Bill Whittle of Eject! Eject! Eject! has a well thought out article the discusses “tribes.” His logic, as usual, is exceptional. Part of his message that is so powerful is that tribal behaviors are not related to cultural things, but the attitudes we have today are the identifying factor in tribalism.

Read and be stretched in your own thinking about our human condition.

While scouting thru the sitemeter logs, I saw a referral from Dawn’s Early Light. I linked over and found a great synopsis of many places to get information on finding missing family members, as well as places to make your donations to…it was nice to see my blog at the top of the blogroll, too…Thank you, Dawn (I assume is your name).

I first found this first person account while reading Black Five. It’s worth your time to read about a man who decided to get off his butt and do something about the devastation along the Gulf Coast. What he did was remarkable in and of itself, but add to that a bad back and a Deuce and a 1/2 with no air conditioning being major parts of the story. The tale tells of the despair, the hope, the thoughtfulness and the bad elements of the human experience. He certainly doesn’t want any accolades, but he deserves them. Read and see through his eyes.

Neal Boortz was on a few minutes ago extolling WalMart’s ability to act faster than FEMA and I thought I’d next here some insightful analysis from him about how it is probably the most highly developed logistical system in the world, which has hundreds, if not thousands of outlets in any given state of the US.

WalMart is the biggest dog driving Information Technology, too. You know why? If you want to play in their arena as a vendor, you have to do it their way. Their way is huge, so huge, because of the vast product network infrastructure, that they have to have something that effective to make it happen, and they do. The skillful use of IT has kept costs down, and delivery track records amazing.

I’d say they could react so quickly because they have the “bases” and the established routes and cargo capacity doing the same thing pretty much every single day, and in most cases, it’s just routine for them to do the 24/7/365 thing like it’s no big deal. They are practiced. Good for WalMart. Home Depot and Lowes have similar capabilities, and I know from first person reports after the hurricanes last year, Home Depot flexed their system hard to make sure they were on time and on target, including have trucks stacked up in southern GA, just waiting for the storm to pass and the FL Troopers to give them the the go ahead to move south.

Neal Boortz incorrectly proclaimed that WalMart did such a wonderful job, because it’s a privately held company (there is some truth to this part) and because “THEY HAD NO RED TAPE!” You know, I can hove no red tape, but if I have no trucks, radios, computerized stocking systems and distribution networks, I couldn’t hold a candle to WlMart, nor the governmental agencies. Why? because it really has little to do with “Red Tape” anyhow.

What is “Red Tape?” To you who have not had the pleasure of serving within a government agency, it’s all those forms we have to fill out, and then the forms and reports we had to fill out. The many signatures required establish what defines “Red Tape.” All of those forms are the end result of procedures, which came to life as a result of something, more often than not, bad, occuring. In the case of the military, reports and forms and procedures are the reactionary result of accidents, or systemic shame. In the case of the non-military portion of the govenrment, I’d suspect many of those forms, reports and signatures are a result of the government getting ripped off, or systemic shame. Systemic shame in this context, is when some official does something from highly suspect, to plain old criminal.

The forms, reports and procedures you love to hate, define the “Red Tape” term. Here’s the real bottom line: They get there, to get in your way, directly, or indirectly, so you, the taxpayer, can have detailed oversight of where the money went and who approved or disapproved some action that now is putting a burr under your saddle. While it’s not directly your fault, it is your fault, as you expect (not unrealistically, I’ll concede) government officials to produce the trail of paper that got you/them/us to where you got unhappy.

What’s so wrong about that? After all, you hand over your tax dollars to the government and you expect it to be properly expended. In the process, procedures and policies and forms and reports are put in place so your questions can be answered. Do you think trhe Walton family will ever open their financials for your purusal? Yep, you got it right, fat chance….

Last year, after the four hurricanes crossed through Florida, it was discovered FEMA aid was paid to residents of Miami, where there was essentially no storm damage whatsoever. The “Red Tape” that seems so undesirable this moment as people try to help in Mississipp, Alabama and Louisiana will provide the path to nail the people employed by the government who were parties to the fraudulent claims, and also indentify the recipients for the monies. That’s a good thing, right?

So, give a rousing three cheers for “Red Tape,” for it is the mechanism by which you can see what your government does to you, or not for you, and you can then make more intelligent decisions when you walk through life and what ever local, state and federal elections come next.

The forms, reports, and most importantly, the signatures are yours for the asking through various levels of the Freedom of Information Act.

Update 09/13/2005: I found this today regarding WalMart’s data operation…simply amazing!

Thanks to Mudville Gazette for the Open Post!

Investigations are veritable treasure troves of information. The view of the value of this information generated is directly related to which side of the table you are on.

I conducted two investigations as the investigating officer, and I did just about everything else for another one, when my boss was the named IO, however, I was the poor guy with the past experience with the issue at hand, so I may as well have been the IO as far as the work load I had.

Senator Hillary Clinton is now demanding an investigation. Wonderful. I’d think the “breaking news” of the last few days regarding how the breached section of levee was actually the most recently reworked section, and how millions and millions have flowed into NO for such projects, but the money didn’t seem to go where it was needed, would cause her to sit back in the saddle for a few weeks, and wait for the fallout to settle. It may come ouot that not only was there a disaster for humanity, but it may well turn out a pile of Democrats may end up looking rather stained by the results.

Another issue is how to “man up” the investigative team. While it may be exciting for some old cronies of each party to come out and get a big paycheck in the service of their country, that sort of investigation, in recent history doesn’t seem to get to the meat of the issues. I’d suggest, humbly, of course, that you put some of the best and brightest we have in the disater preparedness and recovery professions, as well as those from supporting disciplines, sucah as medical/public health, logistics/transportation, civil engineering, etc, etc, but you get the idea. This group has the potential of bringing us some information we can take to the bank, and have more hope pf things working out better in the future.

I have a candidate in mind who has had experience in investigations of big and highly visible disaster: Admiral Hank Gehman, USN, Ret. I’m sure he can take the heat, and can lead an investigative team to a proper set of conclusions, FOR THE BETTERMENT OF OUR CITIZENS, and not the betterment (in terms of not getting caught) of politicians. His “black shoe” (Surface Warfare Officer) background and senior leadership positions have equipped him for such a task.

