Posts Tagged ‘war’

Weapons of Mass Destruction and Western Leaders’ Stupidity

Thursday, October 11th, 2012

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, unseating Muammar Gaddafi,was as stupid a thing as has been done in a generation. We are seeing the foolishness of this action, by the European and American governments, play out before our very eyes. Not that the present government of Libya is as diabolic as the government of Egypt, (that we also brought into power), but the precedent is so pernicious and the incentives it set up so negative, the future will be full of treatises about the folly of our leaders. This idiotic action will visit many evils on the people of the World. No person is safe from the ramifications of this singularly moronic action. You and yours, and me and mine, will experience tragedy first hand as a result.

The Islamist government in Libya was as predictable as spring after winter. To believe that there would be any other result was wishful thinking at best and intentionally damaging the West at worst. The people of Libya had lived under a tyrant for many years. This renders people incomprehensible to liberty. They become used to a despot and will be uncomfortable in liberty. Therefore, it is obvious that they will turn to the autocrat they believe will have the lightest hand, when given liberty to do so.

The outcome was predictable but the pernicious incentives the ouster of Muammar were equally certain. Muammar had publicly given up his weapons of mass destruction. The moment he did he drew the attention of every dictator on the planet. They watched his fortune as they did their own. His outcome would be theirs if they gave up their weapons of mass destruction. Despots are not stupid people. If they were, they would be quickly murdered, and replaced with intelligent tyrants. As soon as the Western powers turned on Muammar it sent a chill through the spines of every oppressor around the World. They understood that the only thing protecting them from the same fate as Muammar was, is, their weapons of mass destruction.

The Islamic regime in Iran watched events unfold in Libya with bated breath. The fate of their nuclear program was, is, intricately tied with Muammar’s destiny. They saw, and understood, as soon as they relinquish their nuke program, they would come under the same threat as Gaddafi. The massing of the western powers, against the single dictator who gave up his weapons of mass destruction, publicly and permanently, ensured that the Islamist regime in Iran would not make the same mistake. In short, Muammar’s ouster, insured the completion of Iran’s nuclear program.

Compare the horrible end of Muammar with the treatment of North Korea as soon as they tested a nuclear bomb. Kim Jong Il was as evil a dictator as Muammar ever was yet he had a nuke at his disposal. The Nuclear bomb he had, insured his fair treatment, and respect, at the hands of the West. Iran watched this side of the World too. They have the ability to comprehend the actions of the West and apply them to their own situation. Iran saw, as did every tyrant on the planet, that the West will do nothing to stop them from getting weapons of mass destruction. BUT, if they ever gave them up, a terrible end would await them as well. This is a strong incentive to speed up development of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons… or to start one.

As soon as Muammar gave up his weapons of mass destruction, a sane West, would have given him a get out of jail free card. He should have been held up, as a benevolent dictator, to other oppressors. The example of a tyrant giving up his weapons should have been a opportunity to pry these fearsome things from the hands of insane people. But instead, European leaders and Obama made the ultimate mistake, sending a different message to the despots around the World. In this, there is nothing they could have done that was more stupid, or more destructive of World peace.

Unless we believe them to be drooling idiots their actions are irreconcilable with common sense. Their protection of Al Queda and ouster of Muammar has made the World an exponentially more dangerous place, and indeed, has set up the conditions for a new world war. They have insured that despots the World over will seek nuclear weapons, at all costs, making the world war they apparently want, a nuclear affair. Raining down radioactive evil on every person on the Planet… and it all could have been avoided, had our leaders not been so imprudent. Well, as I have said before, the dross floats to the top. In the case of Europe and America this couldn’t have been more true!

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in International Power, media, Mercy, philosophy | No Comments »

Clausewitz on War… My Take.

Sunday, August 7th, 2011

Dear Friends,

It seems to me the opening page of Von Clausewitz book- War, Politics and Power, he states a maxim that has applications not only to war but to many other areas of politics. The quote is; “War is thus an act to compel our adversary to do our will… The use of force is theoretically without limits. Philanthropic souls may imagine that there is a way to disarm or overthrow our adversary without much bloodshed, and that this is what the art of war should seek to achieve. Agreeable as this may sound, this is a false idea which must be demolished. As the greatest use of force does not exclude the cooperation of intelligence, the ruthless user of force who shrinks from no amount of bloodshed must gain an advantage if his opponent does not do the same. Thus each drives the other to extremes which are limited only by the adversary’s strength of resistance.” The quote says more than it at first appears. But, since war seems to be coming, from many anti capitalist factions around the World, it is wise to examine some of them.

The more one side limits it’s scope of actions the more advantage it gives the adversary. The historical example is the Vietnam conflict. In Vietnam the US limited it’s scope of action in some cases not equipping the US forces with ammunition until they were fired upon. The generals making the judgment that violating some self imposed philanthropic regulation had greater import than the life of a human being, someone woke up in the middle of the night to breast feed, cleaned up his skinned knees and wiped up vomit from his first time drinking. No, that human life had less gravity, than a self imposed philanthropic regulation.

