Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

[BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Commander-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

blorber(at)southwestcirru
Guest

Posted: Sun May 25, 2008 7:13 pm Post subject: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED

You're welcome.  However, Tuesday, please thank your grocer, your accountant, your lawyer, your mechanic, your barber, your pharmacist, the owner of the corner gas station, butcher, cashier, etc.  These are the true heroes that prove, each and every day, that peaceful cooperation, EVEN IN COMPETITION, yields the riches of the world.  While soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines may, at least for the time being, be called to safeguard human wealth, they do so at the cost of human wealth and life.  As Sun Tzu noted in The Art of War:



"Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting."



By that definition, the soldier, sailor, airman, and marine fails where the grocer and mechanic excel.  Please, celebrate their supreme excellence even as you thank the soldier that is required to answer his calling because of a failure of governments to achieve excellence.



--

John Vormbaum

Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Posts: 273
Location: SF Bay Area, CA

Posted: Sun May 25, 2008 7:53 pm Post subject: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED

Wow Brock, that's pretty deep....and well said.



/J



Brock Lorber wrote:

[quote] You're welcome.  However, Tuesday, please thank your grocer, your accountant, your lawyer, your mechanic, your barber, your pharmacist, the owner of the corner gas station, butcher, cashier, etc.  These are the true heroes that prove, each and every day, that peaceful cooperation, EVEN IN COMPETITION, yields the riches of the world.  While soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines may, at least for the time being, be called to safeguard human wealth, they do so at the cost of human wealth and life.  As Sun Tzu noted in The Art of War:



 "Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting."



 By that definition, the soldier, sailor, airman, and marine fails where the grocer and mechanic excel.  Please, celebrate their supreme excellence even as you thank the soldier that is required to answer his calling because of a failure of governments to achieve excellence.



 --

rambud(at)windstream.net
Guest

Posted: Sun May 25, 2008 9:19 pm Post subject: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED

Mr Lorber,



Ordinarily I do not respond to posts in any given list, except where someone

has asked for help or has made a comment that is so irritating that it begs

a response.



Your knowledge of Sun Tzu apparently comes from some misguided author's

attempt to rationalize The Art of War into every day life, such as "The Art

of War for Business," or worse, "Wikipedia."



The Art of War is a compilation of a Chinese General's thoughts and

teachings that were taught to emperors and military leaders. To attempt to

apply this work to everyday life is only valid when taken into the context

of the times in which it was "written."



Sun Tzu said:  "The art of war is of vital importance to the State.



It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin.  Hence

it is a subject of inquiry    which can on no account be neglected."



War, not business/industry.



Your earlier quote of the Art of War was taken out of context in a feeble

attempt to justify your suggestion. Let us look at the context in which it

was written. 



Sun Tzu said: "In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take

the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so

good.  So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it,

to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy

them.



Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence;

supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without

fighting.



Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans; the next

best is to prevent    the junction of the enemy's forces; the next in order

is to attack the enemy's army in the field;    and the worst policy of all

is to besiege walled cities."



Your misuse of Sun Tzu's words taken out of the context in which it was

written implies that Sun Tzu says we should never go to war. In truth, if

you truly study and understand Sun Tzu, that is NOT the case. War is a

serious undertaking, not to be taken lightly. That is his main point. If

however, war is to be undertaken, then he outlines "rules" to govern

preparations for, and the conduct of, the war.



Sun Tzu said: "There are three ways in which a ruler can bring misfortune

upon his army:--



(1) By commanding the army to advance or to retreat, being ignorant of the

fact that it cannot obey. This is called hobbling the army.



(2) By attempting to govern an army in the same way as he administers a

kingdom, being ignorant of the conditions which obtain in an army.  This

causes restlessness in the soldier's minds.



(3) By employing the officers of his army without discrimination, through

ignorance of the    military principle of adaptation to circumstances. This

shakes the confidence of the soldiers.



But when the army is restless and distrustful, trouble is sure to come from

the other feudal princes. This is simply bringing anarchy into the army, and

flinging victory away.



Thus we may know that there are five essentials for victory:

    

(1) He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight.

   

(2) He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces.

   

(3) He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its

ranks.