I’d rather have a man of the caliber of Admiral John Bulkeley, but he’s passed on, for the task. Besides getting MacArthur out of the Phillipines, he went on to head the Navy’s Board of Inspection and Survey, and he doggedly pursured propblems aboard our ships, so future ship architects would build the ship’s we needed. That’s a story for another day. I met the man and he just was all business. We sure could use him right about now.

General Schwartzkopf comes to mind as a man who could slice thru the BS and get us to where we need to be as well.

Speaking of “black shoes,” the next issue is how to conduct the investigation. We, the black shoes, who have been known to “eat our young,” seem to be very anal retentive in the conduct of these types of fact finding missions. They have a two fold mission, and it’s hard to figure out which takes the greater precedence sometimes, but the competition is between “What went wrong (so we can keep from it happening again)” and “who’s the guilty ‘ONE’?” We get to the bottom of it, but we like to know who to write up the UCMJ charges for, too.

Contrasting this are my fellow aviators, the “brown shoes,” when a crash type situation occurs, they immediately have a mishap board for the aircrew. from what I understand, the purpose is to figure out if there is some kind of mechanical or aerodynamic reason for the mishap. If so, they want to know right away, to save lives in expensive flying machines. Anything the crew spouts out in this forum is no longer fair game for disciplinary charges, so they regularly spill everything, knowing they have a form of immunity for what they have disclosed there. The thought to leave with is: They do this to save lives and airframes. Assessment of guilt will be handled later on, safety is paramount right now, while thoughts are fresh in people’s minds.

I also think Senator Clinton would be well advised to look at the recent debacle over the Rep Tom DeLay trip funding. The Democrats planted their battle standard and promptly found out they had also been funded in a like manner, and in some cases, hadn’t filed the right reports. Once this happened, we just heard the crickets chirping away. Senator Clinton, get a clue before you end up with your party looking very bad over this…..

More thoughts later, or not…I have notes from listening to the news today on this topic. Above, I have mentioned some…

Lots of thoughts have boiled up over the last week as the aftermath of Katrina is the just about singular discussion on talk raido, which is my usual fare in the car and while at work.

I reflect on the times of Hurricane Hugo. One incident where a looter caught some salt rock as he left the area of his crime was publicized. For the most part, there was never a whipser of looting the rest of the time Charleston and the rest of the impacted SE region recovered. I don’t recall hearing about looting as an issue in the aftermath of Andrew in Homestead. I don’t recall looters running rampant in New York City on 9/11 and the days afterwards. The same was true for the Earthquake in LA back in 89…. Even today, there seems to be a lack of news reports of looting on a grand scale other than in New Orleans proper. There obviously is an inherent issue with New Orleans, and not people in general.

Leadership. Not enough going around at the top levels. I suspect there is plenty happening all over the southeast, and some of the most mild mannered people, and some of the biggest slackers are propbably showing a positive side of themselves that they may never have known was in them. Some to the “people in charge” have deserted their posts, but this is not unheard of in the war zones, now and across time in the human experience. I think the leadership skills taught to almost everyone who has served in the military will serve us well. Basic premise: Look around, assess who is currently at the party and find out what they bring to the table. Make a plan and execute, and do it now. As more people come to the party, add to your capability in new skills, or more people power, If someone with more experience than you happens to arrive, brief them on the staus and step down to where you can be most effective. The “after action report” is just that: After the action, not during.

On gassing up my car when I pass a gas station: Years ago, a few central american fishermen became adrift in the Pacific, and ended up being found near Hawaii about 30 days later. They had been dismantling their boat, very carefully, to get wood to make a cooking fore for when they could catch sea birds, or fish. I read an interview in People Magazine with one of them a few years later. He said he, and his fellow fishermen had become obese, as they couldn’t pass up food, as it had become ingrained in them during their ordeal at sea is you eat when you find food, for the next meal isn’t guaranteed. Even over 1/2 a tank, I’ll pull in if it looks like there is gas to be had at a reasonable price.

Logistics. He who has the better logistics wins. Logistics take planning, and time to flow. Yes, the 82nd has a ready brigade, but those boys are laoded out with food for themselves, and lots of firepower. It takes a significant amount of time to pack up all that equipment for air drops. Then it’s staged where it can be combat loaded quickly. While the 82nd could have taken off right away, they would have arrived in New Orleans without the necessary medial supplies and food stores to hand them out. To replace their warfighting load with humnitarian aid supplies takes a little bit of time, but you can bet the troops worked far longer than their work days to get the changes in place for load outs. That happaned in all units, reseves, National Guard, and active duty. The fact that the Coast Guard could jump in the game so quickly is that type of work is one of their primary mission areas (Search and Rescue), so they are fitted out for that effort, hence the rapid response from that service.

The Nintendo, cell phone, XBox instant gratification culture response from the people. Great. We have become spoiled by technology to the point we have no patience when thens are off th tracks. Grow up, and get with the program. You’ll be happier when you can accept that life isn’t always delivered to you 1) your way and 2) when you want it.

Decision making. All forms of communications evaporated. When was the last time “we” exercised without the “stuff” we think will always be there? I suggest just a handfull of people even could project their voice to a crowd or unit for longer than a few minutes without going hoarse. The “art” of pushing your voice out to a large area, and still be intelligible is pretty much gone. It will be a useful method for the next few days, before amplificed systems can once more make us lazy. Oh, back to decision making. I can’t recall who was posting it, it seems to me it was either Yankee Sailor of CDR Salamander, both still active Navy guys, but the discussion was wrapped around the fact that they had so many ways to keep in contact with the “boss” that they never really had to/got to make decisions. When you don’t “go there” as a result of not so good decisions, sometimes you end up never developing the skills needed to make tough, fast, and effective decisions. The NOPD and Fire Department were in that fix. Not only could they no call to ask how to handle things, and therefore had to decide themselves, the “system” relies on being able to communicate and call in help, such as police backup or more firefighting capacity when the situation gets too big to handle. So, the local authorities are kinda overwhelmed, and in an environment they never envisioned. Some people folded, other rose to the occassion.

On the concept of practicing without, I once graded a “selected exercise” (meaning it was the one for the books for the readiness guys) for a cruiser. The drill was a an exercise in how to handle a nuclear attack. One of the things the Damage Control Assistant had to do was calculate the radiation values. Once the simulated bomb burst had occurred and geiger counter reading being passed to Damage Control Central, he reached in his drawer and picked up his little creidt card sized calculator. I told him to put it away, that the electomagnetic pulse of the blast had fried the electronic brains. The look of horror crossed his face, part for my directing him, part because he knew that would be the case. He hadn’t practiced “punching the pubs,” so he felt lost. He regained his composure, and got to work. He did fine, but may have done better later

Following “The Plan.” We Americans are great at making plans, but we so much more prefer “winging it” when the barbarians are at the gate. I think one reason is that unless you’re the poor person who got strapped with typing up “The Plan” (hereinafter referred to as “TP”), no one knows it well enough to carry it out. Now, since the TP is so ominous looking in volumes I through V, no one else will pick it up and read it, except for us few “by the Book” types…

So much for drifting along in the stream of consciousness today. Typos and gramatical things are placed within this post for you reading pleasure….

I had the occasion to work with a recent high school grad a few weeks back. We got to talking about having to rewire a specialized convection heater in the business after a problem, and I mentioned I just went back to my basic electricity education from junior high school shop (I guess we call that “middle school” now) to realize one of the wire grounded out one of the two heating coils. I just sat down and diagrammed the wiring, and traced it around functionally, only to find out when I had replaced the wires, I caused the problem myself.

He said “They don’t teach that.” That initiated a conversation about “shop.” He told me when he took shop, it was taught by a teacher who had a different main subject assignment, and he didn’t even care if the kids showed up in class, since it was just an add on to his normal teaching. Freddy amplified this to say “they only teach us what we have to know for the FCATs.” FCAT stands for “Florida Comprehensive Academic Test.” FCATs have grown out of the “No Child Left Behind” initiative of George Bush’s presidency. The very concept is a powerful one, but it’s how the states reacted to this is interesting. I see parallels in how the attitude presented above may have come about. If performance of the students allows access to Federal funding, then the outcome of the testing cane take on a life of it’s own, leaving basic learning in the ditch of the academic process. That’s what I will attempt to analyze below.

Freddy’s one line about FCATs stood out, and for the past week, kept cropping back up in things I read, heard or recalled of my past experiences. A few Saturday back, I was scanning the letters to the editor in the St Petersburg Times and came across a letter from a mother indicating she was considering pulling her children out of public schools, because all they were being taught was what they needed to pass the FCATs. Two “hits” in my scan of life in a week’s time. It took me back to thinking about all my years in the Navy, where inspections are a way of life, and most particularly, three years being assigned as the lead inspector for the surface ships in combat systems readiness.

“Gouge” was a valued commodity in schools and around the waterfront. A regularly heard statement was: “If the minimum wasn’t good enough, it wouldn’t be the minimum.” Plans of Action and Milestones (POA&Ms) for various readiness exams and training work were passed between ships. You found time to walk the piers and meet your counterparts on other ships, in order to “get the gouge.” The rumors went around and it was common knowledge which ships did well and which tubed the inspections. Hint: Don’t use their “gouge.”

The culture was easily lulled into doing enough to get by sometimes, with the focus being that one and only inspection, the wolf closest to the sled. When times were hectic with deployment and training schedules, it seemed the next avalanche of work for the next big event kept coming. Sometimes the best you could do was to figure out the path of least resistance to the passing grade. Striving for excellence was an entirely different ball game.

The FCAT issue reminds me very much of the situations I saw in the Fleet. My department had scrubbed check sheets for the areas in Combat Systems to be inspected to make sure we could tie a written requirement to every single thing we checked on. We listed the references and the mailed out copies of the check sheets to every ship. In other words, they had the complete list of things to be passed in their hands. The corollary to this is knowing the FCATs are coming and having knowledge of what areas they will test. No surprises here.

Next comes: What will be your view of how to approach the “inspection?” You do have to get through it, so the “matrix” is satisfied for the paper pushers at higher headquarters. I saw two basic attitudes on the ships regarding receiving inspections:

1) Get the list, do all of these things. Make sure these things are ready/done right. Anything else is merely wasted effort and;
2) This inspection is a stepping stone to the future success of the ship, and here are many things we need to understand and make sure they are done.

The difference is the focus on what to do, versus knowing your job, with the check points being an essential part of that knowledge.

I think the educators here in the local area, based on Freddy’s comments regarding teachers who could care less about teaching shop and the letter to the editor claiming teaching is specifically targeted at only FCAT knowledge requirements, have adopted attitude #1. I’d recommend they try approach #2. Here’s my argument:

Situation #1 discounts “peripheral learning” as wasted energy. Since there is a list of what to know, go for that, and that alone. Peripheral learning is where you learn things that will compliment your understanding of the main topics of concern, as well as just adding knowledge for later essential use. The ships I saw that took this approach, which actually was the majority, were the very ones who were inflexible in their thinking on most all other areas, which generally, at the least, kept their grades down, and at the worst, failed them. Life, and combat, are full of the need to be flexible, and practicing rigidity is counter productive to success. In attempting to attain the highest grades possible, it actually appeared they were their own worst enemy. I see the schools doing the same thing, based on my understanding that our schools are to develop young minds to come out and do excellent things in the economy.

Approach #1 is the short sighted view. It is a selfish attitude in that it becomes an exercise in maintaining educational funding, which translates into job security for the administrators and teachers. Yes, some of the funding will go to school programs and equipment, which will be used by the children, but how does that do the children any good if they are unequipped for entering the workforce? I will admit I haven’t used calculus in detail since I took it, but the understanding of this form of math has helped me make sense out of some things I’ve dealt with.

Approach #2 demonstrates an understanding that all the preparation/study effort is to clear a hurdle, enabling you to grow to new levels of knowledge, and that the inspection criteria are representative of the areas of study, but not the only things to know. It’s the maturity of the professional attitude. In the case of the educators, it would be to understand the skill sets tested in the FCAT are essential elements of knowledge, but no guarantee that the exact question will face each of the students later in life. It also demonstrates an understanding that the real success of the students will be shown in later years, when they are in the economy, fully participating for the betterment of the society as a whole, while being able to care for themselves. I submit to take this method to heart will achieve the very goals of showing improvement in the FCAT scores. It facilitates learning, and better yet, understanding.

