Tag Archives: Leadership

by - 0 comments

A template for how to fail

This twisted creature is Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, three decades Overlord & Dictator of Equatorial Guinea.  He’s one of history’s most successful patrons of the arts of human torture and life extinguishment.  So you’ll understand I really, really mean it when I say that even if the soldiers depicted in this photo had gone off script and bayoneted him in the kidneys, this US-Africa 2014 Summit would still have been a failure.

goon

In 2012, China hosted 50 African leaders in Beijing.  Then President Hu Jintao made it a point to play the gilded host as if he was a Ming Dynasty autocrat reborn.  Maybe Hu actually thinks this?  Who knows.  The Reds even somehow conned Mr Ineffective himself, Ban Ki-moon, to make an appearance.

I wonder what they offered Ban for his services?  He doesn’t seem like the kind of guy who’s into loose women or rock.  Maybe booze?  A chance to be ambassador to Seoul for the New Chinese Empire after East Asia is conquered by the Red Army?  Eh, maybe Ban just let himself get swindled into showing up as a hack pawn of the Reds internal self-interest by accident.  I guess.

Anyways, China offered billions in loose (dirty) loans, pledged solidarity with Africa against the world’s evildoers (the West), and generally made it a point to inform those present that China was serious.  Today, China does $200B in annual business with Africa.  Expect this number to climb exponentially for the foreseeable future.  Thus, the Chinese summit succeeded.  Why?  For two reasons, knowing your audience, and then delivering.

Hu knew enough to understand the gentlemen (and two women, I think) in that 2012 room.  The message was quite clear:

We China, want cash, so do you, we’ll help you get that cash, and you’ll help us get that cash too.  We do not care about anything else.

Are you an oil baron strongman who favors money, power, and widespread execution?  The West won’t always do business with you.  Or if they do, they’ll be difficult with you about silly values.  But China will do the same business with you, and not ask any annoying questions.

Are you a kleptocrat so craven you’d rob gold from your grandmother’s tomb?  China will bottom line the deal.  And help you locate your great-grandmother’s tomb, and provide you with the necessary earthmoving equipment.  For a price.

And what did China do?  They backed it up.  They made it happen.  They haven’t significantly altered this policy since 2012.  So effective has this been that the increasingly crucial power broker in Africa is China.  Once upon a time the United States was the middleman between Sudan and South Sudan.

Yet when they needed a guy with leverage to pursue peace from the current South Sudanese civil war, they began to reach for China and not America.  Why?  Because China buys all their oil and doesn’t ask foolish questions like where does all the money go.  They couldn’t care less how evil these guys are.  They’re a customer.  End of story.

This policy model works rather well for China.  It fits their mindset and objectives to make China a world player both in politics and economics regardless of the damage done to the human race.  But China is not the United States.  So it begs the question:

Why did the United States essentially copy China’s model for an African summit?  When the United States is not China?

It’s like a twelve year old got up in class, angry that the kid writing on the blackboard (do they even have those anymore) got all the attention, ran up there and stole the chalk and screamed, “me too teacher, me too!”.

Independent thought?  Coherent policy objectives?  Unique ideas to achieve them?  No, that weak stuff is for amateur losers like your idiot blog author.

And before you one sided goons start to blame Bush & Cheney (valid) or Obama & Kerry (also valid) please don’t forget that this African process is run not by the temporary occupants of power inside the Beltway, but by the everlasting foreign policy establishment of Washington DC.  Your average State Department thug will outlive like five administrations, of both parties, and maintains continuity of said policies.  In theory.

The scum Obiang was brought back into the United States’ arms by the Bush administration.  Now the Obama administration is still kissing his private parts.  Why?  Because apparently the United States needs Equatorial Guinea’s oil to keep the price of gas at the pump from rising three whole cents.  The level of fail is pervasive and systematic.

Now there’s an argument to be made that the United States must live in the brutal world of national self-interest and realpolitik.  That you have to do business with horrible human beings because it’s in the best interests of a country.  Agree or disagree, there’s a legitimate argument in that worldview.

Okay.  But there is not a legitimate argument that backs blatant incompetence and a complete lack of vision.  By any definition, moral, rational, whatever, this summit is a failure.  Why?  Well, let’s have at it.

1)  Failure of values

What is the United States?  I have my ideas.  I’m sure you do too.  But what does the foreign policy establishment of Washington DC (hereafter Morons) want the United States to be in the eyes of Africans?  Well, I guess the answer’s China.  The Morons want Africa’s leaders (and people) to think America is like China.  Thus, they invited most of Africa’s leaders as equals.

In other words, dictators, murderers, and goons were placed equivalently alongside legitimate democrats and freedom lovers.  The United States’ intended message was thus the same as China’s.  The United States doesn’t care who you are, we just love cash.  Now is that really the message the United States wants to send?  Well, I guess so.  I guess the Morons want Africans to believe that the United States will do business with Satan.  As long as the price is right.

2)  Failure of delivery

So now that we’ve established that the United States is only interested in gold.  The Morons figured they needed to do what China did and back it up.  Thus we hear the oft mentioned figure of about $30B-$40B in business investment by American firms promised at this summit.  But please observe how the American $40B is not a signed deal, but is “pledged”.  Oh, and don’t forget that this investment is spread out over years if not decades depending upon the whims of individual American firms.

