Obama Team chooses historic strategy: cut off pirate hoards via land

While all eyes were on Obama to announce a winning strategy against pirates off the coast of Somalia this week, I had complete faith in his team to choose the right tactic. After all, with such a diligent team they couldn’t miss historic naval strategy of Pompey the Great against pirates: cut off their land ports.

Somalia has no government. Despite international outcry against entering a sovereign state, the fact remains that Somalia doesn’t have one, or that’s all they have; no matter how the denizens of this anarchist country may feel about this state of affairs, (“The ruined men of all nations,” in the words of the great 19th-century German historian Theodor Mommsen, “a piratical state with a peculiar esprit de corps.”) its lucky for us.

Similar Historic Battles

Caesar vs. the Cilician Pirates

When pirates captured and hatched a plan to ransom a young Caesar back to Rome for 20 gold talons, he laughed at them for not knowing who he was, and said, “I’m worth fifty, at least.”

After he’d been ransomed back, he rallied a fleet and went back and destroyed the pirates to a man, crucifying the lot of them.

While he was in captivity in the pirate camp, the other pirates said that, although a prisoner, he acted like he owned the place, joining in all their pirate games

Caesar vs. the Gauls

In another example of this ploy by land, in his Gallic Wars Caesar was already familiar with a tactic wherein he would double his troops back to the next town that the Gauls received grain from and then seized it, ensuring that the Gauls went without supplies in their own land.

 
Pompey vs. the Pirates
  • Pompey vs. the Pirates The above quote from a famous classicist is from this link, an article by another famous classicist. The article is about how a September 11 like event, wherein consuls were kidnapped by pirates in Rome itself, so after brushing himself off from Cilicia, Pompey hatched a plan emptying the treasury for a campaign it only took him three  months to complete.
  • Pompey vs. Ancient Piracy from militaryhistoryonline.com,
  • Piracy in the Greco-Roman World –shows that even after Pompey used the hype to make himself “Great,”  “pirate” remained a buzzword in the senate, and indeed, this issue has created a lot of buzz in the news. The pirates were further important because they threatened the sanctions of Pax Romana; likewise, modern pirates threaten the United Nations, which has banned piracy. Moreover, they have adopted a very modern strategy , which is to use this as an excuse to restore order and a republic to Somalia, which is for anarchists as Dubai is to libertarians: a living example of the failure of their theories.

Originally posted 2009-04-12 09:57:59. Republished by Old Post Promoter

Anti-Capitalism

Capitalism is so anti-American. Did I say that? It is the antithesis of everything our governmental model should stand for.

According to Cicero, a republic which is not just is not a republic. Ergo, a republic which is not for the people, by the people, is not a republic too. Therefore, a republic which is for money, is not a republic. So, capitalism is unrepublican. Ha! It’s quite true.

INTELLECTUALS AGREE

Originally posted 2008-06-10 00:33:39. Republished by Old Post Promoter

on definitions

I find it sort of odd, no, scratch that, typical that people disagree with the Empire. Ah, congratulations you rebellious little humans. Congratulations on being rebellious! That’s good, that desire to fight for truth and justice. Unfortunately, not only could fighting against the Empire probably be detrimental to all humankind, it is probably one of the truest, most good things that we have. Be rebellious about being rebellious, be radical about being radical, and you might just arrive at the truth, sort of like looking at your reflection at a fun house through a mirror that makes you look fat and another that makes you look skinny. I don’t mean that to be clever: I mean that, the conspiracy is that so few people know the truth, (they are either corrupt, or angry at corruption, ruling out about 99.99% of the population), and so it has so few champions. Whenever something your government does that’s wrong pisses you off, that’s good! Once again, like the fun house, when you look at the corruption, you see how things should be, so corruption tautologically reveals the ideal. And so you can see why the truth isn’t a really popular thing. People tend to think that the corrupt thing represents the government, when in fact corruption is the very bane of government, and eats at our ideal systems like rot, with the ability to bring them low.
Another reason why the truth about matters like Republic and Empire are so popular is because you don’t know what they ARE, and the reason why you don’t know is the very reason why you should. You don’t know because you were never taught in school that what a republic is, in fact, the definition is not on wikipedia. Despite pages and pages of notes saying that a republic is a mixed constitutional system, that the definition that states it is a government which is not a kingship is wrong, and that it is strictly a government composed of elements of democracy, kingship and oligarchy in perfect balance, they (the corrupt) do not want you to know this, because if you did, why you would have the key to making an educated decision on every bill that it came across your desk come voting time, as the republic says you can, that people are wise enough to judge the information before them, and you would be, and this is why they don’t want you to know. because you see, unlike in a democracy, in a republic the people vote on laws, so the easiest way to corrupt a republic is through the people (the senate and the president are checked by more laws) the corrupt people who get in office don’t want you to learn this, and so it is not taught in schools. And if people learned this, that a republic is a government for the people, by the people, they would be free (free to take part in their government).
You know what other simple defitions they haven’t even begun to be taught in schools? Many of these truths have been hidden so long you’d almost need a degree in classical history and Latin to know them, that’s how long the truth has been hiding. Empire is one of these words that the rebellious love to hate. Anarchists even more hate this word, as they hate all government, not realizing their own part in the cycle of governmental decay (see section). I shold have definitions of both these words on the site, since