Here is my supporting “sea story:”

I met a prospective Commanding Officer (PCO) in one of the offices on the CINCLANTFLT compound. He was then a Commander and the prospective commanding officer of a OLIVER HAZARD PERRY Class Guided Missile Frigate (FFG) . My Officer in Charge and I had just dropped the final draft of the revised Combat Systems Assessment (CSA) procedures off with the COMNAVSURFLANT Chief of Staff for signature by Admiral Reason. I had a copy of the final draft in my brief case. As my OIC was giving this PCO and another one their briefing as to the services our training unit provided, he mentioned the CSA was just revised and would be “all new” and designed to test the ship’s ability to retain it’s performance via use of an on board training team of the ship’s company. The CSA would evaluate the our confidence in the ship to carry out and critique training effectively, and that would determine passing or failure of the CSA. I quietly reminded the OIC I had a copy of the new instruction with me. He told them we would give them the final draft to get familiar with. I went and found a Xerox machine and made two copies. When my OIC was done, I spoke with the PCO and told him I welcomed riders on our inspections, so they could see how we worked, but more importantly, to get a good idea of how to handle the mass of information on the check sheets.

The FFG for this PCO was homeported in Newport, RI. One “O-Dark-Thirty” morning on a tug boat in Charleston Harbor, my team and I were heading out to one of the Charleston based ships, that had been out at sea the day before, practicing their teams. In Charleston, this was a standard practice for DESRON SIX ships, and we got a nice ride to the sea bouy as the sun rose. As I drank my coffee in the pre-dawn twilight, I noticed a chief petty officer nearby. I assumed he was ship’s company, who was headed back to the ship. I asked what his division on the destroyer. He told me he wasn’t assigned to the ship, but had come from the the FFG, because his CO said we were welcome come along. I grinned. He told me the “new” CO had said that before they had their CSA, he would have every man wearing khaki (officers and chief petty officers) ride along on one of our CSAs as observers. That’s what happened. An attentive rider from the FFG became our companions on subsequent CSA the length of the east coast.

The procedures back then were to conduct a “basic” CSA (CSA-B), where we ran all the check sheets, but would assist the crews as needed. We graded things as close to as we found them during those 36 hours, so the ship might see where it stood. The results were between us and their squadron, but were not provided to the type commander. A few weeks later, we would return and redo the CSA, but this time, it was for the grade to be reported up the chain of command. This was the “advanced” CSA (CSA-A).

The FFG had briefings by the returning crew that had watched over our shoulders. The worked on their check sheets, and gamed out ways to do the work better, and to make sure all who needed to understand the material were trained and “plugged in.” I remember getting calls from the Combat Systems Officer of the FFG, asking if they could use some testing equipment from the SONAR system to generate a target track for the operational drills. I discussed this with my system experts, many of whom had been instructors at the school for that piece of equipment, and they had never thought of doing it that way, but agreed that would be a little manpower intensive, but provide very realistic training for the operators. That illuminated the attitude of the crew of the FFG

One time, we had scheduled a CSA out of Newport, RI. A few days before we flew up, now CO called me and said “I understand you aren’t flying out until the next afternoon following the CSA. I wondered if your and your team might have some time to come aboard and sit down with my crew that morning?” He had had his crew thinking ahead of the game, looking for opportunities to get more instruction and training and they had researched our schedule to find out when they could see us. That morning, we arrived aboard and the leadership was ready to talk business. They had cleared the schedule for our impromptu visit. My men, as usual, rolled up their sleeves and went to work. The FFG crew picked their brains, asking questions that certainly indicated they had read the references well, and then some more material. They had the focus of preparing the ship and crew for deployment, not just how to get the best grade for this one inspection.

A few months later, it was time for the FFG CSA-B. As we walked down the pier, I saw CO at the foot of the brow. As I approached, he called me aside and asked that I ask my team to not interfere with his crew, unless a safety issue arose, going through the CSA (this was the basic, and interaction was routine), so they could tell where they stood. He thought they were ready, but he wanted an assessment of his crew alone. I passed this to my men. The result was they scored as high as most ships were on their CSA-A. Not one time did my men have to step in for anything the entire 36 hours. Yes, there were flaws, but then they got right on them.

A few weeks later, the CSA-A was held. The crew was unflappable, the execution almost flawless, the ship clean, and the equipment was in working order. Record keeping, across the areas of maintenance, training, certification were all in order, and it was obvious it had not been “constructed” the few days before from scratch. The CO allowed his chain of command to make decisions at their level, and he watched, but never interrupted so long as they were making good decisions. The one time the Tactical Action Officer made a less than optimum choice, he waited until there was a lull in the action, took him aside, corrected him, then sent him back to keep going. The 189 man crew of a guided missile frigate scored the highest grade to date. Until I left my inspector job, about a year after this had happened, the FFG retained the highest score for Combat Systems Assessment for the Atlantic Fleet surface ships. I believe they may have even held that record until the CSAs were dropped, two years later.

I heard they passed their Operational Propulsion Plant Exam (OPPE) with similar outstanding results. Later, during weekly briefings for COMNAVSURFLANT, it wasn’t unusual for briefer in some area to mention some outstanding report of the FFG performance while deployed to the Mediterranean with COMSIXTHFLT. Reports like this were uncommon, so there had to be something special going on aboard the FFG.

There were many ships that tried to preemptively up their score by “smoozing” my team. I do recall sitting down for the inbrief at the wardroom table and a can of cold Coke and a bag of peanut M&Ms was next to the folder with my name on it. They had called the ships before them and asked “what did I like.” They did OK, but I would have preferred they would have called to ask how to make sure their crew training was done well, so they would be ready to show my team how proficient they were.

This CO of the FFG not only “got it,” he communicated it clearly to his crew. If he was in charge of FCATs, I think the Florida children would be pretty close to the top of the nation in scores, but not because he would have educators focus on getting a good score each year, but to ready the children to perform on a “forward deployment” in the real world after school, as productive members of the economy. He didn’t settle for an individual good scores, he only settled for success in the end game.

Over on one of my favorite blog hangouts, Right Thinking Girl, there was a post rhetorically questioning the response to a nuke going off in the US as part of the WoT. Nothing is rhetorical on RTG, and some threads rage for days. If you’re in the mood for a good debate, head over to see what’s cooking there.

I pondered the point for a moment and then posted my first response. a few of the regulars chimed in on the “gimme
some of that old Hiroshima GLOW” side of the argument. I don’t think a nuke at the shrine would do the right thing. Anyhow, this became the first stage of putting words to something I have been pondering for a few years.

“We are in a world of unknowns. The seemingly tired phrase from Vietnam about “no front lines” was a
simplistic anaology back then, but, as recently London has been a victim of it’s own “upstanding citizens,” we are
in uncharted waters. This war, while “insurgencies” may have existed before, they didn’t have the access to
thermo-nuclear devices from the now defunct Soviet Bloc, which even in their “low yield” capacity can do damage for centuries, let alone anthrax and other “bugs and gas” type stuff, which is nasty, but containable in time and space much easier (from a clinical view, from the victims view, it’s horrific).

When the Evil Empire was a fixed set of geographic points, this enemy, fighting a battle over the territory of the mind (you must accept their ideology), is unlike any war that has been.

Nuking Mecca sure sounds like an immediate gratification, but FTM29 may have a more practical solution…

Bottom line: I think we are, as a human race, so uncompletely prepeared for this type of conflict, even our great thinkers, such as Eliot Cohen (who was the Dean at War College when I attended) is at a loss for how to proceed. Not only is he a brilliant thinker, he has just seen his son, an Army Captain, ship out for the Middle East. He is invested in this war at many levels. Here are his most recent thoughts on the entire matter. Profound to the core of his thoughts and worth your time.

I’m stumped, but then I’m not even a chem light of intensity compared to the smarts of Professor Cohen. This war is being waged and fought in many dimensions of the human experience, and I fear we have not entered all the battlefields. “Winning the hearts and minds” is another Vietnam concept that needs a lot more investigation, but I believe we must go there. I just got my copy of “Our Own Worst Enemy” by William Lederer yesterday ($0.99 plus shipping!) I’m thinking there’s some bits of wisdom in there I need to re-read. H&Ms is not a lame effort, it’s a viable strategy, which the Marines began looking into in the Central American campaigns at the opening of the 1900s. They wrote the Small Wars Manual, which discusses how to interact with the local populace in order to show them you’re there to
help. On the other hand, we were kinda in Central America for the big fruit guys….:( ”

I managed to get away from my desk to do some work, and while I did, it came to me that we have “been here” before, and, in fact, are there now. I returned to RTG’s comment section and then posted this:

“After thinking about this a little more, we are seeing this same model right now: The War on Drugs.

Different “weapons” are being delivered, it used to be a organized crime controlled environment (which had some definable boundaries of the organizations). Then the “cartels” arose, which would be going from the bi-polar power model, to the multi-polar model of powerful entities. So far, so good…manageable in it’s understood environment.

Next came every Tom, Dick, and Harry, who saw there was big profits to be made hopped in as sort of “independent contractors” in a free form economic model. As a result, the defined “enemy” became one on every street corner. They are the jihadi equivalents. Amsterdam may be a comparison for the middle eastern cities that harbor terrorists, and allow them to freely exercise their thoughts in the open.

We have been trying to successfully take this on using the military, law enforcement, border control entities and also public health organizations. So far, we have made headway, but it is an ongoing battle, with no end in sight…

I’m gonna have to think on this some more….just as with the terrorists, it went from country based armies, to just anyone who wants to get in on the act, sanctioned or not, by the control “agency” at the top of the chain of command…and our own citizens wage the war…also with ACLU on their side…mmmmm..interesting cross connect….Not only that, but Europe is a fertile environment for the drug trade as well…another connection.

As far back as 1982, my military assignments had me directly interacting with the drug war. I often thought over all those years how the drug trade seemed to have been a illegal business for much of modern history, but there were the entities such as the Mafia, that did “manage” the trade. I’ll admit, I haven’t taken any dedicated time to study the history of this topic, and my knowledge is essentially exclusively derived from situations where the drug trade interjected itself into the world of military history. I’m striking out here in my limited commentary.

Anyhow, “competition” arose and other big players entered the market. After a while, then many “little people,” as we are inclined to do after an unagreed to apprenticeship, leave the “company” employ, now empowered with sufficient knowledge to start up our own business in the trade. I firmly believe the big guys in the “management” shop lost control It has become a free-for-all market, so, much as like th GWoT, there sure isn’t a central building where the head cheese sits. Which government does Osama work for?

I believe our actions that show people that democracy, or at least that modeled into a look alike to our system, and that the Middle East, and other parts of the globe, will come along, merely because we have something special, that they want, also.

In the same vein, then I added this:

“A study of the manner in which Bismark unified Germany has some good lessons on how to make your enemy your friend. He did it from the position of strength. He was known to let von Moltke “show his stuff,” but only until the point had been made clear. A particular campaign into Denmark is a good case in point and I don’t have access to “On War” right this moment to dig up the one I’m thinking of.

To use a large warhead, or, like if you shoot “one” you’re really sending 10 (it’s a missile design thing) is pretty much an overkill.

While there are not moderate Muslims, there are many, as with Christians and Jewish people who claim the religion, but don’t spend much time really getting to know the faith. I attribute the lack of “moderate Muslim” response due to those who don’t really practice it except for show, then life a pretty regular life otherwise. To nuke a city (and one of our nukes is good enough to do that), would truly risk putting much of the world against us.

Unlike the surrender of the Japanese, where their culture held the Emperor as a god, and therefore to get him to come around was to get the Japanese to stop their aggression, the jihadis are still many splinter group with only the hate of all of the modern world connecting them. No central figure to pressure…”

It’s a thorny issue. I think I have found a proper corollary to the war without borders in the form of the GWoT, without excess hyperbole. Maybe we can look at the two wars in order to help fight each of them to a successful conclusion.

As the ending note, I’ve always bben a cynic when it comes to believing that Congress would ever let the law enforcement and military get serious about winning the war on drugs, for most of them are lawyers, and I know a great deal of defense money is being made for their professional peers, so we’ll just be allowed to play at ending it, but never turned loose to get ‘er done.

And, there you have it. One man’s views. Maybe I’m off the mark, but maybe not.

The entire issue of “FIRE KARL ROVE!!!” seemed to evaporate last night. I’ll tell you, if I was a reasonably smart person in the Democratic Party now, I think I’d have to give my party affiliation a serious moment of thought. More on that later.

Von Clausewitz brought into the lexicon the concept of “centers of gravity” (hereafter a “COG”). Here”s a comment on his definition found here:

Perhaps most important was the idea of focusing one’s military efforts against the enemy’s “center of gravity” (“Schwerpunkt”), which has become an important concept in American doctrine. Clausewitz’s use of this term is problematic, however. He often used it in very general terms to mean something like “the main thing” or “the key point at issue.”

The Democrats are after President Bush. That’s no secret. These past few weeks, they have focused on the COG of Karl Rove. Good move, they have found a “main thing” without a doubt. If they can topple him, I presume the Democrats believe they will see a major degradation of the Republican’s strategic planning. This could work.

