SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: TigerPaw who wrote (21369)7/1/2003 12:01:55 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
America's blunders leave the war unwon

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Louis J. Cantori*
Editorial
The Baltimore Sun
published June 30, 2003

NEARLY 11 WEEKS after the toppling of the statue of Saddam Hussein in Baghdad, expectations in Iraq are plummeting.

There has been no jubilant reception of the troops, and basic personal security, civil services, sound administration and democratic representation are virtually nonexistent. Most importantly, the military campaign continues. Americans are dying. American policy is faltering, if not failing. Military victory eludes the coalition forces.

According to Carl von Clausewitz in his 1832 classic On War, victory occurs when the enemy's army is destroyed, there is a formal surrender and, in particular, the enemy's will is bent to your own. He made the further point that this is accomplished by conquest, not by the "hearts and mind" war of "liberation" of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and his Pentagon team - his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas J. Feith and others.

Further contributing to the inability to conquer Iraq was Mr. Rumsfeld's decision to adopt a force that was "fast and flexible," consisting of electronic air warfare, special forces and a light ground force. This force of 125,000 was able to win the battle of Baghdad, but just as the former Army chief of staff, Gen. Eric K. Shinseki, anticipated, it would have required a "mass" of 250,000 to bend the Iraqi will and win.

Mr. Rumsfeld fallaciously has confused the equipment heaviness of the Cold War-era Army with manpower heaviness and failed to understand the need for a troop "mass" to win wars. The issue is the need for increased speed, not reduction in numbers. The proof of this came April 9, the day Mr. Hussein's statue was toppled in Baghdad, when American forces stood by without orders to shoot looters and watched the destruction of the Iraqi infrastructure just as Mr. Rumsfeld praised the precision of the aerial attack in preserving it.

The Rumsfeld team also has substituted wishful thinking for facts. As von Clausewitz further counseled, such wishful thinking by a military commander can create failure on the battlefield. For example, are Iraqi Shiites repressed democrats who could be counted upon to exultantly embrace coalition forces, or are they sincere patriots prepared to resist the American conquerors?

Perhaps most amazing is the recent surprise expressed about the fact that Muslims in the well-known Sunni triangle surrounding Baghdad are engaging regularly in fire fights around the towns of Fallujah, Tikrit and other places to the west and north of Baghdad. These Sunnis were not only the most loyal of Mr. Hussein's supporters, but their well-known tribalism was the basis of Baathist organizational control until 1991. Since then, because of the effect of U.N. sanctions, the government dealt directly with tribal leaders.

Even though the Baathist organization had declined since 1991, the Sunni triangle remains the epicenter of Iraqi nationalism. Therefore, there is a potent combination of strong Iraqi nationalism and tribal solidarity underlying resistance to the U.S. occupation.

Killing by American soldiers of Iraqi fathers at night and building soccer fields during the day for their children as a continuation of a "hearts and minds" policy is not working. When Iraqi demonstrators are fired upon and deaths occur, the perpetrator is viewed as the American invader and the offense is a blood offense that the Iraqi code of honor calls for revenge. This is a formidable military factor resembling the way in which similar tribalism strengthens the Jordanian army.

The Iraq war was fought in near-willful ignorance of such facts. What is occurring now was predictable. Neither those expert on Iraq within the U.S. government (the State Department, the National Defense University and, particularly, the CIA) nor the small group of highly expert American academics have been consulted by the Defense Department, Congress or the media.

Meanwhile, unhappily, the military campaign in Iraq continues, inconclusively. It is already a quagmire because the Americans cannot impose their will, and they cannot rebuild the country until they can impose their will. Until they do both, they cannot withdraw.

And, incidentally, what's happened to reconstruction?

_____________________________________

*Louis J. Cantori is a professor of political science at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, where he specializes in the Middle East. He has been a distinguished professor at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, the U.S. Air Force Academy and the U.S. Marine Corps University, and is a former Marine.

