Oct 17 - 46/45 - McCain +01
Too Little, Too Late?
So, I was reading parts of the army's new field training manual the other day (by the way, this is not a good way to start a conversation at a party, unless you plan on eating lots of shrimp cocktail...by yourself...in the corner...but I digress), and I was really struck by the emphasis on "stability operations." In effect, these operations are meant to compliment overt offensive and defensive military action (in fact, stability operations are given equal importance), and their target is to promote the well-being of the population embroiled in the conflict. Not only must soldiers be responsible for seeking out and eliminating enemies and securing defensive positions, but they must also provide civil security, governmental support, assistance for economic development, and infrastructure support, among other things. This seems to be a drastic shift away from previous emphases on "winning the information battlefield," although certainly gathering and controlling information is still crucial. However, with a new round of sectarian violence apparently erupting today, I wonder if it is a matter of too little, too late in terms of developing a new approach to handling counterinsurgency. The problem seems to be that it is not just a matter of "winning the hearts and minds" of the Iraqi people as part of the new doctrine of stability operations. To borrow a line from Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, what may be required is the ability to create new hearts and minds. In a country where the people have no experience with democratic self-rule, democratic hearts and minds must be created (this is not to say that the Iraqi people are incapable of democratic rule) in order to develop the necessary formal and informal institutions that provide social stability. With the five-year anniversary of this war having just passed, I wonder if another five years will be enough to accomplish such a feat. For a good overview of the new manual, with links to the manual itself (it's long), go to this website: Army Unveils New Field Manual For Operation
(photo from Department of Defense)
By Kevin - 3/26/2008
36 Comments:
Sounds hauntingly like "Vietnamization".
When they appear to be unimpressed with Daisy Cutters and smart bombs... pay them not to shoot at our Marines and offer their kids candy bars and soccer balls.
And schools and medicine and food and reconstruction and electricity and health clinics, the right to vote in a free election...
meanwhile, along the gulf coast in areas hit hard by katrina, some college students took their spring break to go down and help rebuild.
rebuild. after 2.5 years. in the united states.
how about some "unitedstatization"?
while our schools are crumbling, medicine too expensive, food prices going through the roof..yeah our priorities are screwed up
Kevin, great post. The vagueness of the mission has been such a problem from the moment the military phase ended and the supposed non-combat portion began. The language you referenced in the manual seems to be more change for a mission where the only consistency is that we are still there.
"And schools and medicine and food and reconstruction and electricity and health clinics, the right to vote in a free election..."
Russ, please don't ever accuse people here of drinking the Kool-Aid or wearing blinders again.
Even it were remotely true, would it be worth the $5,000 a second it costs the American taxpayer ?
while our schools are crumbling,
Both my kids go to great schools. It's called planning. Try it.
medicine too expensive,
Get a job with benefits.
food prices going through the roof..
It's not the first time in history prices went up. It's the natural expansion and contraction of the economy. Take an economics course.
yeah our priorities are screwed up
Nope...just your lack of personal responsibility.
Even it were remotely true, would it be worth the $5,000 a second it costs the American taxpayer ?
It's very true...and I agree with the problem with the cost, though. Not enough nanny-state programs have been cut.
Here or in Iraq?
Good Video, I wanted to share
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s9ubMQX7
Is there a bigger nanny state than Iraq ?
Of course Russ thinks this country is- where big business privatizes their profits and nationalizes their
losses.
Sorry wrong address
The Tide is Turning
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7s9ubMQX7WE
Russ, I don't know you but your assumptions about me are wrong...
Although my daughter is not old enough for school it's not hard to see the schools crumbling in most cities..I went to a few of them in Akron, and they are finally building new ones...
I have a job with benefits, actually worked for a state, but I also know many who struggle with healthcare costs...
I am responsible and accomplished but I also give a shit about others unlike you..keep drinking the "other type" of kool aid
Good post Kevin, unfortunately, you nailed it: Too little too late
"privatizes their profits and nationalizes their
losses" - Good point Mencken...Or how about - The law is for everyone else BUT ME
How about Rush Limberger's OPERATION CHAOS - this from an avocate of election "reform" = laws guarding against voter fraud, strict registration and ID's
We used to call it " Working BOTH sides of the street"
Russ: I would appreciate hearing your opinion on OPERATION CHAOS
What sucks is that Russ is usually a worthy opponent here and I respect his opinion. But then he starts channeling Sean Hannity and starts tossing out bumper sticker reductionism and wonders why some people don't fall at his feet.
Personal responsibility is not giving Stanley O'Neal $161 million dollars to fuck up Merrill Lynch. But then that's a gross oversimplification of the situation isn't it Russ?
Anon. Leave Akron if you don't like the schools...you're free to do that.
Menck...You can do better than trying to put words in my mouth.
the govt didn't give Stanley Oneal that money
...not giving Stanley O'Neal $161 million dollars to fuck up Merrill Lynch. But then that's a gross oversimplification of the situation isn't it Russ?
The people who should be ticked about that are Merrill Lynch common stock shareholders...and maybe the employees. And I know quite a few brokers over there (first firm I worked for) who aren't miffed at all.
Unless you owned ML stock, Menck, you have nothing to complain agout. FYI...my Dad retired from ML, and even he's not whining...he understands what happened.
But you have to ask...since it was Stanley's aquisition of First Franklin's subprime debt that caused ML's writedown...and just about every firm/bank has taken a hit because of subprime debt...was O'Neal that evil of a person? Blame the Board of Directors for ousting him and paying him what they paid him.
