A National Strategic Narrative

[jillian]

An interesting piece.

A NATIONAL STRATEGIC NARRATIVE

By Mr. Y

This Strategic Narrative is intended to frame our National policy decisions regarding investment, security, economic development, the environment, and engagement well into this century. It is built upon the premise that we must sustain our enduring national interests – prosperity and security – within a “strategic ecosystem,” at home and abroad; that in complexity and uncertainty, there are opportunities and hope, as well as challenges, risk, and threat. The primary approach this Strategic Narrative advocates to achieve sustainable prosperity and security, is through the application of credible influence and strength, the pursuit of fair competition, acknowledgement of interdependencies and converging interests, and adaptation to complex, dynamic systems – all bounded by our national values.

From Containment to Sustainment: Control to Credible Influence

For those who believe that hope is not a strategy, America must seem a strange contradiction of anachronistic values and enduring interests amidst a constantly changing global environment. America is a country conceived in liberty, founded on hope, and built upon the notion that anything is possible with enough hard work and imagination. Over time we have continued to learn and mature even as we strive to remain true to those values our founding fathers set forth in the Declaration of Independence and our Constitution

more at link:

http://www.wilsoncenter.org/events/docs/A National Strategic Narrative.pdf

 

[editec]

the U.S. should stop trying to dominate and direct global events. The best we can do is to build our capital so that we can influence events as they arise​

we need to focus on sustaining ourselves in ways that build our strengths and underpin credible influence. That shift in turn means that the starting point for our strategy should be internal rather than external.​

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Admiral Mike Mullen has already said publicly that the U.S. deficit is our biggest national security threat. He and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates have also given speeches and written articles calling for “demilitarizing American foreign policy” and investing more in the tools of civilian engagements – diplomacy and defense. As we modernize our military and cut spending the tools of 20th century warfare,​

we must also invest in a security complex that includes [FONT=TimesNewRoman,Italic]all domestic and foreign policy assets.

The United States must be careful to guard our interests and those of our allies, but we miss great opportunities if we assume that the rise of some necessarily means the decline of others.​

Today our security lies as much or more in our prosperity as in our
military capabilities. Our vocabulary, our institutions, and our assumptions must reflect that shift.​

“National security” has become a trump card, justifying military spending even as the domesticfoundations of our national strength are crumbling.

“National prosperity and security” reminds us where our true security begins. ​

BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!​

Good suggestions and pretty much exactly the opposite of what we seem to be doing.

​

​

​

​

[/FONT]
​

 

[martybegan]

Basically a call for isolationism, after you work your way through the language, adding in the usual left leaning talking points of universal healthcare, renewable energy, and more regulation of industry to force it to adjust to what the government wants it to do.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Perhaps the administration could look into reversing some of Woodrow Wilson's and other progressives policies to achieve this vision.
Or Is it just more spending into oblivion claptrap ?

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Oh yeah here is some pandering and empty rhetoric.

Perhaps because
our nation has been so blessed over time, many of us have forgotten that rewards must be earned,
there is no “free ride” – that fair competition and hard work bring with them a true sense of
accomplishment

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

Yeah that is so sad.

For
example, labeling, or binning, Islamist radicals as “terrorists,” or worse, as “jihadis,” has resulted
in two very different, and unfortunate unintended misperceptions: that all Muslims are thought of
as “terrorists;” and, that those who pervert Islam into a hateful, anti-modernist ideology to justify
unspeakable acts of violence are truly motivated by a religious struggle (the definition of “jihad,”
and the obligation of all Muslims), rather than being seen as apostates waging war against
society and innocents.

 

[jillian]

Yeah that is so sad.

For
example, labeling, or binning, Islamist radicals as “terrorists,” or worse, as “jihadis,” has resulted
in two very different, and unfortunate unintended misperceptions: that all Muslims are thought of
as “terrorists;” and, that those who pervert Islam into a hateful, anti-modernist ideology to justify
unspeakable acts of violence are truly motivated by a religious struggle (the definition of “jihad,”
and the obligation of all Muslims), rather than being seen as apostates waging war against
society and innocents.

I didn't say I agreed with everything in the article. And I know the difference between someone who's a terrorist and someone who isn't.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

And I know the difference between Islamic apologetics and Islamic scripture.
This is what Islam looks like when done properly. It is scriptural Islam not a perversion of Islam.

 

[The Rabbi]

Basically a call for isolationism, after you work your way through the language, adding in the usual left leaning talking points of universal healthcare, renewable energy, and more regulation of industry to force it to adjust to what the government wants it to do.

