The Rhymes of The Anabasis of Cyrus

General William T. Sherman

General George S. Patton

Xenophon, The Sea! The Sea!

Mark Twain wrote, "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." The Anabasis of Cyrus is filled with events that have reappeared throughout history to form a rhythm that if not repeated, lends example and advice to other commanders faced with similar challenges.

Not much discussed in the forgoing posts, has been Xenophon’s speech to the assembled soldiers before setting out on their march to the sea. Reading the speech, one will note several themes that have a familiar ring to any student of American military history. This account of how Xenophon dressed for the occasion, has a twin in the way one American General outfitted himself for battle.

“After this, as Xenophon stood up, having equipped himself for war as nobly as he could, for he believed that if the gods should grant victory, the noblest of adornment was fitting for being victorious, but if there should be the need for his life to come to an end, he believed it was right that considering himself worthy of the most noble thing, he meet his end in these noble arms.”

Reading this passage brings to mind General George S. Patton, who in the 1920’s, read and annotated his copy of Anabasis among his many other readings of ancient history. One can begin to understand Patton’s theatre and how he might have been influenced to create his noble image in the shadow of Xenophon.

Something That Should be Discussed on Today's Sunday Shows

Today's Sunday news shows are getting the full treatment by hosting personal interviews with President Barak Obama. I am sure that among the fawning that mostly happens when a president grants an interview with the MSM, that the questions will be carefully thrown so that the networks don't find themselves outside the loop, as Chris Wallace did today when Fox News found themselves the only MSM outlet with no interview with the President.

That said, the issue of Afghanistan and the long war, that this blog and others that make up my bloglists have been discussing will be glossed over in an attempt to focus on the President's main objectives here at home. Two of my blog colleagues, Adam Elkus of Re Thinking Security and Mark Safranski of Zenpundit have co-authored an important essay, posted at Small Wars Journal. Their essay has generated excellent comments from some of the real thinkers and deserve full coverage.

Mark and Adam begin:
It is impossible not to notice that elements of the current acrimonious debates over theory, operations, and practice are proxies for larger political differences over the use of force and its relationship to American national interests. So why are these fundamental policy disagreements being expressed through debate over technical points of military doctrine?

The answer lies in the uncertain, even negligent, muddle that has substituted for a clear paradigm to guide US grand strategy. Because policymakers have failed to define clear US interests, goals, and objectives, attempts have been made to derive grand strategic principles from theoretical debates or operational concerns. While these debates have been intellectually stimulating and often very useful to developing US national security and military doctrine, they cannot sustain US grand strategy. While strategic drift might be inevitable in country where much of strategy is determined by the cleavages of domestic politics, the cost of meandering can be measured in lost opportunities, treasure squandered, and lives lost. Policymakers must make a stand for a strong strategic paradigm to guide US operational methodologies.

This essay raises important points about formulating a grand strategy and the inherent pitfalls that occur when democracy's try and craft a long range plan. This essay deserves a careful read as these two gentlemen, coming from outside the beltway have ginned up solid evidence that our current attempts of formulating a strategy is in need of retooling.

In the short-term it is imperative for a larger linkage of strategy and operations to occur. The current debate over the “contested commons” is a welcome example this kind of discussion. 9 There are also some structural solutions to the poverty of strategy. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton’s new concept of the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR) has the potential of returning the State Department back to the glory days of policy planning represented by the Cold War-era Policy Planning Staff of George Kennan and Paul Nitze. The Secretary of State can also help develop strategic thinking by creating military command and general staff-style schools for diplomats to build and nurture internal talent.

Read more: Theory, Policy, and Strategy: A Conceptual Muddle

Following on the heels of this fine essay is this article linked at Small Wars Journal by Anne Marlowe in World Affairs.

At the time of the US invasion of Iraq in March 2003, counterinsurgency theory was about as popular in American military circles as tank warfare is today. An early study by the chief war planner for the 101st Airborne Division during its first deployment to Iraq reported “a collective cognitive dissonance on the part of the US Army to recognize a war of rebellion, a people’s war, even when they were fighting it.” There was a reason for this. Eager to forget the most painful experience in its history, the army had all but banished counterinsurgency from the lexicon of American military affairs after Vietnam. As a result, the army relied on a flawed strategy in Iraq for a period that lasted, according to author Thomas Ricks, at least “twenty months or more.