When engaged in an existential war, philanthropy should be given it’s due, but philanthropy, or civilization, is not a suicide pact. Lets take another historical example, that of WWII. If the allies had not used every weapon at hand, for philanthropic reasons, the World would have been plunged into a dark age of tyranny, warfare and socialism. The standard of living of the entire World would be much lower than it is today… with all the implications for famine and pestilence. If self imposed philanthropy results in the destruction of civilization and philanthropy’s elimination from the marketplace of ideas, then there will be no more philanthropy and no more civilization.

An adversary’s strength of resistance should be taken into account before the scope of action required can be logically contemplated. When attacked by an adversary, we must look at what level of discomfort he must be placed in, to get his capitulation. Once we have ascertained this, we can then consider the scope of action required to achieve the needed result. To begin action without taking these things into regard is largely why the US always needs to “escalate” some conflict or another. Escalating a conflict is what Stalin liked to do, feed the flames of the battle. The tinder for the flames of battle, are people, of course.

These maxims have their analogies in the political arena as well. When one political side limits it’s scope of rhetoric, but the other does not, the side that puts no limit has an advantage. Take political ad homonym attacks. We see the anti capitalists call the pro capitalists, terrorists, hostage takers, bombers of the economy, and every other vitriolic name imaginable to ensure the anti capitalists don’t have to engage in any real debate. The pro capitalists however call the anti capitalists, our friends on the other side of the aisle. Whenever the policies of the anti capitalist faction are called anti capitalist, (as they are in actuality), the speaker is vilified and such vitriol is heaped on him or her the term politics of personal destruction are made manifest.

Karl Von Clausewitz went on to reveal many more gems of wisdom in his book. It is a bit heavy the first read but it comes more clear as one ponders the text. We can learn a great deal from those that came many years before us. Their wisdom and knowledge of the nature of humanity and our foibles, I believe, were greater than our own. They lived closer to nature and in a world that produced the worst and best in humanity every day. It is best not to forget what they have set down for us lest we be forced to relearn the lessons…

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Group Politics, International Power, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, Societal Myth | No Comments »

On Somalian Famine

Thursday, July 21st, 2011

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, if the Romans had fed, clothed and housed the civilian population of Carthage, history would not have been written in Latin and we might be worshipping Baal. Had the Allies fed, clothed and provided medical care to the German people during WWI or WWII then we would probably be speaking German. It is patent folly and moreover stupidity to provide logistical support to an enemy in wartime. The side that engages in providing logistical support for the enemy’s civilian population may be more civilized, on some level, but is it really civilized to facilitate barbarians wiping out civilization? I, for one, like civilization!

To be human hearted is noble and civilized. We all seek human heartedness in our lives and the good among us seek to bless society with human heartedness. To have empathy for the suffering of others is the table facet of human heartedness. The suffering of people, is the worldly manifestation of evil, and so it is unconscionable. We should all seek to lower the level of suffering in the World. It is in our personal interest to do so even when that suffering seems far away.

Lets say you have a full water skein. You notice it has a leak. Does it make sense to put your hand in and plug the leak? No, your hand will displace far more water than the small leak will loose in an hour. With dubious results of actually fixing the leak. We can safely say that the repair will do more harm than the problem. If we can adhere some material to the outside, temporarily, we can use the skein until it is empty then we can repair it properly.

The same is true of human suffering. It doesn’t make sense to magnify suffering, to diminish it, especially when it creates much more misery then the original problem would have. The intervention in Libya is an example. Had the war ended months ago, (as it would have), the suffering would be over and the people would be rebuilding. But the intervention, to fix a problem of suffering, has led to far more suffering, now the Elite must save face, so the war goes on…

Lets examine the misery in Somalia today. The war and a drought have led to… hard to believe… a famine. Apparently, a state of perpetual warfare and a people who rely on a mix of subsistence farming and international handouts, is not a path to prosperity. The International community is sending aid. Mostly Britain and the US. But the war with the radical Islamic movement, Al Shabab, is hampering efforts to feed clothe and provide medical assistance to the civilians under the control of Al Shabab.

Meanwhile people are starving who are not within the sphere of influence of Al Shabab. Why not simply feed the people who do not support Al Shabab? Why is it so important to provide logistical support for the radical Islamist movement trying to conquer the country and instill Sharia? Why not defeat them first then feed the people who emerge. To provide medical supplies, food, and other essentials, to the civilians under a tyrannical military is not feeding the people, it is feeding their tormentors. The supplies will never get to the people and if some does it will be seized and sent to the fighters extra will be sold to provide ammo and guns.

The food sent to Al Shabab will also be a terrific recruitment tool for them. Join and you will be fed. Not hard to comprehend. No way that could be a bad thing huh? Until the war is over and the country has a functional State, that can protect the property of the people, there will be no end to the famines. Providing logistical support to the civilians within the sphere of influence of Al Shabab will only lead to more war, famine and suffering and perhaps, Al Shabab’s victory. Doesn’t it make sense to provide support for the free people of Somalia and eschew supporting Al Shabab?