If you’re going after a COG, realize the “enemy” will know those pressure points and defend them. Plan a viable strategy to accomplish your mission. This brings up a number of points.

First off, many middle grade and senior officers of the armed forces are sent to the various war colleges around the nation, as well as abroad to learn about von Clausewitz and his concepts of warfare. It sure would be nice to have some of those people in your pocket when you wage any type of war, be it business or political. The Democrats have long viewed military members as people who are not intelligent enough to come to the table, and therefore, they don’t seem to be able to attract “the best and the brightest” when they have to hang up their uniforms. That seriously limits the understanding of planning and executing a strategic plan. Add to this a tendency to see Democratic types spending more time getting to understand domestic and social programs. That would be another strike in the score card, because of the lack of exposure to those types of situations where strategic “war fighting” would be experienced and therefore understood better.

That being said, and back to my earlier comment regarding reviewing your party membership, the Democrats can identify the Republican COGs, but their assaults are virtual banzai attacks. A few months back, while putting Tom Delay in the cross hairs, it appears the Democrats had somehow forgotten to load their weapons with live ammo, and not just paintballs. How embarrassing to stand up and demand someone’s resignation and find out many members of Congress were also not reporting their paid for travel activities per the regulations. Open mouth, insert foot and chew, then repeat. Notice how quiet it got before many Democrats should have been called out to resign?

Same thing just happened with Karl Rove. It seems a journalist made the first move, let alone we find out now Valerie Plame made a point to make sure her neighbors knew about her employment long ago, and that she wasn’t any kind of undercover operative at all. With so many lawyers in Congress, how did they miss checking the “charges” against the “elements of the offense?” I learned that one as a collateral duty legal officer aboard a ship. More paint balls fired, lots of angry voices, but ¦the republican COG is still alive and well. Actually, I think it’s ironic that the defense of the charge was mostly just done by letting the truth that the journalistic organizations, who also show a marked bias against the sitting president caused their own failure.

I say again: It’s tough to fight when you pretty well let people who do know how feel like they are incapable of hanging around with you. Sort of like when the Democrats opened their eyes after last September and proclaimed “We have to find out what these ‘values” are!”

Taking out COGs is a large undertaking, yet it’s rewards are dramatic if you succeed. You have to mount an effective campaign, and match your weapons to the target. Also make sure you know your enemy well. Don’™t go at it half baked.

Associated with this entire issue is one of the extreme hypocrisy of the Democratic party. John Kerry specifically said Karl Rove should go, even if he is found innocent (funny, he wasn’t even charged with any crime). Extend this as though you just got some insight into the strategic thinking of the man who may have become our President. It never works when your main weapon against your enemy is a microphone used liberally at a press conference, to ask you enemy to just dismantle their COG, because you want them to. I’d argue you can demand they destroy the COGs themselves, but only after you have shown them the capabilities of your armed forces. Peace through superior firepower. It’s been proven across history, that negotiations from a position of strength are exceptionally effective. I’d be inclined to believe John Kerry would have considered the power of words to be his most effective weapon, had he made it into the White House. I submit someone with only junior officer service is ill-equipment by the virtues of that alone, to be considered a strategically minded person.

Another extension of this issue is the amount of evidence the Democrats were using to ask a man to end a career. Effectively, they said there didn’t even have to be any evidence at all, that he should just resign. Square this with the fervent calls from the Democrats, led by John Kerry and Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid, for the President to beyond a shadow of a doubt, prove explicitly that there were WMDs and that Saddam Hussien had everything to do with terrorists. Hypocrisy in large neon, flashing lights comes to mind. How can lawyers not get one iota of this disconnect? All they are doing is demonstrating outwardly that they have no plans on how to get anything done.

If they can’t mount an effective assault to regain the Presidency, I submit they are unable to plan any strategy to defend this nation, let alone taking a stab at leadership in any arena. I suspect some Democratic Party members are thinking, for the Democratic party is losing political seats. If the National Democrats march out on any more campaigns against their last two, all they can hope to win is irrelevance.

Thanks, Mudville Gazette!

p>The correlation between the interaction of man with a disease and the US and it’s coalition with the Iraqi “insurgency” have something in common.

Laurie Garrett published her lengthy work, “The Coming Plague” in 1994. While the book is not about malaria, that is one case study she presents to show how we made some poor decisions, which allowed the disease to carry on, even today. In the reading of her well researched book, there are many other parallels between man’s interaction with man that tracks remarkably close to how we have interacted with creatures of far fewer cells and complexity over history. When I read the book years ago, her comments on malaria stuck with me, despite it being a relatively minor portion of the discussion.

In Chapter 2, she discusses how the 1951 World Health Organization “was so optimistic that it declared that Asian malaria could soon reach a stage through careful local management wherein ‘malaria is no longer a problem of major importance.’ The discovery of DDT and other organochlorines, all of which possessed remarkable capacity to kill mosquitoes and other pests on contact…” The insurgency can be looked at in a similar way, that by the application of effective methods and means, the terrorists could be reduced to being “no longer a problem of major importance.” DDT certainly had it’s downside from a public health standpoint, but it did get us out of the starting blocks in the eradication of malaria and killed many mosquitoes.

In 1967, the Surgeon General reported to the President and a gathering of health officials that it was time to close the books on infectious diseases in the US and take on chronic diseases. This then, obviously, would shift the focus away from the eradication of malaria, but it didn’t end the efforts towards that planned move to make it no longer a major problem.

Malaria has plagued the US Military, and of other countries before ours, since the Revolutionary times. In 1947, Congress budgeted $47M to take on the problem of malaria in the 48 continental states. Five years later, funding was stopped, as there hadn’t been any cases of malaria found within the US borders. Other countries around the world still had the problem…Come 1956, a malariologist named Paul Russell of Harvard’s School of Public Health began lobbying for a program to eradicate malaria on a worldwide basis. In a report to Congress, Russell had these words to indicate the degree of commitment required:

”This is a unique moment in the history of man’s attack on one of his oldest and most powerful disease enemies. Failure to proceed energetically might postpone malaria eradication completely.”