As US Army Colonel Gian Gentile has summarized this line of argument, there was a “bad war” in Iraq fought by officers who ignored the theory and practice of counterinsurgency, followed by a “good war” fought by its champions. In Vietnam, however, even the “bad” war was fought by commanders deeply versed in the tactics, techniques, and procedures of counterinsurgency (COIN)—much more, in any case, than their counterparts were on September 11, 2001. The United States may have gone, in James Fallows’s memorable phrase, “Blind into Baghdad.” It did not march blindly into Vietnam. On the contrary, counterinsurgency theory enjoyed a special vogue in the 1960s: it was certainly more fashionable and better understood by an educated public than it is today.

I found myself nodding in agreement as I read Ms Marlowe's article. She has put together an excellent look back at the evolving history of counterinsurgency and how it effected our past efforts in Vietnam and today.

Read more: The Picture Awaits: The Birth of Modern Counterinsurgency

Anabasis of Cyrus Roundtable

This is my first contribution to the ongoing roundtable discussion hosted at Chicago Boyz where several of my most esteemed blog colleagues have assembled to discuss The Anabasis of Cyrus.

The opening phase of this discussion of Greek soldier, historian Xenophon’s account of the expedition to unseat Artaxerxes King of Persia by his brother Cyrus, has touched on several important elements. First, most important to any great undertaking was logistics, aptly covered in the first post by Fringe. Next, Steven Pressfield introduced the route and how it influenced Alexander the Great, who used the Anabasis of Cyrus as a guidebook in his conquest of Persia decades later. Lexington Green then offered up an overview of the each chapter, laying out the story line in concise detail. Most recently, Joseph Fouche took pen to point out important distinctions between Xenophon’s writing style and that of Herodotus.

The book that most of us have chosen to base our discussion is the translation by Wayne Ambler. In the introduction, Eric Buzzetti writes, “The Anabasis has the makings of a great Hollywood movie.” This statement along should stimulate the most benign reader to pursue the book further. Inside, they will not be disappointed; the story unfolds like a travel log detailing distance traveled, people encountered, battles fought and the unfolding loose republican democracy that formed after the death of their generals at the hand of Artaxerxes. Then becomes what could be described as the one of the great epics combining battles with political intrigue and lessons in leadership.

Anyone who sets out to read this book would do well to prepare themselves by carefully reading the introduction. Then turn to the back and make one’s self familiar with the Historical notes and the Glossary where they will find not only a definition of terms, but an explanation of the scale of measurements which is elementary to follow the journey up country and the escape to safety.The opening pages of book I, contain two maps tracing the journey into Persia, the retreat north to the Black Sea and back across the Hellespont to Greece. The maps are simple, but can be enhanced, courtesy of Google Earth and 21st century techonlogy, for a true look at the lay of the land. Here are some of the highlights to be discovered when perusing the route in this manner.

As one looks at the first part of the journey up country across today’s Turkey, they will note that the land contains sustainable resources that Cyrus’s expedition could harvest by trade or pillage. Each stage, five parasangs, (3.3 miles) of the journey is logged in the text, giving amateur geographers a chance to demonstrate their skills. Rivers are noted for their width and potential bounty of fish, and towns, for their accommodation or resistance.

Tracing the journey with the help of Google Earth allows for a birds eye view of the challenges that awaited the Ten Thousand. For example, the five stages, (115 miles) that led from Araxes River across the Syrian Desert to the Mascas River were described as barren and devoid of life. The view today reveals that little has changed in 2500 years. The Euphrates River, a dam now blocking its upper reaches, still stretches like a green ribbon across the breadth of western Babylon. The route soon to be followed by the Ten Thousand up the Tigris traces a green line of irrigated farmland. This land along the Tigris was the lifeline that the Ten Thousand followed as they fought north to the relative safety of the mountains, home of the Carduchoi, ancestors of today’s Kurdish people.

Looking down on this route, one sees the logic of why Xenophon convinced the army to take this route. Going back across the desert would expose them to two dangers. The land just traversed was still feeling the footprints of all who traveled with Cyrus, 110,000 strong, (including the 10,000 Greek hoplites). Second, it was a flat table land that gave the advantage to the Persian cavalry. The mountains however unknown, offered the Greeks a chance to alter their tactics by changing the formation to a hollow square to guard their baggage train. They added more sling throwers, (peltastai) who used lead pellets, for longer distance to stave off the approach of the Persians. As they entered the mountains most of the Persian army stopped pursuing in the belief that the winter would destroy the Greek army.

