The Exit Strategy Myth

"No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people, in their righteous might, will win through to absolute victory." Franklin Delano Roosevelt to Congress December 8, 1941.

What if that statement said that the American people, in their righteous might, will depose a foreign leader and then leave right away? Or that the American people will enter into this fray, this war, but only for say one year, or maybe two?

"Exit Strategy" has become a cliche and policy talk that has moved from the MBA classrooms of Wharton and Kellogg to the committee rooms of Congress to the editorial rooms of the New York Times and Washington Post. Our nation is looked to be the International Police and Bank, if there is a trouble spot the United Nations and other nations look to the United States to supply relief, be it troops, food or funds. But not too much and not too long, they want our money but not our values of liberty, freedom and democracy. As such, to keep them happy we must now always have an Exit Strategy before we begin any international effort. This mentality has emasculated the power of the United States and increased the danger to American troops serving on foreign soil.

I am not sure if the Exit Strategy mentality started in Korea or Vietnam. Certainly in the first American and allied troops pushed to win gaining ground until China, fearing a North Korea defeat, entered the war supplying North Korea. Eventually a truce was reached, the famous 38th Parallel becoming the dividing line between the Koreas. The war resulted in returning to the status quo before the United States, the United Nations and China entered the conflict with two Koreas un-peacefully coexisting. In Vietnam as American involvement escalated to defend South Vietnam and prevent the Chinese backed North Vietnamese from overthrowing the South Vietnamese government, and then extend control and influence into neighboring countries, opposition grew in the United States. As a youngster I watched the evening news at dinner with the news clips and the body counts telling the American people how we were doing. Much later I learned that the American military fought the war with its hands tied by Congress and Washington not committed to winning the war, but rather committed to how to get out of the war. As a result disaster occurred with American troops withdrawing, the Communist Vietcong easily over taking the country and the beginning of human atrocities in Vietnam and Cambodia.

When an enemy knows when you are leaving they have no reason to make you stay. When success is defined by when you leave a conflict rather than when your opponent leaves the conflict, or is removed from it, then success becomes defined by how you fail. Thus the Exit Strategy philosophy is ultimately a strategy of controlled failure.

President Bush is criticized for not having an "Exit Strategy" before the invasion of Iraq. What exactly would that have been: we overthrow Saddam Hussein and we leave? We overthrow Saddam Hussein and we arrest some of his guys and we leave? How does anyone know how a war will go when it starts? How can you know how to end a war without total victory, i.e. have an Exit Strategy?

Bush's mistake, in my humble non-military opinion--but hey if members of Congress and the New York Times editorial board can espouse theirs I can espouse mine--was not committing enough early enough. Bush seemed to understand the difficulty the war would create at home and wanted to mitigate some of that. Sure he had almost unanimous backing by Congress, but rightfully knew that would probably be fleeting once politics got back to normal. Going into Iraq the strategists did not consider the tremendous number of foreign fighters that would enter the country to reign terror on the population and target American troops. In retrospect, always the best way to fight and critique a war, U.S. and Allied troops should have been, and I feel still should be, massed on the borders between Iraq and Syria and Iraq and Iran to prevent the flow of fighters and weapons. Once the country is more isolated then the clean up work and rebuilding can begin. Exit Strategy? Win, stabilize, then see what the geopolitics of the region dictate.

Now we have an Exit Strategy in Iraq, we give up and leave whether the nation is stable or not sometime in 2011, ahead of the 2012 elections--campaign promise kept. Exit strategy result? Vacuum created by exit of U.S. troops filled by terror groups from Syria and Iran who restart religious wars between Sunni and Shia; my guess is the importation of many chemical weapons taken out of the country while the U.N. dithered in 2001.

Apparently we now have an Exit Strategy for Afghanistan as well. Wait six months, increase the number of troops by some seemingly arbitrary number and then pull them all out twelve months later, ahead of the 2012 elections. Our enemies must be pleased with the time frame. They can go back to their day jobs for a year or so, wait for the vacuum created when U.S. troops leave and then re-enter Afghanistan and set up camp(s). Wipe out the progress made in protecting women and girls from barbaric treatment, wipe out gains in educating children, especially young girls, wipe out progress in building water and electric plants delivering services to greater portion of the populace. Wipe out the fledgling democracy taking foot.

