Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: Bush Rebrands Irak - Page 19







Post#451 at 08-04-2006 01:12 PM by salsabob [at Washington DC joined Jan 2005 #posts 746]
---
08-04-2006, 01:12 PM #451
Join Date
Jan 2005
Location
Washington DC
Posts
746

Quote Originally Posted by Linus

- a postmodern version of the premodern Ottoman world.
I have seen this suggested in other posts. I don't think you are, but others I believe have implied that this leads to some sort of containment and means for a peaceful incorporation of Islamic social structure into the world socioeconomic structures and thereby temper Islamic faith-based rage.

I think this is akin to noting that we are secure because those ignorant folks haven't yet discovered gunpowder and that besides it takes two weeks by steamship to get here from there.

The fact of the matter is that a growing segment of that population is gaining access to modern weaponry and increasing their potential global mobility. In the 4th Generation Warfare that we are finding ourselves in, they can use global open-source development to improve their weaponry at a faster rate than any nation-state including the US. They have global communications and a propaganda machine that is orders of magnitude more effective than ours, potentially capable of converting segments of our own citizens to their cause.

And here is what they believe, and believe to the point of willingness to commit suicide -

“And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. And fight not with them at the Inviolable Place of Worship until they first attack you there, but if they attack you (there) then slay them. Such is the reward of disbelievers.” 002:191

“So, when you meet (in fight Jihad in Allah’s Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives).” 047:004

“Remember your Lord inspired the angels with the message: “I am with you: Give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: Smite you above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them.” 008:012

“When at length they provoked Us, We exacted retribution from them, and We drowned them all.” 043:055

“But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever you find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war; but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: For God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. “ 009:005
And we have our own faith-based crazies to facilitate the crusade --

http://www.modbee.com/life/faithvalu...13175747c.html

For thousands of years, prophets have predicted the end of the world. Today, various religious groups, using the latest technology, are trying to hasten it.
Their end game is to speed the promised arrival of a messiah.

For some Christians, this means laying the groundwork for Armageddon. With that goal in mind, megachurch pastors recently met in Inglewood to polish strategies for using global communications and aircraft to transport missionaries to fulfill the Great Commission — to make every person on Earth aware of Jesus' message. Doing so, they believe, will bring about the end, perhaps within two decades.

In Iran, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has a far different vision.

Ahmadinejad, who is defiantly pursuing a nuclear option, has suggested that the elimination of Israel would herald the return of a ninth-century Muslim cleric known as the Mahdi, the 12th Imam. He hopes to welcome that messiah to Tehran within two years.

Conversely, some Jewish groups in Jerusalem hope to clear the path for their own messiah by rebuilding a temple on a site now occupied by one of Islam's holiest shrines. Artisans have re-created priestly robes of white linen, gem-studded breastplates, silver trumpets and solid-gold menorahs to be used in the Holy Temple — along with two 6½-ton marble cornerstones for the building's foundation.

Then there is Clyde Lott, a Mississippi revivalist preacher and cattle rancher. He is trying to raise a unique herd of red heifers to satisfy an obscure injunction in the Book of Numbers: the sacrifice of a blemish-free red heifer for purification rituals needed to pave the way for the messiah. So far, only one of his cows has been verified by rabbis as worthy, meaning they couldn't find even three white or black hairs on the animal.

Linking these efforts is a belief that modern technologies and global communications have made it possible to induce completion of God's plan within this generation.

While there are myriad interpretations of how it will play out, the basic Christian apocalyptic countdown, as described by Old Testament Scripture and the Book of Revelation in the New Testament, is as follows: Jews return to Israel after 2,000 years; the Holy Temple is rebuilt; billions of people perish during seven years of natural disasters and plagues; the Antichrist arises and rules the world; the battle of Armageddon erupts in the vicinity of Israel; Jesus returns to defeat Satan's armies and preside over Judgment Day.

Generations of Christians have hoped for the Second Coming of Jesus, said Eugen Weber, a UCLA historian and author of the 1999 book "Apocalypses: Prophecies, Cults and Millennial Beliefs through the Ages."

"And it's always been an ultimately bloody hope, a slaughterhouse hope," he added with a sigh. "What we have now in this global age is a vaster, bloodier-than-ever Wagnerian version. But, then, we are a very imaginative race."

Apocalyptic movements are nothing new; even Christopher Columbus hoped to assist in the Great Commission by evangelizing New World inhabitants. Some religious scholars saw apocalyptic fever rise as the year 2000 approached, and they expected it to subside after the millennium arrived without a hitch.

It didn't. According to various polls, an estimated 40 percent of Americans believe that a sequence of events presaging the end times is under way. Among the believers are pastors of some of America's largest evangelical churches, who converged at Faith Central Bible Church in Inglewood in February to finalize plans to start 5 million new churches worldwide in 10 years.

"Jesus Christ commissioned his disciples to go to the ends of the Earth and tell everyone how they could achieve eternal life," explained James Davis, president of the Global Pastors Network's "Billion Souls Initiative," one of about 2,000 initiatives worldwide designed to boost the Christian population.

"As we advance around the world," Davis said, "we'll be shortening the time needed to fulfill that Great Commission. Then, the Bible says, the end will come."

An opposing vision, invoked by Ahmadinejad in an address before the United Nations last year, suggests that the Imam Mahdi soon will emerge from a well to conquer the world and convert everyone to Islam.

"O mighty Lord," he said, "I pray to you to hasten the emergence of your last repository, the promised one, that perfect and pure human being, the one that will fill this world with justice and peace."

