledge – today Microsoft begins to live up to Tim’s expectations with several announcements at our Professional Developers Conference (PDC) 2009 in Los Angeles.

If you want to see the future of Microsoft, and the future of the web and computing as we see it, watch live as Ray Ozzie lays it out in his keynote address, streamed live today at 11:30 eastern time, 8:30 am Pacific, over at http://microsoftpdc.com/.

Oh – and if your Latin is rusty, my title above comes from the phrase ”Si vis pacem, para bellum” – the classic doctrine of maintaining peace & deterring war by being better armed and prepared. It is generally attributed to Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus, a fourth-century AD Roman military scholar whom I consider the Sun Tzu of the West. I’ve known many fans of his philosophy in the Pentagon.

Now it may turn out that, whether they know it or not, Microsoft techies are building new ways to avoid a war on the open web. As Sun Tzu wrote,  ”To win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue an enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.” Watch our PDC this week to see examples of what I consider the modern technological acme of skill.

Share this post on Twitter

Email this post to a friend

Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent’s fate.

Sun Tzu, The Art Of War

This is a ruthless world and one must be ruthless to cope with it.

Charlie Chaplin

Man is still the most extraordinary computer of all.

John F. Kennedy

Concern with pleasing humans causes the loss of all spiritual growth.

Umberto Eco, Baudolino

He called so loud that all the hollow deep
Of Hell resounded:–Princes, Potentates,
Warriors, the Flower of Heaven–once yours; now lost,
If such astonishment as this can seize
Eternal Spirits! Or have ye chosen this place
After the toil of battle to repose
Your wearied virtue, for the ease you find
To slumber here, as in the vales of Heaven?

John Milton, Paradise Lost

It’s kind of fun to do the impossible.

Walt Disney

It is better to take what does not belong to you than to let it lie around neglected.

Mark Twain

Before all else, be armed.

Niccolo Machiavelli

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Isaac Asimov

The great Chinese general Sun Tzu stated: “Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster.”  The Art of War hasn’t change centuries later.

In the days before Obama, we had the “War on Terrorism”, “Axis of Evil” and “Islamofascism”.  These have since morphed into “Overseas Contingency Operation”, “other countries” and “terrorists”, none of which adequately describe our enemy.  If we cannot properly label the enemy, how can we expect to know them?

Islamofascism was coined to indicate the similarities between the Muslim Extremists, some of which are terrorists, and the Fascist regimes of Europe in the 1930’s and 1940’s.  This term has fallen out of favor during recent years, the victim of the PC (political correctness) police.  That obfuscation does not change the striking similarities between the Muslim extremists and their Fascists counterparts of the past.

According to Merriam-Webster Online, Fascism is defined as:

A political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

This definition fits those in the radical Islamic movement including the Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah, as well as the theocracy of Iran.  To a lesser extent, it would not be a stretch to include other Arab dictatorships and monarchies under this definition.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Iran has taken a further step to cement its ties to Fascism by placing its intelligence ministry under the direct control of the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.  This change was made out of Khamenei’s concern for loyalty after the massive Iranian protests held earlier this year.  Let’s put some additional pieces together:

• Iran has a “Supreme Leader” who is all powerful.  Germany had its “Führer”, which coincidently in English translates to “leader”.
• Iran has its “Revolutionary Guard” that reports to the Supreme Leader.  Germany had its “Schutzstaffel” (SS) that reported to the Führer.
• Iran, like Germany, is a one party state that does not tolerate decent.
• Iran justifies its means and existence in the name of religion, Islam, and Germany similarly on the religion of the Nazis, National Socialism.
• Hitler tried to exterminate the Jews.  Iran threatens the same.

Starting to sound like history repeating itself?  It sure does to all except those apologists on the Left who grab on to appeasement with the same furor that Neville Chamberlain did prior to the start of World War-II.

