The Israeli Brief--It's Quite Convincing

There has been any amount of hand-wringing and tooth gnashing over the IDF's Operation Cast Lead. To all too many in the human rights community, the progressive wing of politics, and the entire cast of those impatient with Israel, the general view has been that the IDF went after civilians in an almost barbaric way.

There have been allegations almost without end that the IDF violated the Laws of Land Warfare. That the IDF used indiscriminate means, targeted civilians, used "illegal" weapons such as white phosphorus, shot women and children while grinning, and similar acts of a wanton and abandoned nature. At the same time, the responsibility of Hamas for intentional attacks on civilian targets using weapons of inherently low accuracy was overlooked or downplayed. Similarly, the responsibility of Hamas as the de facto government of the Gaza Strip to take all appropriate measures to remove civilians under their control from areas of impending or actual military operations was pooh-poohed.

Finally the Israelis have released their brief for the defense. It is 164 pages of densely argued, intensively documented evidence and argument countering all the myriad accusations made by Hamas, its Arab supporters, and apologists worldwide. Proceeding from the Doctrine of Inherent Military Probability as the Geek often does, the brief for the defense is sufficient to mark Operation Cast Lead as "Case Closed."

There can be no doubt in the mind of any reader who is not possessed of an anti-Israel predilection that the government of Israel (GOI) and IDF made every effort possible to conduct military operations so as to both follow the assorted international conventions and customs of land warfare and minimise civilian death and destruction. In parallel, the brief gives no room to doubt the contention that Hamas intentionally and repeatedly violated the same laws and customs on a level which boggles the mind.

The Geek, as has been demonstrated in numerous posts, is not a reflexive supporter of GOI and the IDF. Quite the contrary, he has levelled historically valid criticisms at both. Repeatedly.

This time Israel was and is in the right. Period. Balancing this, Hamas was and is in the wrong. Absolutely and completely.

The IDF fought a war within the boundaries of both custom and convention. Yes, civilians were killed and injured. Their property was destroyed and damaged. That is the way war goes. All the relevant international conventions recognise this brutal ground truth concerning war. The mere fact that civilians died, were injured, or became terrified is too bad, but it does not and never has constituted a war crime or a crime against humanity.

The Geek must applaud the IDF and the government which controls it for the restraint shown, care taken, means used to limit and lower the inevitable harm which befell civilians in the Strip. At the same time he must condemn Hamas for its intentional, wanton, and cynically self-serving placement of the civilians under their control at risk, great risk, deadly risk.

Hamas, in common with other Islamist jihadist entities, is a criminal conspiracy which dons the colors of religiously inspired, ethnically based identity politics. There is nothing political in the intentional, repeated placing in hazard of the civilians unfortunate enough to exist under Hamas' sway. Nor is this conduct sanctioned by the Quran except by the most tortured, artificial, tendentious interpretations of clerics who are actually ideologues.

It is time for the tender hearted, the human rights activists, the progressives to get a grip on reality. It is time for these folks and all others who have an interest in both truth and the reduction of the unnecessary civilian butcher's bill in the Mideast to tell it like it is. Hamas is a collection of war criminals, violators of the basic laws seeking to make war something other than the mere slaughter of any and all.

It is time to put the real offender in the dock. The name of that perpetrator is Hamas.

The Great North Carolina Jihad Caper (Or Hoax)

The Geek worked for several years in North Carolina so tales of the Tarheel State continue to interest him. Add in the spice of "home grown" jihadism and the Geek runs after the yarn like a platoon of cats after the fish wagon.

At first sight the tale of Daniel Patrick Boyd, his sons and their associates makes for a Stephen King experience. Shivers and shakes, terror in our midst, unknown, hiding behind the facade of a dry wall contractor, good neighbor and all around regular family man. All with the additional zest of fighting in Afghanistan, facing the loss of right hand and left foot for a bank "robbery" in Peshawar, and a veiled woman with piercing eyes.

If the media reports and quotes from the Federal indictment are correct, it would be fair for the reader to react with a sigh of relief and a, "Thank God for the Feds." A danger narrowly averted.