While mayor of Tehran in 2004, Ahmadinejad spent millions on improvements to make the city more welcoming to Imam Mahdi, according to a report by the American Foreign Policy Center, a nonpartisan think tank.

For Christians, the future of Israel is the key to any end-times scenario, and various groups are reaching out to Jews — or proselytizing among them — to advance the Second Coming.

A growing number of fundamentalist Christians, mostly in the South, are adopting Jewish religious practices to align themselves with prophecies saying that Gentiles will stand as one with Jews when the end is near.

Evangelist John C. Hagee of the 19,000-member Cornerstone Church in San Antonio has helped 12,000 Russian Jews move to Israel and has donated several million dollars to Israeli hospitals and orphanages.

"We are the generation that will probably see the rapture of the church," Hagee said, referring to a moment in advance of Jesus' return when the world's true believers will be lifted to heaven.

"In Christian theology, the first thing that happens when Christ returns to Earth is the judgment of nations," said Hagee, who wears a Jewish prayer shawl when he ministers. "It will have one criterion: How did you treat the Jewish people? Anyone who understands that will want to be on the right side of that question. Those who are anti-Semitic will go to eternal damnation."

On Tuesday, Hagee plans to lead a contingent of high-profile evangelists to Washington to make their concerns about Israel's security known to congressional leaders. More than 1,200 evangelists are expected for the gathering. "Twenty-five years ago, I called a meeting of evangelists to discuss such an effort and the conversation didn't last an hour," he said. "This time, I called and they all came and stayed. And when the meeting was over, they all agreed to speak up for Israel."

Underlining the sense of urgency is a belief that the end-times clock started ticking May 15, 1948, when the United Nations formally recognized Israel.

"I'll never forget that night," Hagee said. "I was 8 years old at the time and in the kitchen with my father listening to the news about Israel's rebirth on the radio. He said, 'Son, this is the most important day in the 20th century.' " Given end-times scenarios saying that nonbelievers will die before Jesus returns — and that the Antichrist will rule from Jerusalem's rebuilt Holy Temple — Jews have mixed feelings about the outpouring of support Israel has been getting from evangelical organizations.

"I truly believe John Hagee is at once a daring, beautiful person — and quite dangerous," said Orthodox Rabbi Brad Hirschfield, vice president of the National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership in New York. "I sincerely recognize him as a hero for bringing planeloads of people to Israel at a time when people there were getting blown up by the busloads. But he also believes that the only path to the Father is through Jesus. That leaves me out."

Meanwhile, in what has become a spectacular annual routine, Jews — hoping to rebuild the Holy Temple destroyed by the Romans in A.D. 70 — attempt to haul 6½-ton cornerstones by truck up to the Temple Mount, the site now occupied by the Dome of the Rock mosque. Each year, they are turned back by police.

Among those who have been turned away is Gershon Solomon, spokesman for Jerusalem's Temple Institute. When the temple is built, he said, "Islam is over. I'm grateful for all the wonderful Christian angels wanting to help us."

But when asked to comment on the fate of non-Christians upon the Second Coming of Jesus, he said, "That's a very embarrassing question. What can I tell you? That's a very terrible Christian idea. What kind of religion is it that expects another religion will be destroyed?"

So, are all of these efforts to hasten the end of the world a bit like, well, playing God? Some Christians, such as Roman Catholics and some Protestant denominations, believe in the Second Coming but don't try to advance it. It's important to be ready for the Second Coming, they say, although its timetable cannot be manipulated.

Hirschfield said he prays every day for the coming of the Jewish messiah, but he, too, believes that God can't be hurried.

"For me," he said, "the messiah is like the mechanical bunny at a racetrack: it always stays a little ahead of the runners but keeps the pace toward a redeemed world.

"Trouble is, there are many people who want to bring a messiah who looks just like them. For me, that kind of messianism is spiritual narcissism."

Christian leaders such as Ted Haggard, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, say the commitment to fulfilling the Great Commission has naturally intensified along with the technological advances God provided to carry out his plans.

Over in Mississippi, Clyde Lott believes he's doing God's work, and that's why he wants to raise a few head of red heifers for Jewish high priests. Citing Scripture, Lott and others say a pure red heifer must be sacrificed and burned and its ashes must be used in purification rituals to allow Jews to rebuild the temple.

But Lott's plans have been sidetracked.

Facing a maze of red tape and testing involved in shipping animals overseas — and rumors of threats from Arabs and Jews alike who feel the cows would only bring more trouble to the Middle East — he has given up on plans to fly planeloads of cows to Israel. For now.

"Something deep in my heart says God wants me to be a blessing to Israel," Lott said. "But it's complicated. We're just not ready to send any red heifers over there."

If not now, when? "If there's a sovereign God with his hand in the affairs of men, it'll happen, and it'll be a pivotal event," he said. "That time is soon."




Perhaps its only a matter of which side will lead us into prayer? Afterall, its the same sky god, right?

Makes for a great 4T, no?

'lost in a roman... wilderness of pain
and all [Abraham's] children are insane
All [His] children are insane
[no longer just] waiting for the summer rain"
"Che l'uomo il suo destin fugge di raro [For rarely man escapes his destiny]" - Ludovico Ariosto







Post#452 at 08-05-2006 11:17 AM by Mikebert [at Kalamazoo MI joined Jul 2001 #posts 4,502]
---
08-05-2006, 11:17 AM #452
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Kalamazoo MI
Posts
4,502

Quote Originally Posted by salsabob
Quote Originally Posted by Linus
(I just heard Chucky Krauthammer on Fox News blithely suggest that the real problem in Iraq was now Sadr, as if turning the guns on him would not lead Shiites to rally behind him.)
A couple hundred thousand rally in Sadr City and in other key Shitte cities



Burning not only Israeli flags --



And clearly showing allegiance



Coming to a town near you?