In one of President Obama’s first international speeches this past March, he released a video to the Iranians celebrating “Nowruz” (New Day), a spring holiday.  This special outreach was a naive attempt by the President to improve our relations with the Fascist Iranian regime.  The effort was a total failure.  First, it sent a message to the theocracy that we would tolerate their human rights abuses if they would cooperate on the nuclear proliferation issue.  This show of weakness by the President emboldened the Iranian despots and they have since crushed a democratic uprising in their country and march ever closer to acquiring nuclear weapons.  This week the Iranians arrested three American hikers and accused them of spying.

America must bring morality back to our foreign policy.  Yes, this means being less than diplomatic when required.

This is by far the most precise, well written piece written on why the war in Afghanistan is leading to failure and why those who support it are self promoting themselves in keeping it going.

I am proud Chuck Spinney is a mentor and friend.

Don

[ Note: I added some hot links to the attached article to assist readers in understanding some the background underpinning my argument. CS ]

November 12, 2009

 Obama and the Triumph of the Will The Afghan War Question By FRANKLIN C. SPINNEY

http://www.counterpunch.org/spinney11122009.html

Marmaris, Turkey.

In the opening lines of the oldest treatise on the conduct of war, Sun Tzu said that the question of war is vital to the state, and therefore, it is imperative to study it. This timeless advice has been been ignored repeatedly by the United States since the end of WWII. The inevitable result has been an insensible rise of war mongering, fueled by arrogance and ignorance, culminating in the chaotic spectacle now enveloping the Afghan War Question in Washington.

The intellectual content of the debate over whether or how much to escalate our forces in Afghanistan has degenerated into formless ranting by all sides. The content of this debate is not conditioned by a clear definition of military success. Nor is it conditioned by a definition of a desired political endstate. When asked how he would define victory, the State Department’s special advisor on Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, arrogantly summed up the collective state of mind by saying pithily, “we will know it when we see it.” With thinking like this, it should not be surprising that can be no definition of an exit strategy or a timeline for ending a war we are admittedly losing, even though that war is now in its ninth year.  By the way, Sun Tau also advised to avoid protracted war, and the only protracted shooting war we ever won was the American Revolution, in which we were the insurgents.

Yet, in the middle of the worst domestic economic crisis since the 1930s, President Obama appears to be on the verge of caving in to the irrational pressures for throwing more troops and money into the bottomless pit of Afghanistan. How did the Afghan escalation question degenerate into such a ridiculously chaotic state? Its immediate antecedents are quite clear. At the center of this debate is, or should be, the strategic plan submitted to President Obama in August by the theater commander General Stanley MacChrystal. That plan’s centerpiece is to provide security for the Afghan people by accelerating the training and expansion of the Afghan Army and Police Forces (ANSF). To buy time for this expansion, MacChrystal said a surge in US forces of 40,000 is needed, an estimate, according to subsequent reports, that may have been expanded to as many as 80,000 troops, a number the US would not be able to field and sustain without a reinstitution of the draft.

MacChrystal or one his war mongering allies in the Pentagon or in the right wing of the Republican Party immediately increased the beating of the war drums by leaking a carefully “redacted” version of his “secret” recommendations to the most obliging courtier of the permanent Washington apparat, Bob Woodward of the Washington Post. By not attempting to find and discipline those responsible for a blatantly insubordinate act aimed a pre-empting his decision-making prerogatives, President Obama, the constitutionally designated commander-in-chief, telegraphed pusillanimity to the proponents of escalation, and thus set the tone for subsequent events.

In the best of circumstances, building an effective military force from scratch takes a long time. History has shown repeatedly that, absent a well trained reserve force and a highly trained active duty officer and NCO corps, it is impossible to rapidly expand the active duty forces of any military organization without seriously degrading its recruiting and training standards. This is the case, even when one is expanding it from the base of a competent core force, which is certainly not the case in Afghanistan. Nevertheless, as I pointed out in September, MacChrystal’s plan was fatally flawed, because it contained no systematic evaluation outlining the strengths and weaknesses of the current state of the Afghan forces he wants to double in size over a very short period. In normal circumstances, such a failure of analysis would have been a sloppy, irresponsible omission.

