Saith Me… King of the Hill

Does the enemy attack when we are weak? When we are distracted? Yes, historically there have been attacks when we have been weak and distracted. But we are also attacked when we are arrogantly standing on a hill declaring our greatness to the world.

So when did arrogance begin replacing weakness and distraction as the invitation for an attack? It happened after the First Gulf War, when the US people had shown they supported a fight. After that war, it became clear that the US public had changed since the Vietnam War. Kudos to President Reagan for reestablishing a fighting mentality in the people.

So why is arrogance and the willingness to fight an invitation for attack? In simple terms, the Cold War was a war of economic attrition with both sides betting that military spending would weaken the other side first. Enemies of the US took note, and knew that if the US was drawn into a protracted conflict, it would further weaken the US economy. If the US could be drawn into a preemptive or unilateral fight, then worldwide public opinion would also turn against and weaken the US.

This is the strategy of terrorism, peck at the king on the hill until he is overtaxed, spread too thin. Not so that victory can be achieved in a decisive battle, but so that the king will fall; fall from his own inability to stop reacting to the threat. Fall because rather than sharing the target on his back with allies, he will want to stand on the hill all alone. His arrogance will defeat his kingdom and not the enemy.

Who is to blame for the sad state of affairs…

So Tagg Romney says he would like to punch the President for calling his dad a liar. The online comments then flow as to who would deliver the knock out punch to Tagg before the Secret Service reached him – The President or the First Lady.

But the real question is why it is okay for Tagg to be upset that the President called his dad a liar when his dad keeps calling the President a liar?

This President has been called a liar since before he took office, his very citizenship disbelieved.

Politics is all about spin, always has been, but have we crossed a line? Why has it become so abhorrent? Not the spin, but the mud-slinging.

At the end of the day, We The People had better take a long hard look at ourselves, because as much as we like to blame our politicians for the state in which we find ourselves, we cannot lay the blame for all the accusations and hatred at their feet.  The mud-slinging and the name calling and the horrid bigotry does not start with them, for they are just representatives of the people.

When we lose all respect for the office they hold, and the office is not separate from the holder as much as we might want to argue the point, then We The People, and not those we elect, will be the destruction of our nation.

Follow-up: Morning After:  When I shared this to my Facebook Wall last night I commented, “It really isn’t a joking matter…” and just now, the morning after, I saw the following ABC headline “Tagg Romney Jests That he Wants to ‘Take a Swing’ at President.”

But it really isn’t a joking matter, now is it?

Tagg Romney’s apology

Classwork has me pondering…

A fellow student recently mentioned the conventional nature of war in the conflict between Israel and Lebanon.  This caused me to think about Israel and Iran.

Unlike Israel and Lebanon who share a common border and therefore can wage a conventional war rather easily, Israel and Iran are separated by a large land mass making direct conflict more difficult. On a smaller scale, they seem to be waging a “cold war” of rhetoric and defense build-up, but unlike in the Cold War, they have limited ability to “export” hot, conventional war.

This is where, I think, the US finds itself in a bad situation. Entangling alliances and diplomacy are threatening to pull us in to a regional battle that would leave us the big losers. While Iran does not seem like the ‘nicest’ of world players (especially with the crazy dude spouting craziness all the time), Israel is more dangerous because they seem to be looking for justification for a preemptive strike. When we made the preemptive argument for Iraq, we gave credibility to others who want to make the same argument.  Worse, no amount of justification can overshadow the chaos left behind, or the reality that even with our best intentions, we cannot “build” a foundation others won’t tear down once we are completely pulled out.  To keep the peace and preserve what we have tried to do, we have to be a modern version of an imperial power, i.e. we make the ‘sovereign’ nation dependent on our economic, political, and military strength. Or – the big elephant in the room – we pull out, cut our losses, and deal with the repercussions for the next few decades. If we take the second option, Israel will have further justification for preemptive strike, knowing they will not need to clean up any mess they make, because we set the precedent. I shudder to think what Pakistan would then do.

Then what, would we all take sides? Would it be like a game of Risk? Would we be lucky to end up in a new Cold War, or would we see a WWI chain reaction?

Just something to ponder…

 

News article found after posting – check it out.  http://hamptonroads.com/2012/10/exdefense-chief-says-hit-iran-would-be-disastrous

Are we likable?

Joseph S. Nye, Jr. has developed a definition of Soft Power versus Hard Power.  Hard power is based on coercion (military, economic, etc.). Soft Power is based on creating a system others want to emulate.  He says,

“This soft power – getting others to want the outcomes that you want – co-opts people rather than coerces them.”

and

“When a country’s culture includes universal values and its policies promote values and interests that others share, it increases the relationship of attraction…”

“Narrow values and parochial cultures are less likely to produce soft power.”

So are we going about all this wrong?  Are we, with our polarization of politics and talk of enemies, making ourselves less likable and thereby less attractive to the rest of the world?

Once we were seen as the Yanks who came to save the day.  Then we became the worlds police force, or peacekeeping force.  But something seems to have changed, and often we are disliked more than liked. In our attempt to protect ourselves from bullies, have we crossed a line and become the bully?

Just something to ponder…

………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Nye, Joseph S., Jr. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. New York: PublicAffairs Books, 2004.