The connection?

...And as I looked at those demolished towers in Lebanon, it entered my mind that we should punish the oppressor in kind and that we should destroy towers in America in order that they taste some of what we tasted and so that they be deterred from killing our women and children...OBL 11/01/04 transcript
Beirut Towers before demolished by '82 Israeli bombardment.




Hold on, the elevator to faith-based hell is about to drop another floor.

"Lost in a roman.... wilderness of pain
And all the children are insane."
But what happens if the US withdraws from Iraq? Won't the Sadrists be up to their neck with Sunni alligators? A three-way split does them no good, they would be Shia left in a Sunni-dominated middle state that is bent on revenge.

It will be in their interest to see the Shia win control of the middle of the country--but that won't happen without dealing with the Sunnis, Syrian-backed Iraqi Baathists, and Saudi-backed al Qaeda. Hezbollah and Israel are too remote to worry about in this struggle for survival. Only under continued American-provided stability can they even hold demonstrations.







Post#453 at 08-07-2006 11:29 AM by scott 63 [at Birmingham joined Sep 2001 #posts 697]
---
08-07-2006, 11:29 AM #453
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Birmingham
Posts
697

[quote="salsabob"]
Quote Originally Posted by Linus
In the 4th Generation Warfare that we are finding ourselves in, they can use global open-source development to improve their weaponry at a faster rate than any nation-state including the US.
Are you saying that they can use open-source development to build weapons, ie. hardware? I've never heard of open-source being used for anything but software. Perhaps you mean malicious hacking as a cyber-weapon or the sharing of information on the better use of hardware (a misuse of the the term open-source).

In any case, it has been pointed out (I forget where) that Hizbullah does not use suicide bombers like Hamas because it does not have to. Hizbullas effectively as possible considering the military machine they are up against. Suicide bombings are not an idealogy, they are a tool. They are the weapon of choice for groups who have no other weapons. Even in asymmetrical warefare insurgents/rebels/guerillas/Jihadists/etc use the same classic small group tactics as the mythical minutemen at Concord emplying the best weaponry they could get their hands on.
Leave No Child Behind - Teach Evolution.







Post#454 at 08-07-2006 03:58 PM by salsabob [at Washington DC joined Jan 2005 #posts 746]
---
08-07-2006, 03:58 PM #454
Join Date
Jan 2005
Location
Washington DC
Posts
746

Quote Originally Posted by scott 63

Are you saying that they can use open-source development to build weapons, ie. hardware? I've never heard of open-source being used for anything but software. Perhaps you mean malicious hacking as a cyber-weapon or the sharing of information on the better use of hardware (a misuse of the the term open-source).
Good place to start --


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/15/opinion/15robb.html

The insurgency uses an open-source community approach (similar to the decentralized development process now prevalent in the software industry) to warfare that is extremely quick and innovative. New technologies and tactics move rapidly from one end of the insurgency to the other, aided by Iraq's relatively advanced communications and transportation grid - demonstrated by the rapid increases in the sophistication of the insurgents' homemade bombs. This implies that the insurgency's innovation cycles are faster than the American military's slower bureaucratic processes (for example: its inability to deliver sufficient body and vehicle armor to our troops in Iraq).

Second, there are few visible fault lines in the insurgency that can be exploited. Like software developers in the open-source community, the insurgents have subordinated their individual goals to the common goal of the movement. This has been borne out by the relatively low levels of infighting we have seen between insurgent groups. As a result, the military is not going to find a way to chop off parts of the insurgency through political means - particularly if former Ba'athists are systematically excluded from participation in the new Iraqi state by the new Constitution.
It's possible, as Microsoft has found, that there is no good monopolistic solution to a mature open-source effort. In that case, the United States might be better off adopting I.B.M.'s embrace of open source. This solution would require renouncing the state's monopoly on violence by using Shiite and Kurdish militias as a counterinsurgency. This is similar to the strategy used to halt the insurgencies in El Salvador in the 1980's and Colombia in the 1990's. In those cases, these militias used local knowledge, unconstrained tactics and high levels of motivation to defeat insurgents (this is in contrast to the ineffectiveness of Iraq's paycheck military). This option will probably work in Iraq too.
"Che l'uomo il suo destin fugge di raro [For rarely man escapes his destiny]" - Ludovico Ariosto







Post#455 at 08-07-2006 04:52 PM by scott 63 [at Birmingham joined Sep 2001 #posts 697]
---
08-07-2006, 04:52 PM #455
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Birmingham
Posts
697

Quote Originally Posted by salsabob
Quote Originally Posted by scott 63

Are you saying that they can use open-source development to build weapons, ie. hardware? I've never heard of open-source being used for anything but software. Perhaps you mean malicious hacking as a cyber-weapon or the sharing of information on the better use of hardware (a misuse of the the term open-source).
Good place to start --


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/15/opinion/15robb.html

The insurgency uses an open-source community approach (similar to the decentralized development process now prevalent in the software industry) to warfare that is extremely quick and innovative. New technologies and tactics move rapidly from one end of the insurgency to the other, aided by Iraq's relatively advanced communications and transportation grid - demonstrated by the rapid increases in the sophistication of the insurgents' homemade bombs. This implies that the insurgency's innovation cycles are faster than the American military's slower bureaucratic processes (for example: its inability to deliver sufficient body and vehicle armor to our troops in Iraq).