In this particular case, the omission was made even more outrageous for at least two reasons: First, building a national army that puts loyalty to the state ahead of tribe, clan, and family in Afghanistan’s ancient clan based vendetta culture would be, in the most ideal of circumstances, a highly dubious proposition, because its goal would go against the traditional perquisites implicit in an ancient, highly-evolved culture. At the very least, this challenge ought to have been subjected to the closest anthropological and historical analysis. Second, conditions are hardly ideal. Indeed, it is common knowledge that the current Afghan security forces are already riven by corruption, the conflicted loyalties of warlordism, drug trafficking and murderous criminality, not to mention the central fact that Afghanistan’s Pashtun plurality, whose alienated hearts and minds are crucial to the success of any counterinsurgency strategy, is grossly underrepresented in the army and police forces.

In short, MacChrystal’s cavalier portrayal of the Afghan National Security Forces at the center of his plan ought to have been a show stopper. Moreover, the fact that it was leaked by a politically motivated military officer or a civilian powerbroker to increase pressure on the President for its approval ought have resulted visible discipline. But of course, the huge hole in MacChrystal’s plan was ignored and is now forgotten. No one was hung for crass insubordination. So, it should not be surprising that the Afghan War Question devolved into an evermore formless debate.

A recent AP report by Ben Feller and Anne Gearan introduces two interesting points that will add to the confusion: Rather than lowering the boom and acting as if it was controlling the events it should be controlling, the White is now retaliating by leaking like a sieve. Unnamed officials now tell us that Obama senses (correctly) that he is being railroaded and, in secret diplomatic cables, Ambassador Eikenbury recently injected his objections to the pervasive corruption infecting the government of Hamid Karzai. Obama, reportedly, is using Eikenbury’s objections as leverage to slow down deliberations and to justify his demand for a timetable laying out how long a continued US presence will be needed.

On the other hand, the report, in what is no doubt a trial balloon, says Obama is leaning toward a “compromise” position of authorizing an increase of 30,000 troops, including three Army brigades and an unspecified USMC contingent. Included in this “compromise” head count of 30,000, however, would be an authorization for the bloated overhead of a huge new headquarters housing 7,000 or more troops. Such a headquarters will no doubt necessitate a huge outlay in construction dollars to house it, a quantum increase in the thru-put of logistics pipelines, and a large increase in the number of field grade and general officers to man it. Therefore, this approval also implies an approval for an increase in the size of and vested interests in an open-ended commitment.

President Obama has been accused of dithering by delaying his decision to escalate, but his politically costly purchase of time is not serving to bring clarity to the debate. He has allowed the huge hole in MacChrystal’s incompetent plan to remain unaddressed, except perhaps obliquely by Ambassador Eikenbury, and to metastasize into a festering state of confusion. This confusion has opened the door to the displacement of rationality by emotion. Not surprisingly, given the growing tolerance for irrationality in Versailles on the Potomac, the war mongering proponents of immediate escalation are becoming increasingly hysterical.

If the mindless mutterings by the likes David Brooks (New York Times) and Michael Gerson (Washington Post) are representative, the proponents of escalation have now reduced themselves to emulating the irrational exhortations made by Adolf Hitler, from the depths of his Fuhrer Bunker cut off from reality, about victory being merely a question of willpower. This kind of lunatic ranting should not be surprising, because as my good friend Werther recently explained, the triumph of the will over the intellect is an example of the Right Wing’s historic preference for emotion over reason. This kind of ranting also sets the stage for a future stab in the back argument that blames Obama for losing what was in reality a collosal Bush screw up.

Of course, the histrionics of Brooks and Gerson do not come close to rivaling the emotive power of the torchlight Nuremberg parades immortalized by Leni Reifenstahl in her artistic classic, “The Triumph of the Will.” But the feebleness of their imitation makes it all the more pathetic when a man as intelligent as Barack Obama, a gifted speaker who has all the advantages of the bully pulpit together with the awesome status of commander-in-chief, lacks the moral courage to lift his nation out of their kind of darkness into light of reason.