We Need a Hero

I went to bed last night thinking how sad it is the way people go about fitting in with a crowd, often putting down others to do so.  Popularity is a mighty strong enticement for our youth.  We try to teach them to ‘be themselves’ and not copy the behavior of others.

As adults, do we follow the same advice?  In our attempts to gain the favor of one group, do we feel we must offend someone else?

As youth, our influence on others is often limited, either by locale or by relative anonymity, but our adult influence is often greater than we realize.

It is probably safe to say that we all slip-up time to time by putting down others in order to fit in with a crowd, but do we take the time to rectify our actions?  When we get caught, do we apologize? Do we do the very thing we ask our children to do?  Or do we feel we are justified in our speech or actions more than our children are?

During an election, much will be said that will irritate others.  Much will be said for the shear campaign value of it.  This is, and has been, part of our political culture, but is there a line we cross when we move from putting down our opponent and instead put down our opponent’s followers, the very people we want to represent?

While Mitt Romney is the latest to be called out for this, by no means is he the first to attempt gaining favor of a smaller group of citizens by insulting a larger group. Giving him the benefit of the doubt, I am going to conclude that if one of his children or grandchildren acted in a similar manner, he would require them to make amends.  This is probably the greatest reason for my sadness today.  For as a fellow Christian, especially as a fellow Mormon, and certainly as a fellow citizen, I recognize most of us make mistakes such as Romney’s, and most of us struggle to make amends.

The expectation of doing what is right should be an equal expectation placed on all of us, but sometimes I wonder if it is of greater importance for those with a greater audience to hold a higher standard of themselves than they might expect of others.  Making mistakes is part of human nature, but amending one’s mistakes is somewhat divine. It shows greater character and a greater humility.  It should not be seen as a weakness, while often it is labeled as such by detractors.  But these same detractors are the ones who would require we gain their favor by insulting and offending in the first place.

So I went to bed last night feeling sad, but this morning I woke up with a song running through my head, a song that says, “I need a hero!”  Maybe instead of counting the number of mistakes a person makes in their life, we should spend more time evaluating their reaction once they have made a mistake. For a hero is not a perfect person, but is rather a humble person willing to serve others and who attempts to make amends for their mistakes. For while they may often seem to fall short of our standards, they should never fall short of their standards without making amends.

Other YouTube versions of Holding Out For A Hero:

Shrek Version

Tribute for Peace (this one chokes me up, but it is a must see)

If anyone can find a link to the Paramount VHS promo, the romantic one not the violent one, could you please share it with me.  

Meet the Mooch

I have just found out that I am a mooch on the American Dream.

Worse yet, I am a mooch many times over: a military wife living off of a government pay check and receiving government healthcare, a stay-at-home mom not paying taxes, and a recipient of government assisted education. (But at least I don’t mooch off of the public school system with my kids, right?)

And here, I thought that by supporting my husband, and raising my kids to be productive members of society, I was part of the American Dream. But maybe I was just a dreaming.

Maybe I was wrong all along in not realizing the only American Dream that matters is how large your bank account is when you die?

Or maybe the other guys have it all wrong…

Saith Me… Quest for Knowledge

Every question is the beginning of a quest for knowledge. At the end of every quest there will be a treasure to be found, but some quests are filled with greater danger than others, and some treasures less valuable.  So ask your questions wisely.

Ignorance and discontent need not a majority make…

The ignorant youth love their fits of rage and acts of violence.  Their discontent with themselves and the world around them erupt in vandalism, cruelty, and intolerance. Sadly the ignorant old will hear the tales of ignorant young and say, “Good for them! That’s the way to show those ____.” Thereby they provide justification and acceptance for the acts of hate and rage and intolerance.

In every region of the world there is suffering which, in turn, people will use as justification for violence and hate. Sadly, there will always be those who will take their own suffering out on others, and are so willing, and often so eager, to hurt their neighbor.

During these times of heightened displays of rage, it is good, although sometimes difficult, to remember there are so many who still focus on the positive, so many that despite their own suffering will wake up each day and embrace the blessings of life with gratitude even if liberty and love are in short order around them. These wise people, who choose love over hate, tolerance over ignorance, and kindness over violence, remind us all that there is hope in the world.

The ignorant youth and the ignorant old can never be the majority as long as the wise and grateful do not join their ranks.

Win or Lose: It really is how you play the game!

In a politically heated world, it is easy to forget that it is not whether you win or lose but how you play the game.

When we focus too much on a goal of winning, we may falter in our understanding of what we perceive we are up against.  It becomes too easy to for us to let emotion sway our reason, sway our perception of truth.  In the end whether we win or whether we lose, we still must be able to move forward.

When we become polarized in our ideas of right and wrong, ferocious in our belief that the other side is not only the opponent, but desires the destruction of all we hold dear; when this happens we run the risk of our own ruin. For no matter the outcome of the election, the world will no longer meet the standards we have set, no politician will ever make us happy, and no law will satisfy our thirst for a sense of perfection. Politicians will promise, platforms will declare, but in the end disappointment will be our companion if we do not learn that the political apparatus cannot supply a sense of wellbeing. Only we can supply that feeling, that sense of prosperity, that sense of safety.

When we vote in an election, especially when the election is close, we must focus on the value of the process and not simply on the outcome we desire. This will ensure that win or lose, we will feel good about ourselves, our efforts, and our opponents, once the game is over.