Copyright © 2003, The Baltimore Sun

sunspot.net



To: TigerPaw who wrote (21369)7/1/2003 1:59:38 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
Breakfast with Bill

...Gates on the business investment climate

Bill Gates: Well, capital spending on IT gear is unlikely in my lifetime to ever achieve the levels that it saw in the late '90s. Anybody who's got a business plan where they're holding their breath until those days return is likely to die of asphyxiation. I mean, you just can't ever think of that. The challenge our customers put to us is essentially, given our existing IT budget, how can we get more out of it? How can we know that we're secure? How can we get better workflow? Better business intelligence? Better effectiveness out of the things that are really expensive, which is having all these knowledge workers and trying to design new products and understand where the market is going. All the complex coordination that goes around that.

And so, although we have a few customers that are increasing their IT budget and some that are decreasing, on balance, is we just assume that IT spending won't be all that different than it is today. Hardware costs will keep coming down. Communications costs will keep coming down. The cost of software in a certain sense keeps coming down, in the sense that we put $5 billion in our R&D into our software every year and what's the price of a word processor? Less today than it was 10 years ago, 9 years ago, 8 years ago. Now volume, thank goodness, makes up for that. And that's the challenge, to make sure the new versions are exciting enough that the volume stays high so that you can afford to spend $5 billion a year in R&D, and yet sell operating systems for less than a hundred dollars.

USA TODAY: Are you seeing some signs of an upturn now in tech spending?

BG: I wouldn't say any sort of substantial upturn at this stage, no.

USA TODAY: Does that spell the end of the productivity boom that's been fueling the economy?

BG: Absolutely not. That's one thing to be clear about. Technology is actually doing better work today than any year during the boom. The focus now is on making these systems easy to administer, the focus now is on what value you get out of the systems. There was this view that every company had to do a Web site, had to do e-mail. It's a little of a disillusionment, that 'I did a Web site but so did everybody else; what do I get out of that?' And we're all doing e-mail but the information is not that structured — we get spam. And these systems, because there are so many of them, are hard to administer and so those challenges kind of emerged during the bubble. If you listen to customers, they were already saying those things as far back as 1999.

The product cycle we're in now or the products where TCO, total cost of ownership — all these issues of scaled reliability have really been the focus of what we've put the R&D into. And you could say that Microsoft is still spending on R&D, but are we getting the boost from the other pieces and how they come together? Absolutely. Chip improvements are as fast today as ever. LCD improvements, flat screen improvements, wireless. For these fixed IT budgets, for consumers spending money to buy PCs, the productivity benefits they'll get will be much greater than what they got during the bubble.

Remember, most of the dreams of the bubble never happened. E-commerce didn't really happen. You don't really have a paperless workflow that automates the thing that should be automated and still leaves the worker in the loop of what they have to do. You have this illusory thing where the simple part of the transaction goes digitally. But if you look at all the faxes and phone calls and how all this exceptions channel, which is where most of the work is, has to spend time straightening out this pure digital channel that doesn't understand that workers are still involved in the thing. E-commerce is really something that is in front of us, in terms of getting the benefits out of it. And really having people with easy access to the information and really being able to dig into what's going on in their business, what's going on with their customers — that's the software that comes out of the next 4 or 5 years, not anything that people have today...

usatoday.com



To: TigerPaw who wrote (21369)7/2/2003 8:33:59 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
PeopleSoft: 2Q to exceed estimates

By MICHAEL LIEDTKE
AP BUSINESS WRITER
Wednesday, July 2, 2003 · Last updated 5:11 p.m. PT

seattlepi.nwsource.com

SAN FRANCISCO -- Business software maker PeopleSoft Inc. said Wednesday it overcame the customer jitters triggered by Oracle Corp.'s $6.3 billion hostile takeover bid to stun its unwelcome suitor with a second quarter that exceeded analysts' expectations.

Based on preliminary calculations, Pleasanton-based PeopleSoft expects to report earnings of 10 cents or 11 cents per share for the quarter that ended Monday.

If not for charges for previously announced cutbacks, PeopleSoft said its earnings would be 13 cents to 14 cents per share. Those figures beat the consensus estimate of 10 cents among analysts polled by Thomson First Call.

The company said total revenue ranged from $490 million to $500 million, above analysts' consensus estimate of $443 million.

The preliminary results represent a coup for PeopleSoft, which had been scrambling to close deals during the last three weeks to keep investors happy and ward off Oracle's unsolicited offer.

"It was a Herculean effort by PeopleSoft - all the odds were stacked against them," said industry analyst David Hilal of Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co.

Redwood Shores-based Oracle dismissed PeopleSoft's results as the product of "one-time gimmicks" and "favors from business partners" that won't generate sales in future quarters.

In a call with analysts, PeopleSoft management acknowledged that the results were boosted by a program guaranteeing customer refunds of up to five times the sale amount if the company is taken over. The pledges covered about half of PeopleSoft's new license sales of $105 million to $115 million for the quarter.

PeopleSoft CEO Craig Conway said an "outpouring of customer goodwill" and "an undeniable backlash of sentiment against Oracle" helped PeopleSoft deliver better sales than management envisioned at the outset of the quarter.

"Many customers were determined not to let Oracle's hostile takeover attempt hurt PeopleSoft," Conway said. "They wanted to help."

Until its surge in the latest quarter, PeopleSoft's performance had been sagging since the end of 2001 - one of the reasons that Oracle says its longtime rival is ripe for a takeover.

If PeopleSoft had missed Wall Street's earnings target, the company's stock might have crumbled and made Oracle's all-cash bid of $19.50 per share look more enticing.

Instead of becoming its Achilles' heel, PeopleSoft's second quarter becomes another weapon in management's antitakeover arsenal.

Conway described the results as an "undeniable vote of confidence" from customers who want the company to pursue its proposed $1.75 billion acquisition of rival J.D. Edwards instead of submitting to Oracle.

Investors cheered the results, too, as PeopleSoft's share gained 19 cents to close at $17.98 on the Nasdaq Stock Market. Oracle's shares rose 12 cents to close at $12.45 on the Nasdaq.

PeopleSoft's surprisingly strong second quarter represents the second significant setback this week for Oracle and its colorful CEO, Larry Ellison.

The U.S. Department of Justice indefinitely delayed Oracle's bid on Monday by demanding more information about how the proposed combination would affect competition in the $20 billion market for business applications software.

Ellison insists a PeopleSoft takeover wouldn't cause antitrust problems, but convincing federal regulators could require months.

PeopleSoft's second-quarter performance "definitely puts Oracle in a precarious position," Hilal said.

Another industry analyst, Brent Thill of Prudential Equity Group, predicted in a report issued Wednesday that Oracle's bid is unlikely to succeed.

But high-tech investment banker Ken Marlin thinks Oracle remains very much in the hunt. "If anything the second quarter results make PeopleSoft an even more attractive takeover candidate for Oracle," Marlin said, noting Oracle still has plenty of financial leverage to raise its bid.

While Oracle weighs its next move, PeopleSoft appears to have a clear path to complete the J.D. Edwards deal by its July 17 deadline, unless federal regulators decide to take a closer look at how that merger will affect competition. The Department of Justice has until July 14 to ask PeopleSoft for additional information.

Oracle could still try to buy a combined PeopleSoft-J.D. Edwards, but that would raise even more antitrust issues, Thill said.

---

On The Net:

peoplesoft.com

oracle.com

jdedwards.com



To: TigerPaw who wrote (21369)7/2/2003 11:27:00 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
Contrarian Chronicles
____________________________

Ignore the arm-waving: IT still smells

The fact is, companies are still delaying projects or canceling them outright. That -- plus overly bullish investor sentiment -- could set up a stock fallback soon.

By Bill Fleckenstein

moneycentral.msn.com