While the feds allege that Dan and Company were preparing for "foreign violent jihad," there are at least some in the counterterrorism community who hint of darker probabilities--terror hits here in the USA. Uhh! Double, no, triple the shivers, shakes, and so on.

While there may well be something behind the fed's action, there are more than a few problems with the narrative they have written in the indictment. And, even more in the treatment given that narrative by the media.

The Geek has a more than nodding acquaintance with the US efforts in Afghanistan albeit from before the 1989-92 period when Mr Boyd, senior, was allegedly being trained as a terrorist and trigger puller by one of another of the jihadi groups in and around Peshawar. American wannabe jihadists were about as rare as a black man at a Klan Konvention. Few showed up in the wild wild world of the Khyber Pass and far, far fewer were chosen.

Frankly the Afghan jihadists of every stripe were loath to accept even Arab wannabes unless, like Osama bin Ladin, they came with oodles of cash. Americans were even lower on the totem pole of desirability and then would be read in to the jihadist camp only if they were of Arab or better, Afghan or Pakistani descent.

A nineteen year old American white guy of recent conversion to the One True Faith would be about as welcome in the jihadist camp as a Feeb at the Islamist Terrorist Convention. The pimply faced kid would have been dispatched with a swift kick in the butt and told to do something useful--like raise money.

The Geek's impression of reality was born out by a later well informed CIA man quoted in a recent CQ Politics article. The Geek was relieved to find out that the jihadists had not turned soft in later years.

Bearing out the improbability of the fed's assertion that Boyd was the recipient of "military style training" in and around Peshawar is the fact that a dispute with a local bank escalated into charges of bank robbery for which Boyd and his brother were sentenced to lose their right hands and left feet according to Sharia justice. Had either Dan or his brother been jihadi in Afghanistan all they would have had to do in order to beat the rap was to say so. Heroic Warriors of Allah would never have been brought into court let alone destined to the chopping block.

Instead the US State Department played mood music, massaged those in need of massaging, and the Boyds were let loose on appeal to the Pakistani Supreme Court. Nowhere in the press coverage of the incident here in the US was any mention made of Dan's service in the jihad against the Soviets.

Hanging out in Peshawar? For sure. At a terrorist training camp? Doubtful. But what the heck, bringing in the alleged Afghan jihadist connection makes a better story for the public and eventually the jury.

Then there is the roster of firearms of which much was made by the media coverage. A scan of either the indictment or the linked CQ Politics piece shows that the Boyd arsenal is neither particularly unusual or threatening in either its size or makeup. There are more than a few good old boys in the Tarheel State (or here in the Land of Enchantment) that have larger, more diversified armament holdings. None of the listed weapons is either illegal or (stand by for the dread and quite inaccurate phrase) an "assault weapon."

Then there is the purported demonstration of how to use an AK-47. Was it really, really an actual honest-to-Allah selective fire, capable of full automatic AK-47 or was it one of the many knock off, or look-alike pieces such as the run-of-the-mill SKS? The feds say it was the real deal, but if that were the case, where is this ghost weapon now? The feds, if they know, ain't talking, see.

Nor is the fed's accusation that Boyd and his son went to Israel in order to contact jihadists in Gaza convincing. Even when backed by Israel's having denied them admission on one occasion, the federal narrative is easily challenged as it has been by Boyd's wife.

Her version is that father and son were on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land. She added that initially another son was to have gone as well but he was killed in a traffic accident. Indeed, her alternative gains force when it is taken together with the dirty trick the FBI played on her in the course of arresting her family.

The two narratives will fight it out in court--eventually. However, unless the Federal prosecutors can address effectively the inconsistencies in their version of reality it will not matter if they can convince a jury that Boyd and Company are guilty. The larger, longer, and vastly more exacting court of history will have the final say on whether a verdict of guilty meant a reality of guilt.

Oh, well, as Allah wills

Iraq--Time To Declare Victory And Go Home

Colonel Timothy Reese was, quite a few years ago, a very smart captain. He has gone up in rank. And, stayed high in both intellect and, more importantly by far, intellectual and moral courage.

