Tag Archives: Iran

The Strategic Advantage in Fighting on Only One Front

Posted by

0

“It is a concern to me, it’s a concern to any veteran, anybody in the military,” Hagel said during his first appearance on Capitol Hill since being confirmed as defense secretary.

I think it is significant that this is the only news I found coming out of Fox News, but maybe I just didn’t look hard enough. I guess Fox couldn’t find anything more important coming out of the House Armed Service’s committee than this one issue, who deserves a medal more, those with or without “skin” in battle.

Taking medals away from someone that actually might have earned them is not something I imagine Fox wants to be behind of. Fox better hope Hagel doesn’t come to the conclusion that someone fighting in a Nintendo environment needs to be reward with this medal, as someone in the Service that Hagel talks about in this quote did. If they do deserve it, then Fox should ask why.

As it is, anyone getting the “Nintendo Medal” with Hagel as the top administrator will deserve it. Fox should figure out why he/she would deserve such a medal, before they get on the wrong side of  the strategy behind the giving out of this medal.

But then Fox is owned by someone that wasn’t, if I understand correctly, born or raised  as a North America. Apparently their owner wants America to follow the Rightwing Conservative principles of another nation, in another hemisphere.

The nation he was or still is a citizen of has gone from calling China a totalitarian nation to aggressor nation, and now an assertive nation. It kinda makes me wonder what the Fox’s owner thinks of his own nation, as their Conservative principles change.

It doesn’t appear that China has changed all that much, at least in structure. The Right is a structure, not a culture, and China doesn’t appear to be changing its structure anytime soon.

It also appears that China’s culture is going to need more time for change. China is a very complex culture in which change doesn’t culturally seem to happen, unless there is a revolution. China’s structure is geared towards stopping revolutions.

But then, Fox’s owner is not a North American. He is Australia by culture, so what would he know about strategy anyway?

I think North American people’s advantage has always been that they think more strategic. After reading “Empire of the Summer Moon, I think strategy has always been the North’s advantage, as it presents itself to the world historically.

To that end, I never really understood the significance of Lincoln’s strategy, of using people from both sides of the aisle to fill some of the executive positions within his administration. That was until I watched this hearing on CSPAN yesterday.

The strategy that Lincoln used has the advantage of using an executive, such as Hagle, from the opposition  positioned as a handle to a lever that pushes against the force of the opposition and the POTUS forces as well. Kinda of a twofer.

In the House yesterday, Hagel not only tore into the Republican Chairman of the House Armed Service Committee, who wanted Hagle to take something like a 100 billion more dollars, but Hagle also tore into the smug Democrat who thought Hagel was a force pushing Democratic issues as well. The Republicans and Democrats both got their asses kicked.

In politics, the enemy isn’t in front of the POTUS, but positions themselves behind the leader. The people infront represent an image of change, as the image of Hagel in front of the POTUS.

Lincoln’s strategy handles those behind the POTUS (today they are called Democrats) as well as those in front of the POTUS (today they are called Republicans). Hagel with Dempsey at his side, tore up the House yesterday and made mincemeat out of all who were in front of him.

I would like to see him do the same in the Senate.

Really? The Republicans want to come out on the side of spending more money at the expense of our civilian society, while at the same time the Democrats want to come out on the side that says spending cut aren’t hurting our military, as our civil society takes a pass on having to make any sacrifices?

All Hagel and Dempsey are asking for is time to reposition our forces. I mean everyone realizes that Iran is in Asia, right?

When falling back to a defencive position, as our resources go bye-bye, there is some advantage to be had in having to defend only one front, and that front should be “pivoting” across the Pacific.

The Pacific is the position our debt is centered in. This center can be called a pivot point. While Boehner has come out in favor of paying our debt, I am not sure the Red States agree with him.

I mean, if they really want to secede from the US, aren’t they independent of the debt? If the Red States what to take advantage of our nukes and not pay back our debt, who’s to stop them, Obama?

Oh, right! If they did secede it wouldn’t be their decision, but that ain’t going to happen now, is it.

via Hagel Decision on ‘Nintendo Medal’ Expected Next Week – Fox News.

