How to Lose a War...

Over the past 10 years there have been plenty of arguing about the US policy of waging war. The human race has been fighting each other over one thing or another since the beginning of history. From bashing someone over the head with a club to get a better cave or dropping nuclear weapons to quickly end a globe spanning world war known as WWII. In the WWII there were definite losers and definite winners with little or no ambiguity. However, since then the wars we have fought have not been as clear cut.  The fact is that the Korean, Vietnam, Iraq (both) , and Afghanistan wars have not had a clear cut distinction between  "winning" and "losing".  There are definitely winners and losers but they harder to identify or quantify. It's my belief that these wars provided an opportunity to the people of the beleaguered states to make a fresh start. In the most recent Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts the US military was able to successfully remove those leaders who were running their governments. When the people of Iraq had previously tried to get rid of Saddam Hussein he pretty much killed anyone who dared to offer a different opinion on how to run the country. In Afghanistan the Taliban were maintaining their power by killing anyone who would not adhere to their extreme religious views. In both instances the ordinary citizens had a pretty meek existence. Once the military had removed these leaders it was then up to the ordinary citizens to re-start their governments under a more acceptable system. Both countries have wasted the opportunity that was presented to them. The military were offering both security and money so they could re-build their countries and instead they started fighting and arguing amongst themselves. With the troop withdrawals starting their window of opportunity is closing and what could have ended positively will end up as a failure because the citizens of the effected countries did not accept their end of the deal and so in the end they will continue to suffer. It's most likely how the got in this situation to begin with. In the final analysis if the people can not take responsibility for creating a better society then no amount of military action will be of any help.

After WWI the armistice forced on Germany all but guaranteed that there would be a WWII. Germany was saddled with all the reparations and other restrictions that no reasonable country could be expected to absorb. After WWII the US went the other direction and provided the losers (Germany and Japan) and winners (France and England) with aid and support so they could re-build their countries. The citizens of all 4 countries took advantage of this help and their countries recovered and prospered. If the Iraqis and Afghans don't start taking advantage of the help being provided they will continue to suffer. People like to say that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were not victories but they are wrong. The military was victorious in all of their actions but the military it is not the responsible for re-building a society after the shooting stops. Their part in this situation is limited to providing the opportunity for the people to re-build their societies and they have done that.
Whether you agree or disagree about the wars in the first place the fact is the wars have been waged and you can't just sit in the corner sulking and bitching. You should accept the fact that the wars were waged and redirect your energies to helping re-build the damaged societies. You can always complain about the injustice of war while helping those most effected now that it is over. There are a whole bunch of countries and international organizations that are withholding their support and practically hoping for the situation to unravel for the sole purpose of harming the US. People like this are more interested in making the US look bad then they are with helping those who need help re-building.

It is a shame that the US military has performed their duty and sacrificed their lives and the beneficiaries have wasted those efforts by not taking any responsibility after the fighting was done.

.

Sound of Silence ....

There was a terrorist attack in Pakistan today perpetrated by the Taliban. The target was a UN food distribution center and 43 people were killed. What I would like to know is where are all of the self appointed guardians of human rights and anti-violence? I hear no outraged invectives or rightous anger in either print or video news reports concerning this incident. In comparision to the situation when Isreal attempted to board and search a ship in-bound for Gaza for weapons smuggling and were visciously attacked. It was a act of personal survival by the Isrealis who were left with no other alternative than to use deadly force and unfortunately 9 people were killed. Not 5 minutes after this incident there were shouts of outrage and condemnation hurled at Israel from around the world. Even before the facts of the attack were known. Countries recalled ambassadors and made grandiose statements about human rights and murder. Why is there not a similiar reaction for this deadly attack in Pakistan?

This is only the most recent event where innocent civilians were purposely targeted and  those claiming to be defenders of human rights remain silent.  Even without the direct bombings the Taliban ruthlessly subjugate, terrorize, and kill anyone who does not do what they say. And they proudly admit their actions to the world at large. This type of behavior leaves the Afghanistan and Pakistani general population living in terror and subjugation. Where are all of the condemnations from the self appointed guardians of justice and freedom? The same guardians that endlessly attack Israel for defending themselves from their belligerent neighbors or railing at the US non-stop for actually trying to stop the Taliban and their supporters?