Intellect and the courage to act upon it regardless of any possible negative impact on the career trajectory abound in a (leaked) memo published in today's NYT. Although those further up the food chain in Iraq immediately claimed that the memo represented only one man's view and was not a statement of policy, Colonel Reese delivered hot metal on target regarding the state of play in Iraq at present.

In essence he contends that the US has done about all it can do and further efforts whether in US combat operations or in holding the hands of the Iraqis will be more likely to backfire than not. He does believe that the Iraqi armed and security forces are now capable of containing and expunging the remaining insurgent threats.

While that is on the optimistic side in the Geek's view, it in no way militates against either the accuracy or the trenchant nature of the colonel's core argument. His supporting architecture comes in two parts.

The first portion focuses on the present weaknesses and liabilities of the government of Iraq (GOI). Most of the points he makes in his memo are well known and have been for some time. Taken together they point to the potential of ongoing political turmoil, but not to the necessary expansion of violence. The GOI is at the very best an extremely weak reed on which to place hopes of a stable prosperous state. But that is not to argue that Iraq is already a failed state in the making.

The second line of argument focuses more concretely on the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF). In dealing with the military side of the equation, Reese not only comments on longer standing matters but the "changes in attitude" which resulted after Maliki declared "victory" over the Americans on 30 June 09.

As armed forces reflect accurately the polity and society which created and maintains them, it comes as no surprise that Colonel Reese identifies the majority of chronic problems in the ISF as being legacies of the Baathist/Saddam era. The ISF is at root a Soviet style force with all that implies. All the US efforts to date including "massive partnering" with the ISF have not eradicated the pernicious effects of this reality.

As a result the ISF lack initiative, flexibility, forward planning, good officer-NCO-enlisted relationship dynamics, an emphasis on MOS skill training, operational rehearsals or even after action analysis. The ISF C2 is rigid and centralised in the Soviet manner--a form of political control that not only suited the Baathists and Saddam but would fit the desires of any ambitious political chieftan such as al-Maliki. (Truth in Blogging requires the Geek to admit the last was his assessment and is not contained in the Reese Memo.)

Regardless of all American urgings, the senior command and political leadership of Iraq are unable or unwilling to root out fundamental blocks to the development of a non-political, professional military. Cronyism, corruption, and political interference run rampant as does laziness and a general inability or unwillingness to acquire even the rudiments of a professional force. None of this will change, the colonel maintains, regardless of the presence or absence of US advisers or combat partners.

In his profoundly negative evaluation, the colonel is both writing in tandem with other knowledgeable observers and showing a blunt honesty not commonplace in US experience over the past few decades. It is, as Colonel Reese notes, remarkable and praiseworthy that the US has been able to bring into existence the ISF as it is, warts and all. The ISF does have the necessary minimum combat capacity to act as an internal security force if the threats do not rise above their current level. It is capable of a marginal degree of self-sustainment. And, it could get better, even much better, if the political lords and masters of the place allow it to.

Since the American withdrawal from the cities a month back and the the concomitant "victory over the Yankees" celebration headed by al-Maliki, the relations between Americans and ISF have worsened in the colonel's estimate. He notes, for example, that the ISF does not allow the US to engage in operations which are compliant with the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA.)

The ISF units are unwilling to cooperate with US troops in engaging targets the US command considers high value. This attitude carries over into a reluctance to carry out even routine operations. Unstated, but implied, and certainly experienced in the closing period of the Vietnam War, ISF unit commanders are more than willing to ignore the presence and advice of Americans attached to their unit for the purpose of providing operational and training guidance.

In short, Colonel Reese is right. The "surge" worked. US combat units did break the back of the several insurgencies both sectarian and political. With the possible exception of al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) the several anti-government forces have been forced onto the deep defensive and, save for suicide bombings, have only a very limited offensive capacity. American blood bought enough of a military success that the US can legitimately say it has achieved the minimum strategic goal of "not-losing."

This means that the US can and should withdraw its combat forces at a rate greater than that first intended when the SOFA was finalised. SecDef Gates has already alluded the other day to the very real possibility that an additional combat brigade will be pulled out of theater ahead of schedule.