Enduring Values

Posted by

0

I believe those were the words the guy in charge of Obama’s legacy used to describe the US military’s pivot towards, or what is now called, the “Indo-Pacific”.

The words used to describe the pivot was changed from “Asia-Pacific” to “Indo-Pacific”. The words were changed to highlight the most important partner in the area included in the pivot.

I believe the guy in charged used “enduring values” (if that was the correct quote) in his conversation about the  ”pivot”,  because a “pivot” with “enduring values” in its narrative has no change in momentum nor values.

The US military representing the values of the U.S.A isn’t turning towards the Pacific, because it never really left. All the US military needs to know is whose with them in this pivot.

In other words, in order for the US to pivot towards the Pacific, we don’t have to fight the momentum of changing values to get there. Our values are in the pivot, and they are highlighted in India.

So I guess the guy was basically saying “stuff it”, we are pivoting towards an area of the globe in which our values are the same as India’s and everyone else within the area of the Indo-Pacific Pivot.

For a nation such as the US, who are supposed to be sons of Abraham,  this is quite a big deal. For an area that owns most of our debt, it is a reassurance of the repaying of that debt.

I think this repaying of debt is going to surprize a bunch of people in the US, who thought nukes countered debt (rock over paper).

North Korea first.

.

Boehner memo hails GOP ‘tactical plan’ against Obama as success

Posted by

2

He also complimented Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s (R-Va.) “make life work” initiative, which is meant to showcase GOP ideas that will help working families.

But tactics are only successful if there is some kind of strategy behind them.

Strategy bridges the past and future by having a clear picture at both ends. Tactics, for any movement like the Republican Party, only works if there is a clear picture of where it has been and where it is going. Strategy supplies that picture, which tactics can’t. Tactics are short-term, so it is almost all past and no future.

If there is strategy behind the tactics that Boehner calls a success, then success depends on whose strategy the tactics are following. Is it the Republican strategy or Obama’s?

I think Boehner would have said so, if he thought the Republicans were following some kind of a winning strategy.

While the tactics Boehner underlines are successful, they might represent a losing strategy for the party that has labeled itself the “values” party.

Is it really family “values” to have a bill named “make life work”, on the floor of Congress? The title, if not the bill, seems to give more to Caesar than called for in a party claiming “family values”.

I mean the bill could be about how individuals should stop whining and pull themselves up by their boot straps and go to work. You know, make life work idiot!

Which is what a father would tell the young in the family.

But as The Daily Show said last night, can they do that with a warm smile?

In other words, does the Republican message come across as the rich telling the poor to “suck it up” (if that is even what the bill is about, because I don’t know the bill), or do they give it a human-type emotion.

So if these are not successful tactics for the Republicans are they successful for Obama?

Is it possible that these successful tactics of Boehner’s could be a part of Obama’s strategy to have the Republican name itself as a party in which work is your life, instead of highlighting what comes after work the family.

If this is Obama’s strategy, for the Republicans to name themselves the party of work instead of family, then perhaps Boehner is correct, they are successful tactics.

If this is the case, and the Republican Party is following the strategy of Obama, then I am not sure that the tactics of the Republican Party will be successful, for the Republican Party.

On the other hand, when I was young I thought that I didn’t want work to define me, but now as I grow old I am less sure. To me success now depends on how the society is structured, and how the culture fits that structure.

It is more obvious than ever to me that the U.S.A. is structured as the Right.

If the structure of your country matches the culture holding it up, then to me that means you have a successful country, a country successful in its past and future.

The Right, as a structure has a large normalizing force that controls the friction inside a society, and that normalizing force in America is becoming more corporate each year. I am beginning to believe that the culture in the USA is also beginning to match its structure.

I think there is a large push-back, but each year it gets harder for those wanting the U.S.A. to have a winning structure, either more as the Left or for God to be that normalizing force instead of Caesar.

Those with the losing strategy seems to be those pushing push against corporations (replacing God as the normalizing force) and those of the Right (replacing those on the Left without a normalizing force).

But then the Republican Party doesn’t apologize for being the party of Caesar or on the Right.