In business having an Exit Strategy can be smart using goals, objectives, plans, benchmarks, strategy and implementation for a singular end, usually selling the company. Parenting should have a semi-Exit Strategy: ensure my children are properly educated, have strong morals and values, are able to commit and complete tasks and duties, are prepared to be productive members of society and contributors to their communities, are able to be self-sufficient.

Having an Exit Strategy before or during a war that is not total victory, or "absolute victory," is very much like having a pre-nuptial agreement. Yes I want this to work out but if it doesn't here is my exit strategy so we know how much it will cost us when we fail. Instill the thought of failure before the commitment and what will happen? How many marriages with pre-nuptial agreements last decades compared to those that last a few years?

American foreign policy power has been weakened considerably. Our enemies know we are unable to commit to the absolute victory declaration of Franklin Roosevelt following the bombing of Pearl Harbor. They know that any conflict we enter will be done with great trepidation and criticism that will dictate our less than total commitment to victory but a complete commitment to when and how we will quit. Wait long enough and we will leave the fields of battle.

We are the greatest nation in human history. Do we have flaws? Certainly. But who else would be better at policing our globe? At recognizing evil and acting to free and liberate whole populations from that evil? Who else was able to defeat the totalitarianism of fascism and communism? What happened when we gave up the fights against dictators who commit atrocities and wholesale murder? What happens when our official foreign policy philosophy is based on Exit Strategies rather than absolute victory?

It is my belief that everyone deserves to live under the natural Freedoms and Liberty given to us, everyone. I further believe that it is the Destiny of the United States to promote, protect and support those striving for Freedom and Liberty against evil and barbarous rule and dictators. Currently in the world there is an ideology based on religion that is committed to absolute victory. An absolute victory that requires every nation on earth become one. One nation ruled by religious leaders enforcing ancient laws, enforcing misogynistic policies allowing rape and murder of girls and women, stripping all Liberty and Freedom.

Our enemy is committed to Roosevelt's "absolute victory" while we are committed to Exit Strategies. Unfortunately our commitment to this philosophy also commits us to an Exit Strategy of Freedom and Liberty for all.

Uh-Oh! Obama and Dems Talking About Jobs Again

In Washington the White House and Congressional Democrats are working on another spending spree that is meant to create jobs in 2010. Given their inability to understand the $787 billion "stimulus package" passed in February the American taxpayer, and worker, has cause for concern. You remember the stimulus package, it was supposed to limit unemployment to 8% (now over 10%) create or save millions of jobs (three and half million jobs lost since its passage) and help our economy recover.

It appears the Obama Administration and Democrats cannot remember what they passed since the bill was set up for almost none of the $787 billion to be spent in 2009. The spending from the stimulus package was meant to begin in 2010, to coincide with re-election plans in November and maintaining the majority in both Houses. Further, over $540 billion of the funds are not scheduled for expenditure until 2011. Ooops.

It is now evident that the severity of the economy was misjudged and perhaps more of the funds from the bill should have been spent this year. At the time the timeline was to inject some funds before the 2010 midterm elections and then have the bulk of the funding hit in 2011 so by the 2012 elections, including one for President, the economy will have recovered and Congress and Obama could point to the spending as being the cause.

Now looking at the political and economic landscape, the House Democrats up for re-election in 2010 are pressuring the White House to do something so they can pump more money sooner into their Congressional Districts before unemployed voters go to the polls and vote them out. Not willing to wait for the money already scheduled to be spent in 2010, some are worried their constituents (and by that we do not mean voters do we?) will be out of work, furloughed or otherwise facing reduced paychecks and with those reduced checks comes reduced support.