Not to long ago I realized that I can not bring myself to really hate anyone. I do not hate Arabs or Muslims. Condemning or stereotyping a large group of people is never productive. Then one day I was reading through some blogs and forums that cover subjects such as the recent Wiki leaks, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Israel, and the US reactions to these subjects and I felt hate towards a group of people. The people who do nothing but complain and criticize the actions of those who are at least trying to address some of the problems the world faces today. I am particularly upset with those who have made it their goal in life to attack and discredit Israel 24/7. These people distort and out right lie when they criticize and condemn Israel. If the Arab countries surrounding Israel had not been so quick to attack Israel in 1948 we might not have the situation we have today. However, the fact is they did attack Israel in 1948, 1967, and 1973 and they lost. And now they want a "do over". Since their military incompetence has been on display for all to see they finally decided to fight Israel using vicious propaganda, outright lies, and threats. This propaganda campaign has been going on for 40+ years and the real truth of how this situation was created has been lost. I am neither a Jew or Zionist but I can honestly say that I would help to defend Israel if I was ever in a position to do so. My outrage and motivation has nothing to do with the plight of the "Palestinians". My hatred is pointed at the people using lies,biased propaganda, and the Palestinians themselves to defeat Israel. What I really hate is the idiocy these people display every time they open their mouths. This goes for the people on the street, naive student movements, and of course the pseudo intelligent academics who mangle the truth and present their version of reality the world at large.

So when we have these violent incidents from around the world and they are met with silence it just re-energizes my anger towards those who only decry injustice and horror when it suits their political world view. In particular this includes all of the anti-Israeli and frankly anti-western blowhards who have no problem with selective outrage.

The Really Scary People....

I always get irritated when the "terrorist" label gets attached to anyone threatening or actually trying to do anything that could be considered violent. The term is so over used it no longer has a distinct meaning and therefore does not really describe the reality of the situation. I believe the term was first made popular back in the 70's during the Israeli Olympic Team massacre and the airline and cruise ship hijackings by middle east extremists throughout the 70's. I believe the term was appropriate for those events and possibly the word can apply to the 9/11 attack but there are a whole lot of other events and actions being described using the word "terrorist" that really should be called something else. 

The word or label that truly terrorizes me is "Progressive". There are a group of political idealists who describe themselves as "Progressives" and they make the "Terrorists" look like reasonable people. The "Progressives" rail on any form of government that actually works and look to replace it with their Utopian fairy tales where they get to showoff their superior intellect to impress the down trodden. These people come in all flavors but they favor mainly Marxists, Socialist, or Communist governing philosophy's . Now when I say Socialist I am not talking about a government supported health care plan I am talking about the loss of all private property and a total surrender to the "State". The politics and governing ideas pushed by "Progressives" have NEVER worked in the real world. Every country on the planet that has tried to implement these types of governments have FAILED but that doesn't stop a true "Progressive". These over educated academics and their groupies have a unique ability to ignore the fact that none of their recommended solutions or theories of governing have ever worked outside of a classroom or online forum. They continually attack the open and mainly free democratic societies that exist today while never acknowledging the harm their patron saints have caused throughout the years. These progressive hero's include such luminaries as Mao, Castro, Stalin, Lenin, Che Guevara, Pol pot, and all bunch of other vile murderers and sociopaths pretending to be leaders of the "People". Progressives advocate schemes in which all the "People" are equal but that is not how reality works. Trying to level out the proletariat only removes the incentives from those individuals who contribute the most to the advancement of our civilization. If everyone is equal why should anyone ever strive to get a better education or think up new inventions or methods if there is no reward other than a shorter bread line or new pair of shoes once a year? When a society tries to even out the upper, middle, and lower classes all they ever succeed at is lowering everyone to the lowest common denominator which usually means poor and hungry. Governments should provide a level of protection for all of it's citizens with programs such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and un-employment resources to help those who are less fortunate and a lot of governments around the world do this is some form or fashion. It's never perfect but it works somewhat better than the alternatives.

