PART ONE of MY 16-PART 8 FOR 08

Here’s the first installment of my sixteen part eight for 08 … (which is to say eight to be thrust further into the mainstream plus eight who truly need to be shown the door) - only no politicians.

So here goes …Professor Thomas P.M. Barnett, former Strategic Researcher at the U.S. Naval War College, Esquire editor and author of two must-read books (that is if you just happen to be either a foreign policy nut like yours truly or 2008 presidential contender wannabe) The Pentagon’s New Map and Blueprint for Action and gadfly in general, is probably one of the most important military/strategic thinkers of our day. Which, just in case you haven’t guessed, is why I’m going to spend at least three posts bringing a small slice of his work to your attention. His work, which is squarely focused on the connection between economic development and national security has become deeply influential and deeply controversial inside the Pentagon. And whether or not you agree with what he has to say, Barnett's vision for the future of the U.S. military is well worth hearing.

More importantly, while I often find myself at odds with individual policy prescriptions, like Peter Galbraith’s descriptions of Iraq, Barnett’s titular map has all the force that accuracy can offer. Someone, and yes I mean the junior Senator from Illinois, should consider giving him a job. His full brief runs from 1:30 to 2:45 but the short version I’ll be posting goes something like this …In order to promote peace and stability and thereby combat terrorism; Barnett insists that the U.S. military and its partners must assume a far more ambitious role to police and nation-build in the disconnected parts of the world. To do so, the U.S. military should be divided into two distinct forces: a high-tech military, he refers to as the "Leviathan," a force capable of “taking down” rogue regimes, and a much larger force of follow-up peace-keepers and nation builders he calls "System Administrators."

“The global nuclear threat I grew up with is gone. State-on-state wars of the classical variety (A invades neighbor B) has gone the way of the dinosaur, save for a few states in Africa. We still see the need for the U.S. and coalition partners to play Leviathan regularly, but those wars we’ll win easily, leaving the postwar peace for us to get better at. Those postwar situations will be like most of the remaining violence in the system: featuring transnational and subnational actors, but no real opponent nation-states.

That means we’re down in the weeds, strategically speaking. Yes, our soldiers will be lost, though the numbers will never come close to matching the sort of frequency we suffered in WWII, or even Vietnam, which is–of course–better but not good enough. And yes, there will still be plenty of killing going on in the world, but primarily within dictatorships and failed states, so we’re basically down to the last rotten cases, fairly concentrated in those handful of regions I call the Non-Integrating Gap.

None a serious direct threat to us, save through the extension of transnational terrorism, but all very tough nuts to crack in terms of bringing lasting peace, which only comes with sustainable economic development. I believe we can master even all of those remaining situations within a generation’s time, if America and the rest of the Core commit themselves to “shrinking the Gap” and integrating all those states currently disconnected from, or poorly connected to, the Functioning Core of the global economy (old West plus rising East and South).”

-- Thomas P.M. Barnett

You can check out longer versions of his brief HERE or HERE. (if you have BT)

MY BUDDY DAVE is GONNA LOVE THIS

This is a serious freakin' digression but what the hell. Here's what the folks over at Pitchfork had to say about The Pipettes in question.

"The Pipettes admit they were a concept before they were a band. The polka dots, the dancing, and the re-appropriation of 1960s pop were all apparently set before the band began writing songs. But if the songs came second in the band's grand scheme, they come first on We Are the Pipettes. With few exceptions, each one is polished, clever, and miraculously poppy. Whether singing about a boyfriend's "slightly unnerving" cleanliness, confessing to murderous thoughts brought on by envy, or considering ripping out a mother's spleen, the lyrics are slyly self-aware, offering cartoony twists on modern love. Meanwhile, producer Gareth Parton puts the uniformly excellent harmonies upfront while adding just the right amount of iPod-friendly, DIY-Spector flourishes underneath. Love or loathe their charming nostalgia, but navel-gazing backlashes are wasted on the Pipettes."

Have fun ...then read more HERE or have even more fun HERE.

HAS KIM BEEN ISSUED an EXPIRATION DATE?

This may be an overly flippant way to say this ...but it looks like the Chinese government might be mad as hell and unprepared to take anymore of a certain vertically challenged, film loving, Team America nemesis’s bullsh#t.

Reportedly the Chinese government has been drawing up plans to attack Kim Jong Il’s North Korea. Hu Jintao, head of the China’s Central Military Commission, recently ordered China’s military to draw up attack plans as a move that’s "deliberately meant as a threat to the regime of Kim Jong-Il."

Covert intelligence activities aimed at toppling Kim’s regime (read: exploding bottles of single malt scotch and/or booby-trapped South Korean starlets) are reportedly also being considered.

The Chinese military intelligence service, known as 2 PLA, "is toying with the idea of a palace revolution that would kick out the 'Kim dynasty' and replace it with 'pro-Chinese generals."

This follows on the heels of China's rather obvious displeasure ater North Korea’s Oct. 9 nuclear test--which Hu regarded as a kind of personal snub considering the conciliatory tact he’d previously advocated and pursued.

The plan was reportedly leaked to sources linked to Western intelligence officers in Hong Kong.

OPEN LETTER to FILMSPOTTING

First, I really enjoy your podcast guys. Really.

Second, On the occasion of your recent (DVD release oriented) follow-up mention of your review of Brian Singer's Superman Returns; I regret to inform you that not only were you both wrong, you may both be certifiably insane and or blind on this point. If that seems overly harsh, allow me to put it this way:

Your reviews essentially boiled down to an assessment of how successfully two relatively unknown screenwriters and one moderately talented but semi-hack director were able to make alterations and improvements to the time-tested presentation of thee most popular and successful fictional character in modern history.

I'd write that out again for emphasis, but quite frankly it just plain makes my head hurt.

For reasons I can only ascribe to acute ahistorical amnesia, the two of you seem to regard 1978 (i.e. the wake of Munich, Watergate, our pullout from Vietnam, Nixon's resignation, the Khmer Rouge and the Iranian revolution) as a kinder gentler time akin to the black-n-white TV-land from Pleasentville, when literally nothing could be further from the truth. And, Superman: the Movie acknowledges as much.

Or don't either of you remember Lois laughing outright when Superman tells her that he's there to fight for "truth, justice and the American way"?

While it has many virtues as an action film, Brian Singer's Superman Returns suffers primarily from the fatal same flaw as the Roland Emmerich Godzilla . . . A title charter who isn't actually in the movie.

In short: Superman doesn't drink Budweiser, loiter about soaking up adoration or stalk his ex-girlfriend. He does however fight for "truth, justice and the American way." A phrase, I might add that in no way refers to his concerns being restricted to those of a certain nationality, but rather to ideals. You know, those Common Sense kind of ideas that really need to be fought for.

Again, I really do enjoy generally your podcast guys. Really.