Weekend Reading; see how the world changed last week

Contents

I.  “The Trillion-Dollar War“, Reason (May 2008) – “The War on Terror is now more expensive than Vietnam or World War I—but the dishonest way Washington is paying for it may prove costliest of all.”

II.  “The Uneven Playing Field“, New York Times Magazine  (11 May 2008) – An illustration of the militarization of our culture.  Warriors without a war.

III.  ”My ‘Racial Harassment’ Nightmare“, New York Post ( 9 May 2008) — Freedom slips away quietly, in incidents like this.

IV.  ”‘Deafening’ silence on analyst story“, Politico (8 may 208) — Pity those of our fellow-citizens who rely on the major TV networks for their news, as they learn all the news that is “fit to see.”  We are forutnate to have so many information media; this is an important bulwark of our freedom.

V.  ”Taking the War to the Mexican State, 4GW Style“, Zenpundit  (9 May 2008) — Excellent analysis of ominous trends in our southern neighbor.

VI.  “Taking stock of the dollar’s global role“, Brad Setser, RGE Monitor  (11 May 2008) — The role of the US dollar is imo one of the central geopolitical questions of our time, like the fate of the Austro-Hungarian Empire was before WWI. 

VI.  “The de facto nationalization of the global financial system“, Brad Setser  (8 May 2008) — Wave bye-bye to the global free market system.  This is imo one of the great under-covered stories of the decade.

The articles and excerpts

America takes another step towards the “Long War”

Summary:  This report is just a sketch, some thoughts that hopefully spark discussion about America’s rush to war. It proposes the following:

1. There is as yet insufficient evidence that America is threatened sufficiently to justify the large-scale mobilization of citizens that we call “war.”
2. There is insufficient public evidence that al Qaeda or Islamic jihadists are so serious a threat.
3. The war was begun in Iraq and Afghanistan with inadequate analysis and planning, and those errors continue to this day.
4. Even if this threat is of sufficient magnitude, war is not necessarily the solution.
5. To the extent that force is required, at present we are not equipped to employ it in the manner needed. A scimitar makes a fine weapon, but a poor scalpel.

Introduction

Indeed, the safest road to Hell is the gradual one - the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts.
The Screwtape Letters, C. S. Lewis, Chapter 12 (1959)

The flood of information and commentary available today can obscure events of the greatest significance. We see that today, as America takes another step towards the long war. Without thought or reflection, without debate by our elected officials, without our consent. In many ways just like the Cold War.

If the US starts a new long war, it is our war - for good or ill. Congress and the President are our agents no matter how they conduct our affairs. As bin Laden reminds us, following our leaders does not relieve us of responsibility.  Wars put all that we that we have, all that we are, on the table to be won or lost. Before we enlist ourselves and our children in a new war, let’s think. Is the wager worthwhile? Are the odds in our favor? Are there alternatives other than war?

In the past we have neglected these questions to our sorrow.

Repeating history

US entered the Cold War with the sending of the “Long Telegram” in February 1946 by George F. Kennan, the State Department’s Minister-Counselor at the Moscow Embassy. In this and later works he presented evidence that the Soviet Union considered itself an enemy of the US, and that our best response was a long-term policy of containment (largely economic in nature).  The American people learned of their government’s decision to confront the USSR only in July 1947, when Kennan pseudonymous published “The Sources of Soviet Conduct” in Foreign Affairs.

Similarly, today the US government may have enlisted America in to another long war. Cited here are a variety of official documents, but this paper focuses on a recent work by David J. Kilcullen. Officer in the Australian Army, anthropologist, top expert in counter-insurgency. (See the appendix for a brief biography.)

{ more }

Quotes of the day, helping us better see our world

Contents

I.  See the seeds of inflation sprout and grow!

II.  Blood libel of the week

III.  A statement by General Petaeus  of the seldom said but blindingly obvious about occupying foreign nations

The quotes and links

I.  See the seeds of inflation sprout and grow!

Another step towards war with Iran?

Summary:  The Bush Administration has authorized covert offensives against Iran, taking another step towards war.  Or so we are told.  Again.  The Bush Administration and US military officers have long waged a campaign of words against Iran, firing salvos of heated rhetoric.  But the Left has done its part to fan fears with waves of rumors during the past 3 years about covert ops, cut cables as a prelude to war, and annoucements that routine movements of carriers and expeditionary forces signal that the dogs of war have been unleashed. 