Second, there are few visible fault lines in the insurgency that can be exploited. Like software developers in the open-source community, the insurgents have subordinated their individual goals to the common goal of the movement. This has been borne out by the relatively low levels of infighting we have seen between insurgent groups. As a result, the military is not going to find a way to chop off parts of the insurgency through political means - particularly if former Ba'athists are systematically excluded from participation in the new Iraqi state by the new Constitution.
It's possible, as Microsoft has found, that there is no good monopolistic solution to a mature open-source effort. In that case, the United States might be better off adopting I.B.M.'s embrace of open source. This solution would require renouncing the state's monopoly on violence by using Shiite and Kurdish militias as a counterinsurgency. This is similar to the strategy used to halt the insurgencies in El Salvador in the 1980's and Colombia in the 1990's. In those cases, these militias used local knowledge, unconstrained tactics and high levels of motivation to defeat insurgents (this is in contrast to the ineffectiveness of Iraq's paycheck military). This option will probably work in Iraq too.
Thanks
Leave No Child Behind - Teach Evolution.







Post#456 at 08-07-2006 05:28 PM by salsabob [at Washington DC joined Jan 2005 #posts 746]
---
08-07-2006, 05:28 PM #456
Join Date
Jan 2005
Location
Washington DC
Posts
746

Quote Originally Posted by Mike Alexander '59
But what happens if the US withdraws from Iraq? Won't the Sadrists be up to their neck with Sunni alligators? A three-way split does them no good, they would be Shia left in a Sunni-dominated middle state that is bent on revenge.

It will be in their interest to see the Shia win control of the middle of the country--but that won't happen without dealing with the Sunnis, Syrian-backed Iraqi Baathists, and Saudi-backed al Qaeda. Hezbollah and Israel are too remote to worry about in this struggle for survival. Only under continued American-provided stability can they even hold demonstrations.
I like the direction you are headed in regard to taking advantage of the wedges between the parties. However, I am so concerned about faith-based rage driving 4GW to our shores that I have move beyond your isolationism or containment approaches to a position of seeing the dire need for the active promotion of the wedges. Much of it clandistine (however, with aggressive pursuit of any one who attacks us such as OBL, with extreme heads-on-sticks advertisement of hoped-for successes), the goal would be containment with hoped-for exhaustion (perhaps taking several generations) of faith-based rage in the Muslim world. And needless to say, a key domestic necessity of the strategy being the removal of faith-based decision-making from our own government.

Such a goal/strategy offers interesting tactics for extracting ourselves from the current undesirable commitment in the region. Perhaps through the Sauds/Syrians, we can cut a secret deal with the Bathists to let us out with a 'win' before the real blood starts to spill. Perhaps we can insist on some large but highly isolated bases (but next to Jordan) in the western province -- for their protection, of course. I think key would also be to work a deal with Turkey for an Iraq federation that would give de facto Kurdistan, that along with our commitment and air support, would be a constant irritant to Iran and Syria. Just a start ---


Agent Sands: El, you really must try this because it's puerco pibil. It's a slow-roasted pork, nothing fancy. It just happens to be my favorite, and I order it with a tequila and lime in every dive I go to in this country. And honestly, that is the best it's ever been anywhere. In fact, it's too good. It's so good that when I'm finished, I'll pay my check, walk straight into the kitchen and shoot the cook. Because that's what I do. I restore the balance to this country.
El Mariachi: You want me to shoot the cook?
Agent Sands: No. I'll shoot the cook. My car's parked out back, anyway.
"Che l'uomo il suo destin fugge di raro [For rarely man escapes his destiny]" - Ludovico Ariosto







Post#457 at 08-09-2006 03:32 AM by Linus [at joined Oct 2005 #posts 1,731]
---
08-09-2006, 03:32 AM #457
Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
1,731

Saving Iraq was always going to hinge on the Shiite majority vigorously opposing partition.

Their support for federalism early in the constitutional process ought to have been a warning sign, but it seems that Shiite support for partition is growing.

Quote Originally Posted by Borzou Daragahi
Leaders of Iraq's powerful Shiite Muslim political bloc have begun aggressively promoting a radical plan to partition the country as a way of separating the warring sects. Some Iraqis are even talking about dividing the capital, with the Tigris River as a kind of Berlin Wall.

Shiites have long advocated some sort of autonomy in the south, similar to the Kurds' 15-year-old enclave in the north, with its own defense forces and control over oil exploration. And the new constitution does allow provinces to team up into federal regions. But the latest effort, promulgated by Cabinet ministers, clerics and columnists, marks the first time they have advocated regional partition as a way of stemming violence.

"Federalism will cut off all parts of the country that are incubating terrorism from those that are upgrading and improving," said Khudair Khuzai, the Shiite education minister. "We will do it just like Kurdistan. We will put soldiers along the frontiers."

The growing clamor for partition illustrates how dire the country's security, economic and political problems have come to seem to many Iraqis: Until recently, the idea of redrawing the 8 1/2 -decade-old map of Iraq was considered seditious.
Buh bye Iraq. We hardly knew thee...
"Jan, cut the crap."

"It's just a donut."







Post#458 at 08-09-2006 03:45 AM by Linus [at joined Oct 2005 #posts 1,731]
---
08-09-2006, 03:45 AM #458
Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
1,731

Israel's bombing of a Lebanese power plant has caused an oil spill that "could rival the Exxon Valdez disaster."