And there is no reason they should apologize  given BushII’s failed Crusade into the Middle East and the win by Obama as the structural leader, ha!

I remember watching a video out of Iraq which showed a US military commander in charge on the ground in Iraq rallying his troops with the slogan, “We are doing God’s work”.

I am sure the Persians said the same thing to the Greeks, as the Persians removed the Jews from Israel. Oh wait! That is exactly what they didn’t say.

It is what we said to the Chinese as the corporate Right removed Saddam from Iraq, and the Islamic Left replaced him.

Thanks Bush :)

Some kinda strategy, huh????

via Boehner memo hails GOP ‘tactical plan’ against Obama as success – The Hill’s On The Money.

Palestinian Statehood Vote: Palestinians Certain To Win U.N. Recognition As A State

Posted by

0

For Abbas, the U.N. bid is crucial if he wants to maintain his leadership and relevance, especially following the recent conflict between his Hamas rivals in Gaza and Israel. The conflict saw the Islamic militant group claim victory and raise its standing in the Arab world, while Abbas’ Fatah movement was sidelined and marginalized.

My! My! Nixon goes to China?

Is the labor market so cheap that you just can’t help yourself, or is the price of the land just now getting too high?

The Palestinians turned to the General Assembly after the United States announced it would veto their bid last fall for full U.N. membership until there is a peace deal with Israel.

That must have been some kind of a peace deal! It is funny that something like a pivot can be so powerful.

The structure of a pivot is probably so powerful because a pivot with pressure against it is a description of energy (the only question I answered in the tournament held after I finished with engineering school, and it was the only question nobody else could answer).

All energy has an equal force pushing in the other direction, unless it’s moving. And the moment of inertia (now) is in units of foot to the fourth power(F4), but it is still turning.

via Palestinian Statehood Vote: Palestinians Certain To Win U.N. Recognition As A State.

A Pause for Negotiations in the Israeli-Hamas Conflict

Posted by

0

If no one seems to want to serve as mediator, it is because there is such little room for negotiation. It is not ideology but strategy that locks each side into place.

And what is that strategy?

One of Hamas’ main goals in this current round of fighting is to retain enough Fajr-5 rockets to allow it to threaten the Israeli heartland, the Tel Aviv-Jerusalem corridor. If they succeed, Hamas will have gained a significant lever in its relations with the Israelis.

So at least one half of the strategy that locks each side into place is Hamas’s want of a lever to use against Israel. And to obtain that lever Hamas has used Gaza to created another “Cuban missile crises” that threatens war between Israel and Hamas?

Hamas has used its economy, much like Russia did in Cuba, to plant missiles that can reach deep into Israeli territory, and now believes Israel will let these missiles stay, because war will be too costly for Israel to accomplish its strategy of obtaining a missile-free zone around its nation state.

On the bright side, finally something is happening in the Middle East that Americans can understand, it’s a Cuban Missile Crisis. Gaza is Cuba and Hamas (although a local body) is Cuba’s “enabler” Russia.

The problem (and there are many) for anyone comparing that which is happening in Gaza today and what happened in Cuba during the Cuban missile crisis is understanding what economy Hamas is working from. The strategy is basically the same, but the economies that the strategy is based on are different.

The Cuban missile crisis was resolved when the economy (and everything else) of Russia was threatened with extinction and Israel has done all it can to extinguish Hamas’s economy time and time again. And while the missiles being installed in Gaza don’t represent as great a monetary value as those Russia installed in Cuba, Hamas still needs some kind of an economy to be able to purchase these missiles.

It seems, as Israel destroys Hamas’s economy, Hamas was able to use an outside economy to install its missiles in Gaza. Given Israel’s control over Gaza’s economy, Hamas was either able to build these missile installation using Israeli money or an outside economy actually built those missile installations.

So Israel basically has three choices. It can build another wall around Israel using the Iron Dome and isolate Israel even more, continue a destroy/build scenario with Hamas and let the conditions evolve, or it can go after the economy that installed the missiles in Gaza even if that means its own economy.

The problem with the third option is that it looks more and more like WWIII, “Chief Rabbi Sacks: “I think it’s Got to Do with Iran”“.