More than ever and with more reason than ever, the time has come to shake the dust of Iraq from our boots and get on with the war in Afghanistan.

And, that's a fact, Jack!

With Only A Left Wing It's Easy To Go Hysterical

Hugo Chavez, the 21st Century's equivalent of Fidel Castro, is pumping his reputation as the Joe Biden of the Andes. His latest case of rhetorical dyspepsia alleges that the US is secretly building an invasion force in Columbia and will soon cross into the Motherland of the Bolivarian Revolution.

Hugo's junior partner in the Neo-Castroite Renewal, Rafael Correa, jefe grande of Ecuador, echoes the his patron's anxieties but in a more sotto voce manner. The Hero of Los Indios must be feeling disappointed that the hated and dreaded Yankees have not gone home after he rejected renewal of the American lease on an Ecuadorian base for counter-narcotics surveillance flights.

Now Hugo loves to bloviate. He loves to excoriate. He loves to bluster and threaten. That is probably why he likes dealing with Iran. Those folks are just like him at heart.

No doubt Hugo particularly loves to play the victim role in a self-created, self-written drama featuring the US as Chief Villain and Columbia as the Villain's Assistant. That is why the finding of elderly Swedish anti-armor rockets in the hands of FARC was simply one more base plot created by the imperialists without a shred of truth.

While these aging AT-4 ATGMs are scarcely "sophisticated," they would have been of some assistance to the FARC guerrillas and drug traffickers. There is no arguing that the missiles did come from Venezuela. The Swedes have confirmed the devices were sold to that country. But, no one, not even Uncle Sam and the Colombian government are saying that Hugo was in on the deal. There is simply too much shrinkage from the military arsenals in Venezuela to be sure of that.

On the other hand there is simply too much evidence that both Chavez and Correa would be thrilled by a FARC success in "reactionary" Colombia. And, that both have worked assiduously to bring that thrill into reality.

While Colombia has a real, documentable reason to be peeved with both of these hard left leaning leaders, Bogota has been remarkably calm in the face of repeated provocation. Not so with Sr Chavez and Sr Correa.

Chavez has "frozen" relations with Colombia one more time. As a result the Colombian peso fell nearly two percent since the country's (legal) trade depends much on Venezuela, its second largest trading partner.

Not content with that, Chavez has raised the noise level with his expressed fears that the Marines, or at least the New Mexican National Guard was coming--soon. Hugo needs to take a Xanax or two, perhaps review his collection of Condy Rice photos. He needs to get a grip.

The US is in the process of negotiating with Colombia for the use of three air bases for use in surveillance flights targeted on countering drugs and insurgency within Colombia. This is not out of line considering our six billion dollar investment between 2001 and 2008 in assisting Colombia fight the drug runners and their insurgent sidekicks within the country. If the fourteen hundred or so military and civilian DoD personnel in Colombia constitute an invasion force, then El Presidente Chavez ought to reconsider his country's defense capacities.

Anyway it is not a done deal. There are elements in the Colombian Senate which want to use the proposal as a lever to get a free trade treaty out of the US. To date the Progressive Caucus has opposed this averring human rights abuses on the part of the Colombian security forces, an accusation which is far from baseless. Or there may be other deal sweeteners being considered by these Colombian politicos.

(Recall that Colombia has a long history of wanting more to go through with a seemingly done deal. That is why Theodore Roosevelt created a country, Panama, in order to get his canal dug over the obdurate attitude of a handful of Colombian senators.)

Sr Chavez and Sr Correa need to stop blustering, quit the victim game. Both have been consolidating one-man-rule states. Both are facing very real internal problems. Both have large segments of their population which are not supportive of the "Bolivarian Revolution." Both are ineptly presiding over economic degradation, political repression, and social dislocation.

All of the diversions, from Honduras to the new Colombian fracas, do not alter the basic reality one little bit. The "Bolivarian Revolution" in common with all too many leftist experiments, including the one in progress in the US, leads down a rough and rutted road. Shouting, "victim!" will not keep the wheels on when the ruts get too deep and the bumps too rough.