From a Press-Telegram article on the jobs issue here are some statements from Congressional Democrats showing how out of touch they really are:

The stimulus boosted employment but "did it in a way that was not as highly visible as a lot of people would like," said Rep. Betty Sutton, D-Ohio, one of the House members devising the jobs bill. "It did so in somewhat of a scattershot approach - a job here and a job there, trickled out over time. ..."

Ms. Sutton, it is not high visibility people want but actual jobs. When doling out pork the results tend to be scattershot, a skate park here, a walking path there, raises and not jobs over there...

"I hope we don't play around the edges with this and we do what will work. Invest the money now," said Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Oakland, who chairs the Congressional Black Caucus.

$787 Billion is playing around the edges? But when you voted for and passed the bill Obama said it would create millions of jobs, that's not the edges.

"The American people have an anger about the growth of the deficit because they're not getting anything for it," she (Speaker Nancy Pelosi) said in a conference call.

No, we are angry about the deficit because we are having to pay for it, and we will not get anything for it today or tomorrow. It appears her approach is give something to everyone out of the public trough and we will be happy. Typical politician trying to find the price point when buying votes. This works for special interests, like unions and fellow government employees, but it fails for most Americans who think beyond today when they vote.

The one line in the article that really showed how limited the group intellect and how narrow-minded the thinking is in Washington was this:

"House members also are considering a plan to funnel aid to state and local governments with the assurance the money would be used to preserve jobs."

Whose jobs would they be preserving? State and local governments that are cash strapped and facing huge deficits need to cut spending, the number one expense as with any business is salaries and benefits. By giving a one time shot of cash to a state or city to "preserve jobs" are we putting off the inevitable correction to budgets for one year, and adding another year of future benefit payments? This is a direct payment to government employees, the only organized labor sector that has grown in the past decade, who vote overwhelmingly Democrat, and who would be able to keep their jobs until the 2010 elections.

Let's review the attack on jobs and businesses thus far from the 111th Congress with encouragement and support from the Obama White House. Keep in mind two things: first, businesses, particularly small businesses, employ the overwhelming majority of Americans--they also lay off the majority of unemployed workers; second, our economy is Consumer-centric, with consumer spending responsible for approximately 70% of our economic activity. Fewer jobs means fewer consumers means fewer businesses able to stay in business--and hire workers.

The stimulus package was passed and added $787 billion to the budget and deficit. The funds are primarily targeted to public works, which puts most of the funds through government bureaucrats which leads to inefficiencies and loss of funds as it trickles down to the job site; as well disproportionate amounts of funding go to public works contracts not with private contractors but with public employees--keeping those jobs on city, county and state payrolls and budgets.

Congress tried, and thankfully thus far has failed, to pass Cap and Trade. A massive tax burden on American businesses meant to prevent "global warming." News is coming out that much of the scientific study has been skewed and the books cooked to prevent dissenting views and research on the subject from coming to light. The Cap and Trade bill would increase taxes on American businesses hundreds of billions of dollars with no return. It would lead to job losses in the United States as manufacturers take even more jobs out of the country.

The Senate and House are working on massive health care bills that if passed will increase taxes across the board for health care insurance, medical devices (virtually everything you buy for health and personal care from tampons to toothbrushes), employers and individuals. More taxes means less money to spend on other items, such as microwaves and bicycles, which dampens further the economic engine of America.

My reaction to the Democrats and White House working towards another jobs bill is that we will end up with another couple of hundred billion dollars in spending with them looking for who to pay for the tab. You can bet that whoever gets stuck with the attendant tax bill are those who are currently employing millions of Americans, or have the ability to hire as many if they had the funds to do so.

If they are serious about creating jobs they need to get over their "the rich must pay" rhetoric, quit defining "middle class" as their union supporters, and enact tax incentives for businesses and consumers. After the Bush tax cuts in 2000 the annual revenue to the U.S. Treasury from tax collection increased every year until 2008. Making those cut permanent and adding marginal cuts across the board will put money back on the balance sheets of small businesses, increase disposable income for the American consumer and boost the economy as spending and hiring slowly increase.

