Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:04 AM - Re: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED (Brock Lorber)
2. 09:05 AM - Re: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED (yourtcfg@aol.com)
3. 10:00 AM - INTERESTING DELIVERY (yourtcfg@aol.com)
4. 10:30 AM - Re: INTERESTING DELIVERY (John Vormbaum)
5. 11:05 AM - Re: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED ()
6. 11:40 AM - Re: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED (Steve W)
7. 11:42 AM - Re: INTERESTING DELIVERY (Steve W)
8. 11:44 AM - Re: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED (Steve W)
9. 04:34 PM - Re: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED (Bruce Campbell)
10. 05:26 PM - Re: [BULK] THOSE WHO SERVED (lloyd SILVERMAN)
11. 05:59 PM - Re: INTERESTING DELIVERY (nico css)
12. 06:13 PM - Re: INTERESTING DELIVERY (yourtcfg@aol.com)
13. 08:51 PM - Thank you Col. Williams (Dan Farmer)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | THOSE WHO SERVED |
Col Williams:
With respect, Sir, you misunderstand me. I, educated in the lower halls
of the building named for Fairchild, learned philosophical lessons that
invariably did not apply to the "real Air Force", but struck a chord in
me nonetheless that fueled my appreciation for me and my fellow man that
I carried into and applied with great success in the "real Air Force".
Upon graduation, I learned that the ubiquitous saw that "grads had no
applicable technical knowledge" was true, but found no more applicable
knowledge in technical training.
I found (as I am sure you did) that the "real Air Force" required
experience in the "real Air Force", commanding Airmen, writing reports,
and advocating the application of limited resources in the way I divined
was the best way to complete the mission as outlined by those above me
in rank and position. What never failed, however, was the philosophical
premise upon which my service was based.
It is rare, even among the officer corps, to find someone with an
appreciation for the words of Sun Tzu that you obviously command. My
knowledge of the General's words come from reading and re-reading his
words, and striving to apply them to every endeavor, even if I have to
fashion myself as the opposition - certainly anyone can imagine their
worst enemy as themselves. I did not quote the General lightly, nor, I
believe, out of context.
You did not presume that I am anti-war, or pacifist in common parlance,
and for that I thank you. However, you did suggest that I quoted the
General in an anti-war context. You also suggest that Sun Tzu's
sayings, as written, have no place in competitive endeavors other than
war. I ask, Colonel, is war such a unique animal to be treated as a
separate class other than competitive? Is not the competition between
Company A and Company B subject to the same strategy and tactics as war?
The answer is, in my opinion, no. Competition is competition, and the
General's words apply equally to any form of competition. I can find no
occasion where adversaries have taken the field that the General's
admonitions did not apply. Sun Tzu was a wise philosopher whose words,
as relayed, transcend time and place; they are as applicable now as
ever.
You, rightly, note that mercantile trade is proportionate to naval
might. I ascertain that neither is precipitous; that is, naval might is
worthless without mercantile trade and mercantile trade shall not long
survive without a navy to keep her shipping lanes open. Although it may
seem that we have no quarrel, I posit that a naval force, fully funded
by the mercantile trade (and passed to customers through price), can
accomplish the same ends. What's more, that system passes the cost of
keeping the shipping lanes open to the end users in proportion to their
consumption of the goods passed.
As you mentioned the army, it should be noted that, per the Constitution
of the United States, that a standing army (and, by extension, her child
the USAF) is authorized to the congress but, "no Appropriation of Money
to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years". Luckily, for
your career and my term, congress has seen fit to authorize that
appropriation. It is by no means a foregone conclusion, however, since
the inception of our constitution, that a standing army is either a fit
or desired component of the federal government.
Out of respect, Sir, I shall ask you to revise your farcical ascertation
that German would be the predominant language if the US had not entered
the European theater in WWII. I have seen no credible evidence Germany
was an occupying threat to the United States, nor that the Third Reich
held any disposition toward codifying the German language, however, I
stand to be corrected on both counts.