In the longer term the answer to permanently ending the cyclic famine in Somalia, is to defeat Al Shabab and establish a stable government. Then keep regulation low, taxes low, and keep a tight grip on public servants and government with a NUMA. If this is done the economy of Somalia will grow rapidly. Industrializing Somalia will break the cycle of famine there forever. What could be more human hearted than that?

When a country or ideology is engaged in an existential war then that ideology or country must engage in war. This is simply the framework of reality we have to work within. Civilized suicide is a sin. The loss of civilization to barbarism compounds the vice and is no virtue no matter the intentions. Clausewitz would be indignant at the notion of providing logistical support to the enemy population during wartime. Hsun Tzu would be clicking his tongue like a school marm at a rascally student…

By the way, “Death to Carthage!”

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in economy, Group Politics, Mercy, philosophy | No Comments »

Falkland Islands

Thursday, June 9th, 2011

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that everyone on the planet should be concerned, by the Obama administration’s backing of anti capitalist regimes in South America, undermining the Right of Self Determination in the Falkland Islands. Isn’t the Right of Self Determination the basis of Democracy? I thought these people, (the Obama administration), were blindly democratic but apparently only when it leads to famine, violence and bloodshed, but when undermining Self Determination leads to violence, famine and bloodshed they take that position. Two positions counter to each other… This leads me to conclude that the Obama administration likes, and wants, violence, famine and bloodshed in the World. This being the common thread.

The people of the Falkland Islands consider themselves to be British. They want to remain British citizens and they have representation in Parliament. But the Argentine government wants the land because in 1882 they landed a raiding party. Britain has exercised sovereignty over them since 1883.

Here is an excerpt from Wikipedia, a very leftist, biased organization that skews truth subtly and sometimes not so subtly, knowing it’s extreme bias, Wikipedia shows the attitude of the communist government’s, (and the attitude of any government that sides with Argentina), to the people that inhabit the Falklands, (and therefore you and I);

“Contemporary Falkland Islanders consider themselves to be British. They gained full British citizenship with the British Nationality (Falkland Islands) Act 1983, after the Falklands War. Argentina argues that the islanders do not have the right to self-determination, arguing that they are not aboriginal and were brought to replace the Argentine population that Argentina claims was expelled after the re-establishment of British rule in 1833.[2] The United Nations have called on both countries to begin dialogue over the sovereignty claim.”

So it appears, (reading between the lines), that the Argentine government is not interested in the people’s interest that live there and would rather the population of the Falkland Islands  emigrated, or in other words, ethnically cleanse the Falklands. I suppose this is acceptable since the people in question are British subjects…

Obviously Britain cannot abide such foolishness and neither should any civilized country. Not only abide, but condone, is what the US government is doing however. Yes the communist countries of South America all signed on to a pact, urging Britain to negotiate the ethnic cleansing of it’s citizens, and yes the Obama administration also signed on to this pact negating US and British common law regarding Self Determination, and yes there are some corrupt oligarchal capitalist countries in South America that agree that people are subjects and not citizens… but are these the human hearted people and goals we should be following?

In Libya the US is bombing people to protect their Right of Self Determination. In Afghanistan the US is bleeding it’s youth to protect the Afghan people’s right of Self Determination and in Iraq the ground has been fertilized with the blood of Men and Women who died and were maimed, to grow the Right of Self Determination for the people of Iraq, (but this was done by a prior administration).

The Obama administration has stabbed many allies in the back, (I predict Hosni will die at the gallows), and brought a faction to power in Egypt that has, as it’s central goal, the extinction of a race of human beings. It has delivered Yemen into those same hands and is in the process of delivering Libya into those same filthy hands. All in the name of democracy (self determination)?

It seems, that is what this administration does best, stab friends in the back and sow the seed of violence and war. Poland is another example of a friend scratching at a blade left in his back. Poland and several of our European allies, had the promised missile shield unilaterally taken away by Obama, to appease Russia and Putin. In return Russia has accelerated it’s help with Iran’s nuclear program and Iran will be producing nuclear bombs in 2 months.

Even the media have discovered evidence Iran is making nuclear bombs and modifying it‘s missiles to receive them. Yet when the uprisings appeared in Iran… Obama was silent. Silent of an uprising that could overthrow a suicidally apocalyptic regime soon to be equipped with nuclear bombs while stabbing allies in the back at the same time. Again it makes me conclude The Obama administration is not working to promote peace only sow and tenderly care for the seeds of war.

The only philosopher, (I know of), to say “the way to the over-man is under.” is Nietzsche. It always gives me the shivers reading him. I feel as if I am reading something Lucifer himself might have posited…

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in economy, Group Politics, International Power, Law, media, philosophy | No Comments »