And, that's a fact, Jack.

It's Hard To Grow Food On Oil

The slow motion water crisis in the Mideast has been discussed since the late 1960s. The talking goes on. So does the ever ongoing diminution of both surface and subsurface water available for both domestic and agricultural use.

As was mentioned in a previous post, water is one the major reasons that Israel is loath (to put it mildly) to return the Golan Heights to Syrian sovereignty. It is impossible to see how a genuine Mideast peace can be crafted without the Golan reverting to Syria. It is very difficult to see how the Israelis will consent to this without somehow holding onto the water running through and from the place.

The Golan currently supplies around fifteen percent of Israel's agricultural water. This is water without which Israeli growers cannot continue. It is also water which cannot be replaced by simple conservation or expensive desalinization.

The Israel-Syria conundrum is a miniature of a growing dynamic across the Mideast. It is a dynamic which exists and will continue to fester regardless of the final outcome of the Great Stop Global Warming Campaign. The dynamic in play owes far less to changes in rain and snow fall than it does to increases in population and the reality of nationalism as the main drive of policy everywhere in the real, down-and-dirty world.

Iraq is caught in the water vise today. The squeeze is going to get worse--far worse in the next couple of decades. War as a consequence of the water shortfall is not at all improbable. Unless, of course, the major players--Turkey, Syria, Iran and Iraq--suddenly wake up bereft of nationalism, without any perceived need to take care of their own respective populations at the expense of all others if that is necessary.

Once upon a time Iraq was Mesopotamia, The Land Between Two Rivers. Its soil four thousand years ago was well watered, covered by a network of irrigation canals. The land all around, both above and below Baghdad was fertile. There were problems. Rivers silted. Canals were abandoned as kingdoms and empires rose and fell to the beat of the drums of war. Whole city-states such as Ur withered and died as a result of either the Tigris or Euphrates changing its main flow after a flood.

But, by and large Iraq stayed green. The desert was kept at bay by the billions of cubic meters of water flowing though the two great rivers. Until quite recently, that is.

The road to dryness was, if not paved by good intentions, at least started by them--way back in the glory days after World War II. The World Bank did a study on the floods which ravaged southern Iraq from time to time. The Euphrates had a nasty reputation in this regard, which was well established by the time Hammurabi posted his Code.

The answer was, quite unsurprisingly, considering the Bank was dominated by American technocrats, the building of dams. Dams would provide both flood control and electricity. It was a vision of the Tennessee Valley Authority translated to the cradle of agriculture.

The idea languished for decades. Then the Turks took to it like a deprived dieter attacking a chocolate shake. The Ankara government built dams on the upper reaches and tributaries of the Tigris as if concrete was soon to be prohibited. The South Eastern Anatolia Project was designed and intended to foster development and prosperity (to say nothing of political loyalty) on the part of the Kurds resident in the region.

Arguably, the Turks have been violating the UN Convention on the Law of Non-navigational Uses of International Watercourses. The Iraqi position is that the Turks have been scarfing up water to the disadvantage of Iraq. Blandly, Ankara denies this.

Currently Iraq states it needs fifty billion cubic meters of water annually. Of that sixty percent must come from the Tigris with most of the balance being drawn from the Euphrates. The Iraqi water minister estimates the need will grow to seventy-five or more billion cubic meters by 2015.

Here is the catch. An impartial group, the European Water Association, has concluded that the available flow will drop to forty-three billion cubic meters by that time. Why the big drop?

The Turks aren't finished with their Anatolian project yet. More dams and diversion tunnels are under construction or planned as Ankara presses on with one the most ambitious and expensive civil engineering projects in history. The Turkish government has vowed to finish the project even if the three construction expense guarantee countries--Austria, Switzerland, and Germany--discontinue their participation.

This political resolve on the part of Ankara has blunted Iraq's most successful effort to date in reducing the size and impact of the Turkish project on Iraq's water needs. While it is a tad tough to see how Turkey is going to pull this off if the Western European states back out, the Turkish political will is strong and some new opportunities have emerged as Turkey becomes a crucial transit center for oil from the Central Asian fields. In a sense the 1.68 gigabucks in play is small when the value of Turkey as a transit area is considered.