Looking down on those mountains today from the lens of Google Earth, one can zoom into observe the valleys and gain an appreciation of the challenge of finding a route across the mountains to the sea and the Greek Colonies along its shore. Scouting parties were formed to range ahead to find routes and warn of potential enemies. The army was beginning to resemble what we today would call a combined arms force, with heavy infantry, cavalry, scouts, artillery (sling throwers) and support (camp followers) all arrayed together to accomplish their goal.
The Greek colonies found along the Black Sea offered no sure guarantee of safety, since feeding and supporting ten thousand uninvited soldiers strained even the most affluent colonies larders. The unfolding story of this part of the journey waits to be discussed.

Stepping back to the first book, understanding the tone of the author requires the reader to know that it is being written in the voice of Theopompus, the pseudonym for Xenophon. His viewpoint, although detailed in matters of logistics, geography and military matters is that of a Greek who views all others as Barbarians whose social habits fall below the station of any Greek. The author’s note that Theopompus means “God-sent” is a sign that Xenophon holds his own self-worth in the highest degree, even when writing in the third person.

As we prepare to leave book I, the Greek Hoplites and their generals, basking in the tactical victory of the Battle of Cunaxa are unaware of the fate that awaits them. Book II will open the reader’s eyes to new dangers, tales of audacity and examples of oratory that still echo down through the ages.

Cross posted at Chicagoboyz.com

How America Can Grow 20 Million New Jobs in A Decade

Bell Labs

Steve DeAngelis of Enterra Solutions can always be counted on to produce some of the most thought provoking and timely blog posts of anyone in the game. These next two posts address a favorite subject of mine, innovation and how in relates to education.

Steve opens with this troubling news.

"New York Times' columnist Bob Herbert claims "the biggest issue confronting ordinary Americans right now — the biggest by far — is the devastatingly weak employment environment. Politicians talk about it, but aggressive job-creation efforts are not part of the policy mix. Nearly 15 million Americans are unemployed, according to official statistics. The real numbers are far worse. The unemployment rate for black Americans is a back-breaking 15.1 percent. Five million people have been unemployed for more than six months, and the consensus is that even when the recession ends, the employment landscape will remain dismal. A full recovery in employment will take years. With jobless recoveries becoming the norm, there is a real question as to whether the U.S. economy is capable of providing sufficient employment for all who want and need to work. This is an overwhelming crisis that is not being met with anything like the urgency required" ["It’s Time to Get Help," 8 September 2009]. Adrian Slywotzky, writing for BusinessWeek, asserts that we are looking in the wrong direction for help. He insists we need to stop looking at politicians and business leaders for help and start looking to scientists instead ["How Science Can Create Millions of New Jobs," 7 September 2009 print issue]."

Steve's post is long and deserves a full reading as well as the articles he linked. The most troubling data comes from the second article where Slywotzky's lays out the following.

"Name an industry that can produce 1 million new, high-paying jobs over the next three years. You can't, because there isn't one. And that's the problem. America needs good jobs, soon. We need 6.7 million just to replace losses from the current recession, then an additional 10 million to keep up with population growth and to spark demand over the next decade."

Slywotzky points to a massive drop in R and D by almost every major industry in the country as the root cause of a decline in innovation and cutting edge inventions. The follow statistics should make every American sit up and take notice.

"The PC, Internet, and cellular industries, born in the 1980s and 1990s, more than offset the loss of high-paying jobs in consumer electronics, steel, and other sectors. But in recent years, outsourced software and manufacturing jobs have largely been replaced by millions of low-wage service jobs in fast-food, retail, and the like. Compounding the effects of outsourcing and extended recession, the ongoing destruction of old business models (think print journalism, the music business, and landline telephones) will slash a large number of high-value jobs in the coming decade. The result? A broken demand structure. Of the roughly 130 million jobs in the U.S., only 20%, or 26 million, pay more than $60,000 a year. The other 80% pay an average of $33,000. That ratio is not a good foundation for a strong middle class and a prosperous society. It's time to identify—and fix—the root of the problem."

That last statistic should run tremors up the spine of everyone on both sides of the political spectrum. How can 20% of the population continue to carry the tax burden as spending explodes in all sectors? Currently over 40% of tax filing Americans have no tax liability, leaving a smaller and smaller percentage to carry the water for everyone else. Our middle class is shrinking along with the dollars spent to develop new products. One thing not mentioned in this article is the fact that much of the money for research and development since World War II was fueled by the World War II and the Cold War. The Microwave was developed from a magnetron invented in the 40's for radar. The Internet was developed for military communication. The list goes on to include almost every major innovation in the past fifty years. The answer is not a return to that kind of military industrial complex system, but as Steve paraphrases.