You see, the Morons seem to have forgotten (or actually hate) the idea that American companies are not instructed by bureaucratic government remote control.  When Beijing says $200B a year, you’d better believe they mean $200B a year.  When Barack Obama says $40B, he means nothing.  He doesn’t have that power.  You’d better believe that every single African leader in the room knows that.  If they want actual cash, they have to talk to the CEOs of Exxon or Walmart.  So the Morons structured a summit that at its base level cannot deliver upon the promises made.

And just so we’re clear, $40B, this is what China burns on Africa every two and a half months.  So now the United States has sold out its morals in order to one up China for the equivalent of less than three month’s business.

3)  Failure of vision

Apparently the Morons are stuck in a mindset that was already irrelevant by 1992.  The overall purpose of this summit, I think, was to get African cash in American pockets and to increase United States influence on the continent.  I think.  With these Morons you can never be sure.  So how did the Morons decide to achieve that?  By inviting heads of states.  In other words, by inviting the ole Big Men of Africa to help solve the problem.

But in case the Morons haven’t been paying attention, with some rare and awesome exceptions, the Big Men are the problem.  The Morons completely left aside any vision of how they were going to achieve their objectives, other than the same fossilized tired diplomatic grip-and-grin.  Where poor Obama and Kerry have to legitimize and stand side-by-side with disgusting men in the mere hopes that it’ll build the kind of influence America requires.

But why would a bad dude African leader choose America over China?  Take the likes of Obiang.  He’ll eat tasty White House food any day.  And still sell America a lot of oil.  But do you think he’s ever going to trust America.  Why would he?  He’s probably smart enough to know that in the crunch of darkness, that China will back him and America won’t.

I guess the point I’m trying to make here is that it seems the Morons tried to copy China’s summit model, when it simply does not apply.  It’s like the Morons don’t even understand their own nation let alone the world.  They’re trying to beat China at a game where the rules were written by China.  How do they possibly expect to succeed under such a construct?

– Lady Obama and Lady Bush promoted girl’s education, to a bunch of guys who rob the educational ministries to buy their new boats.  Or sit back and drink $300 a bottle whiskey while their armies fail at their mission to protect their people from lunatics.

– President Obama mocked China for being interested only in Africa’s resources, while his subordinate Morons did everything in their power to put on a summit that expressed America’s desire to do just that.

– The President expressed a hope to tap Africa’s “talents and its potential” by inviting a bunch of guys whose talents include human misery, incompetence, and playing the world’s biggest leaders for fools.

The way I see it, there are two ways you could have made this summit a success:

1)  Only invite the African leaders who aren’t children of Satan

I’ve generalized in the negative sense above, referring to the leaders who showed up with blood & dirt on their hands and cash in their pockets.  Certainly, not all of Africa’s leaders are like that.  I won’t hazard to guess on a percentage because everybody would disagree with my methodology anyways.  But they still should have cut down the list and invited only the good guys.

It seems the Morons tried to do this, for instance Mugabe wasn’t invited.  But their methodology fell short.  A whole slew of evil dudes were invited.  They didn’t move the bar far enough.  Everybody can’t be Ghana or Senegal or Mauritius.  But this is just ridiculous.  Obiang?  Kabila?  [shakes head]

2)  Hold an African summit with people who actually matter

What portion of Africa’s Big Men made sure that millions of Africans can do all their banking on mobile phones?  Did Africa’s overlords bring high speed internet to some of the world’s most remote places by command orders?  The wrong audience was invited and the wrong message was sent to them.

Instead, they should have invited thousands of successful small, medium, and large African businessmen.  Then put them in a room with American businessmen.  You build relationships, exchange ideas, network, and build slowly for the long run.

–  Put the CEOs of Safaricom & Apple in the same room to talk about how they’re going to make machines our masters.  They can bring their staffs and some bright, young underlings to learn from each other.  Then they’ll go hit the bar, get drunk, and Tim Cook can clobber a teenage waitress in the forehead with his new iPhone 5s.

–  Put the gang from SABMiller in the room with a few dozen American microbrewers so they can hash out ideas, concepts, and good times.  SAB can explain how they conquered the planet’s beer market and pitch ideas for how they’re cornering small emerging markets with Africa’s growing number of beer drinkers. The Americans can sample some of SAB’s new sorghum brew.  Then SAB can sample a California micro’s blueberry and pear brew and the SAB guy will viciously break the bottle over the Cali’s head as an insult to beer being beer.

–  Put teenage coding freaks from Nairobi and Silicon Valley together so they can talk about what it’s like to be a loser in their own independent cultures.  And then how they’ll be the ones laughing when they’re all billionaires and those who beat them up when they were younger are pumping their gas.

–  And so on.

Now the Morons would instruct you that my ideas would not accomplish the objectives of the United States.  That I’m just a creepy, ranting jerk who doesn’t know what he’s talking about.  Maybe.  My way sucks if you’re a Moron because it’s slow, doesn’t have any sexy diplomatic grip-and-grins, and generally can’t make an immediate splash.