The most recent “hot” news is “Secret Bush “Finding” Widens War on Iran“, Andrew Cockburn, Counterpunch (2 May 2008) — “Democrats Okay Funds for Covert Ops”   Opening:

Six weeks ago, President Bush signed a secret finding authorizing a covert offensive against the Iranian regime that, according to those familiar with its contents, “unprecedented in its scope.”

Fabius Maximus, reference librarian

On the right menu bar the top section is ”Information you might find of interest.” This contains some reference libararies. Just to name a few: Links to the declassificed National Intelligence Estimates, Reports about the Amry’s greatest threat, and archives of online articles by important writers about modern warfare.

This last page provides links to archives of links to online works of major players in modern military theory and practice. Needless to say, this is a work in progress, as there are so many excellent people in these fields

The Essential 4GW reading list: Martin van Creveld — the Clausewitz of our time. Links to 25 of his online articles — from serious essays to newspaper op-eds.

The Essential 4GW reading list: Donald Vandergriff — perhaps the west’s most significant COIN theorist. Links to 35 articles by or about Kilcullen, 2 backgrounders to his work, and 7 mainstream media articles about him

The Essential 4GW reading list: David Kilcullen — one of our few people working on effective solutions to 4GW — solutions of the third kind. Links to 15 of his online articles.

Please comment on any articles missing from the list; or email me at fabmaximus at hotmail dot com {this is the spam-protected form of the address, to fool bots}.

Fusion energy, too risky a bet for America (we prefer to rely on war)

Summary:  The polywell is one of the most promising of fusion technologies.  This post describes its history and potential.  But the significant lesson from this is America’s irrational policy for investing in its future.

The Polywell has come up in the comments several times, so perhaps deserves an update.  The polywell is the last work of that giant in the world of physics, Robert W. Bussard (who passed over in October 2007). This is the Polywell.

The Polywell, excerpt from the Wikipedia entry:

The Polywell is a plasma confinement concept that combines elements of inertial electrostatic confinement and magnetic confinement fusion, intended ultimately to produce fusion power. The geometry is a polyhedral configuration of electromagnets, within which the magnetic fields confine a cloud of electrons. The “quasi-spherical” negative electric potential well created by the electrons is in turn used to accelerate and confine ions, which will then undergo nuclear fusion. It was developed by Robert Bussardunder a US Navy research contract as an improvement of the Farnsworth-Hirsch fusor.

Some interesting reading for your weekend

Contents

1. “John McCain’s “100 Years” — putting the controversy to rest“, Moira Whelan, posted at Democracy Arsenal (30 April 2008) –  This gives McCain’s actual words on the war, at various times and places. 
2. “In France, Prisons Filled With Muslims“, Washington Post (29 April 2008) — Another decline of the State special report. 
3. “Bluff and Bloodshed“, Christopher Dickey, Newsweek  (1 May 2008) — “The Persian Gulf is more dangerous than ever. Will the U.S. and Iran go to war at sea?”
4. “Barack in Iraq“, Michael Crowley, The New Republic” (7 May 2008) — “Can he really end the war?” 
5. “At least we know how the US financed its trade deficit in April (and March too)“, Brad Setser, RGE Monitor (2 May 2008) — “Record central bank financing continues.”
6. Four important new articles about the food crisis, including one about about Wheat Leaf Rust appearing in the US.

Also — The government did not inflect African-Americans with Syphilis in the Tuskegee study.  See the Wikipedia entry for details.  How astonishing that this pernicious lie is so widely believed!

The articles, with excerpts

Forecast: Death of the American Constitution

Summary:  The American political regime, with the Constitution as its foundation is dying.  This presents some evidence, discusses possible causes, and speculations about the consequences.  The most important section is the end.  America is more than our Consitution.  We can survive its death and go on to an even greater future.  That we cannot see what lies ahead does not mean that we need fear the future.  Reposted from 4 July 2006.

The world changes but America seems unable to see this and adapt as the post-WWII global order collapses around us.  The post-WWII era was defined by:

1. America as a model state: a capitalistic democratic republic which values its citizens’ liberty.
2. American as a superpower, or even the sole superpower.
3. The American dollar as reserve currency; “good as gold” for holding the world’s savings
4. 3rd generation warfare as the dominant mode of military force.
5. Growing American wealth through the “debt supercycle”, continuously expanding debt of both Government and households.
6. Cheap energy, largely from coal, oil, and natural gas.

Today we see all these things slowly fading away.  The daily newspapers record its passing, although most journalists are unaware of the larger significance of what they report. We are suffering from “change blindness,” a flaw in our mental processing in which we fail to recognize large changes which should be clearly visible.