"Slywotzky says today's situation is analogous to that found in America following the Second World War. America's best minds had been put to work trying to produce materials that could win the war at the expense of basic research. The country was able to turn around because it was able to redirect its efforts following the war. As a result, America became the anchor of the global economy. China, which hopes to become the anchor of the global economy, has also committed itself to research and innovation. If America hopes to keep up, it needs to follow a strategy similar to that recommended by Slywotzky."

Read the rest:Science and Jobs

Steve continues to focus on this important message in this next post where he writes.

"Luke Johnson, who runs a private equity firm called Risk Capital Partners, recently published an op-ed piece in the Financial Times in which he claims "Inventors are our greatest heroes" [2 September 2009]. He explicitly makes the claim because he believes that society under-appreciates the people who spend their time inventing the things that make our lives better."

We have lost our focus when our greatest heroes are those who entertain us with sporting exhibitions, musical notes or outrageous behavior.

Read more: Inventors as Heroes

Illustrating that this issue has finally gotten the attention of the White House is this from my blog friend, the intrepid Dan of tdaxp.com, who offers this in summation of his post on education.

"By encouraging (through various means) schools to focus on core classes, we can move away from teaching mere hobbies into creating a strong, 21st century workforce."

Read more: Better Curricula.

I have written at length about the challenges facing America. We face the kind of crossroad that Poet Robert Frost wrote about in "The Road Not Taken" (poem), when he took the road that appeared more difficult, only to find in the end it was worth the journey. A refocusing on our future and a real commitment to send more future captains of industry to the engine room, instead of sending thousands to the bridge, armed with only an MBA.

Has America Become Neurotic Superpower?

What will I do...What will I do.....

Thomas Barnett steps up to declare that Afghanistan is about more than just the United States. To media driven, war weary Americans who seem to believe that all we have to do is bring all the troops home tomorrow for a return to the heady days of either the late 60's for the Great Society crowd, or the boom times of the 80's or post Cold War 90's for Yuppies and dot.Com's. Compared to other wars, like World War II where some weeks casualty lists exceeded the total for eight years of Iraq and Afghanistan, or Vietnam with some years yielding over 10,000, our human cost touches far fewer, but is used in geometric illustrations The dying marine: What the hell was the AP thinking? to shape policy.

Barnett writes in this week's World Politics Review that the debate over our strategy in Afghanistan has taken a decidedly self-centered tone. He notes that defections are coming from all corners of the political spectrum.

Nonetheless, defections from the "good war" are occurring across the ideological spectrum. On the right, Washington Post columnist George Will has declared it's "time to get out of Afghanistan," while on the left, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi warns that congressional support for more troops is fast dwindling. Most tellingly, that avatar of the American middle, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, now confesses that he fears our "babysitting" job in Afghanistan has morphed into a full-fledged "adoption." In sum, our nation's elite are finally grasping just how far into the future a counterinsurgency/nation-building effort in rugged, backward Afghanistan may extend -- i.e., way beyond the 2010 midterm elections.

.

But what's especially odd about this debate is its stunningly self-centered tone: What are America's national interests? How long can America last? How much will America be forced to spend in blood and treasure? What will happen to America's standing if we withdraw? The whole conversation feels like a neurotic superpower talking to its therapist.

At least it took Will, eight years to abandon his support of the current engagement strategy and opt to go the route of off-shore punishment and containment to contain the unruly tribes and suppress the Taliban. Tom Friedman is another story. He went from Teacher, Can We Leave Now? No., By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN, New York Times, July 18, 2009 featured in my earlier post, It's The Schools Stupid!

Where he said:

I confess, I find it hard to come to Afghanistan and not ask: Why are we here? Who cares about the Taliban? Al Qaeda is gone. And if its leaders come back, well, that’s why God created cruise missiles.

But every time I start writing that column, something stills my hand. This week it was something very powerful. I watched Greg Mortenson, the famed author of “Three Cups of Tea,” open one of his schools for girls in this remote Afghan village in the Hindu Kush mountains. I must say, after witnessing the delight in the faces of those little Afghan girls crowded three to a desk waiting to learn, I found it very hard to write, “Let’s just get out of here.”

And them finish with

So there you have it. In grand strategic terms, I still don’t know if this Afghan war makes sense anymore. I was dubious before I arrived, and I still am. But when you see two little Afghan girls crouched on the front steps of their new school, clutching tightly with both arms the notebooks handed to them by a U.S. admiral — as if they were their first dolls — it’s hard to say: “Let’s just walk away.” Not yet.

To his current stance this week.

It may still be worth doing, but one thing I know for sure, it must be debated anew. This is a much bigger undertaking than we originally signed up for. Before we adopt a new baby — Afghanistan — we need to have a new national discussion about this project: what it will cost, how much time it could take, what U.S. interests make it compelling, and, most of all, who is going to oversee this policy?

Looks like Friedman has joined Will in asking God to make more cruise missiles to shoot from offshore. Kind of sad to see him go from sticking to our commitment to let's talk about leaving, in less that 60 days.

Back to Barnett, he recommends that we broaden our tent to include Afghanistan's next door neighbors, Russia, India, Iran and China who each have a vested interest in seeing Afghanistan stable and peaceful.

He pulls no punches in criticizing our current path.

Given all that, why don't we hear any American politicians or experts arguing about how we need to spread ownership of this problem regionally, instead of further burning out our own forces and those of NATO? Because for them, that would be handing "victory" over to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization or the "axis of diesel" -- signaling, no doubt, the onset of a "post-American world."

Read more: In Afghanistan, It's About More Than Just the U.S.

A Recommended Link

A couple of years back I was introduced to Nayan Chandra's book Bound Together from a recommendation by Thomas Barnett as he prepared for his recent book, Great Powers. A major hat/tip goes out to the folks at The China Beat for introducing Yale Global online which is edited by Chandra.

Connectivity has been a major theme of this blog since it's founding and the addition of Yale Global is a welcome link to further understanding our world. This doesn't mean to underscore the achievements of my home country. On the contrary, it serves to illustrate the spread of the very source code of capitalism and free trade that originated on this continent and spread to all corners of the globe.

In keeping with a history theme, here is a series of articles linked by The China Beat that illustrates how the trade of food staples, spread around the world.

Here is a tease to whet your interest.

Whether it is mocha java, a cuppa joe, or half-decaf, skim, no-whip latte, coffee seems to be everywhere - even in Beijing's Forbidden City. But this ubiquitous pick-me-up was not always so prevalent, nor was it always so popular. At varying times a carefully guarded secret, and at others a banned drink, this has not prevented the dark brew and its aroma from spreading from its place of origin in Ethiopia to the entire world.

The story has it that coffee was discovered by an attentive Ethiopian goatherd who noticed a frenzy that overcame his flock after eating the ripe berry. From Ethiopia coffee moved to Yemen where it was cultivated for centuries before arriving in Turkey in 1453. It was in Turkey that the seeds were roasted and then mashed and mixed with water, similar to our modern version.

read more: coffee,

And for those who enjoy a Churchill now and then.

Amerindians introduced tobacco to other European explorers, sailors and settlers - but the plant would never have made the jump to European culture without the help of physicians. They seized upon the notion that many Amerindian cultures valued tobacco as a powerful healing agent. They did not share the Amerindian belief in the supernatural character of illness, but Europeans were eager to discover new plants from the New World with healing properties. In their zeal for finding herbal remedies, these doctors did not realize that they were promoting a major source of disease.

Read more:tobacco,

and chilis, tea, tomatoes, and potatoes,

Enjoy!

September 11, 2001 in The Rearview Mirror of Time.

September 11, 2001

Rick Rescorla, singing to the evacuees of WTC South Tower

1st Cavalry Division patch

Lt. Rick Rescorla, LZ Xray, 1965

2nd Lt. Mark Daily, Mosul, Iraq 2006

Major Robert Soltes, OD, USAR

The images seared into the minds of all who saw the events of this date continues to fade from the collective memory of many Americans as the years roll by and the toll of those who have given their lives in the long war that began that day, overtook the numbers that then, shocked the world. My small tribute to that day, links three men whose lives are connected to the yellow and black shield of the First Cavalry Division, America's First Team. This division's storied history reaches back through Vietnam, Korea and World War II to the middle years of the 19th century on the American Frontier. Our story begins with a man who saved thousands from sure death on September 11.

Cyril Richard Rescorla was Vice President of Security at Morgan-Stanley the largest tenant in the World Trade Center on that day. When the first plane struck, Rescorla implemented an evacuation plan and was able to get almost every employee from 44th to the 74th floors in the south tower out, before the next plane struck. After getting all his people out Rescorla headed back to help others escape. The tower fell and his body was never found. His story, is told better by his wife who dedicated this web site to his memory, Rick Rescorla.

Rescorla was no stranger to stepping up and doing his duty. His image graces the cover of the book, We were Soldiers Once...And Young by Harold Moore and Joe Galloway taken during the Battle of Ia Drang Valley in November 1965. Rescorla, wore that big yellow and black patch and led a company in the battle and also battle at LZ Albany, a day later.

This coming January 15, will be the third anniversary of the death of Lt. Mark Daily, a soldier in the 1st Cavalry Division, who was killed along with four others in a massive roadside bomb while on patrol in Iraq. I wrote about Lt. Daily last year, REFLECTION ON A NOBLE SOUL. His unit, the 2nd Battalion 7th Cavalry was the same unit Rescorla, came to support back in 1965.
Read more:http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/mjdaily.htm

A couple of years ago, I needed to go get my eyes checked. Looking over the list provided by the insurance company I selected one, a Dr. Soltes and made an appointment. I was escorted into the exam room and awaited the doctor. The door opened and a women entered and introduced herself as Dr. Dang. As it turns out, Dr. Robert Soltes had been killed in Iraq while serving with the 426th Civil Affairs Battalion, an Army Reserve unit from California. Dr. Dang was his wife, and learning that I was a Vietnam Veteran, told me the story of Major Soltes, and how his father, also a Vietnam Veteran had served with the 1st Battalion 9th Cavalry of the 1st Cavalry Division as a gunship pilot. We ended talking for some time, and my soul was forever touched by learning about this man and his commitment to family and country.
Read more:http://www.robsoltes.com/
and http://www.fallenheroesmemorial.com/oif/profiles/soltesjrcharlesr.html

The link that these three souls share is to that black and gold shield, for two, it was membership, for the last, it was the link from a father, who instilled a sense of honor and service in his son. The First Team as they are called seems to have a special mojo for taking responsibility that infects those who have served in their ranks. It seems in the case of Dr. Soltes, to have been passed from father to son.

As the years turn to decades and the image seared into the mind of that day, begins to fade in the mist of time and the faces of Rick Rescorla, Mark Daily and Rob Soltes standing along side the long road that had led from that place, being to fade in our rearview mirror, I vow to never forget, and will always remember these men for their love for this country and their sense of duty and service.

The words that have come to haunt me, are the ones spoken by President George W. Bush when he told the American people in his famous speech after September 11, that the losses from combat in this new war would be less than those lost in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. How wrong was his vision, and how many more will fall before the inevitable next attack comes. The only sure thing is that in the future, other's will step forward to serve their fellow citizens and in doing so will forfeit their lives.

Three Thoughts on Afghanistan

Chinnok landing in dust storm, by Michael Yon

Michael Yon

Ryan Crooker

Ahmed Rashid

The three articles I am posting today, bring the thoughts of three men who are intimately familiar with Afghanistan and the war that continues to bring the immense pain of losing a loved one to a growing number of families around the world, as well as the people of Afghanistan.

Michael Yon penned this brief, but important message from Afghanistan.

Helmand, Afghanistan - The West is losing this war. This has been obvious for more than three years. Less obvious is that in 2009, we are down to the wire. Gen. Stanley McChrystal and others will soon recommend to President Obama the latest treatment for a dying patient.

Meanwhile, allies and Americans are asking themselves why we are here. Some are saying that Al Qaeda is still here or is waiting in the wings to return to its home. Yet Afghanistan was never Al Qaeda's permanent home to begin with. Al Qaeda was just renting a little space here, just as it was renting space in places like Germany and Florida.

We must face reality: Our reasons for continuing are not the reasons we came for. We are fighting a different war now than the one that began in 2001. Today's war is about social re-engineering. Given the horrible history of Afghanistan, and the fact that we already are here, the cause is worthy and worthwhile.

The decisions facing us are perilous and immense. On the one hand, we desperately need more troops, while on the other increasing troop levels introduces a host of costs and potential traps.

Read more:

New Afghan war: Frontline correspondent says fight has morphed – but we still can't afford to lose

Ryan Crocker, former Ambassador to Iraq wrote this essay in Newsweek with advice on the pathway the United States must consider in Afghanistan.

Crocker begins:

The 8 a.m. US Airways shuttle from Washington to New York City took off pretty much on time. The mid-September sky was clear, the air still, and most of the flight was perfectly uneventful. My State Department colleague David Pearce and I read the papers and looked over our notes as the plane began its descent toward LaGuardia.

"Look!" somebody said, and a rumble of alarmed voices spread through the cabin. One of the towers of the World Trade Center was on fire, and smoke churned over the upper stories like a thunderhead over lower Manhattan. We craned our necks to see through one window, then another as our plane banked and made its approach to the runway. Then, just as we landed, we saw in the distant skyline the second tower erupt in flames. Cell phones rang out, and random, frightened voices tried to make sense of what was happening.

For a diplomat, I have seen a lot of violence in my career. I survived the 1983 U.S. Embassy bombing in Beirut that was, until that day in September 2001, among the most infamous attacks on Americans in the history of terrorism. David is as experienced in the Middle East as anyone we have at State. But you didn't need our expertise to know, when that plane hit the second tower, that this was the work of terrorists.

His parting advice carries the ring of others who have recognized that like author Steven Pressfield noted in his blog, It's The Tribes Stupid!. My emphasis added in bold type.

In Afghanistan, too, the decision has been made to talk to people who have been fighting against us, and perhaps even to enlist their support. The question is not whether they have been shooting at us; it's whether we can get them to stop shooting. But relentless internal conflict is not endemic in Iraq. In Afghanistan it is. For most Afghans an effective central government isn't even a distant memory. Tribal identity is everything. And Al Qaeda and the Taliban have learned from the mistakes of the insurgencies in Iraq. They have not forced the people to turn against them. They know the hills and valleys of the political terrain as well as they do the killing fields of Helmand province or the caves of Tora Bora. They have learned strategic patience. I can't begin to predict what will unfold in Afghanistan, or in Iraq. But as I leave the field, I take heart from the fact that Dave Petraeus, my comrade from Baghdad who knows all about strategic patience, has oversight of both wars.

Read More:

Ryan Crocker's advice on Afghanistan posted by Robert Haddick at Small Wars Journal.

This final essay comes by way of the SWJ Editors who have linked this Op-Ed Ahmed Rashid from the Washington Post.

For much of the 20th century before the Soviet invasion in 1979, Afghanistan was a peaceful country living in harmony with its neighbors. There was a king and a real government, which I witnessed in the 1970s when I frequently traveled there. Afghanistan had what I'll call a minimalist state, compared with the vast governmental apparatuses that colonialists left behind in British India and Soviet Central Asia.

Read more:

In Afghanistan, Let's Keep It Simpleby SWJ Editors

Studying History from this POV

Zenpundit's avitar

Example of the lack of historical knowledge

Mark Safranski master of Zenpundit has posted what I would deem the read of the summer. His post comes at the end of a week that gave the world the chance to reflect on two important dates that occurred back to back and marked the beginning and the end of the most horrific event of modern history, A “Teachable Moment”, 70 Years On and Thank you Greatest Generation. These two events, have slipped the pages of memory for most, and are retained amid the shrinking cadre of people who count history as an important craft to be followed or taught.

Mark found the seed for his post in a post, September 1, 1939 by fellow blogger Lexington Green who invited readers to list their favorite book on World War II. Mark drew on Lex's post to pen an important piece on the state of teaching history in our public schools.

The ideological Marxoid craziness of which Lex writes does indeed exist, though it is far more common in university courses than in secondary school classrooms ( Oak Park, though, is a pretty liberal UMC burg) and more common in urban school districts on the coasts than in the Midwest or South. In particular, I have seen firsthand at national conferences, teacher-zealots from California who appear to have been kicked out of Trotskyite Collectives for excessive radicalism and who are more like the mentally unsound homeless than someone entrusted with the education of children. They are largely scary exceptions though. The main problem with the teaching of history in our public schools is that as far as subjects go, history is a tertiary concern of government officials, administrators and school boards; as a result, most of history instructors are hard working and well-meaning people who are by education, totally unqualified for the positions they hold.

Sadly, Mark's observations are on target with laser clarity. Each year the number of students failing to graduate high school continue to fall. Enrollment in colleges and universities have undergone a demographic shift that causes one to ask, Where have all the young men gone?

