RECOMMENDED READING<\/b><\/p>\n
From Callimachus<\/strong> at Done with Mirrors<\/strong> <\/a>an excellent, reflective, critical, essay “Among the Dead Cities<\/a>“tackling moral philosophy and history. A luminescent post.<\/p>\n From Dr. Thomas P.M. Barnett<\/a><\/strong>, on “New architecture, new enterprise<\/a>“.<\/p>\n From Nadezhda<\/strong> at American Footprints<\/a><\/strong>, on “Ron Suskind and the Revolt of the Professionals<\/a>“. This post is really worth further reflection and commentary from me, as is usually the case with Nad’s posts, but as I have not read the Suskind book yet I decline, even though obvious questions regarding secario planning leap to mind. Perhaps Art Hutchinson<\/strong> <\/a>will deign to do a review of his own.<\/p>\n William Lind<\/strong> at DNI<\/a><\/strong> offers his review <\/a>of Dr. Chet Richard’s<\/strong> Neither Shall The Sword<\/a><\/em><\/strong>. Some milreading titles available on Sonny’s<\/strong> “Expeditionary Bookshelf<\/a>” at FX-Based<\/a>.<\/strong> That’s it !<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" RECOMMENDED READING From Callimachus at Done with Mirrors an excellent, reflective, critical, essay “Among the Dead Cities“tackling moral philosophy and history. A luminescent post. From Dr. Thomas P.M. Barnett, on “New architecture, new enterprise“. From Nadezhda at American Footprints, on “Ron Suskind and the Revolt of the Professionals“. This post is really worth further reflection […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1828","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/zenpundit.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1828","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/zenpundit.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/zenpundit.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zenpundit.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zenpundit.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1828"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/zenpundit.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1828\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/zenpundit.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1828"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zenpundit.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1828"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/zenpundit.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1828"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
<\/strong>
Dan of tdaxp<\/strong><\/a> on “In Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, the Supreme Court Limits International Law<\/a>“.<\/p>\n
<\/strong>
Wiggins<\/strong> has a tripartite treat at Opposed System Design<\/strong><\/a> with ” China’s Interests -Part I<\/a>“, “Part II<\/a>” and “Part III<\/a>“.<\/p>\n