Originally posted 2009-03-28 08:04:23. Republished by Old Post Promoter

Does the government have the right to legislate morality?

Most people don’t realize the truth in morality, until they become enlightened. They don’t understand there is a need to be moral, when they cannot hear the furies torment you. Samsara threatens when you think a wrong thought, if you step off the path.

It is the duty of the wise to guard the more foolish, and many do not know the reason to be moral, and think it is okay to be shiesty.

Is it is the duty of leaders to be representatives for morality? Certainly we want them to be moral in their political decisions. But is not what is done in the privacy of your own home, your business?

Certainly it is illegal to beat your own child, but this is because it is a crime against another citizen, and are we not all citizens?

Does this give the right to life people a start?

According to the scientifically divine wisdom of the ancients, when their vast and mighty civilization was at an intellectually advanced state, the republic (a mixed constitutional system, balancing the elements of kinship and oligarchy with those of democracy, in a rule for the people, by the people) does not have jurisdiction over your private life, because it is outside of the public sphere.

This brings up a problematic conundrum with respect to a republic as opposed to a democracy. Technically, voting is undemocratic; if the the majority is allowed to decide for the minority, it is mob rule, or ochlocracy, democracy’s opposite, according to my Columbia History professor, Richard Billows. And if the minority aren’t served, then you can have an injustice.

Thus we must be mindful of this in issues such as abortion. If the fetus is judged to be not yet alive, then it is still a woman’s right to choose. This is a big choice, and one that politicians are forced to navigate.

However, in the public sphere, it is the wise who traditionally ruled, and received more votes because they would cast theirs for the interest of the republic, having been enlightened as to its nature, and its basis on a foundation of good. Their knowledge also gave them the wisdom to judge political issue morally, defining the boundaries of the law.

Past this line at which we have judged it acceptable for politicians to legislate morality, we have another type of morality, at which they must be moral in their decision not to step over.

Originally posted 2008-09-07 13:04:29. Republished by Old Post Promoter

Hysteron Proteron

The current question for debate seems to be how to pull out of Iraq. With the Democrats poised to take control of the Senate, all parties race to be most innovative in their planning of what to do about state of affairs at home in the United States.

When the Democrats fail, a new question will arise. Poised in a tremulous state, querilous cries will rise in the face of the future, as people wonder what to do next and where to turn.

by ChiragpungaliyaNow is the future. Once the old system crumbles, we’ll need to project new models and systems of reality. We need to reanalyze our form of government – but most will try to look at the current state of affairs to project the future, rather than looking again to the past and seeing where our own model deviated from the ideal.

As the Greek Sophist Gorgias said, “If everyone had recollection of the past, knowledge of the present, and foreknowledge of the future, the power of speech would not be so great.

“But as it is, when men can neither remember the past nor observe the present nor prophesy the future, deception is easy; so that most men offer opinion as advice to the soul. But opinion, being unreliable, involves those who accept it in qually uncertain fortunes.”

Originally posted 2007-01-07 09:21:51. Republished by Old Post Promoter