[TorryJens]

"War is the continuation of policy (politics) by other means."
- Karl von Clausewitz


“Given the same amount of intelligence, timidity will do a thousand times more damage than audacity”
- Karl von Clausewitz

"The majority of people are timid by nature, and that is why they constantly exaggerate danger. All influences on the military leader, therefore, combine to give him a false impression of his opponent's strength, and from this arises a new source of indecision."
- Karl von Clausewitz

"The first and most important rule to observe...is to use our entire forces with the utmost energy. The second rule is to concentrate our power as much as possible against that section where the chief blows are to be delivered and to incur disadvantages elsewhere, so that our chances of success may increase at the decisive point. The third rule is never to waste time. Unless important advantages are to be gained from hesitation, it is necessary to set to work at once. By this speed a hundred enemy measures are nipped in the bud, and public opinion is won most rapidly. Finally, the fourth rule is to follow up our successes with the utmost energy. Only pursuit of the beaten enemy gives the fruits of victory."
- Karl von Clausewitz

This Prussian General is considered one of the greatest military minds that existed. He is required reading at West Point. Every quote here is pertainent to what is happening now, HOWEVER none of these lessons can be utilized because we have too many that quibble and sway. Those who insist we play nice or those who want constant apologies. The people on the far left who would rather give up MY freedoms than to have to make the hard choices to keep them. Thank God for the US Marines, Soldiers, and Sailors. In the quest for a utopia that cannot ever exist, it is not politicians who are tying the hands of the military this time around, it is those who are so left wing PC that they endanger not only the American GI but the very Western freedoms and society that allows this spineless node to attempt to give away what is not his to give.

[TorryJens]

Originally posted by Noam
and the Army and Air force too'
To the Navy and the Coast Guard..
Who sail the oceans Blue... "Hail" ? Why do you say that ? Because the design of their helmet ?

In our history, oppressed become oppresser, don't you thing it is time to change?

You are powerfull now, but remember the time you were weak and you will see the future.

That is right for everybody.

[Drugmachine]

No, most of your movements falled. But Zionism has truely magnificently succeeded. Much to your chagrin!

[Big A]

Originally posted by Noam

when God tells Gabriel to blow his horn
and we all go to meet his Son..
God will greet our soldiers from over time
and say...'A Job well Done' God?! So according to the poem, if the US will establish a democracy in Iraq... God will appear and then it's gonna be QUESTIONS TIME!! if you thought George Tenet was nervous wait till we call God to the stand.

[HedgeYourBets]

Originally posted by TDidier
Why silly ? Glorification of bestial military force is a real paganic way of thinking. That is human to be fascinate by the force, as a fly by a fire. At the end the fly burn... but of course this remains necessary. Where a nation does not value its protectors and does not invest in them the proper status, their standing erodes, their capabilities decrease, and the nation becomes vulnerable to a "hostile takeover" from outside.

I understand your point, I really do. But this is not a black and white issue. Believers in non-violence have no defence against foreign violence, that's just the way it works. And weakness invites a challenge, sometimes making future violence more likely rather than less. The key is to ensure that this worship of military things does not become pathological, but it is just as key to make sure that a society doesn not abndon its dedication to protection through arms, becasue both will result in the perversion of society. The first by insiders, the second by outsiders.

Great question, a huge job to achieve that... or to begin to try to respond... . I know, but discussion can be illuminating.

Right! . That is the way choose by allthe tyran... But all powerfull become decadent, and all powerless grown is force on his hate (justified for the major part... But as we know, nobody ever stop the fight for his right at ... his right. On the way of power it is usual to continue as long as a catastrophe rise...) indeed, the tyrant's choice. Sometimes necessary (have you read the Dune books, for example? Fictional example, but still, Leto's tyranny was necessary for survival of the species) but usually not.

And yes, there is a risk of becomming decadent and the rest, just like in any society, people, animal or plant (though "society" is obviously the wrong word) which sufficiently insulates itself from the threats outside - eventually it will become softer, paying more attention to luxuries instead of the neccesities of survival.

I would say it is not necessarily an outcome, however, as white Americans were hardly decadent by imperial roman standards during slavery.

As for stopping the fight at people's right, you are largely correct, though since you mention it, can you point out a people who stopped figthing closer to their right than the Jews of Israel? I can't think of any that rose to commensurate power but abused it so little.

Right, but see the exemple of USA, they seemed to be the best on this way, but today... Or look at Israel and his impresive count of nobel prizes, as israelians or just as jews. The USA is still among the best in this, but they have serious problems, both on the macro level (international relations et al) and on the micro level (treatment of blacks, natives, women etc). They seem better than thery have ever been before, though, especially with regards to micro issues, which are probably the most important.