But at least my way the United States gets to keep its honor.  And I contend my way would at least ensure the summit didn’t fail up front, before it’s even finished.  Plus, at least by trying my way you’d have a chance at not failing.  Fail.

[unintelligible muttering]  Yeah, I’m done.  I guess.  [unintelligible muttering]  What do you mean?  [unintelligible muttering]  The State Dinner?  [unintelligible muttering]  White House.  Yeah?  [unintelligible muttering]  African ingredients?  [unintelligible snickering]  Really?  [unintelligible snickering]  Really?!  They used African ingredients?  [throws chair]  You’ve got to be .  Idiots!  [unintelligible snickering]    That’d be like Obama showing up to Kampala and they shove a burger in his face and call it classy!  [unintelligible snickering]  What kind of dirt bag patronizing move is that?  You fly them out here and then get your million dollar chef to use their native ingredients for dinner?  Who’s running this derailment?!  [unintelligible profanity]  [unintelligible profanity]  [unintelligible profanity]

goon

Uh, Mr Dictator, Sir, you’re invited over to my place.  My guests want to have a chat with you about some things.  Please don’t refuse.  Unlike you, we desire to keep liquidation to an absolute minimum.

by - 2 Comments

Some people are larger than life

Think you’re having a bad day? Trust me, you’re not. Try donning your armor and charging against ebola.

I know the world’s been a little busy lately. But in case you didn’t know, a full blown ebola outbreak is in progress.

By the way, why do folks capitalize the word ebola? Like we have to name it, like its Steve or Othman. I refuse. Who decided it deserved to have capitalization? This virus can kiss my ass. Sooner or later we’ll find a way to brutally destroy it. So why should we give in to its unreasonable demands that we make its first letter big?

Doctor Sheik Umar Khan led Sierra Leone’s ebola response. He died at the front. Battling this evil. He was 39 years old.

You can read his profile here:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-28560507

Some people are larger than life. Not everybody gets that call. That chance to battle on behalf of all humanity by doing the very simplest of noble deeds. We all wonder how we’d act if we got that call. Are we cowards? Would we fail? If faced with death or disgrace, what would we do?

Doctor Khan answered the call and did what great men do. It’s rather awful that he’s gone and that he had to die like that. I wouldn’t wish an ebola death on even history’s greatest monsters.

But if you have to check out, this is one of the ways to do it. On the line, in danger, helping your brothers and sisters to the end.

Say a prayer for Doctor Sheik Umar Khan. And let him inspire something good in your life today.

_76625302_dr_khan

by - 0 comments

Let’s hold a delightful desert demolition for all the leaders

I think it’d be a pretty good idea to take Abbas, Netanyahu, and whatever goon is currently pulling the levers at Hamas, we put them in the open desert, then we get about six hundred Jewish & Muslim children to throw pebbles at them until things wrap up. Or we shoot rockets at the Hamas guys, drop bombs on Netanyahu, and Abbas we just leave for the desert to claim. Then everybody else can get on with their lives.

For those of you who are inclined to blame one side or the other, I instruct you to take a better look at reality.

Hamas blames Israel, but is perfectly happy to put rocket launcher emplacements beneath some dude’s house. Then they leave the kids in the house in the hopes that if Israel drops the building that they have civilian casualties to blame on the Jews. Hey assholes, how about you not put the rockets underneath the baby’s crib.

Israel blames Hamas, but is perfectly happy to recklessly drop buildings, arrest countless folks who have nothing to do with this current violence, and generally demonstrate to the planet what it’s like to be a colossal prick. Hey assholes, how about you at least pretend you’re in any way interested in coming off as the good guys.

Who started this round? Who cares. Each leader is happy there’s a fight. It’s what they do. Hamas wants to get their face caved in at least once every two years so they can justify their otherwise piss poor leadership as a resistance. Israel wants to cave in Hamas’ face once every two years so they can drain a never ending supply of rockets. Plus as long as there’s a fight, Israel has no reason to pursue peace. This suits Netanyahu’s worldview just fine.

Maybe you take Hamas’ side. Maybe you think Israel is too heavy handed or that their response lacks all proportionality. Well, I guess, but before you completely pass judgment I’d ask you to spend a week with your kids waiting for the school bus underneath a concrete bomb shelter. Or, go do your bar crawl underneath air raid sirens.

I wonder what Hamas would do if they had jets and heavy armor. I’m sure they wouldn’t drop buildings in Tel Aviv or invade Jerusalem. I’m sure Hamas, because they seem like moral, upstanding dudes, would just be the very picture of model world citizens. They’d show Israel how you act like a responsible power, I’m sure.

Maybe you take Israel’s side. Maybe you think Hamas is just a bunch of terrorists who deserve to die because they want to destroy Israel. Well, I guess, but before you completely pass judgment I’d ask you to explain how you support things like the arrest of tens-of-thousands without charge, the demolition of a guy’s home without trial or conviction, or dropping a whole apartment building because there’s apparently twelve homemade rockets near the water heater.

You know if Israel’s not going to behave like a moral democracy, then why should anybody from the West care what happens to it? If Israel isn’t committed, in any form, to behave like the good guys, then they’re just yet another militant, violent Middle Eastern tribe. And then the world should just let Israel have it out with its enemies like tribes do. Cool, so all that US military aide, all the Jewish support Israel demands, all that can go away because Netanyahu is cool grinding morals underneath tank treads.

