Recommended Reading
….Network-centric warfare is a paramount example of how cyber-enabled military operations merged with mainstream tenets of American strategic culture. Adm. Arthur K. Cebrowski and his collaborators married technology with an expansive geopolitical vision of American ability to determine “rule sets” in an international system that he judged to be imperiled by information-technology-enabled regional actors. Network-enabled force and flexible logistics would help the United States contain the damage from such actors, spread globalization’s connectivity to disconnected regions and deter new conflicts. These geopolitical ideas, while wrapped in metaphors from systems science and economics, are at their core very much rooted in a traditionally American brand of liberal internationalism. The United States does not trust a balance-of-power system abroad to create national security, and thus has historically sought the military capability to create favorable regional, national-level and substate political outcomes.
American military hegemony, coupled with a penchant for cyber-enabled regional intervention, is what is driving adversaries’ search for countermeasures. A military competition is underway over military cyber power.
Steven Metz at WPR –Strategic Horizons: Make North Korea Understand the Cost of Provocation
Dan Trombly – The Sources of Perpetual War
Thomas P.M. Barnett –Interesting Panel on the Chinese Navy (video)
Razib Khan – Jared Diamond and the Anthropologists and Against the Cultural Anthropologists
Dan Nexon – How Reality-based is the Community?
Dart Throwing Chimp –Advocascience
Recommended Viewing:
Page 2 of 2 | Previous page
Mr. X:
February 9th, 2013 at 4:44 am
makes you wonder if anyone would dare say the same things about Russia if Wal-Marts were stacked with Russian goods…but in any case, apples and oranges, I admit. Except for the fact that it’s not a coincidence the ‘Reset’ happened when the Obama Administration and even the outgoing Bushies badly needed the Northern Supply Route, plus an alternative to American astronauts having to rely solely on the post-shuttle private space firms to get into orbit. As for the ownership of U.S. Treasury debt, I think Russia’s still pretty far down the list and has slipped further from the 07-08′ pre-krizis peak when Moscow’s sovereign wealth funds were cracking the top 10 of U.S. creditor nations.
Lynn Wheeler:
February 10th, 2013 at 4:29 pm
going back a little
http://archive.org/details/triumphantpluto00pettrich
from “Triumphant plutocracy” loc6265-74:
XXX. THE LEAGUE TO PERPETUATE WAR The war has just begun. I said that when the Armistice terms were published and when I read the Treaty and the League Covenant I felt more than ever convinced of the justice of my conclusion. The Treaty of Versailles is merely an armistice — a suspension of hostilities, while the combatants get their wind. There is a war in every chapter of the Treaty and in every section of the League Covenant; war all over the world; war without end so long as the conditions endure which produce these documents.
… snip …
even before Spinney
http://chuckspinney.blogspot.com/p/domestic-roots-of-perpetual-war.html
larrydunbar:
February 10th, 2013 at 11:03 pm
Yes, makes you wonder.
historyguy99:
February 11th, 2013 at 5:00 am
Thanks for the recognition on the RR list. Galrahn nails it on the USNI post about Capt. Fanell’s honest appraisal, and Tom Barnett’s comments about Dr. Yoshihara’s part of the same video reveals the growing necessity to temper our pivot by continuing to “Speak softley,” but remember to carry that “Big Stick.” I would call attention to Barnett’s recent article in WPR, http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/12700/trans-atlantic-ties-still-key-to-renewing-u-s-global-leadership, where he consuls re-connecting with our European allies as a counter balance to both India and China, who are poised to make the same mistakes the West did in the early part of the 20th century.
zen:
February 11th, 2013 at 5:18 am
Hi Tom, what was the talk (if any) about the mil-mil connection with Australia at the conference?
historyguy99:
February 11th, 2013 at 2:56 pm
Hi Mark, not too much discussion other than being mentioned during the China panel, and again during the roundtable interview with the three service chiefs. It was mentioned as an example of the pivot and the return of the Marines as an expeditionary force. Most of the conference panels was focused on the effects of the coming cuts and how the Navy will manage. Not so interesting for my personal taste, but the Keynotes by Robert O Work, Adm Haney and one by a futurest were insightful. The links for those are here. http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLWX4R7nG6a8moZ0bIUtkBBIqaOkbr85zb