Unfortunately Congressional Democrats and members of the Obama Administration think they can spend money more wisely and efficiently than the average American, who evidently cannot be trusted with their own financial decisions. Unfortunately they have no sense of history, economics or memory as to what bills and spending packages they have already passed.

Bad news for the American worker and economy, the people who brought us Stimulus I are working on Stimulus II.

Just Some Questions

Below are questions I have asked myself throughout the past week. Instead of writing what my answers to them would be I am interested in any answers you may have, or additional questions you have asked yourself.

For the week starting Saturday November 21, 2009 here are some questions I have had:

Is your charitable giving 2009 more, less or the same as 2008? Than 2007?

Two toppings on a pizza?

Gravy with or without giblets?

What do you do to clear a creative block?

Is life too short to hold a grudge or too long to hold a grudge?

Is “just pass something” acceptable?

How is unauthorized “street art” any different than graffiti or vandalism?

What word do you most commonly and consistently misspell and get corrected by SpellCheck?

What website do you visit, however often, that seems to have the most loony commenters—almost always with pseudonyms?

Going Rouge?

How much is the revenue from bail every year?

Do you think the Obama and Democrats from Congress “job summit” will lead to higher taxes on businesses?

First dish you went to for seconds?

Thirds?

Is the couple sneaking into the White House State Dinner more of a concern or a laugh?

USC or UCLA, who do you want to win (not who do you think will win)?

Best place to travel for Thanksgiving if it is not in your home?

Do you go shopping on Black Friday?

Is it more important to be right or to be friends?
Do the leaked/purloined emails showing GlobalWarmist scientists used coercion and deceit to prevent alternative studies from being included in media accounts and scientific papers change your view on the issue?

What if the “jobs summit” creates more spending to save jobs in city, county and state governments, how does that sit with you?

After the Christmas shopping season which major retailer will call it quits?

Favorite Thanksgiving leftover meal/snack?

Cookies or Pie?

So those are the questions, what are your answers? Click on the comments button below and let us know what you think.

Gratitude

Last November was challenging to say the least. Professionally I was mired in a hole that would continue to deepen for several more weeks, though at the time I was unaware of it. Naturally the pressure of business creeps into other areas of our life. As the calendar pages turned deeper into the year my emotions and concerns followed. Deeper and deeper I sank.

Looking for positives I changed my focus and marketing efforts to seek new business. Looked at the check book and credit card statements to discover what we could, needed, to cut out of our budget. Challenged myself to daily find where I could push myself and my business to keep going and make it through another week and month.

Stress was redefined for me. As the end of November crept up I began to experience fear for the first time in my life, not for myself and my physical well being; but rather for my family and also for my mental and emotional well being. How long, how much work and effort, how many days, until we would start to see positive traction in business? When would the fall stop and the leveling out begin? What level would be level?

Thanksgiving has long been my favorite holiday. As I age and hopefully gain more wisdom I appreciate more and more that with which I am blessed. To have a day specifically set aside for thanksgiving, for reflection on what we do have in our lives rather than what we do not, to not only reflect on our fortunes but also to give thanks to those which bring those riches to our lives, to not just give thanks to others but gratitude to God for placing our lives together. I appreciate more today the American tradition of Thanksgiving arising from early settlers of our nation who despite being surrounded by illness and death, starvation and fear, sat down to give Thanks to God, to share what bounty they had with others who taught them how to survive, how to succeed in the new land where they found themselves. I am in awe of a small group of people casting off from their native land to venture to an unknown land so that they may establish their own community, one where they are free to worship as they choose and not as someone chooses for them. Today more than ever I am more understanding of their gratitude on so many levels as they sat down with their neighbors, saviors, for a meal the purpose of which was to give thanks. Despite all the hardship, the loss, the fear and likelihood that many would not survive the coming months of harsh winter, fear that while the native Indians they have come to know have helped them others wish to bring them harm, uncertainty of so much unknown, despite all of this they gave thanks for what they had--they were still alive and they were still able and active in their Worship.