So when I encounter the word "Terrorists" I will continue on my way with out any fear or hesitation but when the word "Progressive" starts entering the daily discussions I will stop to and pay attention and see if there is anything I can do to personally put a stop to these creatures who call themselves "Progressive".

Religion - Faith,Ritual, or Just Good Management strategy?

Throughout recorded human history religion has been a dominate influence on both individuals and societies as a whole. I personally do not really care about a persons religious beliefs or practices. I can't think of a single decision in my normal day to day life that would be dependant on a persons religious beliefs.

However, I believe there is a big difference between religious "ritual" and religious "faith" and it is usually the "ritual" portion that causes the problems. I believe the rituals are the outward manifestation of a persons faith but when practiced among others who have a different set of beliefs and rituals it can cause conflict. 

I think the outward facing ritualized behavior is used to bolster or remind you of your faith but is this outward manifestation and ritualization always necessary or can a person maintain their faith by focusing on their internal feelings and convictions privately? Can you be religious even if you don't go to a church,synagogue , or mosque?  

In today's world the 2 most powerful and destructive constructs in our daily life are politics and religion. When these 2 subjects combine the outcome is almost always mayhem and destruction. I look at organized religion as a weakness in our society. The key word being "organized". Going back in history the role of organized religion has always been one of control. A way for the usually self appointed religious leaders to gather and control their humble supplicants. This is where religion starts merging with politics and the fun begins. The proof of this type of interaction and control is in our face 24/7. Just look at the middle east and try to deny that religion is not being used by the powerful to control their supplicant populations. And just look at their complete and utter FAILURE.

The middle east is both blessed and cursed with an abundance of energy resources and the amount of money flowing into those countries should be supporting a vibrant society but instead the money is collected by those at the top while the multitudes get nothing but religious dictates and sand. Of course you will hear the old canard about the "West" stealing their resources but that is just nonsense. It is true that most middle eastern oil producing countries got their exploration, operational expertise, and refining technology from western companies but that was a long time ago. Most of these countries have since then "nationalized" (ie. stole)  their oil production infrastructure from the western builders and re-negotiated their deals on their terms. If they are unhappy with their current deal they can always re-negotiate but the more you negotiate the more public the details become and they can't afford that to happen. It's hard to cover up bribery and kickbacks when your negotiations are on the front page of the Wall Street Journal every day.  So deals are made in back rooms with promises and money to ease the way but a situation like this can only exist when both parties are in agreement. So if you don't like your deal stop whining about people stealing your resources and come out in the open to re-negotiate in good faith. That would be worth seeing.

My issue with religion is not that I don't believe in God. I can honestly say I am keeping an open mind on the subject and I am still searching for signs and clues. However there are some things about religion that bother me.

• Why would an all powerful God ever need a lowly human to serve as a warrior? An all powerful God can probably fight his own battles just fine. He needs no "Holy Warriors".
• It's my opinion that the hardcore God believers constantly underestimate and frankly insult God by limiting the scope of his powers to just us humans on the planet Earth. Seems to me creating the universe and all it's contents would have come before Earth and us humans. And judging by the amount of stars in the universe there are most likely other beings arguing about the same things we are right now.
• Organized religion is still the most effective way to force a man onto his knees voluntarily. I wasn't born in this universe to bend my knee to any mere mortal just because he says God commands it and I know for a fact this person has not had a private sit down with God in person. I will need a little more proof before I kneel for anyone mortal.
• In a certain religion one of the key beliefs is that if you confess your sins God will forgive all. What's the downside of sinning if every sin is forgiven? 