Here’s my nuanced solution to this complex problem:

Build a big wall around Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank. Cut off all outside contact from the planet. Close the gates. Open up the gates in about ten years. Whatever happens, happens.

These leaders are just so far off the map, just leave them to their fate. Everything else from the planet just enables their lunacy. If the Palestinians and the Israeli’s don’t like their leaders, behind my wall, they’ll figure it out somehow.

As my grandfather used to say regarding humanitarian intervention, when neither side was humanitarian, and as he’d known his fair share of gunfire, “Just let ‘em have it out.”

Israel-hits-gaza-01

Israeli airstrike in Gaza, circa 2019

by - 0 comments

al-Baghdadi administration unlikely to regain original spark

TAPN

“In the beginning we had hopes, not necessarily bright ones, but something, something could happen. We prayed for it,” sighs a Mosul grandmother who’s name she requested we not publish. “Now there is only the sins of the past, again, we have given up.” She gazes out at the mostly deserted streets from her dilapidated house. Her eyes vacant.

Over three years into his first term as the Prophet’s Successor, the administration of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi finds itself on the ropes. Besieged by internal strife and still embroiled in two wars, al-Baghdadi seems unable to cope with a endless litany of troubles. This last month poll numbers showed the Sultan’s ratings at near 30%, the worst for any first term Caliph since Mustafa III.

Even his closest supporters ponder if his Blessed Reign as Caliph has lost all momentum for good. “There’s a sense there’s a complete lack of direction. Nobody’s driving change anymore,” states an ISIS party insider.

Only this week the administration was rocked by yet another scandal, this time a sexual assault allegation against an ISIS party official at a conference in Ramadi. Councilor al-Rousani has vehemently denied the charges laid against him in Sharia Court on Tuesday. He has admitted to the illicit sexual contact but described it as “completely consensual”.   al-Rousani is married.

al-Baghdadi’s spokesmen have struggled to balance party factions, mainly the pro-rape and hardcore Sharia elements, who have lined up against one another. Said his chief mouthpiece, “The Caliph has requested that al-Rousani take a leave of absence. He asks for the Prophet’s Guidance upon the investigation and demands that all withhold judgment until the facts are known.”

1

“We want the old days back…”

The sense of aimlessness is clear on the Tikrit front. Bogged down in the third year of stalemate the Caliphate Regiments are becoming less enthusiastic in fighting a war they view as increasingly separated from the daily lives of their loved ones. Particularly given the incessant economic turmoil back home.

“Those dirty bastards in Mosul, they have no idea what this is like,” sneered one private, to the wide agreement of his colleagues. “Indeed, they’re just a bunch of bandits,” cried another.

The sense that even the Sultan’s closest military advisors are detached from the sufferings of the Ruled were apparent in Sharia Court this week as High Councilor Colonel bin-Fatad was formally charged with bribery in the now infamous Prophet’s Wind attack helicopter procurement fiasco.

bin-Fatad pleaded not guilty to the charges that he aggressively sought and received bribes from French defense contractor EADS. Although bin-Fatad strenuously denies the accusations, it is said various low ranking officers have cut deals with the Prophet’s Prosecutor and will testify against him.

And in France this week President Hollande is said to believe charges are required against EADS employees who, “clearly violated our laws that when we sell French kit to evil, that it should be above board at all times”. The Sultan is thought to have told his advisors that at the very least, bin-Fatad needed to “lose his cock”.

That millions may have found their way into pockets angers those at the front. “We’re fighting Iran every day and they just take all our cash before we see one dinar,” griped a grizzled first sergeant.

“In the old days we had victories, now we just have battles that never end. And how can we win with this, just look at this,” the first sergeant kicked a dusted, green Huawei radio, “this thing is so complicated and nonfunctional that I have to send two corporals to schools just to get this thing to turn on. But nobody has any school quotas, so the thing just sits here and doesn’t work. We generally use it to hold down the daily orders book from the wind.”

The sergeant shakes his head in confusion, “Once upon a time I had only my Land Rover, my Kalashnikov, and my faith. And we won victory after victory. We ran circles around the apostates. Now I can’t even lead a single patrol without writing three drafts of a seven paragraph order and run it up five officers to get to the Company Commander. It’s like writing how you know you’ll lose. We want the old days back.”

2

“Not the dictator we need…”

In Raqqah, near the ever-present western front, the dissatisfaction was widely described by local students at a “values talking shop”. Sipping tea at sunset they described a future they viewed as without hope, without job prospects, and while trapped in a country that did not honor their dreams.

“When the Caliph assumed power we thought things were different, that he’d bring about Paradise here on this life,” said one university senior majoring in philosophy. “But now all we see is the same games, the same corruption. We want change.”

And yet change has been consistently not forthcoming, both in the wars, and with the al-Baghdadi agenda. Still alongside dictators al-Assad and al-Maliki, supporters questioned whether the three were inherently tied to each other’s static fates.