Change blindness must be experienced to believe it.  Take the test at this website.  Read the instructions!  Right click on the picture to move to the next one.  (Note:  if you cannot see the change, reduce the “gap” to zero.)

A brief check on the health of the American nation-state.

Aristotle said that the political regime of a state dominated other aspects of its society.  Let’s have a quick test about the health of the American Nation-State.  Following Aristotle’s view, it looks at the foundations of our polity.  The correct answers are given directly after the list of questions.

{ more }   — Click on “more” even to post comments; no comments can be posted from this screen.

Experts, with wrinkled brows, warn about the future

Summary: Experts often see the future with alarm, seeing the dangers but not benefits. That gets attention, from both the media and an increasinly fearful public. Both sides feed this process. It need not be so, as most trends contain the seeds of good and bad futures. This post considers two examples.

Over several decades I have politely listened to countless lectures — by professors, generals, directors of this and that — with the same message: the world changes, which might bring bad things. Thousands of words then follow. Why do we listen to such things without throwing fruit?

Planning for worst-case scenarios is just good sense. Speculative exercises, such as War Plan Red — war with the United Kingdom, including invading Canada (see here for more) — are useful on many levels. But preparing for worst-case scenarios can easily be taken to extreme. Focusing on worst-case scenarios, to the exclusion of more likely outcomes, is madness.

Except in geopolitics, where it is often standard operating procedure (more or less, depending on the person involved). Examine studies of any broad geopolitical issue, and you will many that describe change as inherently dangerous.

1. the Iraq war — withdrawing might produce catastrophic civil war, even genocide.
2. population growth — inherently destabilizing
3. population decline — inherently destabilizing
4. global cooling (a 1970’s favorite) — inherently destabilizing, all effects are bad
5. global warming (today’s favorite) — inherently destabilizing, all effects are bad
6. nations growing richer — potentially destabilizing, wrecks havoc on a country’s economy and politics, unequal distribution of gains aggravates internal conflicts.
7. nations growing poorer — potentially destabilizing

It is not that these concerns are “wrong” or “invalid”. Rather they are too often expressed in an unbalanced fashion, without considering that these things also bring benefits — and might lead to better conditions, depending on what we do. Here are two specimens of this genre. The first shows a too-typically fearful look at the future.  The author of the second sees both sides of the coin.

Nigeria, a weak link in the global oil supply

Shell got their money’s worth from this study. Events in Nigeria so far are moving just as the consultants predicted.  That is bad for oil consumers, like us.

“Peace and Security in the Niger Delta“, Conflict Expert Group of WAC Global Services (December 2003)

From a story about this study on National Public Radio:

This 2003 report was commissioned by Shell and written by outside consultants. Since it was first leaked, Shell has not disputed the document’s authenticity, but has said it strongly disagrees with some of the report’s conclusions.  This copy, obtained by National Public Radio, appears to have had some language deleted. … The consultants warned that, without big changes to how the giant company works with the government and the communities of the delta, a discontent delta population could drive Shell out of the oilfields by 2008.

This is a form of political peaking.  Nigeria can produce at current rates for years or decades, but political factors might prevent this.

For more information about Nigeria’s oil production, see Wikipedia.

 Please share your comments by posting below, brief and relevant, please.  Too long comments will be edited down.  Or email me at fabmaximus at hotmail dot com (note the spam-protected spelling).

Other posts about Peak Oil

Successful info ops, but who are the targets?

 This looks like good news:

U.S., Allies See Progress in Selling Al-Qaeda As an Enemy to the Muslim World“, Walter Pincus, Washington Post  (28 April 2008) — Excerpt:

“More and more Muslim and Arab populations — [including] clerics and scholars — are questioning the value of al-Qaeda’s program,” Juan Carlos Zarate, deputy assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for combating terrorism, said Wednesday at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Or, it might be bad news:

“Using Info Operations to Defeat AQ“, Marc Lynch, posted at Abu Aardvark (29 April 2008) — Excerpt:

Thanks to Matt Armstrong for tipping me off to the online proceedings of the 2008 Unrestricted Warfare Symposiumat Johns Hopkins, which includes an interesting set of briefing slides by Col. Karen Lloyd of J3, Joint IO Warfare Center.   The interesting part of her presentation was what appears, from the slides, to be some frank discussion of what the US is currently doing in the information operations arena against al-Qaeda, including from Slide 6 …

… Now, compare this to an April 23 speech at the Washington Institute by deputy national security advisor for combatting terrorism Juan Zarate called “Winning the War on Terror,” which offered four examples of the “growing rejection of the al-Qaida program and message”:
 
These examples offered by a senior American official to an American audience in support of the claim that “al-Qaeda is losing” (persuasive enough to merit a story in the Washington Post) mirror, nearly point for point, the examples presented by Col. Lloyd of successful US information operations aimed at defeating al-Qaeda.