And Israel won't even allow officials to assess the catastrophe let alone begin a cleanup.

Quote Originally Posted by Bloomberg
"The spill has yet to be cleaned up or assessed more than three weeks after the bombing of the coastal Jiyyeh power plant south of Beirut because of the continuation of hostilities, Achim Steiner, Executive Director of the UN Environment Program, said in the statement.

The spill, which has polluted around two-thirds of the Lebanese coast and spread into neighboring Syria, may threaten East Mediterranean countries such as Cyprus and Turkey, Lebanon's Environment Minister Yacoub Sarraf has said...

...The Israel navy also prohibited Lebanese and foreign officials from surveying the damage of the spill from Lebanon's territorial waters, the minister said. The spill has grown into a 3,000-square kilometer area because it absorbed water, Sarraf said.
"Jan, cut the crap."

"It's just a donut."







Post#459 at 08-09-2006 08:57 AM by [at joined #posts ]
---
08-09-2006, 08:57 AM #459
Guest

Could someone explain what any of this has to do with generations?

I now these discussions are important but could someone relate them a bit to the generational threads? I'm really on this site for that purpose.
Not that I'm trying to rain anyone's party here.







Post#460 at 08-09-2006 09:13 AM by Child of Socrates [at Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort joined Sep 2001 #posts 14,092]
---
08-09-2006, 09:13 AM #460
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort
Posts
14,092

Quote Originally Posted by JayN
Could someone explain what any of this has to do with generations?

I now these discussions are important but could someone relate them a bit to the generational threads? I'm really on this site for that purpose.
Not that I'm trying to rain anyone's party here.
The "Special Topics" forum is kind of a catch-all for whatever people want to post.

There's more generational talk in the "Generations" forum. I'd look there.







Post#461 at 08-09-2006 10:11 AM by KaiserD2 [at David Kaiser '47 joined Jul 2001 #posts 5,220]
---
08-09-2006, 10:11 AM #461
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
David Kaiser '47
Posts
5,220

Quote Originally Posted by JayN
Could someone explain what any of this has to do with generations?

I now these discussions are important but could someone relate them a bit to the generational threads? I'm really on this site for that purpose.
Not that I'm trying to rain anyone's party here.
They certainly have a lot to do with turnings. We have propelled the whole Middle East into a 4th. As the New York Times points out today, our moderate friends are being squeezed out by our policies.

David K '47







Post#462 at 08-09-2006 12:02 PM by Linus [at joined Oct 2005 #posts 1,731]
---
08-09-2006, 12:02 PM #462
Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
1,731

Quote Originally Posted by JayN
Could someone explain what any of this has to do with generations?

I now these discussions are important but could someone relate them a bit to the generational threads? I'm really on this site for that purpose.
Not that I'm trying to rain anyone's party here.
The real question here is what it has to do with the Iraq War, which is what this thread is supposed to be about. The answer of course - apart from analogies between Israel's failing war against Hezbollah and the Iraq War - is precious little, but it seems to have ended up here anyhow.

But anything that bothers the radical right should probably be left where it is. In fact, perhaps I'll start leaving posts - like little droppings - here and there, at random, concerning the barbarity and stupidity of Israel's war.

If you're wondering what Israel's bombing of Lebanese civilians and infrastructure and its callous disregard for the environment while doing so might have to do with generations theory, I suggest perhaps you read this little book.

As to why you came here, I think you'll find that no one especially cares, anymore than they care overly much why I came here. In fact, I think you'll find that unless Dick "Secret Bunker" Cheney or Jesus H Christ himself show up no one especially cares why anyone else is here.
"Jan, cut the crap."

"It's just a donut."







Post#463 at 08-09-2006 01:05 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
08-09-2006, 01:05 PM #463
Guest

Actually, I'm something approaching a peacenik liberal. Hardly a conservative on anything. I think we should just get out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Let the Middle East blow itself to kingdom come. I'm not interested in our involvement in wars over there or anywhere, really. As for why to support Israel, even morally? Well, I feel they have a right to exist and they are certainly, for all their many imperfections, far more democratic than their Hizbollah enemies. How many Jews would Hizbollah accept into its ranks? Or Christians? Or maybe even Sunnis? I can tell you that there aer Druze, Christians, Arab Bedouins, Jews, and Muslims all serving in Israel's Army. Israel is a diverse society like ours. Again, though, you could post hundreds or thousands of posts if you like about Israel. That's fine with me. Just please elaborate on how the Irak debacle has to do with generations. Not only, you, Linus, but everyone. And although I'm a liberal (which is supposed to mean openminded) I don't think they have cornered the market on moral perfection. I think there are many highminded conservatives who are quite nice people, thank you.







Post#464 at 08-09-2006 01:17 PM by Linus [at joined Oct 2005 #posts 1,731]
---
08-09-2006, 01:17 PM #464
Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
1,731

Mr. Strauss and Mr. Howe's theory involves not just generational cycles, but a series of four "turnings" which culminate in a Crisis era.

There is some debate in these parts about whether the Iraq War is a Crisis War or not, but simply debating the fact - as well as the war's ongoing progress (or lack of), and what it means for the region and for America now and in the future (as well as for Iraq itself) - makes it relevant to a discussion of the Theory.

It is my belief that the threat of Islamist terrorism (and the reordering of the mideast's political geography), as well as the end of cheap oil, and the need for political and economic reform at home (and reform of international institutions) are the principal themes of this Crisis. Iraq certainly figures into all that.