Said the ISIS party insider, “al-Baghdadi doesn’t want to stay equal with the two of them, but he can’t escape their grasp. Yet since he’s the Caliph, people are always expecting him to deliver, to overcome the two of them. But al-Assad and al-Maliki have Iran and the Sultan only has the Will of the Prophet. What can you do?”

The students in Raqqah were harsher, “He’s not the dictator we need. If this Prophet’s Successor can’t fulfill our destiny then it’s time to find somebody who can.” Although the values group was unsure how they would conduct such a power transfer given the al-Baghdadi administration’s propensity to liquidate its most fervent enemies in a sea of brutality that makes Stalin’s ghost flinch.

3

“You can’t hide behind a title…”

This next week promises two greater challenges that might perhaps truly test what remains of al-Baghdadi’s authority. On Wednesday, the Prophet’s Court provides its final ruling on the much touted water usage rights on the Tigris. On Friday, the High Council reaches its deadline to pass the next fiscal year’s expenditures. Either event might prove fatal to the administration’s future.

“For three years the Caliph has promised economic prosperity and now he’s hiding behind the courts,” shouted al-Qaeda opposition party official al-Nir. “If the Sultan won’t stand up even to ensure all our people have clean drinking water then what’s the Caliphate for except to keep the rich, rich?”

Caliphate watchers were nearly unanimous in their belief that the High Council would not pass its budget on time due to the overwhelming disagreement over line-item additions inputted by Fallujah representatives in back room dealing last week. International financial institutions warned that yet more financial hurdles would only weaken the Caliphate’s already damaged credit rating.

“Increasingly the markets are concerned that the Sultanate can’t even pay its bills, let alone grow the economy consistently,” commented one BNP Paribas manager, “I think what we’ll ultimately see is the financial community lose faith and perhaps a downgrade of the bond rating to near junk”.

“You can’t hide behind a title,” emphasized al-Nir, “if the Sultan can’t deliver on his promises maybe it’s time to go.” And go he might. In private al-Baghdadi is said to frequently express exasperation with the challenges of office and frustration at the inability of most of his subordinates to produce results. He is said to frequently seek “detachment” in the peace of the desert where he states his intention is to “go fuck off”.

He is said to actively consider retirement from time-to-time but worries of the consequences. “He thinks if a new Caliph appears that he’ll get beheaded along with his whole family,” stated the ISIS party insider, “in reality he’s probably right. But that leaves the rest of us to endure his malaise.”

Back in Mosul the concept of a brutal bloodthirsty purge of leadership has no appeal for the grandmother. “I just want there to be peace, and maybe a little money to go around. But I don’t see it, not from al-Baghdadi or the opposition. We’ve lost faith in them all.”

4

by - 0 comments

Failure due to lack of vision is not solved by panicked action

In Revenge of the Jedi, as the Emperor is instructing Luke in the arts of religious politics, he informs Luke that he’ll, “pay the price for your lack of vision”. And then proceeds to shock his body with computer generated electricity. Of course at that point, the Emperor had about three minutes to live. So it would appear he was the guy without vision. And just as the arrogant Emperor believed he owned everything, but actually had no vision, so it goes for the current and previous emperors of America.

Since 2003 every single American leader in major power has had a substantial lack of foresight. Please note the equal application of failure from Bush, Obama, and all their underlings. As we’ve discussed, each side is attempting to now blame the other in order to sharpen their political swords. What does this matter to the rest of the world? If America has failed, then America has failed. A refugee in Mosul does not care about the midterm elections.

Both presidents botched this war. Place blame however you want. It’s irrelevant right now. It’s just noise for the media. But what I find amusing is the various actions proposed to solve the problem at hand. The two sides that bungled their actions and created this mess are now racing toward the funeral with their various solutions. Hey assholes, you all screwed this up in the first place. Why should anybody listen to your arrogant wisdom on how you’ll sweep up your own mess?

Here is what each side would say if they were honest with themselves, the people, the planet, and reality:

– Bush, Supporters, Etc

“We’re sorry. We tried to fight war on the cheap and fast. We had no concept of history, time, and reality. Once we discovered how large the task was, we lied to the world about our power, capability, and will. Instead of mobilizing the entire might of America to save Iraq after we broke it, we asked our citizens to go shopping while 0.6% of the population carried the burden of war for over a decade. We treated them like heroes even though we were asking them to fight the war alone because we were too cowardly to tell the rest of the country what it would take to win. We failed to explain to our nation that in order to succeed, we’d have to remain in Iraq for fifty years and spend trillions. We demanded the other side continue our war even as we still were intellectually dishonest with America about just what it would entail to win said war. When the other side actually ended the war, we rightly predicted disaster, but generally kept our mouths shut because we didn’t want to alienate an electorate that fully supported an end to American participation. Now that Iraq as collapsed, for political purposes we’re going to spin it as a disaster the other side created even though no American actually cares or wants anything to do with Iraq anymore.”

– Obama, Supporters, Etc

“We’re sorry. Most of us, except for our current leader, supported this war from the start because we knew we’d win. And America loves winners. So we wanted to be winners too. But then we realized we were losing. And we discovered, like our counterparts, just how hard this was going to be. So in a wind of cynicism and hypocrisy we changed our minds and began to lie and obfuscate how much we were in favor of this fight at the beginning. When we got power, we had no choice but to end the war because we’d won power opposing its continuance and because our people asked for it. We knew we’d take the risk of breaking Iraq by leaving, but we didn’t care. We just needed to end the war. And we tried to spin it as a victory for our own political advantage even though any rational person would know it wasn’t actual victory. We gave America what it wanted, and now America is shouting at us because we lost Iraq. Well, what did you expect? We knew what we were doing when we ended it. This is what happens. Go back to shopping and shut your mouths while we attempt to blame the folks who started this war to cover ourselves. Even though we know we ended it wrong, we don’t care. And you know what, in their hearts, neither does any American.”

So now these gangs of idiots are going to solve this somehow. With what? Airstrikes, Maliki’s removal, support from Iran, space-based-death-rays? Whatever. Any solution that either side has offered this last week will fail. Because they all contain a lack of vision. You cannot fix Iraq with panicked short term actions. That kind of next sound bite leadership is what created this disaster in the first place.

Both sides are led by losers who gooned this up. The American citizen does not actually care about Iraq because they were never asked to invest anything in its future. Does that mean the best answer is to do nothing? Well, no. Very little bad can come from American jets sending the incinerated remains of ISIS members into the stratosphere. And talking to Iran, who’s the real power in Iraq right now, is probably not the worst of ideas since they’re the only country in it to win it. 

But I guess my point here is don’t expect results. The guys who created this mess aren’t going to fix it with short term choices. Iraq was a basketcase before 2003, it still is now, and it’ll be so ten years from now. Accept it, calm down, and make the best of this awful situation. But don’t demand real answers. Not from these leaders. Not from either side.

In the end this is all a growing trend for the world to observe. America, under the leadership of either half of the political spectrum, with this current citizenry, is no longer a reliable power. Military and economic might is nothing if it’s not backed by a cohesive strategy, principled leadership, a distinct vision, and a population with the will to take long term action. Lots of people on the planet will favor this new world order and be glad that America’s out of effective play. But I suspect if you live in Donetsk, Tbilisi, Riga, Manila, Osaka, Tunis, or Mosul, that you don’t. Whether you admit it or not.

43-44

Two leaders unfit for war

by - 0 comments

Nobody is capable of fixing this mess

We can get overly focused on the man in charge.  Yes, they’re the face of an organization and the one calling the shots.  But many times, a department’s performance is beyond the capabilities and judgment of one man.

The focus now shifts to who the new boss will be.  Well, I’ve got news for you folks, it’s irrelevant.  Whoever’s next, the result is the same.  If Eric Shinseki can’t fix the VA, nobody can.  You will never find a more experienced, mature leader guided by such integrity.  The problem isn’t Shinseki, the problem is the VA.

Consider some numbers that illustrate the level of the problem:

VA

$153B for 312K employees caring for 9M patients

National Health Service

$183B for 1.7M employees caring for 63M patients

Now somebody smarter than I could probably explain why this comparison is not equivalent.  There’s probably some concept I’m missing.  But at the base level these numbers still tell the core story.  The VA is a bloated dysfunctional bureaucracy.

Just changing the person at the top won’t alter things.  Pumping more money into the budget won’t either.  Only two things can correct this situation:

a)  Completely change the VA’s organization, mandate, budget into something different

b)  Completely change the way government employees are managed

In any reasonable world the VA is a bankrupt entity that should have died and been rebuilt into something better decades ago.  But this is government and government can’t go bankrupt.  Yet without creative destruction this mess will just go on.  Kill it and then rebuild it.

Or you have to start treating government employees differently.  The folks who have ruined the VA lack integrity, efficiency, and value because they exist in a system that does not reward talent, merit, and performance.  That so many senior VA officials have turned out as corrupt, incompetent fools should not surprise anybody.  You get the people your organization generates.

Will Congress and the public even consider options (a) and (b)?  Probably not.  They’re too hard and controversial.  So don’t be surprised in a decade when everything’s the same.

0530_shinseki_gone_970-630x420

This man has to go back to the VA next month for his checkup

by - 0 comments

Things are returning to normal, but they shouldn’t

Nobody wants to live in a state of perpetual crisis; to get pounded every single day in the head with awful reality.  So Uncle Vlad has sounded rather charitable lately.  And so do his Western counterparts.  Now that the drama’s subsided, everybody wants to get back to normal.  Vlad’s backed Ukrainian elections, pulled some troops away, and didn’t resort to screaming like the lunatic he is when Prince Charles called him exactly what he is.

By the way, you have to applaud Charles for speaking the truth and the not backing down.  When you see how the three big men of British politics responded, you affirm quite a lot of who they really are:

Cameron:  The Prince… “…everyone is entitled to their private opinions.”

Clegg:  The Prince… “…free to express himself.”

Miliband:  The Prince… “…has got a point.”

Which is to confirm that Cameron remains the hack-fraud everybody thinks he is; Clegg is still a vacuum-sealed-lifeform-in-a-suit; and Miliband, for all his many, many faults is still a democrat at heart and has the admirable quality of telling everybody what he really thinks.  Even if telling everybody what he thinks usually gets him in trouble.

But it’s okay you tart Brits.  You’re not the only ones led by a walking corpse.  Monsieur Hollande still can’t bring himself to not sell amphibious assault ships to Vladimir.  Apparently because he says that once you sign contracts, they are sacred.  Oh, I get it.  So Vlad can violate international law and multiple signed treaties but the French will be damned if they break a single contract.  This is to say that Vlad could invade Poland and burn Warsaw to the ground.  But as long as it doesn’t lead to the loss of five-hundred union jobs in Saint-Nazaire, Hollande would respond, “Meh, [French shrug] what can you do?”

Vlad is not happy with Charles.  For once he almost seems to whine just a little.  He doesn’t like being compared to one of history’s greatest monsters.  But they’re essentially the same kind of guy.  Except that Vlad has a much lower body count and is in the end rather less successful in achieving his goals up front.  But Charles is right and both Vlad and Hitler see Europe the same way.  Unfortunately for us all, there’s no Churchill or de Gaulle waiting in the wings to turn things around.  And so this will go on and on.

Everybody in our blessed Western establishment governments and businesses want things to go back to normal.  The West needs Russia for gas, for oil, for cash, on Syria, Iran, Afghanistan transport links, nuclear proliferation, and about sixteen other major actions.  But to push Ukraine to the side and get back to normal in the pursuit of these goals misses the gravity of the damage Putin has recently wrought to the West and the world order it claims to represent.  This one you can’t let slide.

In two weeks Vlad shows up to the Normandy commemorations of 06 June.  Oh, yeah, if you didn’t know, Hollande has not withdrawn the invitation.  So in two weeks all the “leaders” of the West are going to stand side-by-side with a leader who’s just recently gone against everything those who fought at Normandy stood for.

They’re going to let him get away with it because they think they need him.  They require his Russia so they can get back to normal.  They might as well kidnap five Ukrainians off the street, take them to Sword Beach, and urinate on them atop an old Nazi coastal gun box.  And while they’re at it, walk over to the cemetery and spit on the graves of the fallen.  It’s the same as standing next to Putin after what’s happened.  It’s a disgrace.

9862553

“Well Vlad, you have to know, you’re a filthy Hitler shit.”

“Yeah, and what are you going to do about it, pig?!”

by - 0 comments

Trust the gun wielding goon with your freedom, what could go wrong?

I have this idea of a bunch of drunk cavemen leaders discussing whether or not to establish an army to liquidate the residents of a neighboring cave. They vote to do it. Then the next morning the leaders all wake up to find the general they elected to command their new cave army has launched a coup. He beheads them all and then doesn’t attack the neighboring cave after all.

Who needs an army anyways? Well, I guess Ukraine, probably Vietnam, and all those Baltic states who will soon become Russian provinces while NATO discusses what minor tool of Putin to sanction. But mostly, I think the planet’s countries don’t need armies. Throughout history, most armies only battle their own people. I’m certain we’ve got more coups than wars on the books.

Why has Thailand needed an army since 1932? They’ve had twelve coups. But the only times it was really needed against say Imperial Japan or to hedge Communist Vietnam, they never really fought. So by my count the only battle the Thai army has ever truly engaged in was against its own people. Maybe the Thai should only have cops instead. It’d be safer that way.

But it was rather comical to see the fools at the US State Department twist their words in a manner befitting a hack of Putin. As they walked around whether or not the army’s actions earlier this week amounted to a coup. I guess thousands of guys on the city streets with machine-guns is a training exercise?

Whatever. Don’t be too hard on them. They’re interested in preserving US influence in Thailand, regardless of who’s in charge. We don’t possess a US State Department interested in supporting US values. That’s weak ass stuff. Imposing your values across the world by any means is for jerks like Putin who actually care about things.

But fortunately those seeking clarity of the situation when clarity already existed were nicely assisted by history’s latest caveman asshole: General Prayuth Chan-ocha, Self-Appointed Dictator & Overlord of the Thai People. When in doubt, as always, trust the guy who’s serious enough to put guns on the street.

But it’s okay, the US is on the case. Secretary Kerry has warned of “negative implications for the U.S.-Thai relationship”. Ah, I see. I once again refer Secretary Kerry to his outstanding performance with the Ukraine crisis and remind him that people generally look at what you’ve done to determine whether you’re a serious man. If I was the good general, would take any threat Kerry offers seriously?

One Shirt, Two Shirt, Red Shirt, Yellow Shirt, whatever. Both sides are at fault in why Thai governance has been a basket case for a decade. These guys make Africa’s best kleptocrats look like freaking masters of the human race. Hey, at least Mugabe can keep things somewhat moving, even if he’s still having folks beat in back alleys. I’m pretty sure Mugabe’s got less automatic weapons on the streets of Harare today than Bangkok does.

But you know who’s not going to improve Thailand’s situation? The army. So whatever their motives, they’ve now further sent their country into the drink. The good general says he’s there to “return peace and order to the country as soon as possible”. They all say that. Some of them might even mean it. Maybe the general actually means it? But even if he does, he clearly doesn’t know anything about history. If you know history, you can already call how well this one’s going to work out. Bet money on it.

normal street corner

Well, at least the guy on the right isn’t laying a pool of blood; I guess that’s something; I guess

by - 0 comments

Uncle Vladimir is a winner

We want to be led by a wise & just person right? Somebody who is smart, honest, and has a sense of duty? Maybe we’re on the wrong track. Maybe we need to vote for the asshole that has the power to get things done.

Vladimir Putin is a winner, which is not necessarily to say that his opponents are losers. But certainly Vlad’s adversaries are failures. But I also don’t mean winner in the sense that Vlad’s won a vodka-fueled-bar-brawl, although I’m sure he’d kick somebody ass. By winner, I mean somebody who has the power to enforce their will upon reality. A man who gets things done.

So in this context, you would call Hitler and Stalin winners too, even though they were deliciously-evil, disgusting-human-freaks who ultimately lost. And even when the winner is a Western good guy, don’t try and make them a saint. A true Abraham Lincoln is a once in a millennium occurrence. Think of a guy like Churchill. Churchill was a winner, but he also said and did some very dumb things in his day. But the point is that overall, he got things done.

Look at all of Vlad’s counterparts: Cameron, Merkel, Obama, & Hollande. Everybody’s got their opinion on these folks. In my mind, people have the broader impressions of them all wrong. Everybody wants to mark up Cameron over immigration, Merkel on the Euro crisis, Obama on health care, or Hollande on taxes. Folks, I think in general, you’re all missing the point. Any one issue obscures a singular core problem with all four of them:

They generally don’t get things done.

If you want to argue with me that any of them are getting things done, at least domestically, just comment below or e-mail me and I’ll demolish your argument. For the moment we’re just going to accept that I’m right, because I am, when I say all four of these folks just don’t have it. You could conceivably argue that all four of them are smart, honest, and are propelled by true duty. Yet, they don’t have it, they’re losers.

Vlad has it, he’s a winner. He wanted Crimea, he got it. He wanted a destabilized Ukraine, he got it. He wanted to end this crisis with him firmly in control of future events, and he most certainly has that. Friends, don’t be fooled by the empty suits in the West when they assure you they deflated this crisis via their meek actions. Ukraine does not belong to Russia this morning only because Vlad generally knows when to quit while he’s ahead.

We’ve said it before, we’ll say it again. Love Vlad or hate him (we hate him), you have to at least admire a guy who knows what he wants, generally speaks his mind, and then backs up every single word he says. When in doubt, you bet on the guy you can rely upon. Even if I was a pro-Russian separatist in Donetsk, and Vlad sold me out yesterday by somewhat endorsing national elections? Well, I’d still side with Russia. Because twenty years from now I’d still trust that Vlad, or his appointed successor, would be there for me. Whereas the West will not.

So the question then becomes why the others are such losers. Well, I have three thoughts that come to mind off the top of my head:

– The Media

Essentially, we need to destroy Western media as we know it and start over. Vlad barely cares what the media thinks, or manipulates the message to his own ends by beating the journalists at their own sick game. The era of the sound bite, twenty-four hour news, gotcha questions, and militantly partisan trash is not designed to increase voter awareness. It’s designed to sell advertising.

When one of the most basic arms of a functioning democracy is primarily focused not on keeping government honest, but on selling things, then we have a huge problem. Western leaders are trapped in this cycle. Every decision they make is funneled through the lens of how it will play in this tortured media environment. This does not make for healthy decision making. It does not encourage the kind of risk taking you occasionally require from leaders.

– Politics

More and more, the leaders of the West are professional politicians. They have never done anything else. Cameron, Merkel, Obama, & Hollande at one point did other things, but everything substantial they have ever done in life was a job for or about politics. This establishes a very narrow focus, a worldview that does not conform to reality. They can’t get things done in the real world because they’ve never lived in the real world.

If politics is a game, they are trying to lead as if they are in a game. But the world is not a game, it’s a cruel bitch and they don’t know how to play it. Vlad grew up strangling people in Dresden back alleys for a living. The other four grew up in classrooms or smoke-filled (no longer smoke filled) political back rooms. Vlad had to get things done or he’d get fired or executed. They had to please their political masters with some obscure, unknown political action that nobody cared about or got to see. Pit them against each other in the real world, and we shouldn’t have been surprised at the outcome.

– Apathy

You get the leader you vote for. Nothing about Cameron, Merkel, Obama, & Hollande is generally a surprise to the world. These four turned out roughly as anybody could have predicted if you knew who they were before they were elected. The voters make the call, they bought what they got. The public put four career politicians in charge of their lives. The public also lives with a dirty news media that they still watch and read. The results speak for themselves.

But look at who could replace these four? All four leaders (or big men) of the opposition are exactly the same. Miliband, Steinbruck, Boehner, and Cope are all cut from the same cloth. They all have their hard core supporters, but the overall problem is just apathy. Apathy as in the eight folks on offer to lead the West are all the same. They don’t get things done. And nobody seems to care. Put Miliband, Steinbruck, Boehner, or Cope in charge tomorrow, and nothing, I mean nothing truly changes.

As a reminder, Vlad is an elected leader. The election was rigged, but even if Russian elections were free and fair, he’d still win. The Russian people picked a winner, the West picked losers. Take that as your basis, and a lot of what’s happening in the world today really makes sense.

vlad_may_parade

One successful leader, aware of history, propelled by action, adored by his people