What happens when your worship seems to be failing, or if not failing at least not showing any signs of stopping continued failure? Where does one go when this is what you feel is happening? This is something the Pilgrims must have faced, and what many Americans face today. This is what I was facing last year as Thanksgiving and then Christmas neared and appeared. Daily I would pray and meditate and set to my affirmations. For myself that I am healthy and complete as God intended and strong emotionally and physically to provide for myself and my family. For my business that I am a successful and prosperous mortgage broker with an abundance of clients who I am able to assist in obtaining home ownership and their financial goals. For my wife that she is healthy and happy, daily finding fulfillment and gratification in her efforts and endeavors. For my daughters that they are healthy and happy learning each day as they express and receive love, kindness and respect.

It is hard to be grateful when there is lack and scarcity. It is difficult to look at the prospects ahead when mired in the now of fear. It is challenging to continue to have Faith and Commitment when the path thus far has led into a darker forest.

No matter the numbers I am cooking as if we have a houseful. I love making the Thanksgiving meal, obviously turkey--grilled; cornbread sausage stuffing, roasted garlic mashed potatoes, big rolls, vegetables, gravy (and apple barbecue sauce), pumpkin cheesecake and apple pie. I start looking forward to and thinking about making Thanksgiving dinner right after Halloween. I love it.

Last year we had a wonderful Thanksgiving. Just the four of us. Looking at my daughters in their pretty dresses and the lovely smile on Leslie's face all negative thoughts and concerns were pushed back. After dinner we played "I am thankful for...." and went around the table with each of us saying one thing and not allowed to repeat what someone else has said. We went around and around. Listening I laughed as I heard how the young are thankful for so many things that would seem trivial to us. But their is no trivial when giving thanks. That is what the lesson of gratitude really is, there is nothing trivial if you are thankful.

As I look back on the past year and the slow growth in business activity and the slow leveling off of the hole digging and the very slow filling back in of the hole. As I look back on where I was emotionally and spiritually a year ago to where I am today I see a year of lessons and much for which to be grateful.

I am so grateful I kept my course with my communication with God. Grateful for Reverend Peggy's messages delivered to a congregation but seemingly addressing me. Grateful so much for Leslie's quiet understanding and encouragement to me to keep up my spiritual work and effort. Grateful that when it would have been easiest to say, "enough this is bunk, look where I am and where I am going" I said instead, "I have faith and trust in God, but I need to continue to do my part to manifest what His plan is for me." That rather than blaming others and looking for reasons not to succeed in turning around my anxiety, fear and feeling of scarcity and lack, I turned inward and looked at where I am successful, where I have abundance and for that which I am grateful.

This Thanksgiving will be different than last. We will be grateful to be sharing our table with Leslie's mother and her sister and family. Our small family will recognize our part in a bigger family. This Thanksgiving while reflecting on what I have to be thankful for this past year I will be offering tremendous gratitude to those who have believed in me, supported me, lifted me and inspired me to continue my course and maintain my commitment to my beliefs and spirituality.

Our faith and gratitude are never tested when success and abundance are easy and readily at hand. I am thankful for the lessons of the past few years that have shown me what gratitude truly is. My fear today is where I would be had I given up that faith and failed to be grateful for what I do have rather than complain about what I do not.

I am grateful, thank you God.

"You Have The Right To Remain Silent. Anything You Say..."

To enforce the law and defend the interests of the United States according to the law; to ensure public safety against threats foreign and domestic; to provide federal leadership in preventing and controlling crime; to seek just punishment for those guilty of unlawful behavior; and to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans. Mission Statement, Department of Justice website.

On November 13th, a Friday when President Obama was touring Asia, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that he was bringing "alleged" 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other from Guantanamo Bay detention facilities to New York City to face trial in American civil courts for their roles in the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York City and Washington D.C. While I am not pleased with this decision, the decision itself pales in comparison to the statements and comments made subsequent to the announcement by the Attorney General. Reflecting on the mission statement above here are comments made by Holder to members of the media and on Capitol Hill.