When will global oil production peak? Ask the CIA!

Summary:  The date on which global production peaks depends to a large extent on the Saudi’s.  Political peaking occurs if they decide to no longer increase production.  Geological peaking occurs when they cannot increase production.  The plans of the Saudi Princes shift with the political winds.  The size of their oil reserves are a matter of fact known only to them, and is among their most closely guarded secrets.  Might others also know?  {excerpt from a post on 1 November 2007}.

What do the KGB and CIA know?

A modest proposal for solving the global food crisis

Here is a modest proposal for a small step to help better utilize the world’s food supply:  feed the pets more scraps and less pet food — then donate some of that money to the World Food Program. 

 I.  “UN to set up task force to tackle global food crisis“, AP (29 April 2008) - Opening (bold emphasis added):

The United Nations will establish a top-level task force to tackle food shortages and escalating prices that threaten to touch off a “cascade of related crises” around the world, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Tuesday.  Ban, who will lead the task force, said the group agreed on a series of measures for the medium and long term, with its first priority to meet the $755 million shortfall in funding for the World Food Program. …

II.  “In 2005, dog and cat food sales in the US reached a new record high of over $14.3 billion.” — from The Pet Food Institute, citing “Pet Food & Pet Care Products in the US”, Euromonitor International (2005)

It is just a thought. 

“Combating the Growing Threat of International Organized Crime”

Summary:  On rare occasions speeches by public officials deserve attention.  This is one, describing the growing danger of international criminal organizations.  For more on the geopolitical implications of this, see John Robb’s Global Guerillas website, or read his book Brave New War.  Hat tip on this to Simon Hunt Strategic Services.

“Combating the Growing Threat of International Organized Crime“, speech by United States Attorney General Michael Mukasey,  given at Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).  Excerpt:

Perhaps we are victims of our own success because it seems that there is a widespread belief around the country that organized crime is no longer a serious threat. Most Americans think of organized crime only as a part of America’s past, its modern role merely the subject of popular movies or television dramas. I can assure you that organized crime is different in source and different in scope, but unfortunately this phenomenon, in a different institutional costume, is alive and well.

That is why, earlier this year, the Organized Crime Council met for the first time in 15 years. It did so because the United States faces a new and more modern threat, from international organized crime. We can’t ignore criminal syndicates in other countries on the naïve assumption that they are a danger only in their homeland, whether it is located in Eurasia, Africa, or anywhere else.

Only our amnesia makes reading the newspapers bearable

Tom Englehardt’s TomDispatch always goes to the top of my reading pile.  Tom publishes long, complex articles which compare to the average blog post like the Lincoln-Douglas debates to our Presidential pretend-jousts.  Today he pens another classic:   ”Petraeus, Falling Upwards — The Petraeus Story“.  Excerpt:

You simply can’t pile up enough adjectives when it comes to the general, who, at a relatively young age, was already a runner-up for Time Magazine’s Person of the Year in 2007. His record is stellar. His tactical sense extraordinary. His strategic ability, when it comes to mounting a campaign, beyond compare.

I’m speaking, of course, of General David Petraeus, the President’s surge commander in Iraq and, as of last week, the newly nominated head of U.S. Central Command (Centcom) for all of the Middle East and beyond… And the campaign I have in mind has been his years’ long wooing and winning of the American media, in the process of which he sold himself as a true American hero, a Caesar of celebrity.

… This, after all, is the man who, in the summer of 2004, as a mere three-star general being sent back to Baghdad to train the Iraqi army, made Newsweek’s cover under the caption, “Can This Man Save Iraq?” (The article’s subtitle — with the “yes” practically etched into it — read: “Mission Impossible? David Petraeus Is Tasked with Rebuilding Iraq’s Security Forces. An Up-close Look at the Only Real Exit Plan the United States Has — the Man Himself”).

It gets better, and is worth reading in full.  The over the top gushing about General Petraeus mocks the journalism profession’s ideals – especially in light of increasing evidence of the mainstream media’s cooperation with our government’s information operations against the American people.  (some links appear below).  Note:  this post discusses the media, not the General.