Defeating fascists is hard to define. Before, during, and after WWII,
fascists were the leading political influence in the United States. It
was presumed, in the US, that a council of knowledgeable businessmen in
a given field could determine both the product and price of all
producers in that field. It failed, of course, miserably, but for
economic reasons totally separate from any war, yet that is the enemy we
still face each and every day.
It is not, in my way of thinking, disingenuous to compare the current
ideological conflict to the conflict continuing since the 7th century,
that is, control of Jerusalem. I really, really understand why the
vocal minority has always felt that way. I just can not. I have my own
parts of the world I'm working to control.
General Sun Tzu is firmly in my camp, regardless of whom else chooses to
believe it.
Brock Lorber
(If I could use such a signature block it would be:
Capt, USAFR)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Bud
Williams
Sent: Sun 5/25/2008 10:16 PM
Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO
<rambud@windstream.net>
Mr Lorber,
Ordinarily I do not respond to posts in any given list, except where
someone
has asked for help or has made a comment that is so irritating that it
begs
a response.
Your knowledge of Sun Tzu apparently comes from some misguided author's
attempt to rationalize The Art of War into every day life, such as "The
Art
of War for Business," or worse, "Wikipedia."
The Art of War is a compilation of a Chinese General's thoughts and
teachings that were taught to emperors and military leaders. To attempt
to
apply this work to everyday life is only valid when taken into the
context
of the times in which it was "written."
Sun Tzu said: "The art of war is of vital importance to the State.
It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin.
Hence
it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected."
War, not business/industry.
Your earlier quote of the Art of War was taken out of context in a
feeble
attempt to justify your suggestion. Let us look at the context in which
it
was written.
Sun Tzu said: "In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to
take
the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not
so
good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy
it,
to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy
them.
Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme
excellence;
supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without
fighting.
Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans; the
next
best is to prevent the junction of the enemy's forces; the next in
order
is to attack the enemy's army in the field; and the worst policy of
all
is to besiege walled cities."
Your misuse of Sun Tzu's words taken out of the context in which it was
written implies that Sun Tzu says we should never go to war. In truth,
if
you truly study and understand Sun Tzu, that is NOT the case. War is a
serious undertaking, not to be taken lightly. That is his main point. If
however, war is to be undertaken, then he outlines "rules" to govern
preparations for, and the conduct of, the war.
Sun Tzu said: "There are three ways in which a ruler can bring
misfortune
upon his army:--
(1) By commanding the army to advance or to retreat, being ignorant of
the
fact that it cannot obey. This is called hobbling the army.
(2) By attempting to govern an army in the same way as he administers a
kingdom, being ignorant of the conditions which obtain in an army. This
causes restlessness in the soldier's minds.
(3) By employing the officers of his army without discrimination,
through
ignorance of the military principle of adaptation to circumstances.
This
shakes the confidence of the soldiers.
But when the army is restless and distrustful, trouble is sure to come
from
the other feudal princes. This is simply bringing anarchy into the army,
and
flinging victory away.
Thus we may know that there are five essentials for victory:
(1) He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight.
(2) He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior
forces.
(3) He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all
its
ranks.
(4) He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy
unprepared.
(5) He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by
the
sovereign.
Hence the saying: If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not
fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not
the
enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you
know
neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle."
I suggest to you sir, that if we go by your suggestion, then we will
lose
every battle.
No great nation, and by this I will use your implied definition that a
nation is great because of the mercantile richness of the nation, ever
rose
to that status without a strong military that was able to protect the
rights
of those merchants and to open up and maintain the markets for those
merchants.
This country was born with a rich potential for greatness, but this was
not
achieved until Mahan, a naval Captain, was able to articulate the
historic
facts that no great nation (and at the time of his writing the sun never
set
on the English Empire, the richest and most powerful nation on earth at
that
time) was able to achieve greatness without first commanding the sea. He
wasn't talking about "owning" the ocean, but being able to protect the
sea
lanes through which merchant ships traversed thereby providing the
valuable
markets necessary to obtain new resources and to sell the nation's
finished
products. Because of Captain Mahan's influence in Congress and with
Presidents, most notable Teddy Roosevelt, America started building what
would eventually become the world's most powerful navy.
