David Wilkinson asked:
> *marital-arts expert*? America??
I gather from your question that you may have fallen prey to the
"bungling government" thread of neoliberal propaganda. We have a situation
where government policy is determined by a hidden corporatist agenda, and
cover-stories need to be constantly concocted by politicians to justify
those policies in popular terms. Of course the policies never achieve the
goals espoused in the cover stories, since they weren't designed to that
end, and thus in the public mind the government is always "bungling things
up".
This public perception is turned to good advantage in the overall
neoliberal propaganda campaign. Since one of the objectives of that
campaign is to demonize/discredit government, there is no attempt to
paper-over the bungling in the mass media, as there would have been in
pre-neoliberal days. Instead, the mass media itself joins in exposing the
"bungling", as the alternative press has always done, though for different
purposes.
In order to judge the acumen of a policy, from a real-politik point
of view, one must first identify the hidden agenda being pursued, and then
see how well the policy serves that agenda. I think it is clear from the
WW II experience that U.S. participation was deftly timed and deployed, if
you accept that global hegemony was the goal being sought.
If ending fascism had been the primary elite goal, then German
re-armament would not have been so strongly encouraged, "appeasement" would
not have been so long purused, American military mobilization not so long
delayed, D-Day would have been carried out earlier, and fascist post-war
regimes would not have been forced on Greece (and others).
To take a more recent example of acumen co-existing with
"bungling", consider the Bosnian affair. From a cover-story point of view,
the goals would have been to end the fighting and re-establish democratic
order, with people's rights respected to live peacefully in their
traditional homelands. From such a perspective, obviously, Western policy
has been highly unproductive, and America's long-held stand-off posture
shameful. The whole thing was "bungled".
But if one peeks just a bit beneath the cover, one observes a
simple replay of the original imperialist Balkanization scenario, carried
out this time in coordination with a broader balkanization of the entire
former USSR. It was the goal of the elite to split Yugoslavia up into
ethnically-based, mutually hostile, mini-countries -- and by this measure
the policy was well planned and fully successful.
Germany arm-twisted Europe into endorsing Croation independence,
and this led inevitably to Bosnian independence, which could only lead to
civil war. The Serbs were then given rope to hang themselves with, and the
scenario was allowed to play out, with lots of press fanfare, mainly aimed
at demonizing the Serbs.
With the world eager for Uncle Sam to ride to the rescue, America
then carried out its patient plans. The strategy-architect of Desert Storm
was dispatched to Croatia to make sure that Croatia and Bosnia were
prepared for joint military operations, and to verify that their illegally
imported weapons had been effectively deployed. Finally Uncle Sam publicly
accepted his "call to duty", and cruise missles were deployed to the
region.
Croatia then prepared for its offensive by expelling nearly a
million Serbs, and the stage was set. The invasion was then launched
against Serb-held territories, and Uncle Sam arranged the traditional
"incident" to enable him to play his key role in the invasion. The
incident was a mortar attack on a marketplace from a Muslim position (that
was instantly blamed on the Serbs), and it was perfectly timed to enable
decisive tactical support to be delivered.
The outcome is a balkanized Yugoslavia, with the German-backed,
neo-fascist Croats having a bigger share than they would have gotten
without Western intervention -- and the Serbs remain media-demonized in
case further intervention is needed. In all, an unfortunately
well-executed operation. The martial arts virtues I see exhibited in this
(and the WW II) scenario include:
1) Wait for precisely the right moment to move
2) Never telegraph your moves
3) Know your moves well; maintain concentration
4) Use your opponent's energy against him; get him off balance
5) When you act, act decisively, while conserving your energy and
maintaining your balance
Regards,
rkm