PS My apologies for lumping you in with the likes of Marky Mark and Pope Hope (who could improve on that name?). I suppose it is an improvement over them that your enthusiasm for bombing Arabs into the dark ages only pertains to Israel, and not to America; kudos!
"Jan, cut the crap."

"It's just a donut."







Post#465 at 08-09-2006 01:59 PM by The Wonkette [at Arlington, VA 1956 joined Jul 2002 #posts 9,209]
---
08-09-2006, 01:59 PM #465
Join Date
Jul 2002
Location
Arlington, VA 1956
Posts
9,209

Quote Originally Posted by Linus
Quote Originally Posted by JayN
Could someone explain what any of this has to do with generations?

I now these discussions are important but could someone relate them a bit to the generational threads? I'm really on this site for that purpose.
Not that I'm trying to rain anyone's party here.
The real question here is what it has to do with the Iraq War, which is what this thread is supposed to be about. The answer of course - apart from analogies between Israel's failing war against Hezbollah and the Iraq War - is precious little, but it seems to have ended up here anyhow.

But anything that bothers the radical right should probably be left where it is. In fact, perhaps I'll start leaving posts - like little droppings - here and there, at random, concerning the barbarity and stupidity of Israel's war.

If you're wondering what Israel's bombing of Lebanese civilians and infrastructure and its callous disregard for the environment while doing so might have to do with generations theory, I suggest perhaps you read this little book.

As to why you came here, I think you'll find that no one especially cares, anymore than they care overly much why I came here. In fact, I think you'll find that unless Dick "Secret Bunker" Cheney or Jesus H Christ himself show up no one especially cares why anyone else is here.
Not to be picky, but why aren't you posting things on the Israel bombings in the Israel thread rather than the Iraq thread?
I want people to know that peace is possible even in this stupid day and age. Prem Rawat, June 8, 2008







Post#466 at 08-09-2006 07:07 PM by Linus [at joined Oct 2005 #posts 1,731]
---
08-09-2006, 07:07 PM #466
Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
1,731

I think we covered that subject already: I was an idiot, or drunk, maybe both.

And I still may be.
"Jan, cut the crap."

"It's just a donut."







Post#467 at 08-09-2006 08:09 PM by Bob Butler 54 [at Cove Hold, Carver, MA joined Jul 2001 #posts 6,431]
---
08-09-2006, 08:09 PM #467
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Cove Hold, Carver, MA
Posts
6,431

A Perspective

Quote Originally Posted by JayN
Could someone explain what any of this has to do with generations?

I now these discussions are important but could someone relate them a bit to the generational threads? I'm really on this site for that purpose.
Not that I'm trying to rain anyone's party here.
From my perspective, crises are periods of change when flaws in the old society or new technology renders an old pattern of culture obsolete. They are often violent. Before all out 4T violence occurs, there are often escalating series of precursor violence. I call these spirals of violence. Others use the word 'cascades'. The Sons of Liberty protests in Boston, John Brown's Bleeding Kansas and Harper's Ferry raids, and the Spanish Civil War might stand as examples of precursor violence. These are effectively dry runs, illustrating the emotions and issues that might be seen again in the near future on a larger scale. They might also reveal new military technology and tactics, potentially revealing for those who wish to avoid designing armed forces to fight the wrong style of battle.

The effectiveness of insurgency given modern weapons availability and how this changes the balance of power between major and minor powers seems likely to be a major theme in the upcoming crisis. Iraq, Gaza and Lebanon are the most visible illustration of this new reality, the the Balkans, Somalia and East Timor also provide lessons.

Insurgency is only the military element. There are energy, political, religious, racial, economic and ecological issues as well. It seems to me, that no matter how wise we grow in using military force against insurgents (or recognizing the wisdom of not doing so) one has to solve the energy, political, religious, racial, economic and ecological aspects of the problem if one wants a resolution of the military aspects.

But we are still too much in the 'On to Richmond' phase. It is tempting, early in a crisis, for the established factions to attempt to maintain the status quo by force. I would say broadly that this generally doesn't work. If a conservative faction wants to maintain power, it ought to address the issues which drive the progressive faction. Queen Victoria and Bismarck might illustrate a basic pattern for how conservative establishments might neutralize progressive opposition, maintain power, and save their countries from major upheaval in the process.

I like George III's and George XLIII's approaches less well.

I personally do not emphasize the generations aspect of S&H's theory. I will accept a premise that every four score and seven years, the political environment is more favorable to transforming change than at other times. I don't like to dwell on the generational stereotypes. They remind me too much of astrology, in saying all people born in a given time frame share similar characteristics. This may be true in a very broad sense, but I don't think it prudent to stereotype people. I want to discuss issues with people, not with stereotypes of people. There are enough people on the board fighting against distorted constructs of 'what all liberals think' or 'whiggery', people fighting against political movements that exist only in their own minds. We're having enough tangential arguments between Red and Blue value systems, between Christians and Muslims, without bringing the old 60s Generation Gap divides back to life.

I believe S&H are onto something. In a broad statistical large scale way, the generations are real. I just don't choose to add fuel to that particular fire. There are other fires that need tending more.







Post#468 at 08-11-2006 06:35 PM by Virgil K. Saari [at '49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains joined Jun 2001 #posts 7,835]
---
08-11-2006, 06:35 PM #468
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
'49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains
Posts
7,835

Rectify this!