(4) He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared.

    

(5) He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by the

sovereign.



Hence the saying:  If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not

fear the result of a    hundred battles.  If you know yourself but not the

enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know

neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle."



I suggest to you sir, that if we go by your suggestion, then we will lose

every battle.



No great nation, and by this I will use your implied definition that a

nation is great because of the mercantile richness of the nation, ever rose

to that status without a strong military that was able to protect the rights

of those merchants and to open up and maintain the markets for those

merchants. 



This country was born with a rich potential for greatness, but this was not

achieved until Mahan, a naval Captain, was able to articulate the historic

facts that no great nation (and at the time of his writing the sun never set

on the English Empire, the richest and most powerful nation on earth at that

time) was able to achieve greatness without first commanding the sea. He

wasn't talking about "owning" the ocean, but being able to protect the sea

lanes through which merchant ships traversed thereby providing the valuable

markets necessary to obtain new resources and to sell the nation's finished

products. Because of Captain Mahan's influence in Congress and with

Presidents, most notable Teddy Roosevelt, America started building what

would eventually become the world's most powerful navy.



The world has evolved since Mahan wrote his seminal work, but despite the

vast amount of cargo that is moved through the air, the fact still remains

that most of the world's (to include the US) goods are still moved by sea,

and it is STILL our navy that ensures that sea lines are open and "free" of

pirates (and piracy still exists in the straits off Indonesia and in other

parts of the world).



The Roman Empire existed and flourished only because of its military.



The great city-state of Athens was great not because of it wealth (economic

and intellectual), but because its navy enabled it to spread it wealth.



This country would not enjoy the world leadership position it is in if it

was not for its military that fought two world wars on foreign soil to

protect the rights we believe in. Yes, our military-industrial complex

helped us to defeat the Nazis and the Fascists, but again, that was the

harnessing of the potential that country possessed. We were utilizing that

potential in the Lend-Lease Program with England and the Soviet Union, but

those countries were unable to turn the tide of Nazi Germany until American

men and women in uniform entered the conflict. It is only by dumb luck (most

notably Hitler's decisions to not invade England and to instead invade the

Soviet Union) and the efforts of a few courageous men (and here I will honor

the British and American airmen in the Battle of Britain) that we are not

speaking fluent German.



Yes, this country was made great because of people such as JP Morgan,

Westinghouse, William Randolph Hearst and other bankers, industrialists, and

media moguls. But I repeat: you can build all the widgets in the world that

you want, but if you don't have a market for the widgets, then you are just

as poor as those who are unable to build the widgets, and you don't get

markets without a military to ensure that your interests are protected.



You want to honor business men and women? By all means do so...on Labor Day,

a day dedicated to the men and women who broke their backs to build the

world's leading economy. 



Memorial Day is a day to honor those who have sacrificed their families,

their wealth, potential wealth, and for some, their very lives in order to

provide a safe and secure environment in which to work, sell, and prosper.



I realize you differ in your opinion as to the importance of this day. Fine.

Your military has protected your right to do so. I leave you with this one

last thought: we are currently in a war for our very existence, whether you

choose to believe so or not. You may go hide your head in the sand and say

it is not so just as Charles Lindbergh and others did prior to the attack on

Pearl Harbor and the subsequent declaration of war against the US by

Germany. But the reality is that we are fighting an enemy that despises the

very life you hold so dear. Honor the business men and women who "made this

country great?" We are hated and attacked BECAUSE we are so wealthy. Our

wealth is not "winning" this war; it is not destroying our enemy. It is your

military that is taking on this mantle of burden, and it is this military

that will ultimately win out, providing you allow the military to do what it

is trained to do.



To quote Sun Tzu one last time: "It is only one who is thoroughly acquainted

with the evils of war that can thoroughly understand the profitable way of

carrying it on."



It is fortunate that our forefathers had the insight to ensure this new

country they created was able to protect itself so that it might flourish,

and that our great grandfathers had the wisdom to recognize the distinctly

unique contributions our military has made to the greatness of this country.



