I've been giving some thought lately to stand-up comedy.
I mean I've been reading books on humor/comedy writing. I've tried to lighten up my generally serious tone of writing with something, well, lighter. But I started watching stand up on Comedy Central. And Last Comic Standing. So, I've been thinking a lot about Stand-up.
Not in doing it. God no, that is simply too terrifying.
I've done some scary crap in my life, lone back packing in the mountains, lone SCUBA diving, sky diving, being a body guard, once I was even an armed body guard for a murder witness, 24/7 for a week.
But doing stand-up? Now that, is scary.
Look, they don't like you carrying a gun on stage. Yes, they want you to go out there with NO protection. And wear a flak jacket? No good, no use, it can't stop those non materiel slings and arrows of outrageous drunkards, when you're bombing. Its useless.
Yet, they do tell you to "Go out there and Kill that audience!"
But then when you do, its all police and red barrier tape and hand cuffs and getting knocked about by the local constabulary.
Anyway, not that I could do it stand-up. I mean seriously? Get in front of people where they are waiting on you to do something professionally entertaining?
Right. I don't think so.
Back in 10th grade English one day, I was sitting in my usual front desk, central as usual. You see, Teachers liked to have me up front and central. I don't know why, I think they liked to see where my hands were. I just found it...annoying. I mean, they were and always have been, hanging loose there at the end of my wrists; so like what gives?
Class was about to start that day and I made some comment and the class simply lost it. They were laughing pretty hard. I was pretty pleased.
The teacher, and she was a great teacher, liked me; for some reason. She's the one who tried to get me to work on the school newspaper, but gave me the oddest look when I responded with such comments as, "how much does it pay?" and "I don't work for free."
So she tried to gain control of the class, but mistakenly left an opening for me to make yet another comment. The class cracked up again.
We went through several more iterations of this routine. I think she was enjoying it, too. I could kind of tell because she was trying hard not to laugh along with the class. It was hard to miss because she was standing right there in front of me.
Lucky for me, she realized she had a sit down comic in her class and was as entertained as the rest of the room. I had received many "hacks" in my school career prior to High School, those pummeling whack paddles that did so much damage to my backside, so there had been plenty of teachers in my past who didn't appreciate my cleverness so much.
Now its obviously a compliment if you can be a class clown and crack up the other students. But when you can entertain the teacher too, and when she doesn't just put a stop to it, and she is laughing too, through even several gags, well, that's pretty talented, I would say.
So finally she said, "Okay, OK, its obvious now that you can keep the class in fits of laughter, but we really need to get to work, we have a schedule to follow."
I thought that was so nice and such a compliment, that I relented and gave her control of her class back. And she KNEW that I had voluntarily done so. It was hard to sit through class after that for the rest of the hour; but I was so in awe of her for being so entertained by me, and so respectful of my talents, that I gave her my full and rapt attention for the rest of the class and also for the rest of the semester.
Getting back to my getting in front of a crowd as a stand-up, doing it cold, with people I've never met, who are having thoughts of wanting to kill me, if not for two possible eventualities; such as my being funny and such as their drinking heavily enough; well, as I said before, I just don't see it happening.
Not in this lifetime anyway.
In closing I would just like to say that Jr. High School Teachers and stand up comics, both have my intense and deep respect for putting themselves on the line as they do, on a regular basis.
Cheers one and all!
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
What is this current war about?
America, is going into debt. Why?
We are running a very expensive war. We can and do, kick some ass. But at what cost?
According to CIA Director, Leon Panetta, as of a week ago, there are only about 50-100 Al Qaeda left in Afghanistan.
June saw 100 NATO Troops killed.
The US military will cost over $100 Billion in 2010.
That's a Billion dollars for ever Al Qaeda member for 2010. REALLY? Do we really want to spend that much on a few rag-tag, hard ass, dirt poor, fundamentalists, in a foreign country? Would we spend that much on domestic types like that in the US?
Fareed Zakaria today compared our fighting the Taliban, who are alleged allies of Al Qaeda, to our having fought against, "Italy during WWII, after Hitler's regime in Germany had collapsed, and Berlin was in flames, just because Italy had been allied with Germany."
