Chaitanya Jyothi Museum Opening, 2000
RAMANAM
In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.
Countrymen,
ORBIS NON SUFFICIT
SOLUS DEUS SUFFICIT
US Armed Forces as a whole and as units thereof propound vision statements. These often contain the phrase anytime, anywhere to indicate intention regarding readiness for operations. They do not, usually, contain phrases declaring a rational national strategic objective (NSO) or guidance for achieving it. The vision statements stress readiness to fight and omit, usually, the reason to fight. A can do without a why do. In recent years, some vision statements even contemplate reasons for not fighting at all, or, fighting without intent to win, which means indefinitely — cf. so-called responsibility to protect (R2P, and see Update 1: below).
In other words, vision statements from US Armed Forces as a whole and as units thereof tend to focus on potentials rather than essentials, what they can do rather than what they should do, how they do it rather than why they do it.
This is weak and opens US Armed Forces to undeserved but effective criticism and, more to the point, manipulation. Year after year and commander after commander, the vision statements change and remain the same because they address, usually, potentials rather than essentials, the can and the how rather than the what and the why.
This weakness of the usual military mission statement opens leadership to charges of being, on the one hand, craven, mercenary automatons killing for no reason and, on the other hand, ignominious, insouciant tarts easily seduced by unscrupulous civilians to execute nefarious purposes well outside constitutional and statutory mandate not to mention military necessity and/or professional dignity.
Now specifically:
Usually in these mission statements, the phrase anytime, anywhere is not qualified by a phrase akin to: as directed by [POTUS/SecDef]. Thus, the mission statement could be interpreted to mean the commander and unit may and may be made to muck about in the world as they and their civilian superiors deem fitting, driven only by military potentials rather than national essentials, what they can do rather than what they should do. Of course, that is not meant, but without the qualifier a dishonest actor can say,
See, US Armed Forces are rogue, full of themselves and their own powers, no doubt for self-aggrandizement. They are a danger to our country.
and:
See, US Armed Forces are a Praetorian Guard for rampant politicians, administrative state bureaucrats, and deep state groupies.
The phrase anytime, anywhere references potentials requiring rational strategic guidance, namely, a statement of national essentials, an NSO. What one can do and what is proper for one to do are rarely the same.
Enter ye by the narrow gate for wide is the gate to perdition.
Usually the potential to far exceeds the proper for, which is how nations and persons diminish themselves and get run over. They fall in love with their potentials, the gods of space, and ignore their responsibility to discover and pursue only their essentials, the God of time.
Essentials against potentials. An interesting way to frame the strategic question. It can be made to look like a budgeting question, but really, it is much, much more than that. It is budgeting only if the lure of potentials drives discussion. Budgeting is for reining in the wild horses of desire, the lure of potentials, the gods of space. This is neither easy, certain, nor reliable because one is working against, not with, powers of being.
Potentials resist governance by essentials.
Potentials seduce attention away from essentials.
Essentials drive potentials or the system goes to wreck.
Grand national strategic discussion is driven from the other direction: our position on the globe is essentially what and should be essentially what? With rational answers to those questions, potentials can be summoned as needed and deployed as necessary to accomplish the grand national strategic objective (NSO).
What mission statements by US Armed Forces as a whole and as units thereof contemplate — raising potentials — remains valid, However, if complete, they would include also recognition that potentials are legitimate only as servants of a rational national strategic objective (NSO), and that if that objective is not in view for all to see and approve, potentials should be held in abeyance until it is, or at least be deployed only where the NSO’s principal canons can be anticipated — and agreed — with reasonable accuracy.
It could be argued, though not with complete honesty, that a military unit’s mission statement contemplates ramping up potentials so as to force their allure to blind civilian authorities to the prior question, What should we do, what really is proper for us now and long-term?
To wit: This toy is so damned pretty, let’s use it already! is the temptation high potentials (steaming, gleaming horses) embody so seductively.
To wit: let’s muck about in myriad affrays around the globe without the guidance of a rational NSO.
Such an argument would be unfair to the intent of any US Armed Forces mission statement — and when someone is determined to be unfair, they will be unfair — but the concept of essentials controlling potentials — that is, of a rational NSO controlling the three assets of statecraft: diplomacy, finance, war-fighting — is long-term essential mentation and should be all-term command application.