In other words, after a civil war, which started in Iraq, picked up by the Arab Spring, and continues into Syria; the economies of those fighting the civil war merge, like it did in North America.

Israel’s attack on Gaza could be an attack on this new economy that is emerging out of the fighting, and I am sure the world is very interested in this new economy.

As Iran has been helping the fighters on both sides of the civil war, Iran is probably just as much involved (or evolved) in this new civil war economy as anyone, including Egypt.

via A Pause for Negotiations in the Israeli-Hamas Conflict | Stratfor.

Turkey eyes Iraq as it banks on exports

Posted by

0

It comes despite tensions with Iraq, whose prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, has declared Turkey a « hostile state », and with Iran, to which Ankara has this year sold billions of dollars worth of gold, but which is on the opposing side to Turkey in the Syria conflict.

Ah yes. Export to Iraq continue to happen despite tensions. I think most of the world (not sure Financial Times is the best place for world views) understands that Turkey’s exports to and imports from “Iraq” are the tensions between Turkey and Iraq, at least economically.

Much of my analysis of the world depends on my theory of war. I believe all war is about economic considerations, and fought by people with little economic considerations. For war to break-out between Turkey, Iraq, and eventually Iran someone has to get the guys with little economic considerations to start fighting. In the Middle East there doesn’t seem to be a shortage of those willing to fight, especially for “no” economic considerations.

I don’t think Financial Times wants to hear about that one, so they are bias away from truth, but are at least fact based when they analyze how an economy like Turkey’s distributes itself in the world.

In other words they fudge when they use Nouri al-Maliki’s name in their article, but use the data of imports and exports to make it seem like it is all tied together.

The reason this story has no ties to truth: Turkey isn’t really dealing with Iraq, only a small Kurdish part of it. This Kurdish part is both Sunni and Shia, and because of their ties, the Kurds become the “middleman” between Turkey and Iraq.

Financial Times should stick with the story that Iraq is still not one State, even after years of civil war, and name the people Turkey is actually dealing with, leaving out Nouri al Maliki’s.

Or the Financial Times should create another story that says Nouri al-Maliki is in control of his country, and mentioned his name in this article, in context as the person Turkey is dealing with.

I mean, the Financial Times’s article is the first story, but to me the way it is written makes the article seem like the second story.

The Financial Times’s article is truthful enough, but if a choke point develops in “Kurdistan” for the products Turkey imports into and exports from Iraq (and eventually into Iran, Syria), I wonder how much incentive Turkey will have in a few generation to “un-choke” it.

If a choke point develops  I think there would be enough people, with little economic consideration, to fight.

And fight they will, if they are not given economic considerations.

At the time of choke points, I doubt Europe will look anymore tempting to Turkey, generations from now, as exports from Iraq is mostly in the form of oil, and the “choke-point” will affect Europe, Asia, as well as Turkey.

via Turkey eyes Iraq as it banks on exports « ACTURCA.

Iran Said Ready to Talk to U.S. About Nuclear Program

Posted by

0

The United States and Iran have agreed for the first time to one-on-one negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, according to Obama administration officials, setting the stage for what could be a last-ditch diplomatic effort to avert a military strike on Iran.

Probably too little, too late.

“It has the potential to help Mr. Obama make the case that he is nearing a diplomatic breakthrough in the decade-long effort by the world’s major powers to curb Tehran’s nuclear ambitions, but it could pose a risk if Iran is seen as using the prospect of the direct talks to buy time.“

That said, there is probably not much time to buy.

via Iran Said Ready to Talk to U.S. About Nuclear Program – NYTimes.com.

U.S. May Not Be Able to Stop Syria From Using Chemical Weapons

Posted by

0

And there is little appetite in the U.S. military for taking on that challenge. Globalsecurity.org estimates Syria possesses “hundreds of liters” of Sarin, mustard gas and VX. The Pentagon estimates that 75,000 troops would be required to secure the chemical stockpiles, a force nearly the size of the one the U.S. fields in Afghanistan.

via U.S. May Not Be Able to Stop Syria From Using Chemical Weapons | Danger Room | Wired.com.