What?
Not to mention, beyond the military costs, there are tens of Billions of dollars being poured into Afghanistan in aide and support and one has to question, the logistics, intelligence and sanity of how that money is being doled out and spent.
Apparently, according to the Wall Street Journal, over $3Billion in cash has been flowed out of Kabul over the past three years? They claim: "More declared [and therefore legal] cash flies out of Kabul each year than the Afghan government collects in tax and customs revenue nationwide."
What?
Well, maybe, just maybe, we should be using those Billions to help America domestically.
I'm just sayin'....
We are running a very expensive war. We can and do, kick some ass. But at what cost?
According to CIA Director, Leon Panetta, as of a week ago, there are only about 50-100 Al Qaeda left in Afghanistan.
June saw 100 NATO Troops killed.
The US military will cost over $100 Billion in 2010.
That's a Billion dollars for ever Al Qaeda member for 2010. REALLY? Do we really want to spend that much on a few rag-tag, hard ass, dirt poor, fundamentalists, in a foreign country? Would we spend that much on domestic types like that in the US?
Fareed Zakaria today compared our fighting the Taliban, who are alleged allies of Al Qaeda, to our having fought against, "Italy during WWII, after Hitler's regime in Germany had collapsed, and Berlin was in flames, just because Italy had been allied with Germany."
What?
Not to mention, beyond the military costs, there are tens of Billions of dollars being poured into Afghanistan in aide and support and one has to question, the logistics, intelligence and sanity of how that money is being doled out and spent.
Apparently, according to the Wall Street Journal, over $3Billion in cash has been flowed out of Kabul over the past three years? They claim: "More declared [and therefore legal] cash flies out of Kabul each year than the Afghan government collects in tax and customs revenue nationwide."
What?
Well, maybe, just maybe, we should be using those Billions to help America domestically.
I'm just sayin'....
Monday, July 5, 2010
Just what is, well armed? Post 4th of July edition
For years now, I have had an ongoing argument, a discussion really, with a friend. The argument goes something like this:
"One should always have a weapon at hand in order to be ready for the unexpected."
I think he fears an attack coming on him when he least expects one. Perhaps sometime when he is out and about on the street, or when someone might accost him when he is relaxing in his home and he will suddenly find himself at a loss as to how to protect himself.
Valid concerns, all, because things like that do happen. People do get attacked at the most unexpected and inconvenient of times. After all, criminals lay in wait for those unsuspecting moments to happen. Or they do their best to create moments like that. I really don't think, generally speaking, that he is simply afraid of being attacked. I think the relevant issue with him here is in experiencing an attack and being unprepared for it. A big difference.
And that is where my argument in all this came in. When I said that his was certainly a valid concern, but for all that, it was really useful only "in a perfect world" scenario.
And this is where it is relevant to all people, everywhere. Although I said it is indeed a true statement, there are however a few facts that seem to preclude this reasonable seeming assumption, from being all that useful, in this all too real world. That is to say, in this all too realistic world.
You see, typically in the "real world", whenever you will need that weapon to actually be at hand, it will then all too typically simply not be there and available to you. Mostly, this will be because, either:
1) you simply forgot it at home (or somewhere)
2) you lost it (somewhere)
3) you recently had it taken away from you (most probably by the assailant in question during that unexpected moment), or,
4) you will find that you are more than one inch away from being able to actually access it (in time, and to be of any actual use), or,
5) you will find that you have fallen into the single most annoying thing that the ubiquitous "Mr Murphy" of Murphy's Law fame, ever does to us. Which is to have set you up so that you find, and at a time far too late in the moment to be able to do anything about it, that you have brought "a knife to a gun fight".
Now it may not be an actual knife that you brought; you may have even brought a gun with you. Yet in such a case, though it may even be a hefty .40 caliber Beretta automatic (and it could even be a fully automatic version), or a .45 model 1911, you will inevitably find that the assailant has one up'd you and brought a Mac10; or some similar type of sub-machine gun such as a full rifle-caliber machine gun; or worse, a 12 gauge pump action (or again, automatic) shotgun (and preferably not a sawed off one to boot).
My point in all this is merely to point out the value of learning "weaponless techniques" before falling into the mindset of feeling safe because you have a weapon and all this, prior to needing said weapon. Because anyone that has a weapon, had better not only know how to use it, but had better also know how NOT to use it. That is to say, how to use it when its NOT handy, how to not use it if you don't need it, how to use your mind if you don't have it, and how to not need to use it, when you do have it.
The positive issues here are, of course, that you can use it if need be, to save the day, to protect yourself, friends and loved ones and hopefully all will be well in the world.
So what are the negative issues to always having a weapon handy? Hmmm...how about it breeding paranoia? Ever have a dream where you are attacked, protect yourself and have to fire a gun and the bullets slowing shoot out about a foot and drop to the ground? I've talked with several law enforcement and special forces types, most of whom said that most people who live by the gun, have had that exact same dream.
Being perceived as a paranoiac is just another byproduct of the "have to have a weapon" mentality. But the most relevant issue is that you will simply get to depend upon it too much.
What are the positive issues to what I've suggested? Well, how about, you're ALWAYS prepared? At least, you're never not prepared because you are lacking your weapon. Even in a shower, when naked, you can be ready, with no weapon at hand. No traditional one anyway.
That method means that you basically always have a weapon with you. What? How about a bar of soap? Sounds stupid, but you'd be surprised what can be used effectively as a weapon. How about a plastic back scrubber in the shower? Not the least of which would be that which you were born with: your hands, your body, your teeth, and most importantly your brain. Then there is always the rolled up magazine.
Not to mention, every item in near reach of you can be an available and viable weapon; even some out of reach items can be helpful, depending upon how you handle things. IF you train for it, build the mindset for it, and do not depend only upon a firearm or knife or some such traditional weaponry, you will be far ahead of the game. Yes, you can kill with your mind. In more ways than one.
Then, should you ever find that you were actually at a point to really HAVE a weapon while you were being attacked (of course, having by then also learned how and when to use said weapon), THEN you would be doing quite well, because you could use that weapon to your advantage and protection.
AND you would (could, should) know how to use proper techniques against it should it get taken from and turned against, you; as well as be able to use your hands, body, mind and environment to your advantage, should the need and situation ever arise and dictate it.
Just something to consider.
Don't you think?
"One should always have a weapon at hand in order to be ready for the unexpected."
I think he fears an attack coming on him when he least expects one. Perhaps sometime when he is out and about on the street, or when someone might accost him when he is relaxing in his home and he will suddenly find himself at a loss as to how to protect himself.
Valid concerns, all, because things like that do happen. People do get attacked at the most unexpected and inconvenient of times. After all, criminals lay in wait for those unsuspecting moments to happen. Or they do their best to create moments like that. I really don't think, generally speaking, that he is simply afraid of being attacked. I think the relevant issue with him here is in experiencing an attack and being unprepared for it. A big difference.
And that is where my argument in all this came in. When I said that his was certainly a valid concern, but for all that, it was really useful only "in a perfect world" scenario.
And this is where it is relevant to all people, everywhere. Although I said it is indeed a true statement, there are however a few facts that seem to preclude this reasonable seeming assumption, from being all that useful, in this all too real world. That is to say, in this all too realistic world.
You see, typically in the "real world", whenever you will need that weapon to actually be at hand, it will then all too typically simply not be there and available to you. Mostly, this will be because, either:
1) you simply forgot it at home (or somewhere)
2) you lost it (somewhere)
3) you recently had it taken away from you (most probably by the assailant in question during that unexpected moment), or,
4) you will find that you are more than one inch away from being able to actually access it (in time, and to be of any actual use), or,
5) you will find that you have fallen into the single most annoying thing that the ubiquitous "Mr Murphy" of Murphy's Law fame, ever does to us. Which is to have set you up so that you find, and at a time far too late in the moment to be able to do anything about it, that you have brought "a knife to a gun fight".
Now it may not be an actual knife that you brought; you may have even brought a gun with you. Yet in such a case, though it may even be a hefty .40 caliber Beretta automatic (and it could even be a fully automatic version), or a .45 model 1911, you will inevitably find that the assailant has one up'd you and brought a Mac10; or some similar type of sub-machine gun such as a full rifle-caliber machine gun; or worse, a 12 gauge pump action (or again, automatic) shotgun (and preferably not a sawed off one to boot).
My point in all this is merely to point out the value of learning "weaponless techniques" before falling into the mindset of feeling safe because you have a weapon and all this, prior to needing said weapon. Because anyone that has a weapon, had better not only know how to use it, but had better also know how NOT to use it. That is to say, how to use it when its NOT handy, how to not use it if you don't need it, how to use your mind if you don't have it, and how to not need to use it, when you do have it.
The positive issues here are, of course, that you can use it if need be, to save the day, to protect yourself, friends and loved ones and hopefully all will be well in the world.
So what are the negative issues to always having a weapon handy? Hmmm...how about it breeding paranoia? Ever have a dream where you are attacked, protect yourself and have to fire a gun and the bullets slowing shoot out about a foot and drop to the ground? I've talked with several law enforcement and special forces types, most of whom said that most people who live by the gun, have had that exact same dream.
Being perceived as a paranoiac is just another byproduct of the "have to have a weapon" mentality. But the most relevant issue is that you will simply get to depend upon it too much.
What are the positive issues to what I've suggested? Well, how about, you're ALWAYS prepared? At least, you're never not prepared because you are lacking your weapon. Even in a shower, when naked, you can be ready, with no weapon at hand. No traditional one anyway.
That method means that you basically always have a weapon with you. What? How about a bar of soap? Sounds stupid, but you'd be surprised what can be used effectively as a weapon. How about a plastic back scrubber in the shower? Not the least of which would be that which you were born with: your hands, your body, your teeth, and most importantly your brain. Then there is always the rolled up magazine.
Not to mention, every item in near reach of you can be an available and viable weapon; even some out of reach items can be helpful, depending upon how you handle things. IF you train for it, build the mindset for it, and do not depend only upon a firearm or knife or some such traditional weaponry, you will be far ahead of the game. Yes, you can kill with your mind. In more ways than one.
Then, should you ever find that you were actually at a point to really HAVE a weapon while you were being attacked (of course, having by then also learned how and when to use said weapon), THEN you would be doing quite well, because you could use that weapon to your advantage and protection.
AND you would (could, should) know how to use proper techniques against it should it get taken from and turned against, you; as well as be able to use your hands, body, mind and environment to your advantage, should the need and situation ever arise and dictate it.
Just something to consider.
Don't you think?
Sunday, July 4, 2010
Happy 4th of July - Special Ed. Congrats Happy Independence America!
And on a day of Independence Day celebrations and explosions, a link to an article about the biggest Human created firework in the sky in the history of the world:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128170775
Have a great 4th of July, Holiday American (strangely said with a French accent). The rest of the world, well, you have a good day too!
And hey, all you terrorists, insurgents, losers and just general "I want to kill people" (and your basic and in general, asshole) types; why don't you all celebrate with America on America's Birthday, and take the day off from hurting people who you don't EVEN KNOW; take your typical Rube Goldberg thinking about fixing your life situation and just RELAX; have a drink, consider reality over that of your typical, "magical thinking that makes me want to kill others and feel all grand and superior to them" (in other words, tiny) mindset.
Yes, Religion = Magical Thinking (work it out). If you are REALLY into your magical thinkings, then go ahead, just cave in and praise (whomever) and spit it out: "God Bless America!" Okay, you can think it, you don't have to say it out loud and embarrass yourself in front of your loser friends.
See, you did it (you couldn't avoid it could you, pisses you off doesn't it?). Now, doesn't that feel better. You want to attack America, but you KNOW you WANT to enjoy our lifestyle, isn't that really what you're pissed off about?
Well, Let It Go.
Try celebrating a little independence from your usual run of the mill, "I'm so in a rut", and "I wanna kill (especially innocent) people", way of thinking....
Have a beer and a hot dog. Celebrate Life, not death. You might find, you like it.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128170775
Have a great 4th of July, Holiday American (strangely said with a French accent). The rest of the world, well, you have a good day too!
And hey, all you terrorists, insurgents, losers and just general "I want to kill people" (and your basic and in general, asshole) types; why don't you all celebrate with America on America's Birthday, and take the day off from hurting people who you don't EVEN KNOW; take your typical Rube Goldberg thinking about fixing your life situation and just RELAX; have a drink, consider reality over that of your typical, "magical thinking that makes me want to kill others and feel all grand and superior to them" (in other words, tiny) mindset.
Yes, Religion = Magical Thinking (work it out). If you are REALLY into your magical thinkings, then go ahead, just cave in and praise (whomever) and spit it out: "God Bless America!" Okay, you can think it, you don't have to say it out loud and embarrass yourself in front of your loser friends.
See, you did it (you couldn't avoid it could you, pisses you off doesn't it?). Now, doesn't that feel better. You want to attack America, but you KNOW you WANT to enjoy our lifestyle, isn't that really what you're pissed off about?
Well, Let It Go.
Try celebrating a little independence from your usual run of the mill, "I'm so in a rut", and "I wanna kill (especially innocent) people", way of thinking....
Have a beer and a hot dog. Celebrate Life, not death. You might find, you like it.
Saturday, July 3, 2010
The Saturday TFTD (Thought For The Day)
Let us rise up and be thankful,
for if we didn't learn a lot today,
at least we learned a little,
and if we didn't learn a little,
at least we didn't get sick,
and if we did get sick,
at least we didn't die,
and if we did die,
well then, why in the hell
are we talking about all this?
for if we didn't learn a lot today,
at least we learned a little,
and if we didn't learn a little,
at least we didn't get sick,
and if we did get sick,
at least we didn't die,
and if we did die,
well then, why in the hell
are we talking about all this?
Friday, July 2, 2010
Financial Crisis 101
Recently, I was out riding my motorcycle. I have a very nice, vintage 1980 Honda CB900 Custom with ten gears and a feeling of nostalgia when I drive it that is second to none. I had just been watching Fareed Zakaria on CNN, so it must have been late Sunday morning. While I was riding, something very interesting occurred to me. It was about our economy, of all things. As I was shifting gears from third to fourth and accelerating, having just made a very smooth transition, I imagined the following: what if there were a metaphorical society within the crankcase and just how would they perceive my shifting of their gears and accelerating?
Would they feel like they were in some kind of freefall during the neutral gear position? Even though only momentary, wouldn't it have an affect on a group perceiving this drastic change in their environment? How would they feel when the next higher gear was engaged? What would it do to them once the gear was engaged and acceleration applied?
I had the feeling that they would feel panic; at least at first. I mean, I think I would. After all being in neutral one would feel life begin running rampant around you and you would feel as if the world were in chaos. Or, at least the potential for chaos would be prevalent. Then once the fourth gear was in place, wouldn't there then be a feeling of more stability, albeit with a difference.
Sometimes, when you shift gears you falter in the transition.
When I change gears and the transition is perfectly smooth, the acceleration perfectly smooth, there is such a rush of adrenalin, a rush of emotion, even. But that is not an every time occurrence. And so, in this state of our economy, perhaps all the same applies here. Yet in the end, what is important is how things end up. Right? So, what do we achieve in this transition?
Won't we find ourselves in a higher gear, running faster, saving fuel, and getting to our destination more quickly as the world rushes by at an ever faster rate? How does one perceive that? Depending on the person, shifting from third to fourth gear could be life changing; or if not, then doing so at a much higher speed could at least appear that way.
Of course, it depends on the organism experiencing the change, too. So, depending on even the country that is experiencing the change, and the state of their own economy, it would set the tempo for how they experience change as their world currently exists. This all presupposes that what we are going through is not just a crisis as its seemed, not just mistakes having been made on even multiple levels, but also that we are simply going through a shifting in the world paradigm within our current economic models.
Maybe just maybe, once the transition is completed and the next higher gear is engaged, things may be all right and at that point we can move on to the new status quo of a next greater level of the world economic organism.
It is all, really yet to be seen. Perhaps we all just need to take a deep breath and let it happen.
Tomorrow: Just what is, well armed?
Would they feel like they were in some kind of freefall during the neutral gear position? Even though only momentary, wouldn't it have an affect on a group perceiving this drastic change in their environment? How would they feel when the next higher gear was engaged? What would it do to them once the gear was engaged and acceleration applied?
I had the feeling that they would feel panic; at least at first. I mean, I think I would. After all being in neutral one would feel life begin running rampant around you and you would feel as if the world were in chaos. Or, at least the potential for chaos would be prevalent. Then once the fourth gear was in place, wouldn't there then be a feeling of more stability, albeit with a difference.
Sometimes, when you shift gears you falter in the transition.
When I change gears and the transition is perfectly smooth, the acceleration perfectly smooth, there is such a rush of adrenalin, a rush of emotion, even. But that is not an every time occurrence. And so, in this state of our economy, perhaps all the same applies here. Yet in the end, what is important is how things end up. Right? So, what do we achieve in this transition?
Won't we find ourselves in a higher gear, running faster, saving fuel, and getting to our destination more quickly as the world rushes by at an ever faster rate? How does one perceive that? Depending on the person, shifting from third to fourth gear could be life changing; or if not, then doing so at a much higher speed could at least appear that way.
Of course, it depends on the organism experiencing the change, too. So, depending on even the country that is experiencing the change, and the state of their own economy, it would set the tempo for how they experience change as their world currently exists. This all presupposes that what we are going through is not just a crisis as its seemed, not just mistakes having been made on even multiple levels, but also that we are simply going through a shifting in the world paradigm within our current economic models.
Maybe just maybe, once the transition is completed and the next higher gear is engaged, things may be all right and at that point we can move on to the new status quo of a next greater level of the world economic organism.
It is all, really yet to be seen. Perhaps we all just need to take a deep breath and let it happen.
Tomorrow: Just what is, well armed?
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Does the US need more Spies?
Does the US need more spies? I would argue, undoubtedly yes. In the first place, we do need spies; and in point of fact, we do need even more spies than we have now.
In light of the Russian spies recently captured, it might seem we are doing a bang up job of tracking down spies in our country. But you can figure, its an iceberg picture; whatever we are seeing, is minuscule related to the entire picture. Its an integral part of espionage to have enough resources in play that if a few cells get captured, there are still enough other cells around to maintain your intel gathering.
Back in the 1970's and 80's, the US went through a period of years when Washington (DC) wanted to do things on the cheap. Certainly in the late 80's they felt the cold war was over, so, "lets cut resources we no longer need". Armchair spies, desk jockeys really, made decisions to look good to the higher ups and show how they can maintain surveillance without expensive HumInt (Human Intelligence) resources in the field. Modern electronics were startling in their new capabilities as was the money they could save us.
One could almost say, they were stunning in their affect.
Stunning to the point of shocking the intelligence community into apathy or possibly, delirium. The amount of money, that is, the illusion of the amount of money that could be saved, suddenly took precedence beyond the logic of reality. Or the need for real people in real places. Consider that electronics simply cannot catch innuendo, intent, or deceit. As usually, these people looked at the short term. We saved money; not, we lost huge amounts of money and lives over the next period of years. We will never know how much we have lost in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East in general.
To use electronic signals inteligence, or SygInt, to take the place of actual resources on the ground (HumInt), was seen at first as a wondrous concept. It could save us money, save our citizens' lives even and simply make us look cool to the rest of the world. Whittling down our HumInt "Johnny on the spot" intel was not because it was "hard to achieve" as many like to say, mostly in order to save face; rather it was because it appeared to be too bountifully cheap.
If one thought that we could be covered by using "eye in the sky" technology, well, why not? Also, at that time we were also friends with a bully and murderer named Saddam Hussein. So we decided that we didn't really need assets in the Middle East. After all, Saddam would let us know what was going on. Wouldn't he?