Quote Originally Posted by The AnalPhilosopher
The reason it’s inappropriate to describe Islamists as fascists is simple: They’re not statists. To Muslims, including that subset of Muslims I call Islamists (see below), a state is at best a temporary thing, performing certain administrative, organizational, or ideological tasks. It has no independent significance, as it does in, say, the Christian tradition. (“Render unto Caesar” and all that.) Islamists aren’t trying to create a state in which all the parts work as one; their ultimate goal is a stateless world in which everyone worships Allah. Read up on Islam if this seems strange to you.
The AnalPhilosopher Contra Bush of Crawford: On the Term Fascism







Post#469 at 09-01-2006 08:34 PM by KaiserD2 [at David Kaiser '47 joined Jul 2001 #posts 5,220]
---
09-01-2006, 08:34 PM #469
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
David Kaiser '47
Posts
5,220

Interesting item tonight

The Pentagon is fulfilling its legally mandated responsibility to Congress, with interesting results.

Pentagon: conditions for civil war exist in Iraq

By Will Dunham 2 hours, 11 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The core conflict in
Iraq has changed from a battle against insurgents to an increasingly bloody fight between Shi'ite and Sunni Muslims, creating conditions that could lead to civil war, the
Pentagon said in a report on Friday.
ADVERTISEMENT


Yes No
Yes No

Yes No


The congressionally mandated report provided a sober assessment of Iraq over the past three months, saying overall attacks rose 24 percent to 792 per week -- highest of the war -- and daily Iraqi casualties soared 51 percent to nearly 120.

Violence between minority Sunnis, who controlled Iraq under former President
Saddam Hussein, and the majority Shi'ites, who are asserting themselves after decades of oppression, now defines the conflict, it stated.

Sectarian violence is spreading north, outside of Baghdad into Diyala province and oil-rich Kirkuk, it said. Death squads, sometimes with "rogue elements" of U.S.-trained Iraqi security forces, are heavily responsible for the sectarian violence, including execution-style killings, it said.

And some ordinary Iraqis now look to illegal militias to provide for their safety and sometimes for social needs and welfare, undermining Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's government, it said.

The 63-page report said the Sunni Arab insurgency remained "potent and viable," although its visibility has been overshadowed by the increasing sectarian violence.

The release of this fifth in a series of quarterly Pentagon assessments comes as
President George W. Bush strives to bolster sagging U.S. public support two months before U.S. congressional elections while Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President
Dick Cheney assail war critics.

"Conditions that could lead to civil war exist in Iraq," the report stated.

"Nevertheless, the current violence is not a civil war, and movement toward a civil war can be prevented," it added. It called the security environment the most complex since the March 2003 U.S.-led invasion.

'TIPPING INTO CIVIL WAR'

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said the report showed speeches by Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld "are increasingly disconnected from the facts on the ground in Iraq. Even the Pentagon acknowledges Iraq is tipping into civil war."

Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Edward Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) said the report "reaffirms what the American people already understand: the conditions of civil war exist, violence in Iraq is spiraling out of control and staying the course is not a viable option."

Since the last report in May, the core conflict in Iraq has changed into a struggle between Sunni and Shi'ite extremists vying to control key areas in Baghdad, protect sectarian enclaves, divert economic resources and impose their own political and religious agendas, the report stated.

Peter Rodman, assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs, said, "The last quarter, as you know, has been rough, and the levels of violence are up. And the sectarian quality of the violence is particularly acute and disturbing."

The United States has boosted its Iraq force to 140,000, the most since January, with the 15,000 troops in Baghdad trying to halt the slide into all-out civil war.

Asked if Iraq already was in a low-grade civil war, Rear Adm. William Sullivan, a senior strategic planner for the military's Joint Staff, said, "It's hard to say," adding there is no "universally accepted definition" for civil war.

The civil war wasn't started by Al Queda. It was started by Sunnis 80 years ago, and the Shi'ites are fighting back for the first time. Iraq is going the way of the other post-1919 states, the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia.

David K '47







Post#470 at 09-02-2006 04:54 PM by Mikebert [at Kalamazoo MI joined Jul 2001 #posts 4,502]
---
09-02-2006, 04:54 PM #470
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
Kalamazoo MI
Posts
4,502

Quote Originally Posted by salsabob View Post
I like the direction you are headed in regard to taking advantage of the wedges between the parties. However, I am so concerned about faith-based rage driving 4GW to our shores that I have move beyond your isolationism or containment approaches to a position of seeing the dire need for the active promotion of the wedges.
I don't see the US as being the target you see it to be. IMO, these sorts of fears are a reflection of belief in American exceptionalism. Some Americans believe America has a special role in the world, ordained by God or History. If America is *special* then it stands to reason that those who envy our specialness would reserve extra special hatred for America.

I don't think foreigners buy the American exceptionalism view. Jihadists who want to restore traditional Islamic rule in their respective countries see America as an impediment, like the Soviet Union was in the 1980's, rather than as a *special* "attractor" for their attention. Were the US involvement in the Middle East more like that of Sweden or Brazil, I believe jihadists woudl pay as much attention to America as they do towards Sweden or Brazil.







Post#471 at 09-05-2006 12:19 PM by salsabob [at Washington DC joined Jan 2005 #posts 746]
---
09-05-2006, 12:19 PM #471
Join Date
Jan 2005
Location
Washington DC
Posts
746

Quote Originally Posted by Mikebert View Post
I don't see the US as being the target you see it to be. IMO, these sorts of fears are a reflection of belief in American exceptionalism. Some Americans believe America has a special role in the world, ordained by God or History. If America is *special* then it stands to reason that those who envy our specialness would reserve extra special hatred for America.