Rae A. "Bud" Williams, Col, USAF (ret)

--

nico(at)cybersuperstore.c
Guest

Posted: Sun May 25, 2008 10:41 pm Post subject: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED

Wow, Bud. I was busy compiling a response, but I thought it best to delete

it. I'll keep this one instead. Thank you for your service, sir.

Nico

 



--

blorber(at)southwestcirru
Guest

Posted: Mon May 26, 2008 12:04 am Post subject: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED

Col Williams:



With respect, Sir, you misunderstand me.  I, educated in the lower halls of the building named for Fairchild, learned philosophical lessons that invariably did not apply to the "real Air Force", but struck a chord in me nonetheless that fueled my appreciation for me and my fellow man that I carried into and applied with great success in the "real Air Force".  Upon graduation, I learned that the ubiquitous saw that "grads had no applicable technical knowledge" was true, but found no more applicable knowledge in technical training.



I found (as I am sure you did) that the "real Air Force" required experience in the "real Air Force", commanding Airmen, writing reports, and advocating the application of limited resources in the way I divined was the best way to complete the mission as outlined by those above me in rank and position.  What never failed, however, was the philosophical premise upon which my service was based.



It is rare, even among the officer corps, to find someone with an appreciation for the words of Sun Tzu that you obviously command.  My knowledge of the General's words come from reading and re-reading his words, and striving to apply them to every endeavor, even if I have to fashion myself as the opposition - certainly anyone can imagine their worst enemy as themselves.  I did not quote the General lightly, nor, I believe, out of context.



You did not presume that I am anti-war, or pacifist in common parlance, and for that I thank you.  However, you did suggest that I quoted the General in an anti-war context.  You also suggest that Sun Tzu's sayings, as written, have no place in competitive endeavors other than war.  I ask, Colonel, is war such a unique animal to be treated as a separate class other than competitive?  Is not the competition between Company A and Company B subject to the same strategy and tactics as war?



The answer is, in my opinion, no.  Competition is competition, and the General's words apply equally to any form of competition.  I can find no occasion where adversaries have taken the field that the General's admonitions did not apply.  Sun Tzu was a wise philosopher whose words, as relayed, transcend time and place; they are as applicable now as ever.



You, rightly, note that mercantile trade is proportionate to naval might.  I ascertain that neither is precipitous; that is, naval might is worthless without mercantile trade and mercantile trade shall not long survive without a navy to keep her shipping lanes open.  Although it may seem that we have no quarrel, I posit that a naval force, fully funded by the mercantile trade (and passed to customers through price), can accomplish the same ends.  What's more, that system passes the cost of keeping the shipping lanes open to the end users in proportion to their consumption of the goods passed.



As you mentioned the army, it should be noted that, per the Constitution of the United States, that a standing army (and, by extension, her child the USAF) is authorized to the congress but, "no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years".  Luckily, for your career and my term, congress has seen fit to authorize that appropriation.  It is by no means a foregone conclusion, however, since the inception of our constitution, that a standing army is either a fit or desired component of the federal government.



Out of respect, Sir, I shall ask you to revise your farcical ascertation that German would be the predominant language if the US had not entered the European theater in WWII.  I have seen no credible evidence Germany was an occupying threat to the United States, nor that the Third Reich held any disposition toward codifying the German language, however, I stand to be corrected on both counts.



Defeating fascists is hard to define.  Before, during, and after WWII, fascists were the leading political influence in the United States.  It was presumed, in the US, that a council of knowledgeable businessmen in a given field could determine both the product and price of all producers in that field.  It failed, of course, miserably, but for economic reasons totally separate from any war, yet that is the enemy we still face each and every day.



It is not, in my way of thinking, disingenuous to compare the current ideological conflict to the conflict continuing since the 7th century, that is, control of Jerusalem.  I really, really understand why the vocal minority has always felt that way.  I just can not.  I have my own parts of the world I'm working to control.



General Sun Tzu is firmly in my camp, regardless of whom else chooses to believe it.



Brock Lorber

(If I could use such a signature block it would be:

Capt, USAFR)

--

yourtcfg(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Mon May 26, 2008 8:05 am Post subject: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED

AMEN.......jb

 

 

 --

andrew.bridget(at)telus.n
Guest

Posted: Mon May 26, 2008 10:05 am Post subject: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED

 	  Quote: 	
		    I have seen no credible evidence Germany was an occupying threat to the 

 United States, ... however, I stand to be corrected ....


