Articles

Sep. 15, 2004

The Art of War

While bin Laden is still on the loose, Bush claims to have captured 75% of the al Qaeda. Still terrorist acts around the world continue to increase in intensity and frequency. Where is the truth? What is the real threat?

Fear is a Good Business Certainly, the Bush Administration has a vested interest in keeping us scared. Speaking with my upholstery man today, he claims the increase in hurricanes is a result of terrorists seeding the clouds and creating bigger storms. In our minds, like the great Red scare, we have created an enemy with far sophisticated than the most technically advanced countries in the world. The GDP of the Middle Eastern countries combined is less than Spain. The level of sophistication is close to most third world countries. Do we benefit by making our enemies larger than reality? Worse, when we attempt to find local terrorists they sit in jail rotting and then are released with no trial.

Where have all the Terrorists Gone The numbers in jail in Guantanamo have dwindled from over 2000 to now under 500. Are these people just melting? The public who funds the war on terror gets little or no feedback. Listening to a Newsweek reporter on NPR today, he made a case for conditions getting much worse in Iraq. However, the press is not reporting the changes for three important reasons. First, the election coverage is filling the pages. Second, it is becoming more dangerous to go many places to get the news. Finally, because there is less print space - due to lack of public interest - fewer reporters are willing to chase an old and declining story. Walter Cronkite took a great deal of heat reporting the number dead every day during Vietnam. The American public has little capacity to hear about wars we are losing.

The news blackout is further complicated by the removal of information officers with the turn over of power and the suppression of the press by the new Iraqi administration. What this all adds up to is not a calming down or a defeat of terror, but an escalation of violence. As a result, whoever is elected will face an increased barrage of news on Iraq after the election making things look worse than they are now. If Bush wins, he will use the deteriorating conditions to expand the war - probably invading Saudi

The US expanded in Vietnam and most every war where things failed to go as planned. This pattern of escalation is almost as fatal as the French policy in WW I of attacking and fighting to the last man standing - even against superior forces.

Rules of War I do not have the experience of a general or a politician, but I do read. History is an important and goes well beyond learning 1066 is the date of the Battle of Hastings. The date and the battle are meaningless unless one explores and understands the geopolitical change the conquering of Britain brought. The fundamental change has driven western society since. Looking at Iraq, the war on terror and the entire Middle East situation one is astounded by the lack of historical perspective our leaders are displaying. We are informed that terrorism is a new phenomenon - one not seen before in history.

This perspective is bogus. An Anarchist killed McKinley. Booth was a terrorist in his day. Even the Revolutionaries were terrorists fighting for freedom from Britain. I have been reviewing "The Art of War" written back some time in the 8th century BC. Sun Tzu makes a very important point of how to treat your enemy so his forces become yours. We followed this strategy in Afghanistan by aiding an existing group to give them power. Then when we had the bad guys on the run we let them slip away and attacked Iraq following the same strategy that caused us to lose in Vietnam. It is almost as if two separate groups crated the two strategies. The polices that worked so well in Kosovo and Afghanistan were never employed in Iraq. Instead, the Bush administration abandoned every rule of war and engaged in a costly expansionist war with poor local support, extended supply lines, little planning while maneuvering the "B" team over unwinable terrain. Like Vietnam one has to question is wining is the goal?

A change of Strategy There is a way to win in Iraq and a way to win the war on terror. Truman got bogged down in Korea because he lacked tactical military experience. When Ike came on board, he used his military background to settle something he knew he could not win. A good general knows when to attack and more importantly knows when he cannot win more than is risked. Staying a course that is getting bad results is BS. What makes a good general, trader or fisherman is knowing when to change strategy.