I don't think foreigners buy the American exceptionalism view. Jihadists who want to restore traditional Islamic rule in their respective countries see America as an impediment, like the Soviet Union was in the 1980's, rather than as a *special* "attractor" for their attention. Were the US involvement in the Middle East more like that of Sweden or Brazil, I believe jihadists woudl pay as much attention to America as they do towards Sweden or Brazil.
Ideally, you are correct. And importantly, our reduced overt involvement should be a major tenet of our strategy. However, how long, and in what way, could we reduce, in reality or in perception, our involvement to a level of that of Brazil or Sweden, or perhaps just to the higher level of involvement of say China or Russia?

For argument's sake, let's put aside the reality of the degree we are dependent on a global economy that is highly dependent on ME oil. Let's also put aside that "American exceptionalism" belief that it is up to us to secure that ME oil flow (e.g. the Saudi's can fend for themselves or the fall of the House of Saud is of no long-term consequences). Let's also assume that we can withdraw our overt involvement in a way that will not be perceived as defeat and embolden the Jihadists or others (e.g. Iran) to cause us any significant harm (during the time delay before they realize we are of no more consequence than Brazil or Sweden).

What remains for consideration is that other "American exceptionalism" belief, the perception of our unique involvement in the ME. Before one begins to determine how long and by what means this perception can be removed, one needs to understand its nature and most importantly, understand that it is a belief or perception that is not just held by Americans. Even before the latest Iraq excursion, it would be difficult to argue that the perception of involvement of the US in the region has not been burnt into the psychic of most in the ME. Further, there is considerable Jihadist text that likens the assault of globalization on Islam to that of a snake with a head being that of the US. To diminish the perception of our exceptional involvement, one needs to either diminish the impacts of globalization and/or diminish the sense of the US being the exceptional "face" of that globalization.

Perhaps once established, a caliphate may be able to limit globalization's actual impact (China's and Iran's attempts my be instructive) on Islamic culture, however, I question if such limitations will achieve that which is desired by the Jihadist -- eliminating globalization's challenge to the imposition of Sharia law throughout (at least) the ME. Even without any involvement by the US, it seems that establishing the caliphate state, isolating it from globalization, and imposing Sharia law may take a struggle in the region and at least a little bit of time. And as long as we are the exceptional "face" of globalization that impedes Islamism, we are of issue to the Jihadist. And frankly, would the Jihadist want it to be any other way?

While Israel provides some measure of a rallying point, the Jihadist clearly understands that overt US involvement, in reality or in perception, is what is crucial to their legitimacy and survival in the shifting sands of the ME that are extremely dangerous even for them. As such, they will do what is necessary to keep us overtly involve, and it may be difficult for us not to overtly react to their provocations to keep us overtly involved. At best, when we do overtly react, we can strive to react in a manner that can be perceived as "just" (e.g. Afghanistan) and not as "unjust" (e.g., Iraq?).

If it hasn't already done so, I think the natural direction of globalization is to loss its American face (how can it be otherwise with so many Chinese and Indians now working the globalization milieu?). However, central to their strategy and survival, the Jihadists will work to keep that US face. Right now, with us stumbling around like some wounded monster in the mist of the ME, they don't have to work too hard at it.

We need a new path. We need to take their strategy of "Managing Savagery," turn it on its head, and direct it with full covert force upon them.

This is a little out-of-date and simplistic, but it’s a good start --


http://www.ctc.usma.edu/Stealing%20A...20--%20CTC.pdf

Ergo, let’s give the Jihadists something else to worry about, i.e., other Muslims ceaselessly wanting to kill them. And, as a bonus, perhaps our Arab Sunni Jihadists will return the favor by demonstrating to the Persian Shiite Iranians how nuclear weapons have no bearing on their personal security.
"Che l'uomo il suo destin fugge di raro [For rarely man escapes his destiny]" - Ludovico Ariosto







Post#472 at 09-10-2006 12:50 PM by herbal tee [at joined Dec 2005 #posts 7,116]
---
09-10-2006, 12:50 PM #472
Join Date
Dec 2005
Posts
7,116

De facto Pakistani-Talibani alliance








Post#473 at 09-10-2006 07:57 PM by Finch [at In the belly of the Beast joined Feb 2004 #posts 1,734]
---
09-10-2006, 07:57 PM #473
Join Date
Feb 2004
Location
In the belly of the Beast
Posts
1,734

Quote Originally Posted by herbal tee View Post
Hmph. We "lost" them 30 years ago. Read Ghost Wars for a dose of reality about that region. We've been playing, and being played by, all sides for decades.
Yes we did!







Post#474 at 09-10-2006 08:18 PM by KaiserD2 [at David Kaiser '47 joined Jul 2001 #posts 5,220]
---
09-10-2006, 08:18 PM #474
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
David Kaiser '47
Posts
5,220

The Crittenden Compromise?

Here's a very interesting account of a prominent Silent's attempt to save the Republican Party and his country. I predict failure.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/fea....dreyfuss.html

David K '47







Post#475 at 09-10-2006 08:42 PM by Finch [at In the belly of the Beast joined Feb 2004 #posts 1,734]
---
09-10-2006, 08:42 PM #475
Join Date
Feb 2004
Location
In the belly of the Beast
Posts
1,734

Quote Originally Posted by KaiserD2 View Post
Here's a very interesting account of a prominent Silent's attempt to save the Republican Party and his country. I predict failure.
Very interesting. Doesn't the fact that a Silent has any influence at all at the highest levels of goverment mean that the 4T has not yet begun?
Yes we did!
-----------------------------------------