I do not feel very confident about our future. The overwhelming majority of people on the planet are being held hostage by religious extremists of every type and no one seems eager to offend the self righteous blowhards when it comes to making public policy or changing our world for the better. The world is steadily becoming over populated and our natural resources are vanishing just as fast in the opposite direction. The "right to life" idiots would literally start a war if the government were to institute population control measures. Of course the government could just kill all of those who disagree with the new policy like the Chinese government did back in the 50's. Maybe we could market it as a policy of "tough love" to save the world. And while I adore a capitalist economy I do think we are going a little over board with our never ending consumption. I think instituting a strict policy geared towards recycling and aggressive alternative energy applications would be a good place to start. Of course before this can take place we will need to forbid any outside donations to any political parties. The government already provides a set amount of money (millions) to presidential candidates and that should be all they get. It's time to kill the for profit lobby industry once and for all. I actually think this type of thing could be pushed right know because the public seems to be a little upset with the morons running the country today. Somewhere along the line our leaders stopped doing the jobs they were elected to do and instead all they do is collect money and campaign endlessly. Maybe it's time for them to go home and examine the state of their faith.

Echo Chamber Propaganda and Other Musings

My previous post touched upon how information and comment on the Internet can be manipulated to obscure the truth and still end up looking legitimate to those who never question the information they find on the net. For the past 5 years I have setup and operated a news bot that searches the Internet regularly and reports back to me on those items that I have an interest in. I have included all the major international press services, online newspapers, online magazines, blogs, and forums of all types. I have also primed my bot with a list of keywords to narrow and correlate the information returned. I find it interesting to compare how current world events are being portrayed around the world and note the differences and similarities in how the information is being reported. What I have discovered is that the major global news networks (CNN,BBC,Fox, Speigel DE,Guardian,Independent UK, Asia Times, Pravda, Al Jazerra, NY Times, Washington Post, Brussels Journal, Jerusalem Times, Asia Times, India Times, and a few others) all get the basic facts correct however the editorial stances and reader feed back can vary by a wide margin. I am still puzzled WHY news organizations, whose job used to be to report the news, needs an editorial position. I always thought their job was to present the factual information and let their readers and viewers formulate their own opinions. It seems that all the news outlets spend more time talking to the supposed experts on the topic in their round tables that usually devolve into nothing but glorified circle jerks.

The one consistent and unfortunate fact that does show up everywhere is the world wide belief that no matter what the problem or issue is it is usually the fault of the United States. This is dangerous because I believe it gives the leadership and citizens of other countries and international organizations a built in excuse for all the problems in their own societies. This also creates harsh divisions within the American society making it harder to unite the people in order to solve our common problems that should be non-partisian. Unfortunately the animosity  and hostility generated on other confrontational issues is spilling over and making it harder for any compromise to be reached on any issue.  In today's political environment do you think the US government or it's citizens could create a Bill of Rights like the one that exists? Can you imagine how long and bitter the arguments would be? How the original Constitution and Bill of Rights were actually created is beyond me. Maybe common sense was more prevalent in the earlier days of the country. And the real funny thing about the US Constitution is that it was created by the wealthy and white land owners. I can think of several modern political groups who would have a hard time accepting this fact with good humour.

The leaders in the Middle East frequently make use of the "blame the US" tactic for all of their internal problems on a regular basis.  However, with the recent release of the diplomatic cables the world is getting a little peek at what is really going on in the world of international relations. Both Saudi Arabia and Yemen have been outed for doing one thing and telling their citizens and the world at large something entirely different. It's also been shown that the US governments public statement's regarding the Iranian nuclear issues are actually pretty tame compared to some of Iran's neighboring countries (and I am not talking about Israel). On the subject of the released diplomatic correspondence and other documents I have mixed feelings. I do not believe the military operational data gathered in Iraq or Afghanistan should have been released. Any competent military analyst can use this data to profile and predict the US military responses, weapons, and unit tactics given certain situations. I also found the "Apache" footage showed nothing but what happens in war. The Iraqi fighters do not wear any uniforms or identifying insignia on the battlefield, there were armed people in the group fired upon, there were no identifying marks on any vehicles that denoted ambulance vehicles. The diplomatic cables are actually turning out to be more damaging to the other countries involved than the US. There are probably some cables that should not be released but it's too late to worry too much about that now and we should probably  just move on. I do feel sorry for the soldier who released the information. So far I have not seen anything that would justify a 22 year old spending much of the rest of his life in jail.