Nor is Turkey alone in the impending parching of Iraq. Both Syria and Iran play a role as well.

The Iraqi's coreligionists across the border in the Land of the Mullahs have been building a new dam almost every time a dog raises its leg on the watersheds feeding the Tigris. In addition, the Iranians have dammed two rivers that formerly fed the marshlands in the deep south of Iraq. This, in turn, has hindered the effort to restore the marshes originally destroyed by Saddam's government in the aftermath of the Gulf War. Satellite imagery along with ground reports show that the net effect of Iran's dams has been to extend the desert of the Arabian Peninsula further north into portions of the former marshland.

In Faw, the southern most city in Iraq, water shortages have already resulted from the Iranian damming and diverting of the Karun River. This appears to be the shape of things to come. Without some very expensive and time consuming infrastructure construction, Faw is doomed to the fate of Ur.

Syria is a minor player--so far. Lake Assad, created by a dam on the upper Euphrates, filled over thirty years ago. However, Syria has a need for more water, so the potential of further dams being built either on the Euphrates or its tributaries must not be discounted.

Worsening the situation for Iraq are the results of bad planning, bad operation, and decades of war and neglect. As a result the salinity of water in Iraq as well as in its soil has increased. Silt deposition has retarded flow and decreased water quality to the point that it is unusable for most agarian purposes.

On top of those negatives, the Iraqi population has increased even with the losses through war and flight from war. Additionally, the push for industrialization as well as the requirements for water in the extraction sector have pushed down the amount of water needed for domestic and agricultural purposes.

Worse, there is no sign that the current government in Iraq can agree on either what needs to be done or how to do whatever might someday need to be done. Water has continually slipped down the ladder of national priorities--even as more land is subject to desertification and more former farmers are forced to the cities.

Having been bred and born in the American Southwest where water is mighty scarce, the Geek is well aware of the old reality--"who controls the water, controls the range."

Right now Turkey controls the water and thus is the dominant player in the power relations between itself and Iraq (and, to a lesser extent, Syria.) Whether the Turks are serious with the often whispered and occasionally shouted slogan, "a barrel of water for a barrel of oil," remains to be seen.

Whether Iraqi suspicions that Iran, Turkey, and Syria are throttling down the water flow so as to make Iraq dependent upon their agricultural exports is more than problematical and less than certain. In any event the capacity and will of each country to act to deprive Iraq of necessary water may be simply the consequence of safeguarding the interests and needs of each country's populations.

But, it may signify something darker. Something more sinister. Something far more likely to lead to conflict, to war.

Oh, well, as Allah wills.

The Barbarians And The Central Kingdom

Yesterday Barick Obama, President of the United States, played the role of the barbarian satrap and kowtowed to the mandarins of the Central Kingdom. In his lauding of China and "the new era of cooperation." POTUS Obama outdid the genuflections and forehead-to-the-floor posturing that for centuries was the normal protocol governing those barbarian chiefs who waited on the pleasure of the Emperor.

Frankly, the Obama genuflection and encomium made the Geek physically ill. There is no new era of cooperation. There are no grand set of principles held in common between the Chinese government and that of the US. There is no reality grounded reason to be praising China and its leaders for anything--other than singleminded pursuit of Chinese national and strategic interests.

That, after all, is what governments are supposed to do. Pursue, expand, and ruthlessly defend national and strategic interests regardless of the posture taken by other states.

Fifteen or so years ago, President Bill Clinton fawned over China and the Mandarinate as he opened the door of "free trade" between the Central Empire and the US. Of course those who were not blinded by the light of belief--belief in the myth that free trade and globalization would not only lift the boats of every person in the world but provide American consumers with more choice at lower cost--groaned in anticipation of what would come.

What came, as surely as rain falls down not up was a series of three sounds. The first was the rush of greedy feet as American industry and finance made a rush to the Open Door of China. The next was Ross Periot's famed "sucking sound" as jobs and capital went through the same Open Door. Then came the sound of cash registers as they recorded the purchases of Americans flowing into the coffers of Beijing.