Can it be that young men, once allowed to read about the acomplishments of their ancestors, have been made content to learn that those forefather's surpressed every other race, creed and gender, leaving them with a inner sense of self-loathing. No wonder that when compared to many men today, the site The Art of Manliness looks foreign.

Mark continues:

Aggravating matters, even if a prospective teacher did major in history in college, fewer of their professors were full-time history instructors than ever before, meaning that even the quality of the small minority of teachers who are history majors is going into decline! NCLB scorns history as a subject, so school districts across the nation will continue to starve it. Poorer districts will fire all the social studies teachers in coming years and parcel out the history sections to unwilling English teachers in order to save the jobs that will preserve reading scores (assuming those are making AYP in the first place). After that, the science teachers will start to get the axe.

Read more:American Public Schools and History

As I finished reading this post and began to read the growing list of 41 Comments », I was struck with the impression that much of what Mark was warning about was being illustrated right before my eyes. The majority of the comments began to focus on a debate over the legitimacy of interning people of Japanese ancestry during the war. As much as the debate was lively and civil from both sides, it took away from the main point of Mark's post that history as taught in American schools is barely taught let along, focusing more on the social aspects of history instead of the consequences and effect on civilization. Americans are taught that our government failed to protect the rights of all citizens, at the same time, no mention is made of the interment and torture of foreign nationals by the Japanese government during the same time, or the the 20,000 Japanese-American citizens living in Japan being forced to renounce their citizenship at the point of a bayonet.http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/reviewsw109.htm. and http://home.comcast.net/~winjerd/CivCamps.html.

Mark's respondents are a rather astute crowd whom do not reflect the average young American, who for the most part remains ignorant of many of the major events of history. But, many of them, became hung up on discussing a finite point, instead of addressing Mark's original thesis, that history is an almost non-existent subject, or at best used as a medium to chastise and reinforce the negative aspects of American and European history over any achievements.

What I have found in many of the classes I teach, is that the older students who are re-entering, have learned most of their history from watching the History Channel, or a series like Band of Brothers on HBO, and seem to be more receptive and interested in learning and discussing history. If I had a penny for every time one of my students said, "I saw that on the History Channel." I would have a jar of pennies. At least I get that from them, younger students, essays are filled with comments, like "corruption, lies, robbing the poor, crushing the dreams of the people, and a president worse than Hitler," when describing American government. If you try and ask the student to explain their rationale, they respond that it is the truth as they have learned from their history classes in high school and by watching John Stewart and Bill Mahr. It is revealing that during a discussion about World War II, General Patton, was only remembered for hitting a soldier, not his brilliant relief of Bastogne in the Battle of the Bulge.

A few months ago I was privileged to lead a reading group discussing Thomas Barnett's book Great Powers: America and the World After Bush. The touchstone chapter that set the stage to understand America's role in the future can be found in Chapter 3, where Barnett looks back at American history and in the space of seventy some pages outlines the accomplishments that are now for the most part overlooked in high school classrooms. I wrote a post that described my view on that subject, A Few Thoughts on the Importance of Teaching American History, it still has merit and deserves review.

Brain Food Tuesday

Changing the pace from the previous cordite and sulfurous fumes coming from the post on Afghanistan. I am gratifed to share this next post from Steve DeAngelis of Enterra Solutions.

Steve writes:

Nowadays an oft-heard complaint is that we are being bombarded with so much data that we are being overloaded. Humankind has always struggled with how to make sense of the world around us. We draw pictures, develop taxonomies, create graphs, generate maps, and so forth. Good visualization of data helps us draw the maximum amount of benefit in the least amount of time from a large amount of data. Often in my business meetings, I use a white board or grab a scrap piece of paper to draw out an idea I'm trying to explain. These doodles often find their way into more formal PowerPoint presentations. Using visualization to enhance understanding is a tried and true method of knowledge transfer. Hence, the old adage, "a picture is worth a thousand words." Geographic Information Systems (GIS) have been particularly useful for visualizing data associated with particular locations. Visualization can be so powerful that The Economist reports "interest groups around the world are using mapping tools and internet-based information sources to campaign for change" ["Mapping a better world," 6 June 2009 print issue].

Read more: Visualizing a Better World

The stand out find in Steve's post is Gapminder and their youtube video 200 years that changed the world. watch it and be amazed and informed.

This graphic illustrates how the world has changed in the past 200 years and puts a graph to the map that grand strategist Thomas Barnett created to define the gap and core states.