As for Israel, I would respectfully suggest that were Israel not perpetually faced with the threat of invasion and extermination, they would not have excersized their ability to oppress nearly as much as they have, and their curtrent oppression is less than in most places in the world, especially in the middle east. Women are far more oppressed in Saudi Arabia and in Arab culture generally, and minority groups in Arab countries are treated far worse than Israeli Arabs, even acounting for the disparity in rights among the majorities.

Soviets or nazis never thought themself as oppressors, they just act as they were persuaded was their right to act. not sure I buy this. I think they perceived both - they poerceived they were oppressors but had the right to so act.

It is always the same planning: I'm the best, if I'm the best the cause is that God want that, then I've right to rule my neighbours, for their own good I'll beat them...
Nothing to do with democratie/tyrany... Just stupidity. but with respect to the Americans, they do not want to directly rule, and they are not interested in removing peoiples' self determination. They just want to remove certain choice options, i.e. wage a jihad-genocide against infidels.

While I have a lot of discomfort with religious beliefs in the US, I do not think they as a whole are the we are the best because of god types. They just undertsand that no one else in the world will stand up and fix problems. So if the Americans want something done, they cannot rely on others and must do it themselves. Quite unlike Europe in the cold war, which may be one of the major contributors to the divergence in world view between these countries today.

Warning Canajew, that is the starting point of fascism: oppress for the good of the peopulations... Patriarcal scheme that produce our kings along our whole history.
Just trust in democraties and in the laws accepted by the people... I am aware of that, but I thank you for pointing it out. However, there are many starting points for facism, and some are also necessary starting points for other things.

I understand the "benevolent dictator" is a wonderful idea but impossible in practice due to the inherent characteristics of man (well, maybe possible for 1 generation, but not for multiple ones, 3 seems to be the limit).

But just because an option has risks does not mean it should not be at least looked at. Every option has risks. Risks, when identified, can be mitigated. Alowing a bunch of enemy fanatics the freedom to publish wehat they want, to recruit who they want and to act as they want also has risks, no? Short of killing them, given they are not going to change is not oppression the least bad option? And as for killing them all, this too, of course, is a much stronger starting point for facism, and one that should be avoided at all costs, whoever "them all" may be.

And note that the Arabs, and the Palestiniasn especially ARE a bunch of facists. How does this affect your willingness to allow their empowerment, knowing what they will do with this power as soon as they can?

You are right but we have to remember that we know it well, we practicied that not so long ago... Both tyrany and cultural oppression (low-cast systeme that existed in occident not so long ago). we did. And low key oppression continues in even the most enlightened of western countries today. I just thought to point this out becasue there is a tendancy among the well-meaning but relatively ignorant young leftist base to point to mild US oppression and scream THERE - OPPRESSION, without comparing ti to oppression that exists everywhere else. Yes it needs to be addressed and no it should not be swept under the rug, but no, it is not the biggest oppressive force that exists today. Context is often lost when people do not use a spectrum but just point and say - see, oppression - especially where they ignore oppression in other places (like in Saudi Arabia, for example, or with the apparently delusional "Queers for Palestine" (explain that one for me please?!?))

Very hard question, that's right. But it is the starting point to a real try to understand the mechanism of violence (not only in ME, this mechanism is universal). I agree, universal.

The war is on propaganda of course, just look at the facts and ask you the question: if it was me? Looking at the both sides of course... but what does "if it was me" mean? If I were raised a Palestinian and brainwashed into a cult-of-death shaheed worship culture? Or me as a rational objective actor put onto the board? The Palestiniasn have had so much brainwashing over the years and been fed so many lies continuously for the past 60 that it is very difficult to know who I would be were I there.

But if I knew what I know now (rather than being a brainwashed death cultist) and I were Palestinian, I would argue forcibly that Israeli oppression stemmed from and continues because of our unwillingness to allow them security. I would note that all of the Palestinians' educational institutions were built by the Israelis, and that the Israelis have noted time and time again their willingness to withdraw in exchange for peace. I would not that the oppression I have suffered since 2000 was a direct consequence of my leadership sanctioning and initiating a war of terror directed against Israeli civilians, and I would argue that it needs to stop immediately.

I would also argue that the entire approach had been wrong, becasue the PAlestinians, due to the aformentioned propaganda, truly don't undertsand Jews or Israelis at all. If they did, they would know the best way to get something from a Jew is guilt. Had the Palestinians adopted non-violent protest, fighting with songs and flowers, working to set up peacable civil infrastructure and develop a functioning civil society, they would have gotten almost all they weanted a long time ago (except for the fictional right of return, of coruse, but looking at it from their side I still know its stupid and made up and functionally impossible so I will foresake it in the name of peaceable co-existence and mutual prosperity).