George W. Bush had his own "bidness" based motives for continuing and expanding the immense and primarily one way trade with China. For all the years of the neocons, the money flowed to China. The Mandarins of the Forbidden City used the money well. The infrastructure was improved. Business flourished like fungus after a soaking rain. And, the Peoples Liberation Army in all its arms was modernised at a fierce rate--well in excess of any legitimate defensive need.

Because the cash flooded through the Open Door faster than Beijing could spend it, the surplus was invested in US T Notes and Bills. By the time Bush went, the Central Kingdom held more than 800 billion dollars in these instruments. Of course, buying American government securities made sound financial sense--until now. More, the scarfing up of Uncle Sam's IOUs made very, very good sense in the game of international power politics.

Facing the unknown future of massive indebtedness on a scale never before contemplated in US history, the Obama administration must, that's right, must be sure the Chinese continue to buy and hold our governmental paper. Without the Chinese underwriting the deal(s) there is no way to pay for the ambitious domestic agenda sought by President Obama and the Progressive Caucus of the Democratic Party. No way whatsoever even with tax increases which would gladden the heart of the most confiscatory oriented "progressive."

There is a cost involved. A very real if not dollar denominated cost. By virtue of holding so much of America's collective debt both public and private, the Denizens of the Central Kingdom can exercise significant authority over American foreign policy in all its myriad forms. From global warming to what can be done with Iran to the nature and character of the American commitment to Taiwan, Beijing can exercise a significant piece of "the say."

We the People must share responsibility with the past two administrations for having sold out American freedom to act on the world stage for a mess of consumerist pottage. The Open Door swung wide to our dollars during the greatest spasm of greed and rapacity ever seen in our history. The past two decades have put the legendary excesses of the "robber barons" during the Guilded Age to utter and complete shame.

The reason for that charge is simple. Over the past two decades or so, many of We the People have been direct participants in the mechanism of corporate greed. Through our 401's, or mutual funds, our retirement plans, We the People have demanded corporations show a profit regardless of the hidden, indirect, and long-term costs. Not only have We the People allowed, we have demanded that corporations generally commit treason to the best interests of this country in order to see the next quarter's bottom line better that of the current quarter.

We have cheered lustily at the profits while ignoring the consequences. And, if the consequences, the abstract impacts of the pursuit of profit ever bothered us, we could quickly assuage any anxiety by going out and buying something--anything. So what if factories closed. So what if Walmart, leader of the corporate subverter pack, shelved its "We Buy American" ad campaign as more and more on the big box shelves was marked, "Made in China." So what if our money flowed into the pockets of a regime hostile to our interests, values, and role in the world.

What the hell! As long as the goodies were cheap enough. As long as credit was cheap enough. As long as our individual and joint portfolios were profitable enough, our attitude was that of Edward Newman--"What! Me Worry!"

As long as the buying was good and the profits accruing to us were high, there was no need for We the People individually or collectively to ask, let alone answer a very key question. The question is easy to posit but hard to either contemplate or answer. Here it is---

"How much is enough?"

Look at it. Roll the words around in your mouth. In your mind. Think about it in your life. And, in the lives of all of us. "How much is enough?"

It is the most important question We the People can ask of ourselves--and each other. The answer to this question is the sole means by which our nation will regain its freedom to act for a better world. The answer can free us--over time--from the Chinese, the Arab Sovereign Wealth Funds, and others who bind our capacity to act with impunity on the world stage in chains of debt.

How We the People answer that question will determine more than any other factor what sort of life our descendents can expect in the world. How much freedom they will experience. How much our nation will be the actual guide to a future in which prosperity is not limited to the few at the top of the globalization pyramid but can be far more broadly distributed. How much our nation can act robustly in the world to advance and protect our national interests and those of other countries, other peoples who share our values and norms.

"How much is enough?"

Answered correctly that question allows, no demands, that We the People blow the whistle on the legions of corporate traitors who have facilitated so eagerly--with our complete support--the selling out of American national sovereignty and interest. Answered correctly this question provides a roadmap to a future of greater energy independence, fiscal sobriety, and diplomatic freedom.