The world has evolved since Mahan wrote his seminal work, but despite
the
vast amount of cargo that is moved through the air, the fact still
remains
that most of the world's (to include the US) goods are still moved by
sea,
and it is STILL our navy that ensures that sea lines are open and "free"
of
pirates (and piracy still exists in the straits off Indonesia and in
other
parts of the world).
The Roman Empire existed and flourished only because of its military.
The great city-state of Athens was great not because of it wealth
(economic
and intellectual), but because its navy enabled it to spread it wealth.
This country would not enjoy the world leadership position it is in if
it
was not for its military that fought two world wars on foreign soil to
protect the rights we believe in. Yes, our military-industrial complex
helped us to defeat the Nazis and the Fascists, but again, that was the
harnessing of the potential that country possessed. We were utilizing
that
potential in the Lend-Lease Program with England and the Soviet Union,
but
those countries were unable to turn the tide of Nazi Germany until
American
men and women in uniform entered the conflict. It is only by dumb luck
(most
notably Hitler's decisions to not invade England and to instead invade
the
Soviet Union) and the efforts of a few courageous men (and here I will
honor
the British and American airmen in the Battle of Britain) that we are
not
speaking fluent German.
Yes, this country was made great because of people such as JP Morgan,
Westinghouse, William Randolph Hearst and other bankers, industrialists,
and
media moguls. But I repeat: you can build all the widgets in the world
that
you want, but if you don't have a market for the widgets, then you are
just
as poor as those who are unable to build the widgets, and you don't get
markets without a military to ensure that your interests are protected.
You want to honor business men and women? By all means do so...on Labor
Day,
a day dedicated to the men and women who broke their backs to build the
world's leading economy.
Memorial Day is a day to honor those who have sacrificed their families,
their wealth, potential wealth, and for some, their very lives in order
to
provide a safe and secure environment in which to work, sell, and
prosper.
I realize you differ in your opinion as to the importance of this day.
Fine.
Your military has protected your right to do so. I leave you with this
one
last thought: we are currently in a war for our very existence, whether
you
choose to believe so or not. You may go hide your head in the sand and
say
it is not so just as Charles Lindbergh and others did prior to the
attack on
Pearl Harbor and the subsequent declaration of war against the US by
Germany. But the reality is that we are fighting an enemy that despises
the
very life you hold so dear. Honor the business men and women who "made
this
country great?" We are hated and attacked BECAUSE we are so wealthy. Our
wealth is not "winning" this war; it is not destroying our enemy. It is
your
military that is taking on this mantle of burden, and it is this
military
that will ultimately win out, providing you allow the military to do
what it
is trained to do.
To quote Sun Tzu one last time: "It is only one who is thoroughly
acquainted
with the evils of war that can thoroughly understand the profitable way
of
carrying it on."
It is fortunate that our forefathers had the insight to ensure this new
country they created was able to protect itself so that it might
flourish,
and that our great grandfathers had the wisdom to recognize the
distinctly
unique contributions our military has made to the greatness of this
country.
Rae A. "Bud" Williams, Col, USAF (ret)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brock
Lorber
Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2008 11:07 PM
Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
You're welcome. However, Tuesday, please thank your grocer, your
accountant, your lawyer, your mechanic, your barber, your pharmacist,
the
owner of the corner gas station, butcher, cashier, etc. These are the
true
heroes that prove, each and every day, that peaceful cooperation, EVEN
IN
COMPETITION, yields the riches of the world. While soldiers, sailors,
airmen, and marines may, at least for the time being, be called to
safeguard
human wealth, they do so at the cost of human wealth and life. As Sun
Tzu
noted in The Art of War:
"Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme
excellence;
supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without
fighting."
By that definition, the soldier, sailor, airman, and marine fails where
the
grocer and mechanic excel. Please, celebrate their supreme excellence
even
as you thank the soldier that is required to answer his calling because
of a
failure of governments to achieve excellence.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of
yourtcfg@aol.com
Sent: Sun 5/25/2008 6:10 PM
Subject: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
lets all take a moment and offer a prayer for all those? who have served
and
are serving our great nation.? I? travel a lot on the airline delivering
airplanes and ALWAYS tell EVERY soldier I see "Thank you".? I challenge
all
of you to do the same.? jb
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: THOSE WHO SERVED |
AMEN.......jb
-----Original Message-----
From: Bud Williams <rambud@windstream.net>
Sent: Sun, 25 May 2008 10:16 pm
Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
Mr Lorber,
Ordinarily I do not respond to posts in any given list, except where someone
has asked for help or has made a comment that is so irritating that it begs
a response.
