Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 7 of 16 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 15 16
Re: Maybe Al Gore is onto something...
grunt #292463 02/16/10 06:32 AM
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
 Originally Posted By: grunt


OTOH all my political efforts have never made the difference in any election because reason only wins debates while emotion wins elections and I won‘t use emotion to scare people onto voting.


Well Said. Worth Quoting.


Now this is how you learn Philosophy :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tm0Uq08xXhY
Re: Maybe Al Gore is onto something...
madjak #292467 02/16/10 07:01 AM
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,437
shareholder in the making
Offline
shareholder in the making
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,437
That wasn't my intended angle at all, although I can see how you made the leap there. \:\(


I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you.
Re: Maybe Al Gore is onto something...
grunt #292468 02/16/10 07:03 AM
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,437
shareholder in the making
Offline
shareholder in the making
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,437
You're smarter than the Marine stereotype. \:\)


I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you.
Re: Maybe Al Gore is onto something...
pmbuko #292474 02/16/10 07:35 AM
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
I found it a bit weird thinking you might have. I am glad to be corrected.

Honestly though, don't get me wrong here. I do care about the environment, I just wish people like Mr Gore and his followers would stop whining about things and actually get pragmatic.

IMHO, if people are convinced C02 is causing imminent climate catastrophe, I don't understand why they don't just go out and plant some trees instead of trying to introduce some weird sort of socialist mechanisms instead.



Last edited by madjak; 02/16/10 07:36 AM.

Now this is how you learn Philosophy :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tm0Uq08xXhY
Re: Maybe Al Gore is onto something...
pmbuko #292477 02/16/10 07:43 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,569
connoisseur
Offline
connoisseur
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,569
 Originally Posted By: pmbuko
Can you cite examples? I'm honestly interested in how you came to your current stance on the subject.


Here is an outstanding paper written by a couple of PLA Colonels:

Unrestricted Warfare

And here is a more accessible Wiki summary:

Unrestricted Warfare

My understanding of the differences between the more ridged and deconstructionist way of Western thinking vs the more flexible and holistic way of eastern thinking started when I learned to play go and chess as a kid. But it wasn’t until I joined the Marine Corps that my mind was really opened to the warfare ramifications.

The Corps I joined was run by Vietnam Vets who learned from experience what it’s like to fight a non Westernized Asian enemy. Everyone in my Battalion was required to study counter insurgency warfare. For NCOs and officers required readings included “The Art of War” and Mao’s writings. The Marine Corps itself has up until recently done most of it’s heavy fighting in the far east and like any successful expeditionary force adopts what works from it’s enemies. So in many ways the Marine Corps has become more “Eastern” than “Western” in it’s fighting much to the chagrin of Western reporters in Iraq. Hell when I was in we didn’t even use the term Gung Ho! We always said “Gong He” (pronounced more like gun-gee but like one word) which is the Mandarin way of saying it. I never once heard someone say “Gung Ho.”

Basically what I learned was that there are no rules. You do what it takes to win anything less is stupid while anything more is wasteful. You attack only where the enemy is weak and run when he is strong. You attack by any and all means combat, political, educational, economic, moral. Even when not engaged in open hostilities you pursue the conflict through any other means available always trying to outmaneuver your enemy and win the battle/war in the best way possible w/o having to fight.

If you are interested in eastern military philosophy then you must start by reading “The Art of War.”

On a more general side the basis in our difference in thinking about warfare stems from our respective cultural beliefs. Several things happened in the West that happened nowhere else in the world on the same scale at the time.

Christianity (and to some extent it’s precursors) introduced a finite linnear concept of time (the universe has a beginning, middle and end) whereas most of the rest of the world viewed time as cyclical.

Through both Christian and ancient Greek philosophies the idea of dichotomies (the dialectic) evolved into Western culture and permeates “intellectual” thinking of all types.

Modern Science developed a codified way to deconstruct the world (or arguments) into parts. Makes for faster progress as smaller problems are usually easier to solve but often with a narrow focus and understanding. Loosing sight of the forest for the trees so to speak.

IMO these cultural precepts lay the foundation for Western thinking and from them develop higher order differences we see between Western European and other ways of thinking. The apparent “success” (only time will tell) of the “Western Way” fuels Westerners sense of superiority and the Westernization of the rest of the world.

Add to that the Germanic concept of the individual prevalent in Anglo (Germanic) peoples and you further differentiate the English speaking peoples from the rest of the world even many continental Europeans.


Bored Yet?
Dean

P.S. My two favorite social theorist are Mark Twain and George Carlin.


3M80 2M22 6QS8 2M2 1EP500 Sony BDP-S590 Panny-7000 Onkyo-3007 Carada-134 Xbox Buttkicker AS-EQ1
Re: Maybe Al Gore is onto something...
grunt #292478 02/16/10 07:56 AM
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
Not Bored at all,

Very interesting. A Colleague of mine once said something that has allways stuck in my head though - "we always seem to prepare for the war that has just been".