	


In Mein Kampf, while the US is not (as far as I remember) not specifically 

mentioned, it is clear that Hitler viewed the Aryan race was the superior 

and, again, if I remember correctly, Hitler directly states in Mein Kampf 

the Aryans had the right to subjugate the inferior and bend them according 

to the Aryan will. Of course, I'm assuming that the US and the rest of the 

world would have been within Hitler's sights had he succeeded in Europe.



A counterpoint argument to this is the 1942 agreement Hitler reached with 

the Japanese to divide Asia amongst them: ergo, no world domination if they 

were to share the world with the Japanese, so therefore the Americas might 

have been left alone.



But, as a counter-counterpoint, one could argue that Hitler was pretty 

ticked with the Japanese hosting several thousands of Jewish refugees, 

courtesy of Sugihara Chiune, a Japanese diplomat, who gave them visas to 

enable their escape. (As a result of his actions Sugihara Chiune was 

stripped of his post and served out the majority of his post-war life as a 

salesman in Russia. Sugihara Chiune is also the only Japanese to have been 

awarded the  "Khasidei Umot ha-Olam" by the government of Israel.)



Regards,

Andrew

---

steve2(at)sover.net
Guest

Posted: Mon May 26, 2008 10:40 am Post subject: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED

Andrew,



I had never heard of Sugihara Chiune. That's fascinating stuff. I'll have to 

learn more. Not much I've ever read of the Japanese would make it seem they 

were capable of much compassion during the war. At least not the military.



Steve

---

steve2(at)sover.net
Guest

Posted: Mon May 26, 2008 10:44 am Post subject: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED

I always liked Lao Tzu, better than Sun Tzu.



---

brcamp(at)windows.microso
Guest

Posted: Mon May 26, 2008 3:34 pm Post subject: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED

The german missle program included an ICBM phase (the A9/A10) which was planned before the first missile left the ground.  Components of the first batch of A10s were found at Nordhausen when it was liberated by the allies.  Had Heisenburg succeeded in the bomb effort (which probably only failed because of the allies destroying the heavy water plant in Norway put the project back at a critical time, when the early work on charaterising plutonium was happening), it would have been a nuclear tipped ICBM in 1946.



The messerschmidt me264 bomber project first flew in 1943, but the project was requested before American entry into the war, in the later 30's before even lend lease. The Japanese (a german ally) had active plans until the battle of midway to occupy Hawaii, then use it and the Aleutians (alaska, also occupied American territory) to serve as the base for an invasion of the American west coast.



Hilter made it extremely plain that he felt that blacks were an even more "degenerate" bloodline than us jewish folks, and a bigger threat to "Aryans".  The entire position of the Nazi ideology pointed to America as fundamentally an enemy of his concept of blood purity by its very existence.  And there was more than a small group of Americans (including the likes of Charles Lindbergh and Joseph Kennedy) who were for the united states either remaining aloof, or even joining the war on the german side.  Lindburgh's loyalties were so much and object of concern that he was denied a security clearance and kept away from the European theater during the war.



I suspect had Germany won, they would have settled with the Japanese as soon as the birthrate and gas chambers could handle them.   Remember, "Heute Deutchland, Morgen die Welt!".  Doesn't really sound subtle to me.



        Bruce



--

WINGFLYER1(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 8:07 am Post subject: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED

I am MIGHTY DAMN PROUD of you Bud !!! Gil



Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

  [quote][b]

WINGFLYER1(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 8:19 am Post subject: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED

I think we should all get behind Bud and elect him for PRESIDENT. What do  you all think of that proposal? I had the opportunity to tell my State   representative and State senator that the biggest threat to the UNITED  STATES is not Al Quida but the U.S. COBGRESS, should have seen the looks on  their faces and the silence afterwards. Never seen,in my life time, so many  idiots gathered in one place as we now have in the Congress. Lets elect Bud  for PRESIDENT and we can kick off the campaign at our Oklahoma  gathering.



Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

  [quote][b]

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> Commander-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum