Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: quehubo who wrote (135221)	6/1/2004 9:31:33 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Is that too emotional for you? No Q, that's a very thoughful and insightful analysis. I particularly liked the point that even if we develop alternative sources of energy, we're still reliant upon the Gulf oil because we compete in world markets and we must keep our costs in line with our foreign competitors. Of course the death grip that the Gulf nations could have on us if they squeezed really hard would be easier to bear if we had better developed alternative energy sources. Or dirty energy sources that we could clean up a little. I'm curious to hear your rationale or reliance on the rule of law to justify the use of deadly force to compel the Gulf nations to produce their oil, or maybe even to sell it at a "fair" price? As far as the military goes, it's the old bell curve problem. We can accept that only 10% of people are really good at their jobs when failure means a slight annoyance. When failure in leadership means irrevocable and needless death, however, and when the system protects the incompetents in order to protect itself, then the tolerance of the bell curve is obscene. Strategy, planning and leadership require that the top 10% be given the reins and that we weed out the others. The military bureaucracy and the "follow orders" and the "kiss ass to get ahead" climate results in leaders like Zinni and others getting canned for not "playing ball," while nose in the ass types like the General Myers just get promoted until they're playing Tonto to Rumsfeld. If you think that's bad, you should see what goes on further down the line where those that prevaricate and cover the most adroitly typically get promoted, and those who try to play it straight or who use independent judgement get riffed as soon as they make a mistake. And the ones that pay are the ones that DIE because of bad leadership. And they're often the ONLY ones that pay a price because their superiors and the families are told these stories about what heroes they were and how their deaths were valorous. War's a big, stinky, bloody and fear filled mess. Only a few thrive in that environment and they're the ones that, in self defense, get to the place where they just don't give a damn anymore and live for the adrenalin rush. I wish that we could see the faces of those that die, as they die, so we could truly weigh the price of our "bet the farm" gamble on a sucker bet in Iraq.