Your knowledge of Sun Tzu apparently comes from some misguided author's
attempt to rationalize The Art of War into every day life, such as "The Art
of War for Business," or worse, "Wikipedia."
The Art of War is a compilation of a Chinese General's thoughts and
teachings that were taught to emperors and military leaders. To attempt to
apply this work to everyday life is only valid when taken into the context
of the times in which it was "written."
Sun Tzu said: "The art of war is of vital importance to the State.
It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence
it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected."
War, not business/industry.
Your earlier quote of the Art of War was taken out of context in a feeble
attempt to justify your suggestion. Let us look at the context in which it
was written.
Sun Tzu said: "In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take
the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so
good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it,
to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy
them.
Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence;
supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without
fighting.
Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans; the next
best is to prevent the junction of the enemy's forces; the next in order
is to attack the enemy's army in the field; and the worst policy of all
is to besiege walled cities."
Your misuse of Sun Tzu's words taken out of the context in which it was
written implies that Sun Tzu says we should never go to war. In truth, if
you truly study and understand Sun Tzu, that is NOT the case. War is a
serious undertaking, not to be taken lightly. That is his main point. If
however, war is to be undertaken, then he outlines "rules" to govern
preparations for, and the conduct of, the war.
Sun Tzu said: "There are three ways in which a ruler can bring misfortune
upon his army:--
(1) By commanding the army to advance or to retreat, being ignorant of the
fact that it cannot obey. This is called hobbling the army.
(2) By attempting to govern an army in the same way as he administers a
kingdom, being ignorant of the conditions which obtain in an army. This
causes restlessness in the soldier's minds.
(3) By employing the officers of his army without discrimination, through
ignorance of the military principle of adaptation to circumstances. This
shakes the confidence of the soldiers.
But when the army is restless and distrustful, trouble is sure to come from
the other feudal princes. This is simply bringing anarchy into the army, and
flinging victory away.
Thus we may know that there are five essentials for victory:
(1) He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight.
(2) He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces.
(3) He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its
ranks.
(4) He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared.
(5) He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by the
sovereign.
Hence the saying: If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not
fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the
enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know
neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle."
I suggest to you sir, that if we go by your suggestion, then we will lose
every battle.
No great nation, and by this I will use your implied definition that a
nation is great because of the mercantile richness of the nation, ever rose
to that status without a strong military that was able to protect the rights
of those merchants and to open up and maintain the markets for those
merchants.
This country was born with a rich potential for greatness, but this was not
achieved until Mahan, a naval Captain, was able to articulate the historic
facts that no great nation (and at the time of his writing the sun never set
on the English Empire, the richest and most powerful nation on earth at that
time) was able to achieve greatness without first commanding the sea. He
wasn't talking about "owning" the ocean, but being able to protect the sea
lanes through which merchant ships traversed thereby providing the valuable
markets necessary to obtain new resources and to sell the nation's finished
products. Because of Captain Mahan's influence in Congress and with
Presidents, most notable Teddy Roosevelt, America started building what
would eventually become the world's most powerful navy.
The world has evolved since Mahan wrote his seminal work, but despite the
vast amount of cargo that is moved through the air, the fact still remains
that most of the world's (to include the US) goods are still moved by sea,
and it is STILL our navy that ensures that sea lines are open and "free" of
pirates (and piracy still exists in the straits off Indonesia and in other
parts of the world).
The Roman Empire existed and flourished only because of its military.
The great city-state of Athens was great not because of it wealth (economic
and intellectual), but because its navy enabled it to spread it wealth.
This country would not enjoy the world leadership position it is in if it
was not for its military that fought two world wars on foreign soil to
protect the rights we believe in. Yes, our military-industrial complex
helped us to defeat the Nazis and the Fascists, but again, that was the
harnessing of the potential that country possessed. We were utilizing that
potential in the Lend-Lease Program with England and the Soviet Union, but
those countries were unable to turn the tide of Nazi Germany until American
men and women in uniform entered the conflict. It is only by dumb luck (most
notably Hitler's decisions to not invade England and to instead invade the
Soviet Union) and the efforts of a few courageous men (and here I will honor
the British and American airmen in the Battle of Britain) that we are not
speaking fluent German.
Yes, this country was made great because of people such as JP Morgan,
Westinghouse, William Randolph Hearst and other bankers, industrialists, and
media moguls. But I repeat: you can build all the widgets in the world that
you want, but if you don't have a market for the widgets, then you are just
as poor as those who are unable to build the widgets, and you don't get
markets without a military to ensure that your interests are protected.
You want to honor business men and women? By all means do so...on Labor Day,
a day dedicated to the men and women who broke their backs to build the
world's leading economy.
Memorial Day is a day to honor those who have sacrificed their families,
their wealth, potential wealth, and for some, their very lives in order to
provide a safe and secure environment in which to work, sell, and prosper.
I realize you differ in your opinion as to the importance of this day. Fine.
Your military has protected your right to do so. I leave you with this one
last thought: we are currently in a war for our very existence, whether you
choose to believe so or not. You may go hide your head in the sand and say
it is not so just as Charles Lindbergh and others did prior to the attack on
Pearl Harbor and the subsequent declaration of war against the US by
Germany. But the reality is that we are fighting an enemy that despises the
very life you hold so dear. Honor the business men and women who "made this
country great?" We are hated and attacked BECAUSE we are so wealthy. Our
wealth is not "winning" this war; it is not destroying our enemy. It is your
military that is taking on this mantle of burden, and it is this military
that will ultimately win out, providing you allow the military to do what it
is trained to do.
To quote Sun Tzu one last time: "It is only one who is thoroughly acquainted
with the evils of war that can thoroughly understand the profitable way of
carrying it on."
It is fortunate that our forefathers had the insight to ensure this new
country they created was able to protect itself so that it might flourish,
and that our great grandfathers had the wisdom to recognize the distinctly
unique contributions our military has made to the greatness of this country.
Rae A. "Bud" Williams, Col, USAF (ret)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brock Lorber
Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2008 11:07 PM
Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
You're welcome. However, Tuesday, please thank your grocer, your
accountant, your lawyer, your mechanic, your barber, your pharmacist, the
owner of the corner gas station, butcher, cashier, etc. These are the true
heroes that prove, each and every day, that peaceful cooperation, EVEN IN
COMPETITION, yields the riches of the world. While soldiers, sailors,
airmen, and marines may, at least for the time being, be called to safeguard
human wealth, they do so at the cost of human wealth and life. As Sun Tzu
noted in The Art of War:
"Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence;
supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without
fighting."
By that definition, the soldier, sailor, airman, and marine fails where the
grocer and mechanic excel. Please, celebrate their supreme excellence even
as you thank the soldier that is required to answer his calling because of a
failure of governments to achieve excellence.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of
yourtcfg@aol.com
Sent: Sun 5/25/2008 6:10 PM
Subject: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
lets all take a moment and offer a prayer for all those? who have served and
are serving our great nation.? I? travel a lot on the airline delivering
airplanes and ALWAYS tell EVERY soldier I see "Thank you".? I challenge all
of you to do the same.? jb
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | INTERESTING DELIVERY |
HI KIDS
As?some of you know, I deliver all types of airplanes all over the country, even
around the world.? I recently delivered a 500B from Commander Services, Stockton
CA to Central Air in Kansas city.? The trip started with he delivery of a
new American Champion Scout, on 31" tundra tires, from Caldwell ID to Moab UT.?
I checked the new owner out (great fun flying in the spectacular canyons!),
then flew the "crowd killer" to CA.? The 500B was just out of an extensive annual
and had a new long shrike nose as well as the Central Air boost pump mod.?
The boost pumps are removed from the fuel sump and installed in the engine nacelle,
great improvement!!
John Vormbaum had already test flown it so when I got there it was "squawk free".?
I blasted off and headed east, into a headwind, yep, a headwind eastbound,
lucky me!!? Crossing the Sierra Nevada range was spectacular.? Still plenty of
snow.? The weather deteriorated as?I pushed east.? Through Utah, I had to do
a bit of unexpected scud running.? The clouds became broken again, but flying
in the haze and mist was putting some airframe ice on.? it is pretty unusual
to be VFR and icing??? It has only happened a few times in all my flying.
Still into a headwind, I pressed on to Moab UT, where just the previous day I had
flown the Scout.? I fueled ($7.50 per gallon, self serve!!? Yikes!!).? I then
crossed the Rockies.? Crossing in a straight line ment flying at 14K?over?13,999'
mountains for about an hour and a half.? Crossing?high mountains in a normally
aspirated twin,?means flying it like a single.? If an engine fails, you
will land the airplane.? Even the valley floors were well above the single engine
ceiling.? I kept a close watch on roads, valley floors and even frozen lakes
as a possible landing spot.??The airplane however worked perfectly and I
was soon looking at the great?plains.? It was then things began to get very interesting.?
The forecast had been for only minor, widespread T showers that day.?
The next day was to be (and was) much worse.? I was 12 hours ahead of the
storms that just ripped Colorado!!? The weather forecast was way off (funny how
people?believe that we can predict what the weather
will be?like in 100 years i.e.?"global warming" when we cant predict, with any
accuracy, what the weather will be?in a week, or even tomorrow!!? amazing)?
anyway.? All I could see in front of the airplane was water from the sky and lighting.?
I made a half hearted attempt to work my way through it, but quickly
gave up.? The storm scope in the airplane had so many lightning strikes it looked
like it was in the test mode!!
I called center and was told that the unexpected development was 180 miles to my?south
and 100 miles north, moving north a 40kts.? I turned?north and enjoyed
the first?and only tailwinds of the trip, 235kts.? I could see lots of lightning
both on the storm scope and out the window but keep a distanced and finally
was able to turn back east.? The speed immediately went from 235kts to 119kts!!??
I had used up my fuel reserves and made a precautionary fuel stop in N.Platt
NE just to be sure.? Then on to KC without incident landing?a little after
midnight.? There are few things more beautiful than flying over a big city,
in a Commander, at night.? Breathtaking!!? John Towner runs a first class freight
operation there and I spent a comfortable night in his "bunk house" to?be
awakened the next morning?by the loudest clap of thunder I?ever hear.? The rain
on the hangar?roof was so loud I could not use my cell phone.? The storm had
made it to KC.? man was?I glad to be on the ground!!
??Just another day in the life of a "Delivery Dog"!!? jb?
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: INTERESTING DELIVERY |
Wow Jim, that's a pretty exciting trip! Living in CA I have ZERO
experience with T-storms....and I hope to keep it that way!
Glad you made it safely & had some good friends on the other end of the
trip to take you in. The Towners are the best!
Cheers,
/John
yourtcfg@aol.com wrote:
> HI KIDS
> As some of you know, I deliver all types of airplanes all over the
> country, even around the world. I recently delivered a 500B from
> Commander Services, Stockton CA to Central Air in Kansas city. The
> trip started with he delivery of a new American Champion Scout, on 31"
> tundra tires, from Caldwell ID to Moab UT. I checked the new owner
> out (great fun flying in the spectacular canyons!), then flew the
> "crowd killer" to CA. The 500B was just out of an extensive annual
> and had a new long shrike nose as well as the Central Air boost pump
> mod. The boost pumps are removed from the fuel sump and installed in
> the engine nacelle, great improvement!!
> John Vormbaum had already test flown it so when I got there it was
> "squawk free". I blasted off and headed east, into a headwind, yep, a
> headwind eastbound, lucky me!! Crossing the Sierra Nevada range was
> spectacular. Still plenty of snow. The weather deteriorated as I
> pushed east. Through Utah, I had to do a bit of unexpected scud
> running. The clouds became broken again, but flying in the haze and
> mist was putting some airframe ice on. it is pretty unusual to be VFR
> and icing?? It has only happened a few times in all my flying.
> Still into a headwind, I pressed on to Moab UT, where just the
> previous day I had flown the Scout. I fueled ($7.50 per gallon, self
> serve!! Yikes!!). I then crossed the Rockies. Crossing in a
> straight line ment flying at 14K over 13,999' mountains for about an
> hour and a half. Crossing high mountains in a normally aspirated
> twin, means flying it like a single. If an engine fails, you will
> land the airplane. Even the valley floors were well above the single
> engine ceiling. I kept a close watch on roads, valley floors and even
> frozen lakes as a possible landing spot. The airplane however worked
> perfectly and I was soon looking at the great plains. It was then
> things began to get very interesting. The forecast had been for only
> minor, widespread T showers that day. The next day was to be (and
> was) much worse. I was 12 hours ahead of the storms that just ripped
> Colorado!!&n bsp; The weather forecast was way off (funny how
> people believe that we can predict what the weather will be like in
> 100 years i.e. "global warming" when we cant predict, with any
> accuracy, what the weather will be in a week, or even tomorrow!!
> amazing) anyway. All I could see in front of the airplane was water
> from the sky and lighting. I made a half hearted attempt to work my
> way through it, but quickly gave up. The storm scope in the airplane
> had so many lightning strikes it looked like it was in the test mode!!
> I called center and was told that the unexpected development was 180
> miles to my south and 100 miles north, moving north a 40kts. I
> turned north and enjoyed the first and only tailwinds of the trip,
> 235kts. I could see lots of lightning both on the storm scope and out
> the window but keep a distanced and finally was able to turn back
> east. The speed immediately went from 235kts to 119kts!! I had used
> up my fuel reserves and made a precautionary fuel stop in N.Platt NE
> just to be sure. Then on to KC without incident landing a little
> after midnight. There are few things more beautiful than flying over
> a big city, in a Commander, at night. Breathtaking!! John Towner
> runs a first class freight operation there and I spent a comfortable
> night in his "bunk house" to be awakened the next morning by the
> loudest clap of thunder I ever hear. The rain on the hangar roof was
> so loud I could not use my cell phone. The storm had made it to KC.
> man was I glad to be on the ground!! Just another day in the life of
> a "Delivery Dog"!! jb
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Stay informed, get connected and more with AOL on your phone
> <http://mobile.aol.com/productOverview.jsp?productOverview=aol-mobile-overview&?ncid=aolmbd00030000000139>.
>
> *
>
>
> *
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: THOSE WHO SERVED |
> I have seen no credible evidence Germany was an occupying threat to the
> United States, ... however, I stand to be corrected ....
In Mein Kampf, while the US is not (as far as I remember) not specifically
mentioned, it is clear that Hitler viewed the Aryan race was the superior
and, again, if I remember correctly, Hitler directly states in Mein Kampf
the Aryans had the right to subjugate the inferior and bend them according
to the Aryan will. Of course, I'm assuming that the US and the rest of the
world would have been within Hitler's sights had he succeeded in Europe.
A counterpoint argument to this is the 1942 agreement Hitler reached with
the Japanese to divide Asia amongst them: ergo, no world domination if they
were to share the world with the Japanese, so therefore the Americas might
have been left alone.
But, as a counter-counterpoint, one could argue that Hitler was pretty
ticked with the Japanese hosting several thousands of Jewish refugees,
courtesy of Sugihara Chiune, a Japanese diplomat, who gave them visas to
enable their escape. (As a result of his actions Sugihara Chiune was
stripped of his post and served out the majority of his post-war life as a
salesman in Russia. Sugihara Chiune is also the only Japanese to have been
awarded the "Khasidei Umot ha-Olam" by the government of Israel.)
Regards,
Andrew
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brock Lorber" <blorber@southwestcirrus.com>
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 12:58 AM
Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
Col Williams:
With respect, Sir, you misunderstand me. I, educated in the lower halls of
the building named for Fairchild, learned philosophical lessons that
invariably did not apply to the "real Air Force", but struck a chord in me
nonetheless that fueled my appreciation for me and my fellow man that I
carried into and applied with great success in the "real Air Force". Upon
graduation, I learned that the ubiquitous saw that "grads had no applicable
technical knowledge" was true, but found no more applicable knowledge in
technical training.