I wonder what Turkey’s appetite is like? While telling the Syrians that the “Turks” are coming, would be rather like telling the Russians that the Mongols were on the march, they would first shit themselves then laugh about shitting one self.

I mean, considering who’s marching, I am thinking Assad may be the least of Turkey’s worries.

I am not sure, even with China’s help, that Turkey’s appetite is as big as that. Gnawing into a front consisting of, at the very least, both Arabs and Persians?

K.I.S.S. (K.O.S.S.)

Posted by

1

…while President Obama’s staff prefer to emphasize to the administration’s many successes in counterterrorism operations instead of the accumulation of serious issues faced by the Department of Defense, the armed services and America’s returning veterans.

via The Coming National Defense Crack-Up – Independent Voter Network.

Yes, there is a “Coming national defense crack-up” coming, but that doesn’t mean that our national defense doesn’t have a strategy in the Global War On Terror.

The strategy is two prong.

The first prong skewers the process of “Act” that keeps the Islamist who perpetrated 9/11 from Orienting themselves, from a position of advantage. This simply means we have to  ”stir” the hive to keep a plan, like that which happened on 9/11, from happening.

The second prong is one that accumulates an “Orientation” of rule-sets, which brought about an end to the Crusades. It was an Orientation of accommodation.

These condition of accommodation required the nation-state of interest to become “Islamic” instead of Christian. The Crusades ended as Jerusalem became Islamic, and the God fearing Christians existed with the Muslims.

As the US is the greatest bearer of the power of Christianity, next to the Vatican, the second prong requires the US to turn-over nations, who are under the BushII “Crusade”, to Islam, which is what happen in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the nation-states most affected by the Arab Spring. The Arab Spring was a civil war, but the outcome has been mostly to the advantage of the Islamist.

So, if there needs to be a debate in America, I suggest we debate the thought that we are  ”turning” the US military power in the South Pacific. I don’t think it is happening, we are simply creating a line in the sand.

My thought is that there hasn’t been a turning of the power of the USA towards the Pacific. The real strategy has been that the USA has formed two fronts–one that crosses Australia and the other front that crosses Jerusalem.

Jerusalem marks the line, that America will not cross, in regards to Islam and the Middle East, as much as Australia marks the line that America will not cross in the South Pacific, and China.

To bring the war in the Middle East, fought by the nation of the Great Experiment, to a conclusion, we need to keep our strategy simple folks.

The Coming National Defense Crack-Up

Posted by

0

…while President Obama’s staff prefer to emphasize to the administration’s many successes in counterterrorism operations instead of the accumulation of serious issues faced by the Department of Defense, the armed services and America’s returning veterans.

via The Coming National Defense Crack-Up – Independent Voter Network.

Yes, there is a “Coming national defense crack-up” coming, but that doesn’t mean that our national defense doesn’t have a strategy in the Global War On Terror.

The strategy is two prong.

The first prong skewers the process of “Act” that keeps the Islamist who perpetrated 9/11 from Orienting themselves, from a position of advantage. This simply means we  ”stir” the hive to keep a plan, like that which happened on 9/11, from happening.

The second prong is one that accumulates an “Orientation” like that created to take advantage of the conditions, which enabled the Crusades to end, an Orientation of accommodation.

These condition of accommodation required the nation-state of interest to become “Islamic” instead of Christian. The Crusades ended as Jerusalem became Islamic, and the God fearing Christians existed with the Muslims.

As the US is the greatest bearer of the power of Christianity, next to the Vatican, the second prong requires the US to turn-over nations, who are under the BushII “Crusade”, to Islam, which is happening.

So, if there needs to be a debate, I suggest we debate the thought that we are  ”turning” of the US military power in the South Pacific.

There hasn’t really been a turning of the power of the USA towards the Pacific. The USA has formed two fronts–one that crosses Australia and the other that crosses Jerusalem.

Jerusalem marks the line, that America will not cross, in regards to Islam and the Middle East, as much as Australia marks the line that America will not cross in the South Pacific, and China.

To bring this war, fought by the nation of the Great Experiment to a conclusion, we need to keep this simple folks.