Your comments show that you guys at least have prepared well for what seems to me to be a predominantly psychological war. By this I mean that if terrorism failed to terrorise, then it must be a failure.


Now this is how you learn Philosophy :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tm0Uq08xXhY
Re: Maybe Al Gore is onto something...
pmbuko #292481 02/16/10 08:11 AM
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
It looks like at least some scientists have got the message about publishing their models and data with their papers - just like the good old days

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/15/hatton_on_hurricanes/

Oh, and BTW he cut his teeth in I.T. Fully supporting an earlier claim.


Last edited by madjak; 02/16/10 08:15 AM.

Now this is how you learn Philosophy :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tm0Uq08xXhY
Re: Maybe Al Gore is onto something...
madjak #292482 02/16/10 08:40 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,569
connoisseur
Offline
connoisseur
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,569
 Originally Posted By: madjak
Not Bored at all,

Very interesting. A Colleague of mine once said something that has allways stuck in my head though - "we always seem to prepare for the war that has just been".

Your comments show that you guys at least have prepared well for what seems to me to be a predominantly psychological war. By this I mean that if terrorism failed to terrorise, then it must be a failure.




Your friend's statement is very true that militaries always prepare to fight the last war. In that respect it left the Marine Corps as you point out in a much better position to deal with the present situation. Also, the Marine Corps Combat Development Command and it's predecessors. Have always tried to focus on anticipating the next war. They developed an amphibious warfare doctrine in anticipation of a war with Japan despite the naysayers claiming opposed amphibious landings were impossible. The Corps played a pivotal role in the bringing close air support into U.S. doctrine from a British concept because it’s hard for artillery to keep up with infantry in the jungles. The Attack helicopter evolved for the same reason that it’s hard for tanks and anti-tank guns to maneuver in the jungles. The first modern recon drones in the U.S. were bought by the Marine Corps from the Israelis when the Commandant was shown a live image of himself looking at himself looking at the image.

I can’t speak to today’s Corps. I got out because as the Vietnam Vets left the bureaucrats began taking over as happens with all peacetime militaries. However, the culture of the Naval service has historically been more “free thinking.” If you think about it back in the age of sail you couldn't just radio HQ for instructions on how to handle a problem. Naval officers often conducted U.S. foreign policy. Contrast this with the Army which almost never fought in number w/o being able to contact a higher HQ within days and the Air Force which has never existed even in a previous form w/o the ability to pick up a phone and call higher HQ. I’ve served in the Navy Reserve, Active Marine Corps, Army Guard and now the Air Guard and say that my experience bears out the bureaucratizing effects of the various services heritages.

And your comment about “psychological war” is correct. Many people mistakenly equate the maneuver warfare doctrine with moving tanks to engage the. However, that misses the whole point of the doctrine which is to win w/o fighting by putting your enemy in an untenable position via “maneuver“ be it physical or psychological. The latter being preferable. I read an excellent book (hope I still have it) by an Army Captain who chastised the Army’s application of the doctrine as non-existent in the First Gulf War.

P. S. A little piece of trivia most people don’t know. The cap badge of the Royal Marines shows the Eastern hemisphere while the Marine Corps badge displays the Western Hemisphere. Anglo-American Hegemony anyone? ;\)



Last edited by grunt; 02/16/10 09:02 AM.

3M80 2M22 6QS8 2M2 1EP500 Sony BDP-S590 Panny-7000 Onkyo-3007 Carada-134 Xbox Buttkicker AS-EQ1
Re: Maybe Al Gore is onto something...
grunt #292483 02/16/10 09:16 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,569
connoisseur
Offline
connoisseur
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,569
 Originally Posted By: Me

What did I learn from all of this. Pretty simple, those with power get what they want and those without power don’t. Spin, moralize, justify any way you want if it makes you feel better because in the end might makes right because those with power decide what’s right and wrong. If people want to save themselves some reading some very smart men distilled most of this all down into one document:


Forgot the link that was suppose to follow that in my post above.

United States Bill of Rights


3M80 2M22 6QS8 2M2 1EP500 Sony BDP-S590 Panny-7000 Onkyo-3007 Carada-134 Xbox Buttkicker AS-EQ1
Re: Maybe Al Gore is onto something...
grunt #292486 02/16/10 09:30 AM
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 91
Grunt,

Interesting stuff. I am assuming you have seen the film or read the book "The Pentagon Wars"?

I use it in my training all the time with respect to Product Development.


Now this is how you learn Philosophy :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tm0Uq08xXhY
Page 7 of 16 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 15 16

Moderated by  alan, Amie, Andrew, axiomadmin, Brent, Debbie, Ian, Jc 

Link Copied to Clipboard

Need Help Graphic

Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics24,400
Posts432,349
Members15,420
Most Online2,082
Jan 22nd, 2020
Top Posters
Ken.C 18,044
pmbuko 16,437
SirQuack 13,690
CV 11,815
MarkSJohnson 11,451
Who's Online Now
1 members (Jeff_in_the_D), 237 guests, and 3 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newsletter Signup
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.4