With minor changes, this sounds much like the speeches of President Bush, but when he speaks of the terrorist threat. The comparisons in this story are quite striking. Enemies that are not alike. Someone with a vision to know what is not good for society. Lobbying to get the support, and there are many more I’m sure you’re picked up on by now. “Having won World War II, Americans were of a mind to ‘fix things up’: it just seemed fitting and proper in those days that American should use their seemingly unique skills and common sense to mend all the ailments of the planet.”

Funding from Congress came in 1958, but with stipulations of and end to funding by 1963. Why the time frame? Paul Russell’s report indicated that four years of spraying, followed by four years of sure that three consecutive years of no infections were noted. Like all plans, whether for war fighting, or building, or fighting diseases, the “program manager” makes projections based on generally ideal conditions. In the case of the worldwide eradication of malaria, as with dispensing with the threat of terrorism, the campaign must pretty much proceed in parallel everywhere simultaneously, or you’re likely to have the enemy merely slip away to somewhere safe. This does, however, require a high degree of commitment to the plan, as well as a high expense to keep the attack going everywhere. This, of course is much of the discussion today.

As far as ideal planning, the general desire if to get moving as soon as funding flows, but sometimes you have to begin in a piecemeal fashion, which, as with combating malaria and terrorists, can not be very effective. Top that off with a bunch of, for the most part, lawyers who don’t always grasp the technical detail of the plan, and therefore take the Reader’s Digest version and also apply simplistic measures to the plan. In this case, handing out money, then demanding it be done in a few years.

As life and much of history dictates, things change. Along comes a bright graduate student, Andy Speilman, who figured out DDT wasn’t the final answer. What he observed was the Anopheles mosquitoes were dying, but some were resistant to DDT, and still reproducing. A wrench in the gearbox of the plan had just been discovered. Speilman met Rachel Carson, a marine biologist at Woods Hole, and she explained that evolution would get in the middle of the eradication plan.

By 1963, malaria was certainly beat back tremendously, an example being India going from 1 million cases a year in 1955 to 18 by 1963. Congress, checking their notes, realized it was the terminal date of the plan and therefore, committed no more funding to the project. “As far as Congress was concerned, failure to reach eradication by 1963 simply meant it couldn’t be done, in any time frame. And virtually all spare cash was American; without steady infusions of U.S. dollars, the effort died abruptly” says Garrett.

The story continues from there and is fascinating reading, but look at the connections to the current debate about how to handle the GWoT. Once more today, I heard a caller on a talk show bring up the President’s “major hostilities are over” speech on the aircraft carrier. Anyone with any military experience would agree that when artilleymen and tankers are doing foot patrols in the crowded streets of another country, major hostilities are over, otherwise, they’d be rocking the bad guys with the really cool hardware they were trained to use with deadly efficiency. Also, when B-52s no longer fill the skies over the battlefield, it’s a big hint that major operations are concluded. The President was correct. He didn’t say “the war is over and we are victorious.” Had that been the case, it would have been proper to remove a major portion of the deployed military. And, despite that proclamation by the President, as was the case in 1963, the enemy is still around; diminished, but still there.

What lessons are to be extracted from a historical account of how the American leadership took on malaria and the GWoT?

– It’s difficult to judge the exact end of a major plan, regardless of the discipline involved.
– Arbitrary constraints linked to Congressional budget cycles can actually delude you into thinking it’s easy to see the day things will change/end. Oh, if it could just be so simple. On the other hand, the person championing the cause needs to be forthright in indicating the expected “variation” in the timeline. I feel President Bush has been honest about saying this war will be a long and complex one, and he said that early on.
– If you really want to make something “no longer a major problem,” don’t make artificial end dates, instead make milestones with evaluation criteria. At those junctures, see what the state of the plan is and modify your responses accordingly. Make sure the checkbook holders understand this clearly, and get the will of the people to line up with that understanding.
– A form of tactical evolution has happened on the battlefield. We have most likely gotten to the point where we have killed off the weakest of the terrorists, and not are locked in a war with the ones that are resistant to the military tactics applied to date.
– Most times, the weapons you begin the fight with aren’t the ones that will win the conflict Congress is a big group of “bean counters.” I have had life experiences with such people, on a smaller scale, and it was always interesting to see “them” grasping the pennies and not seeing the bigger picture. Sometimes spending a few dollars more today will guarantee you spend far less a few months of years from now. If they can’t let go of the funding to get that done, then you’re pretty much locked in to dealing with it longer.

Regardless of how rosy an initial plan looks, it’s best to evaluate it realistically along the way. Adapt and survive. Don’t declare victory when that’s not the case. Stay the course when your life depends on it.

We have a chance to end the story of the GWoT differently than the one about our war against malaria, which is still with us.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

We invaded Iraq, and it was difficult, yet we managed to militarily subdue a nation is a very short time. The troops fought well gainst some dedicated opposition.

We had seen the amount of conflict reduce as time went on. In reading blogs from those on the front lines, I noticed fewer entries about VBIEDs going off, and more posts that were substantive reports on getting to know the local population, helping out injured Iraqis, doing community projects…

The in recent weeks, the number of attacks by the terrorists ramped up, and we began losing increased numbers of service members.

As a result, members of our Congress began calling for a a timeline to pull out of Iraq, and began pronouncing the entire effort as the now well worn out word “quagmire.”

What’s happening? The opposition is taking some shots at us.

Where have we seen this before?

In the center of Europe in late 1944, the was a little shoot-em-up recorded in history as “The Battle of the Bulge.”

“The Battle of the Bulge which lasted from December 16, 1944 to January 28, 1945 was the largest land battle of World War II in which the United States participated. More than a million men fought in this battle including some 600,000 Germans, 500,000 Americans, and 55,000 British. The German military force consisted of two Armies with ten corps(equal to 29 divisions). While the American military force consisted of a total of three armies with six corps(equal to 31 divisions). At the conclusion of the battle the casualties were as follows: 81,000 U.S. with 19,000 killed, 1400 British with 200 killed, and 100,000 Germans killed, wounded or captured.

In late 1944 Germany was clearly losing the war….”

We had breached Fortress Europe on the beaches of Normandy, fought across France and entered Belgium, enroute the invasion of Germany.

I’m sure if you had been with the troops surrounded at Bastonge, you certainly wouldn’t conceive that the Germans were, as the last line of the except above properly presents being characterized as “clearly losing the war.” It was a last gasp for Hitler, hoping he’d make a big enough dent in the pending invasion to regain the offensive. Since we are so lucky to know the end of the story, we know his gambit failed. The Third Reich was crushed within the next 7 months.