Anytime you see the word "sustainable" in a document you are reading the screed of the Left. Sustainable is their core word. It is their core word precisely because it sounds good while not having any meaning at all. How long is "sustainable"? Fresh fish isn't sustainable for more than a day or two. The sun will not be sustainable in a couple of billion years. Yet who could be against something that is "sustainable"??
Yes, you pegged it, Marty. It is a "let's cut out the old imperialist racist sexist America so the rest of the world loves us and we can spend the money on universal tai chi."
It is garbage and claptrap. And no wonder a simp like Jillian falls for it.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

You cannot make chicken salad out of chicken shit no matter how much globalist progressive claptrap you put into it.

 

[Bosun]

Islamic tradition attributes the tone of certain Qur'anic verses to the political standing of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) at the time of their recitation... In Mecca, Muhammad was powerless over the pagans, polytheists and infidels. His recitations were pleading, liberal, and tolerant.

Muhammad tried hard to be accepted and fit in. He just wanted to save souls... The good brother lacked the power to defend himself and was not strong enough or had the following subdue the Meccans.

However, after the hijrah to Yathrib (pre Islamic city of Medina), the brother began to enjoy the influence, power, and followers, and had success in Meccan caravan raiding. He abrogated the original recitations with more and more violence. Please read Surah 9 for the spewing of hate......

I have observed, when Islam is weakened, offer peace until Islam becomes superior, then sever the bonds of friendship or diplomacy and bring the sword without leniency to those who refuse to submit.

Bout all I can say is beware and watch out for the apologists and appeasers, and the fundementalist brothers who appear to be sleeping or want to drink sweet tea....

 

[Bosun]

You cannot make chicken salad out of chicken shit no matter how much globalist progressive claptrap you put into it.

but, my brother, some like to eat shit sandwiches and howl at the moon..... remember fitnah is much more appropriate than fitrah......

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Reads like all so much left-wing gobbledygook stressing isolationism, "investment", defense slashing and ecobabble. A prime example of why the leftwing fringe needs to be put out to pasture with the rest of the nutters and neocons.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

 

[Bosun]

Yeah that is so sad.

For
example, labeling, or binning, Islamist radicals as “terrorists,” or worse, as “jihadis,” has resulted
in two very different, and unfortunate unintended mis-perceptions: that all Muslims are thought of
as “terrorists;” and, that those who pervert Islam into a hateful, anti-modernist ideology to justify
unspeakable acts of violence are truly motivated by a religious struggle (the definition of “jihad,”
and the obligation of all Muslims), rather than being seen as apostates waging war against
society and innocents.

I didn't say I agreed with everything in the article. And I know the difference between someone who's a terrorist and someone who isn't.

what do you agree with in the article and where are you at regarding the article, my dear sister?

what do you know regarding the difference between a muhammadan who is a terrorist and a muhammadan who is not a terrorist?

what causes moderate muhammadans to become radicalized fundamentalists?

my dear sister, jillian, let us begin to discuss the treatment of unbelievers, kafir if you will, and the concept of jihad.....

nowhere in the qur'an is the blood of the kafir protected. if one goes to the sunnah one will find circumstances where those under the protection of the dhimma cannot be killed. However as one studies the qur'an, surah 9.29, it says that those unbelievers who refuse second-class dhimmi status must be killed, unless of course they submit to Islam. Have you already converted to islam?

let us discuss the fundamentalist views of jihad and the treatment of disbelievers. it is true and i will agree that not all Muslims believe in this. many are blind to the the fact that these concepts exist. true muhammadanism, fundamental islam if you will, has these concepts, among others, that drive jihadists to kill and subjugate unbelievers. these concepts are not perversions of the faith.

the concepts are pure. my dear sister, please do not mistake fundamentalism for extremism.

a friend once told me that Fundamentalism in Islam is only extreme to our Western sensibilities, which Islam has had little if any influence on. Within the realm of Islamic jurisprudence, these concepts are mainstream. They are among the reasons why no serious attempt has been made to define jihad in a way that is not offensive to disbelievers.

 

[bucs90]

You cannot make chicken salad out of chicken shit no matter how much globalist progressive claptrap you put into it.

Yes you can. I have a big debt problem right now in my household. I ran up $100,000 in credit card debt, and bought a car and house that, well, the repairs are gonna cost more than they're worth.

So I went to a financial consultant. He said to fix my problems, I need to run up about $100,000 more on my credit card, and by a new car. Then he said take out a loan and use it for a tropical vacation. Apparantly, the best way to fix my debt is spend a shitload more money. Liberalism does work, yay!!!

 

[Bosun]

Yeah that is so sad.