It is a mighty powerful question, and that is what makes it so hard to ask and answer. For its power lies in the ability of the answer to be truly transforming. Not the Obama form of transformation, pure prestidigitation requiring smoke, mirrors, and a look-at-this-hand-not-that-one approach to politics and society.

The current economic mess including the unprecedented projected deficit gives both the right time and motivation to ask the key question. It is time for each and everyone of us to use the mantra of Mr Obama's Chief-of-Staff and let no crisis go by unexploited.

"How much is enough?" Ask it. Answer it. Ask the companion questions: "Do I really need that?" "What is important enough to need." Once you get in the groove pointed out by these questions life can be transformed.

It may take a personal crisis. A few years ago the Geek and Her Geekness ran across a luxury SUV stuck in the sand and gravel of the canyon. The owner, some sort of high dollar lawyer had believed that his overpriced vehicle could actually go far, far off the road. He was wrong.

It was hot, over a hundred in the shade. And, out in the dry watercourse, there was no shade.

Their cell phone wouldn't work. Mountains are like that. Even the onboard emergency service system didn't connect. Narrow canyons are like that.

The engine had overheated running the air conditioning. The driver, his wife and the two teenage kids had no more water.

They were miserable. Desperate. Not much traffic out here.

Just before the Geek's (then) forty-two year old Jeep pickup easily yanked the wheel-spinning land yacht out of the holes it had dug, he asked, "Do you really need that thing?"

After a long few seconds, the man replied, "No. I guess not."

May we all be that honest. If we are, we will have a richer and much freer nation.

India's New SSBN--Threat To Stability?

India launched its first nuclear powered submarine in a flurry of publicity the other day. The boat which is at least three years worth of sea trials away from acceptance as a combat unit in the Indian navy was built entirely in India--with Russian assistance. It and its cargo of short range ballistic missiles are a prestige item to be sure.

The question is whether or not the boat, whose name translates as "Destroyer of Enemies" is either a useful weapons system or an inherently destabilizing factor in the region or both.

The Pakistani government clearly sees the "Destroyer of Enemies" as a destroyer of the strategic balance between the two rivals as it gives India a survivable retaliatory capacity. At least in principle it does.

The Islamabad government is attempting to rouse support for its position in the region by alleging that the new Indian SSBN is a potential threat to all neighboring (Muslim) states. Not surprisingly the Indians deny this.

Barely pausing for breath as the Indians re-emphasized the non-threatening intent of the sub, the Pakistanis raised the spectre of a new regional "arms race." The Pakistanis need to get a grip.

The "destroyer of enemies" is more a technology demonstrator and a show-the-flag project than it is a useful system. Its missiles are very short range. Its capacity to launch submerged remains to be seen. The speed with which the Indians can increase the range and payload of the boat's missiles is yet to be seen. Also awaiting the future is the ability of the Indians to bring more SSBNs on line and the speed with which they can do this.

Building more boats will take time. A lot of time. It will take experience with the lead unit of the proposed class. A long period will necessarily ensue before the Indians can claim the possession of a legitimate seaborne leg of their nuclear triad.

Time brings with it the potential for change. Change in the relations of the two old enemies brought about by the common threat of Islamist jihadists. Change brought about by a common apprehension about Iran. Time to realise that even the limited nuclear exchange which can be executed by India and Pakistan is a death sentence for both. Time to realise that the nuclear arsenals are far less useful than their expense warrants.

It is unfortunate that the Indians launched their new toy in the immediate aftermath of the first small steps toward rapprochement between it and Pakistan only days ago at Sharm al-Sheik. The launch is an unnecessary impediment to the selling of even this limited understanding to the Pakistanis (although it will assist the Indian PM getting this unpopular move through the Indian parliament.)

Cooler heads have to prevail in Islamabad. The Indian tech demonstrator does nothing to alter the strategic balance. Neither does it pose any threat to regional stability.

The Pakistani navy should look on the bright side. Maybe they can extort some money out of the US to fund new anti-submarine warfare vessels or something like that. See, even non-threats have an up side.