Structure (male principle) has to control energy (female principle) or energy runs to chaos. The obverse also obtains: if energy does not vivify structure, structure collapses to stupidity. Either way is chaos, but one is bright and the other is dull:
The Soviet then vice The Third Reich then, respectively,
Germany/UK today vice Venezuela/Iran today, respectively, and,
California today vice Illinois today, respectively.
It is most often the case in history that chaos, when it occurs, is bright rather than dull, men letting women run wild rather than women deserting men. We have ringside seats on both kinds, a special blessing, one supposes, attendant upon being alive at this passing of history. But again, the bulk of chaos today is of the bright kind’s making: men letting women run wild, and, within US administrative and deep states, females males have let slip the leash.
Βασιλεία του Θεού
Kingdom of God
Update 1:
Responsibility To Protect
Responsibility to Protect (R2P) is an rhetorical weapon — call it weaponized empathy — employed by the UN and other NGOs to induce transfer of assets from individuals, corporations and governments to themselves.
In the USA, R2P has no legal basis. It is a narrative demand merely. It tugs heart strings and subdues reason. It submits national diplomatic, financial and military assets to NGO control. It promises protection to select populations but cannot deliver it because its nature is conflict suppression rather that conflict resolution, and because no program can be permanent, especially one which cannot succeed.
Discrepancies exist between R2P promises and R2P results. A driver of discrepancies is conflicting, changing and evolving priorities and political conditions in and among UN/NGO member states.
First and greatest, R2P is narrative demand against the sense of the Parable of the Good Samaritan. R2P would make that parable justify narrative-driven, government-enforced compulsion in place of God-driven, government-facilitated volition. What the parable commends be done freely inside the protection of Divine Grace, R2P demands be done under compulsion inside the punitive force of rules-based systems (another narrative demand) devised by unaccountable NGO experts and practitioners.
Also, the Good Samaritan of the parable effectively heals the man waylaid by robbers. R2P envisions keeping robbers at bay, an objective humanity, so far, has failed to accomplish in any time or clime. Robbery is stopped by removing robbers from circulation, not by holding them at arm’s length.
Second, R2P is narrative demand against the sovereign authority of nation states and in particular that of the USA, because of its assets. R2P demands submission of USA diplomatic, financial and military assets to UN/NGO control in the name of helping the helpless. Nation states surrender their sovereignty when forced to it by defeat in war, not willingly for an alleged greater good or when virtue-shamed by weaponized empathy.
Third, R2P demands commitment by mainly USA, but also other wealthy nations, to permanent deployment of assets to UN/NGO-designated R2P projects. R2P is conflict suppression, not conflict resolution. Asset deployment for R2P has no end in sight, no achievement possible other than limitless expenditure of protector nations’ assets, a fact illustrated by the history of R2P projects and the USA’s current deployed asset positioning.
Fourth, R2P is an effort to bind the USA to a NATO-Article-5-type obligation to protect every UN/NGO-favored party on the planet. It is a corridor down which to enforce the UN/NGO aspiration for Global Governance (and here) as replacement for national sovereignties and especially USA national sovereignty.
Fifth, the inner objective of R2P is to commandeer national assets, especially those belonging to the USA, for private purposes. R2P is about wealth transfer to intending and invisible tyrants at NGOs.
The USA has two responsibilities:
- Self-preservation;
- Fulfilling commitments made in duly ratified treaties so long as the other party or parties are fulfilling theirs.
The USA fights ISIL and the Salafi Jihad generally because they have attacked us and proclaim, believably, that they will attack us again. There is no other reason to fight ISIL and the Salafi Jihad than that one. There needs be no more.
The theological component in the announcement of strategic war to annihilate ISIL and Salafi Jihad generally is integral with the USA’s responsibility to self-preserve. It is not a responsibility or part of a responsibility to protect other groups, nations, NGOs, whatever. The justification for war to annihilate ISIL and Salafi Jihad altogether that we propose here is as stated here.
Responsibility to Protect contravenes Reason and reason. It is invita minerva, against the life of the mind. This means it contravenes USA grand national strategic and tactical objective and interest.
Jihadis are born faster than they can be killed.
Jihad grows heads faster than they can be lopped off.
Kinetics and decapitation merely wastes time, money and energy.
Jihad itself must be poisoned at the root.
AUM NAMAH SHIVAYA