On the News Hour with Jim Lehrer the day of the announcement the following exchanges:

After answering that in making the decision he, Holder, consulted with people at the Department of Justice and Department of Defense, and others, Holder was asked by Lehrer:

JIM LEHRER: Did you run it by President Obama?
ERIC HOLDER: Just informed him of the decision.

Holder goes on to explain that the President "believes the President should have hands off the Justice Department....in those things that are in the province of the Attorney General all he needs is to be informed."

Really. The President of the United States, Chief Executive of the United States Government, believes that the Attorney General can operate independently of the White House and counsel from the President? Is this in all cases or just ones that are extremely controversial politically? Is this to protect the Attorney General or the President? Later in the interview Holder says he spoke to his wife and his brother about the decision (his brother is retired from the Port Authority of New York). On the one hand you have your boss, who happens to be President of the United States and an attorney who, as we were reminded throughout 2008, is also a Constitutional Law professor, on the other you have your boss and big brother. One is given a phone call aboard Air Force One and being told what is going to happen, the other two have discussions about the impact of such a decision.

Further in the interview:

JIM LEHRER: Well, Mohammed was water-boarded, was he not?
ERIC HOLDER: He was.

On March 2, 2009 in a speech before the Jewish Council for Public Affairs Plenum Holder said, "As I unequivocally stated in my confirmation hearing before the U.S. Senate, waterboarding is torture." So the Attorney General states publicly he believes waterboarding is torture, admits KSM was tortured and now is going to prosecute him using statements that were revealed while being, in Holder's opinion, tortured. I know several attorney read this blog, help me with how this plays before a judge following our Constitution.

Further in that March 2009 speech, Holder also speaks of Obama's Executive Orders establishing inter-agency task forces to deal with the Guantanamo detainees and their prosecution or release. To follow, Obama establishes task forces and then allows the head of Justice to make unilateral decisions within the Executive Orders of the White House.

There are many sides to this upcoming trial. Among them are when were KSM and friends read their Miranda Rights, you know them, personally they were drilled into me as a child watching Kojak, Baretta, Adam-12, S.W.A.T. and other cop shows. We know that many a criminal has been kicked loose from prosecution because when apprehended and questioned he was not read his rights, or "Mirandized." Because KSM and the gang were picked up in a war by soldiers they were never Mirandized, so have they been now? Does evidence obtained before 2009 get to be entered in the court?

What happens if they are kicked loose because of our legal system and protecting the rights of the accused and the presumption of innocence? What of our President's declaration on Fox that he is confident the trial in New York would end in convictions and the execution of Mohammed and his co-defendants? Does that somehow inhibit the ability of the defendants to receive a "fair trial?" If Obama was merely informed of the decision to bring the Guantanamo 5 to New York for trial, and he was travelling around Asia when the announcement was made, how can he be confident in their prosecution and subsequent execution?

What has really pushed me on this issue however is the statements made by Attorney General Holder in Congress last week before the Judiciary Committee in questioning from Senator Lindsey Graham (video here of exchange). The head of our our Justice Department, the person who is supposed to ensure all work at the Department of Justice adheres to the mission statement above, when asked what happens if the most wanted man in the world, Osama bin Laden, is captured on a battlefield tomorrow. What is the captain, major, general who captures him supposed to do and when is going to be read his rights?

"That all depends."

So the head of Justice has no idea what happens if the person most wanted by the Justice Department, and everyone else, is captured? Shouldn't there be a policy and procedure manual "What to do when we capture Osama bin Laden?"

I am unsure if Eric Holder is competent is fulfilling his position of Attorney General and is bending backwards and sideways to protect his boss, Barack Obama; or if Eric Holder is incompetent and unable to understand the chain of command and operates without consulting the Administration and Obama. Either he exemplifies an Administration in over its head in running a country, or he exemplifies an incompetence within the Administration to effectively appoint and manage Department Secretaries and others.

Either way I am not feeling too confident about the ability of this Justice Department to effectively prosecute, and execute, the Guantanamo 5 and other terrorists captured by United States Military forces.

Remember the mission, "...to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans."