Syrian Strike

  In response to an alleged chemical weapons attack from Syria's Assad Regime,  President Obama announced yesterday he plans a "limited, narrow" attack against Syria.  Apparently he will not seek UN Security Council validation or a resolution from the US Congress.

My intent here is to influence as well as inform.  This attack targeted non-combatants in rebel controlled regions of Syria, evidently killing well over a thousand men, women and children.  The attack demonstrates Syria has the capability and will to use whatever weapons (however atrocious) it can produce.  Our questions for the next few days:  Should the US attack Syria and if so, why?  How should we attack Syria and the accompanying question: what should US goals be for such at attack?

Taking a considered view on our democracy, what should the procedural requirements be for a US President to employ the formidable firepower of the US government on another country?  Should we seek international consensus for such attack also, and if so, how? What are the moral imperatives for such an attack (and for abstaining from the attack)?  There are, of course, Constitutional and legal perspectives on the process, but the most vital question to consider is this:  given the world and the US government today, what should the US President decide and how should he implement the decision?

The first response answer is this:  the US must eliminate Syrian ability to launch successful attacks on its citizenry, US allies in the region and the US itself.  We must do so because we can do so.  Larger questions such as whether we seek to overthrow the Assad regime at this point and to what extent attacks target existing military equipment and associated production facilities, avoiding innocent loss of life, are considerations for selecting US targeting approach, weapon selection and strike delivery.

The most important question:  where are Syrian weapon systems implicated in and capable of these attacks?  Important related questions are where and how were these systems built and how did all the components for the systems and ammunition arrive in Syria?  But are we truly ready for such follow-on questions?  Although nearly 50% of US citizens favor an attack on Syria, we are weary of war:  more than one presidential term ago, we elected Barack Obama to extricate US Forces from Iraq and Afghanistan, not find us a new war (or wars) to conduct.

Eighty (80!)% of US citizens say President Obama should seek Congressional support for such an attack (according to a poll NBC News commissioned, quoted also above).  Intriguing and important fact.  Get back to Washington, Congressman (and woman, Senators included)!  Your country needs you and it doesn't appear the President plans to ask for your opinion...

Writing Sample

  Two months ago I wrote the below paragraphs for a prospect...

There is an active debate about the Presidential election… gnashing of teeth about new demographics, gloating that this election is a validation of left-leaning policies and, from the right, messages suggesting America deserves our impending doom.

Mitt Romney may be the most qualified man in America to fix our economy, given the consulting, investing and public sector projects he has run.  Romney did manage to make a fatal comment or two (with supporting, high profile, gaffs from other members of his party).  Thus, level-headed analysis might suggest all is not lost, gained, or permanently altered.

We can expect more of the same economic and social policies.  But is our foreign policy on track?  In a recent CNN interview, former CIA chief Michael Hayden listed four foreign policy concerns:  Iran with its nuclear ambitions; China with its growing military presence and ongoing leadership transition; global terrorism; and cyber-security attacks.

Let’s set aside three of these four concerns for the moment (since the most visible security lapse in the past 60 days were successful terrorist attacks on US embassies).  Investigation of the Benghazi attack, specifically, is ongoing:  the FBI; the State Department; the US House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform; and the US Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs are conducting independent investigations.  There is much we do not know about the attack and activities that led to it, although we trust these four investigations will insure facts and evidence are not overlooked.

For the past decade, public discourse would suggest the Al Qaida Muslim extremist group had become the most severe existent threat to the security of the United States.  Although Ansar Sharia in Benghazi claimed credit for the attack that claimed Chris Stevens’ life (and the lives of three of his colleagues), according to reports about Stevens’ personal journal, the Ambassador himself suspected he was an Al Qaida target.

Public discourse suggests Al Qaida is the problem.  Unfortunately, the perception that the most dangerous threat the US faces is Al Qaida is simplistic, and the illusion that policy makers present to the public that Al Qaida is an effective monolith is both inaccurate and dangerous.

Hayden perhaps represents US leadership consensus when he suggests that “Al Qaida prime” is undermined.  Hayden implies here (and others apparently believe) that Al Qaida once had a core, highly effective, organization, that US military and intelligence operations have been able to pick apart and render ineffective. 

Although US operations have killed or captured many Al Qaida henchmen, including Osama bin Laden, and key leadership across a number of hostile Islamic groups have also been neutralized, the threat the United States and its interests faces from terrorist organizations is as great as it has ever been.

If Al Qaida were responsible in any way for the Benghazi attacks, the fact that we are targeting that organization higher than any other threat on the Globe… and the fact that the intelligence community found there was no evidence suggesting the Benghazi attack was "planned or imminent," would suggest one of two possibilities:  1) Al Qaida is so good that we just can’t catch them, no matter how hard we try; or 2) there are many independently operating Islamic organizations operating without meaningful direction from anywhere and they are frequently well enough equipped and trained to successfully strike our interests.

Either possibility is disturbing.  The second is more likely.

For the billions$ spent, we have much work to do to address the terrorist threat to the US and its interests.  Although the public shouldn’t expect all the details our intelligence operatives uncover about the threat or operating details of our response, we do have a right to an accurate characterization of one of the most dangerous developments to face our democracy in a hundred years: spontaneous evolution of independent

organizations that vilify the very existence of our freedom and values we hold most dear.  

organizations that vilify the very existence of our freedom and values we hold most dear.  

Why eWISEinc LLC?

Why the eWISEinc blog, you ask? Where can a person maximize contribution in a world of constant improvements and change?  We want to deliver decisive efficiencies for linchpin sectors, and add value via a well integrated, best in class, approach.

eWISEinc LLC is considering solutions such as the one shown here:

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/12/where-er-doctors-work-entirely-via-webcam/265935/

Thanks for visiting (please follow)!!

Reasonable Steps

Earlier this morning I reposted a blog entry proposing giving weapons concealed carry permits (CCW) precedence over "gun-free zones for schools" to allow teachers to carry a firearm (or have a firearm present, perhaps in a nearby lock box).  The original blog is here:

http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/an-opinion-on-gun-control/

A friend responded to my repost with a question about whether there was an armed guard at Colombine, suggesting that one armed individual wouldn't be very helpful.  Other comments suggest Europe is safer due to gun laws.  This blog is my reply.

A lone gunman killed 72 people one July day in Scandinavia (2011). In Mumbai, India, where gun laws are even more restrictive, a few buddies held law enforcement at bay for three days in 2008, killing 166 people.  The NRA suggestion that armed guards be placed in all schools seems heavy handed, but I am also concerned with some of the "weapons ban" conversations that are sweeping social media.  

Truth be told, I didn't own a firearm until after my first Iraq deployment, where I was prohibited from carrying a weapon.  When I returned to the US, I decided to exercise my self-evident right to own a firearm.  Since then I have purchased several additional firearms (mostly to address specific hunting quarry) and received some guns from my Dad.  I don't own anything that qualifies as an assault rifle (under anyone's definition), although I probably would acquire such a rifle in 308 caliber should budgets allow.

 So my life probably would be affected if an assault weapon ban is enacted, although I wouldn't become an automatic felon (as would some of my friends, who own one or several such rifles for hunting or target work).  

I think state-level laws allowing teachers and other school employees with CCW permits to carry in an otherwise gun-free zone make sense and would be effective.  We shouldn't force all teachers to carry guns, or even require every school have an armed staff-member.  We should make it legal for a former member of our Armed Forces, or otherwise trained person, to carry a firearm in the school where they work.

I believe a broad ban would be a bad idea and not very effective.

Serving

Professor David from the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) recently spoke in Pentagon City about Iran's nuclear program.  I asked him what might cause Hezbollah or Hamas to shift targeting focus to the US.  He was quick to remind the group that the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut was such an attack, but suggested that our foreign policy should not be driven by threats.

Less than a week later, our thoughts and prayers are with the loved ones of those lost in Libya, and those serving overseas in embassies or military bases.  We can't imagine that some wacko producing and publishing a video could result in such violence and hatred for all of us.  We are saddened that some of the most idealistic among us, the most committed to your welfare, should pay such an awful price.  We can't help but imagine callous and well trained manipulators whipped up popular anger and orchestrated those attacks.

We underscore our hopes for the safety and prosperity of your children, just as we fight for the prosperity and happiness of our own.  May we find a way to prosper in peace together.  Amen.

Make something!

  Twitter helps me stay informed on occasion.  Today I was directed to Joel Runyon's blog about Russell Kirsch.  Russell invented the first internally programmable computer.

Joel didn't say whether Russell amassed a fortune.  Evidently Russell didn't mention it either.  You can expect a Harvard MBA (me) would worry about that!  Joel didn't set out to find Russell Kirsch... evidently Russell found Joel working on his blog at a local coffee shop.

Best Russell Kirsch quote in the blog:  "...nothing is withheld from us what we have conceived to do.  Most people think the opposite..."  Evidently there were only two people who believed that, to quote Russell again: "God and me, so I went out and did it."

Thank you Russell, for that inspiration.  And thank you, Joel, for finding that fine man, for sharing his wisdom.  Perhaps I should save this post, log off and make something! 

Teaching Mathematics

  This morning my youngest woke convinced we should hold a yard sale.  Primarily, she wanted to trade that big Barbie house in her room for some cash, from which she would make a gift to charity and buy a new treasure (probably something to expand her "my little pony" collection).

She would hear nothing about waiting for the neighborhood sale, when signs would have been posted for a week.  Those signs and neighboring "vendors" virtually guarantee that crowds will converge intrigued by the collective marketing.  My princess identified forty or fifty items for sale, made the price tags and sat out with those items (arrayed across the driveway) while eating her breakfast.

I gave her two dollars in change, confirming she knows a penny from a nickel from a dime.  After her sister and Mommy woke up and joined us, we each pretended to negotiate for several items, then got change back from our payment.

Great day to be in the sun, learning from one another.  One little first grader may not be rich, but she will be tuned to her numbers in the Fall.