What’s war good for absolutely nothing, well its good for destroying your enemies and protecting you country actually

Heads up, or a hat tip-------possible war between Israel and Hezbollah

No blogging as I am very busy but here is the quick news round up, the next my view will but about India.

BANG!!
North and South Korea have naval skirmish: Yonhap

Silly bugger, i hope he burns in hell
Charles Taylor 'duped' by Nigeria

Once again the Italians are on the right side.. wait when have they ever been on the right side?
Iran Turns To Italy To Launch Satellite

Watch out for the Thai fury special move, its straight out of the street fighter play book
Thai fury as Thaksin arrives in Cambodia

Yeah and they smell so good as well
Gulf Al-Qaida chief: Shi'ites like Iran more dangerous than Jews

Quick News Round up

Brun sazs sorreee
UK's Brown apologizes for misspelled letter

Weird old man looks to start some trouble
Chavez tells troops to ready for war with Colombia

NO IT SHOULDN’T
Russia must keep promise to supply missiles: Iran

Erections in Iraq… sorry that’s elections in Iraq, both are achievements, though I am not sure which one I want to see least
Iraq election set for January 21 after new law passes

Lets hope he hurries up and dies
North Korea: Kim Jong-il and his 19 private train stations

Here we go again

The whole Russia Ukraine gas nonsense maybe starting again
Ukraine Says It Paid Russian Gas Bill

My View Preview

I will explore briefly is the dreadnought moment, I don’t mean revolution in military affairs, they are typically longer lasting and can be seen emerging through chronometric analysis. I mean instead a moment in military affairs where an idea, or a weapon is so strong that all else falls before it, such as the dreadnought, hence the phrase the dreadnought moment. I want to ask are we, this generation, due a dreadnought moment?

Quick News Round up

Yeah but they make good carpets...
Iran tested advanced nuclear warhead: report

The fallen
US Army Base Massacre: Killer Caught On CCTV

So deploying them was a good idea then?
UN: 50 peacekeepers punished for sex abuses

HAPPY B-DAY COOKIE MONSTER
Sesame Street celebrates 40 years

My View

Today’s my view is about vacuous decision making. There are two prominent western leaders that stand accused of this. One leader is already in office the other will soon be elected. But these leaders stand accused of a lacking of forward planning, a lack of principle and rather ironically just not being a good enough politician.

The problem of these two leaders and in general vacuous decision making is an important one to tackle and has two real major and profound implications.

The first major implication is a lack of real effective leadership in changing or implementing their view for their countries. This is important as the leaders move from leaders who stand at the front and charge into battle first, into mere super mangers. Both leaders display an inclination to mange a situation out of existence rather than lead their respective countries to a principled decision. While just managing a situation means there is a very strong chance of a large compromise, it creates no real outcome, no clear understanding of any situation emerges. What does emerge is a half cooked idea, what does emerge is a fudge and what does emerge is trouble later on down the line. An example of this(without making it personal) is health care reform in America, without clear a decisive outcome health care reform has petered on for nearly fifty years with no side being happy and no one every truly understanding how health care works and where health care should go. Both leaders stand ready and accused of turning every issue into a situation similar to American health care reform

While the first issue was to do with reforming a country and implementing a clear a decisive vision the second major issue manifests itself in leadership especially abroad. A leader whatever he/she is or thinks must be decisive, bold, relentless and strong. Yet both these leaders yet again appear to have all the tendency of a super manger and not even a third rate leader. Neither leader wants to take any sort of lead in their respective spheres of influence, neither leader wants to lead on Afghanistan and neither wants to lead on Iran. Thus due to their lack of leadership their countries influence will decline(they will be happy to manage that decline), their soldiers will continue to bleed heavily while both leaders dither on decision making in Afghanistan and lastly will they look to manage Iran, it will go Nuclear.

In short managing a situation and a political system has a place and a virtue but management is not and must never become an ideology. Especially in times like these we need clear decisive and principled leadership