All these things were proved wrong and in the worst ways. People need to try and understand that we will ALWAYS need ground assets and in every country in the world. Although we need more sophisticated assets in many countries of the world, it simply isn't necessary in every country. Time and again this has been proven, yet it is always in cost saving times that we fall under the ponderous influences of cost cutting measures. At times such as these, it is easy to delude ourselves into believing we can scrape by with resources that are less than optimal, or even nominal.
Oddly enough, this has been the same attitude that we have achieved in the US toward supplying our young with the tools and quality of teachers they need as well as in maintaining our system of medical services. What is with that? Really, this has to stop.
We need not to fool ourselves. The US is in a type of cold war right now. Industrial, or corporate espionage is really more accurate, but it all amounts to the same thing and always has. Cost cutting now will only cost us more in the future in both money and lives lost. We may not want to believe it, but it is certainly so true.
As a more base example, just try believing that the gun some street criminal is pushing in your face doesn't exist sometime. See how well that works in the real world.
Last but not least there is this:
http://costofwar.com/
Tomorrow: Financial Crisis 101
In light of the Russian spies recently captured, it might seem we are doing a bang up job of tracking down spies in our country. But you can figure, its an iceberg picture; whatever we are seeing, is minuscule related to the entire picture. Its an integral part of espionage to have enough resources in play that if a few cells get captured, there are still enough other cells around to maintain your intel gathering.
Back in the 1970's and 80's, the US went through a period of years when Washington (DC) wanted to do things on the cheap. Certainly in the late 80's they felt the cold war was over, so, "lets cut resources we no longer need". Armchair spies, desk jockeys really, made decisions to look good to the higher ups and show how they can maintain surveillance without expensive HumInt (Human Intelligence) resources in the field. Modern electronics were startling in their new capabilities as was the money they could save us.
One could almost say, they were stunning in their affect.
Stunning to the point of shocking the intelligence community into apathy or possibly, delirium. The amount of money, that is, the illusion of the amount of money that could be saved, suddenly took precedence beyond the logic of reality. Or the need for real people in real places. Consider that electronics simply cannot catch innuendo, intent, or deceit. As usually, these people looked at the short term. We saved money; not, we lost huge amounts of money and lives over the next period of years. We will never know how much we have lost in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East in general.
To use electronic signals inteligence, or SygInt, to take the place of actual resources on the ground (HumInt), was seen at first as a wondrous concept. It could save us money, save our citizens' lives even and simply make us look cool to the rest of the world. Whittling down our HumInt "Johnny on the spot" intel was not because it was "hard to achieve" as many like to say, mostly in order to save face; rather it was because it appeared to be too bountifully cheap.
If one thought that we could be covered by using "eye in the sky" technology, well, why not? Also, at that time we were also friends with a bully and murderer named Saddam Hussein. So we decided that we didn't really need assets in the Middle East. After all, Saddam would let us know what was going on. Wouldn't he?
All these things were proved wrong and in the worst ways. People need to try and understand that we will ALWAYS need ground assets and in every country in the world. Although we need more sophisticated assets in many countries of the world, it simply isn't necessary in every country. Time and again this has been proven, yet it is always in cost saving times that we fall under the ponderous influences of cost cutting measures. At times such as these, it is easy to delude ourselves into believing we can scrape by with resources that are less than optimal, or even nominal.
Oddly enough, this has been the same attitude that we have achieved in the US toward supplying our young with the tools and quality of teachers they need as well as in maintaining our system of medical services. What is with that? Really, this has to stop.
We need not to fool ourselves. The US is in a type of cold war right now. Industrial, or corporate espionage is really more accurate, but it all amounts to the same thing and always has. Cost cutting now will only cost us more in the future in both money and lives lost. We may not want to believe it, but it is certainly so true.
As a more base example, just try believing that the gun some street criminal is pushing in your face doesn't exist sometime. See how well that works in the real world.
Last but not least there is this:
http://costofwar.com/
Tomorrow: Financial Crisis 101
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)