This trend to always blame the US use to upset me but now I find it amusing and am able to get beyond the disgust. While the US has caused some problems it is by no means responsible for everything bad in the world and it has actually did some good throughout it's short and eventful history.

A rational and analytical person should be able to recognize and admit publicly that the US cannot and is not the cause of every single problem in the world but you would never know it by studying the forums and blogs that weigh in on the problems of the day. Most of the blog and forums turn into "echo chambers" where each post or comment does nothing but feed on the opinion of the previous poster without thought or question. These types of "echo chamber" responses fill the Internet and people use them to justify their bias on the issue and re-enforce their sense of rightness and their contempt on those who disagree with them. This type of behavior applies to all sides in every discussion. Every once in a while I run across an online discussion that actually contains comments and opinions from both sides of the argument but this tends to be the exception rather than the rule and that is what worries me. I have run across online discussions with hundreds of comments that are based on nothing but lies and misinterpretations of the underlying facts of the issue. People have a tendency to ignore and cherry pick their own version of the facts to support their opinion and trash the opinions of those they see as their "opponents". I usually try to dismiss this type of behavior because it really scares me when I see how people can distort the truth just to win an argument. And winning the argument rarely solves the problem being debated. To retain some sanity I can usually can tell what type of person is making a certain type of comment. Their are some people who like to post the most outlandish nonsense on any subject just to see what type of response they can elicit (Your typical Troll) . However, the ones who really worry me are those who are obviously educated on the subject but still mangle the facts to achieve their ideological goals. As I mentioned before this type of behavior is common on all sides of every issue and debate but there are some who stand out with neon lights flashing and horns blowing. In my opinion the US and world in general has allowed the extremist on each side to control the debate. Through the use of the Internet even the most vile fringe groups can dominate the online debates. People no longer need to actually man the barricades or march on the capital to bring attention to their cause. All you need to do is manage the information flow and in today's world that  means strategic use of the Internet as a force multiplier. I'm still trying to think how this situation can be handled but so far I am coming up empty.

Modern Technology - Fact or Fiction?

I have been involved in the IT field since before anyone ever heard of a PC or the Internet. I have watched, designed, developed, managed, and actively participated in an ever changing IT system environment. I have experienced both the good and somewhat less good effects of our ever changing technology base. We are now able to publish and comment on information in real time with the entire world as our audience (at least those with access to the Internet) and that is a great achievement. However, this ability to rapidly exchange information also allows disinformation to be published and distributed just as fast. It is possible to inundate the Internet with false and misleading information that some people never question. The statement "I found it on the Internet!" does not guarantee that the information you have collected is true at all. In fact I think the biggest problem today is that people do not even realize how faulty and unreliable some of the data returned by a simple Internet search can be and fewer still put in an extra effort to verify their original source. There are individuals and groups that specialize in seeding the Internet with enough data on any topic for the specific purpose of manipulating the search engine results that everyone uses today.  This type of information seeding is often used by political groups, governments, corporations, specific issue interest groups, and people who just like causing trouble. This type of faulty or biased information input can have serious consequences and I do mean serious. From teenage alienation and suicide to the volatile international and religious arena.

 I have not had the Internet available as a resource for all my life. Once upon a time I had to actually use hard copy books, newspapers, TV, and Library services to gather information for both educational, professional, and personal interests. Today we have people who have grown up relying totally on the data available on the Internet and it bothers me that our future generation is being spoon fed incomplete, corrupted, and biased data on a daily basis and making important decisions based on that data.

In my mind it is the manipulation of social issues that present the biggest problem. At times the world seems like it is divided into two sides on every issue. (Left/Right,Liberal/Conservative, Me/You,  Us/Them, North/South, etc..) And these type of divisions are causing all kinds of problems, both big and small. This type of division often means that people of both sides of an issue only post or read things that support their own beliefs. I am hoping that we will be able to devise a method of rating content based upon the proven reliability of the data source. Systems like these already exist on some sites that offer commercial transactions (eBay) but there needs to be some way to expand and popularize this type of confidence system on the Internet as a whole. It's probably wishful thinking but you can always hope. Until then I can only hope we don't get drowned in the unreliable and faulty data being accessed by the world's population.