I didn't say I agreed with everything in the article. And I know the difference between someone who's a terrorist and someone who isn't.

what do you agree with in the article and where are you at regarding the article, my dear sister?

what do you know regarding the difference between a muhammadan who is a terrorist and a muhammadan who is not a terrorist?

what causes moderate muhammadans to become radicalized fundamentalists?

my dear sister, jillian, let us begin to discuss the treatment of unbelievers, kafir if you will, and the concept of jihad.....

nowhere in the qur'an is the blood of the kafir protected. if one goes to the sunnah one will find circumstances where those under the protection of the dhimma cannot be killed. However as one studies the qur'an, surah 9.29, it says that those unbelievers who refuse second-class dhimmi status must be killed, unless of course they submit to Islam. Have you already converted to islam?

let us discuss the fundamentalist views of jihad and the treatment of disbelievers. it is true and i will agree that not all Muslims believe in this. many are blind to the the fact that these concepts exist. true muhammadanism, fundamental islam if you will, has these concepts, among others, that drive jihadists to kill and subjugate unbelievers. these concepts are not perversions of the faith.

the concepts are pure. my dear sister, please do not mistake fundamentalism for extremism.

a friend once told me that Fundamentalism in Islam is only extreme to our Western sensibilities, which Islam has had little if any influence on. Within the realm of Islamic jurisprudence, these concepts are mainstream. They are among the reasons why no serious attempt has been made to define jihad in a way that is not offensive to disbelievers.

to promote further discussion, my deal jillian, one must realize that islam in obedience to the qur’an and that is the terrorism today we are seeing today.

according to what i have found in studying the qur'an, salvation in islam is confusing and often elusive. the only sure way to paradise for a muhammadan that i know of is through jihad.

I suggest that you read surah 9:111 “God hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than God? Then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme.”

“And if you are slain, or die in the way of Allah, forgiveness and mercy from Allah are far better than all they could amass.” (Surah 3:157 Al-Imran 3:157)

muhammadans are offered their place in paradise along with 72 virgins if they particiapte in holy battles.

muhammed said, “The person who participates in (Holy Battles) in Allah's cause and nothing compels him to do so except belief in Allah and His Apostle, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty (if he survives) or will be admitted to paradise (if he is killed).” (Al Bukhari vol. 1:35.) “They [true believers] will sit with bashful, dark-eyed virgins, as chaste as the sheltered eggs of ostriches” (Surah 37:48).

my dear sister, jillian, this provides us with some insight into their denial of this life and being rewarded in their next. the promise of heaven to those who die in battle for the cause of their allah is quite a promise. to enter heaven without their inner struggle may be more difficult and elusive...

 

[jillian]

what do you agree with in the article and where are you at regarding the article, my dear sister?

i agree we need to start thinking more glabally and decide what makes us stronger into the rest of this century and the next.

yet, you didn't ask what i DISAGREE with. (given that i said i didn't agree with all of it). I DON'T agree that we should stop calling terrorists what they are. Groups like hamas, hezbollah, al queda... all terrorist groups. I wouldn't absolve them of that by pretending they are anything but pond scum. But it's clear that the point is that by lumping ALL muslims together, we make a bad situation worse. It's not like you can wage war against an ideology. If we waged a "war on fascism" instead of a war on germany, during WWII, we'd still be fighting.

what do you know regarding the difference between a muhammadan who is a terrorist and a muhammadan who is not a terrorist?

terrorists blow things up. regular everyday muslims do not.

what causes moderate muhammadans to become radicalized fundamentalists?

i suspect a combination of brainwashing and rage has a lot to do with it.. same as what takes a regular everyday christian and turns them into insane murderours scum who blows up abortion clinics and kills doctors.

my dear sister, jillian, let us begin to discuss the treatment of unbelievers, kafir if you will, and the concept of jihad.....

thanks. but i don't need you to "educate" me on islam and the koran. i've made a point of reading my book, your book, their book, the baghavad ghita. is Islamic fundamentalism the biggest threat to world peace in our century? yes? but not every muslim is a fundie wackjob. same as not every christian is a fundie wackjob.

and while i appreciate your "professorial" tone, dear, I find the neo-con need to tar every muslim in the world with the same brush to be imbecilic and against our national interest.

 

[editec]

Basically a call for isolationism, after you work your way through the language, adding in the usual left leaning talking points of universal healthcare, renewable energy, and more regulation of industry to force it to adjust to what the government wants it to do.

No, not isolationism, Marty.

 

[editec]

Reads like all so much left-wing gobbledygook stressing isolationism, "investment", defense slashing and ecobabble. A prime example of why the leftwing fringe needs to be put out to pasture with the rest of the nutters and neocons.

We've just spend the last 50 years implementing policies leading to international progressivism.

How's that been working out for the nation and its people, Sog?