I think we are in this circumstance once again. The terrorists, like Hitler sense the end is near and need to score some big points and hope we’ll go defensive and possibly have the will of the people broken.

At the Battle of the Bulge, the situation for our troops was far more desperate, and there was a reasonable probability of them being overrun. How did the on scene commander respond? When asked by the German Commander to surrender, Gen McAulffie responded with a one word, famous answer: “Nuts!”

A commander surrounded, using cooks and clerks and anyone else with a uniform, to hold off the Wermacht troops, stood his ground. Patton’s Army did a “left face” and sped north to relieve the troops at Bastonge, no small feat for an entire Army.

The outcome? Stunning defeat for the enemy.

I once heard courage defined as hanging on for 10 seconds more than anyone else. I think that definition tends to fit will into this discussion of a battle 61 years ago. I think it’s a thought we need to hold onto for today.

My take is, like sharks, who can sense 2 parts per million of blood in the water, the terrorists have heard the cries from our own Congress, and are making an all out effort to make a splash. They want us to perceive they have been resurrected, and this spate of attacks is a foreshadowing of what is to come. It defies logic to believe an enemy, who has no “home court” at all, is composed of various competing groups, loosely held together by a hatred for the allied forces, with no effective means of secure communications, facing a well equipped and well trained military, armed with technological marvels to augment boots on the ground cannot have gathered the resources to mount a sustained offensive capable of dislodging our forces.

On the other hand, having learned the lesson of both Vietnam and Mogadishu, know if they can spill some US soldier’s blood and get Congress to begin howling for a pull out, there is a chance we will leave, only to later find out they were on a tactical “sprint,” designed to appear as a strategic offensive. We also need to hold to these lessons.

They are on the ropes, the country of Iraq is coming along well, we need to steel ourselves hang on for “10 more seconds.”

We have been here before, facing much worse at the Alamo, Gettysburg, at the Chosin Reservoir, in the Pusan Perimeter, and during the Tet Offensive. In each case, the US military stood up to the task with incredible dedication to a cause greater than themselves, and, while men were lost, the long term battles were won.

To pull back now is to admit defeat and go home, not only dishonoring the sacrifice of the 1700+ service members lost in this war, but the loses of all before them on the battlefields here and abroad where we have fought to defend freedom.
at’s happening? The opposition is taking some shots at us.

Where have we seen this before?

In the center of Europe in late 1944, the was a little shoot-em-up recorded in history as “The Battle of the Bulge.”

“The Battle of the Bulge which lasted from December 16, 1944 to January 28, 1945 was the largest land battle of World War II in which the United States participated. More than a million men fought in this battle including some 600,000 Germans, 500,000 Americans, and 55,000 British. The German military force consisted of two Armies with ten corps(equal to 29 divisions). While the American military force consisted of a total of three armies with six corps(equal to 31 divisions). At the conclusion of the battle the casualties were as follows: 81,000 U.S. with 19,000 killed, 1400 British with 200 killed, and 100,000 Germans killed, wounded or captured.

In late 1944 Germany was clearly losing the war….”

We had breached Fortress Europe on the beaches of Normandy, fought across France and entered Belgium, enroute the invasion of Germany.

I’m sure if you had been with the troops surrounded at Bastonge, you certainly wouldn’t conceive that the Germans were, as the last line of the except above properly presents being characterized as “clearly losing the war.” It was a last gasp for Hitler, hoping he’d make a big enough dent in the pending invasion to regain the offensive. Since we are so lucky to know the end of the story, we know his gambit failed. The Third Reich was crushed within the next 7 months.

I think we are in this circumstance once again. The terrorists, like HItler sense the end is near and need to score some big points and hope we’ll go defensive and possibly have the will of the people broken.

At the Battle of the Bulge, the situation for our troops was far more desperate, and there was a reasonable probablity of them being overrun. How did the on scence commander respond? When asked by the German Commander to surrender, Gen McAulffie responded with a one word, famous answer: “Nuts!”

A commander surrounded, using cooks and clerks and anyone else with a uniform, to hold off the Wermacht troops, stood his ground. Patton’s Army did a “left face” and sped north to relieve the troops at Bastonge, no small feat for an entire Army.

The outcome? Stunning defeat for the enemy.

I once heard courage defined as hanging on for 10 seconds more than anyone else. I think that definition tends to fit will into this discussion of a battle 61 years ago. I think it’s a thought we need to hold onto for today.

My take is, like sharks, who can sense 2 parts per million of blood in the water, the terrorists have heard the cries from our own Congress, and are making an all out effort to make a splash. They want us to perceive they have been resurrected, and this spate of attacks is a foreshadowing of what is to come. It defies logic to believe an enemy, who has no “home court” at all, is composed of various competing groups, loosely held together by a hatred for the allied forces, with no effective means of secure communications, facing a well equipped and well trained military, armed with technological marvels to augment boots on the ground cannot have gathered the resources to mount a sustained offensive capable of dislodging our forces.

On the other hand, having learned the lesson of both Vietnam and Mogadishu, know if they can spill some US soldier’s blood and get Congress to begin howling for a pull out, there is a chance we will leave, only to later find out they were on a tactical “sprint,” designed to appear as a strategic offensive. we also need to hold to these lessons.

They are on the ropes, the country of Iraq is coming along well, we need to steel ourselves hang on for “10 more seconds.”

We have been here before, facing much worse at the Alamo, Gettysburg, Wake Island, Chosin Resevoir, in the Pusan Perimeter, Ia Trang Valley, Khe Sanh and during the Tet Offensive. In each case, the US military stood up to the task with incredible dedication to a cause greater than themselves, and, while men were lost, the long term battles were won.

The enemy of today isn’t anywhere near the caliber of the other amred forces we encountered in those battles. Our forces are today every bit as good as thier predecessors wearing the uniforms of the United States.

This entire push by the left is what we used to call a “banana.” Put something stupid in your staff work, near the front, to catch the boss’ eye, let him harange you for it, correct that and come back to get it signed out “because it reads much better now.” Don’t buy into it, “read” their entire message…

To pull back now is to admit defeat and go home, not only dishonoring the sacrifice of the 1700+ service members lost in this war, but the loses of all before them on the battlefields here and abroad where we have fought to defend freedom, particularly in desparate circumstances.

Update 6/30/2005: Reference my speculation above, see what Major K has to say about the terrorists’ huffing an puffing (before being smoked like a cheap cigar….)