But what's your gripe with this? As someone said...as a taxpayer, what Stanley made isn't coming from your pocket. The government didn't bail ML out.
CEO's have nice compensation packages. Get past that and be at peace.
Merrill Lynch is managing my investments so I think I have every right to bitch. I could switch but my broker says " hey it wasn't my fault".
CEO compensation is a joke. Again, there is no personal responsibility for failure that the rest of us
live with, just parachutes.
Russ, I have some ML and this whizzed me over somehwat.
"Get past that and be at peace"
Beautiful, my son!
Shalom
I gotta say this:
I took a Merrill Lynch investment series (non credit) in college quite a while ago. Cant remember the ML employee that taught it - but he was very upright about it and the knowledge that he taught me is some of the best I every learned.
I think I know what Mencken is driving at. Seems that assholes like O'Neal end up with undue rewards.
I am little jealous - playing by the rules all these years....but not too bad off.
What goes around comes around.
Look it's this simple. Russ rants about personal responsibility, but when some guy like O'Neal
screws up it's all mulligans and "oopsy.. my bad
... hand over the Krugerrands" .
Why is O'Neal the asshole when the Board of Directors decided on his lovely parting gift, Petey? I mean seriously, would you expect him to say, "No thanks...that's too much." It sounds obnoxious to you and me, but when you get to a certain income level, you start thinking "lifetime family legacy." His great-great grandkids will be talking about how he was the first black CEO of Merrill.
And Menck...like you said, you could leave, but you like your advisor. Your relationship must be based upon trust. I always tell my clients, your not a customer of xyz firm, you're MY client.
I started at Merrill in Akron about 16 years ago, by the way. Best firm in the world to be trained by.
What sucks is that Russ is usually a worthy opponent here and I respect his opinion. But then he starts channeling Sean Hannity ...
Aww...that was actually nice. Not the Sean Hannity part...the first part. Thanks, Menck.
I usually try and keep my ultra neocon in check, but every once in awhile, it sneaks out.
The Board are a pack of assholes too - to give him that golden parachute. Makes me wonder how many board members O'Neal had pictures of w/farm animals.
Excerpt from WSJ:
But the problem that I have is that many of Mr. O'Neal's -- and other executives whose companies later crash and burn -- restricted stock grants were awarded based on performance that was materially inflated by bad investments. Merrill Lynch had to write down billions on subprime loans but booked substantial income with them for a little while, when things were going well. The compensation that he "earned during the years prior to 2007" was based in part on results buoyed by investments that later turned out to be garbage!
There ought to be some way for companies to reduce the amount of restricted stock a "retiring CEO" walks away with to a account for inflated results and subsequent writedowns.
O'Neal is an asshole.
Ultra Neocon - NOOOOOOOOOOOO
Sorry Kevin, for hijacking the thread ----Russ did it
If I had known the ML board members names I would have named them too. And Petey's WSJ quote was right on... that O'Neal's previous compensation was based on bullshit. It's like these guys have diplomatic
immunity.
Kevin,
Your analysis is right. It is a revealing example of how poorly planned this war was. Rumsefeld and Chaney thought they could use the "light foot-print" philosophy, and it abysmally failed.
Rambo bitched about the liberal politicians not letting them fight Vietnam, but this was a case of the neo-cons (Rummy & Chaney) not listening to General Franks and others. And regardless if you disagreed with the war, once American troops are there, they should be given every strategic advantage possible.
Regarding CEO packages, while it is disgusting and excessive, it is what the market demands. If these companies could not afford it, or if the CEOs could not demand it, then the money would not be there.
It is indicative though on how thoroughly devalued the average worker has become. Somehow, corporate CEOs are making exponentially more money than they ever were, while workers are not.
SM, I agree that the military should have been listened to. Fact is, Gen Franks and the top echelons quit in protest of politicians misguiding the Iraq operations.
On the CEO comps/ market "demands"
Will you (if you do) and others STOP worshipping the "market" - as if it were a self governing mechanism...and realize that with globalism, the "market' may be a more of a Godzilla - able to step on Uncle Sam at will..
Word for the day - RE-REGULATION
Petey, maybe you were not aware, but I am the biggest proponent of protecting American jobs by demanding other countries trade freely with us. I have railed against our dogmatic belief in free trade and have called for our government to take more protectionist measures.
The fact we refuse to punish China for constantly devaluing their currency and producing goods with slave labor is appalling. We also refuse to punish Europe for using protectionist measures against our goods.
The reason we refuse to protect our workers is done in the name of "free-trade." The thing a lot of people miss is that Adam Smith's philosophy was based on "all things being equal." China's, Europe's, and even Japan's protectionist policies do not make "all things equal."
So while I believe in free trade, I also believe that the playing field should be level and that we need to enact measures that are in the best interest of our country.
Russ I don't live in Akron, and where I live does not matter... like I said your not the kind to give a shit about others...we will just leave it at that
Wah.
SM we are on the same page concerning what I call FAIR Trade.
I was attempting in very few words, to chastise the belief that "to the victor go the spoils"...moreso that O'Neal deserves all he could extract.
O'Neal is a carpetbagger - nothing more or less. His behavior should be chastised and certainly NOT encouraged.
Back to topic:
Can all who blog here agree on this?:
We wish our troops home for Iraq to their families as soon as possible
This post has been removed by the author.
Post a Comment
<< Home