I found (as I am sure you did) that the "real Air Force" required experience
in the "real Air Force", commanding Airmen, writing reports, and advocating
the application of limited resources in the way I divined was the best way
to complete the mission as outlined by those above me in rank and position.
What never failed, however, was the philosophical premise upon which my
service was based.
It is rare, even among the officer corps, to find someone with an
appreciation for the words of Sun Tzu that you obviously command. My
knowledge of the General's words come from reading and re-reading his words,
and striving to apply them to every endeavor, even if I have to fashion
myself as the opposition - certainly anyone can imagine their worst enemy as
themselves. I did not quote the General lightly, nor, I believe, out of
context.
You did not presume that I am anti-war, or pacifist in common parlance, and
for that I thank you. However, you did suggest that I quoted the General in
an anti-war context. You also suggest that Sun Tzu's sayings, as written,
have no place in competitive endeavors other than war. I ask, Colonel, is
war such a unique animal to be treated as a separate class other than
competitive? Is not the competition between Company A and Company B subject
to the same strategy and tactics as war?
The answer is, in my opinion, no. Competition is competition, and the
General's words apply equally to any form of competition. I can find no
occasion where adversaries have taken the field that the General's
admonitions did not apply. Sun Tzu was a wise philosopher whose words, as
relayed, transcend time and place; they are as applicable now as ever.
You, rightly, note that mercantile trade is proportionate to naval might. I
ascertain that neither is precipitous; that is, naval might is worthless
without mercantile trade and mercantile trade shall not long survive without
a navy to keep her shipping lanes open. Although it may seem that we have
no quarrel, I posit that a naval force, fully funded by the mercantile trade
(and passed to customers through price), can accomplish the same ends.
What's more, that system passes the cost of keeping the shipping lanes open
to the end users in proportion to their consumption of the goods passed.
As you mentioned the army, it should be noted that, per the Constitution of
the United States, that a standing army (and, by extension, her child the
USAF) is authorized to the congress but, "no Appropriation of Money to that
Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years". Luckily, for your career
and my term, congress has seen fit to authorize that appropriation. It is
by no means a foregone conclusion, however, since the inception of our
constitution, that a standing army is either a fit or desired component of
the federal government.
Out of respect, Sir, I shall ask you to revise your farcical ascertation
that German would be the predominant language if the US had not entered the
European theater in WWII. I have seen no credible evidence Germany was an
occupying threat to the United States, nor that the Third Reich held any
disposition toward codifying the German language, however, I stand to be
corrected on both counts.
Defeating fascists is hard to define. Before, during, and after WWII,
fascists were the leading political influence in the United States. It was
presumed, in the US, that a council of knowledgeable businessmen in a given
field could determine both the product and price of all producers in that
field. It failed, of course, miserably, but for economic reasons totally
separate from any war, yet that is the enemy we still face each and every
day.
It is not, in my way of thinking, disingenuous to compare the current
ideological conflict to the conflict continuing since the 7th century, that
is, control of Jerusalem. I really, really understand why the vocal
minority has always felt that way. I just can not. I have my own parts of
the world I'm working to control.
General Sun Tzu is firmly in my camp, regardless of whom else chooses to
believe it.
Brock Lorber
(If I could use such a signature block it would be:
Capt, USAFR)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Bud Williams
Sent: Sun 5/25/2008 10:16 PM
Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO
Mr Lorber,
Ordinarily I do not respond to posts in any given list, except where someone
has asked for help or has made a comment that is so irritating that it begs
a response.
Your knowledge of Sun Tzu apparently comes from some misguided author's
attempt to rationalize The Art of War into every day life, such as "The Art
of War for Business," or worse, "Wikipedia."
The Art of War is a compilation of a Chinese General's thoughts and
teachings that were taught to emperors and military leaders. To attempt to
apply this work to everyday life is only valid when taken into the context
of the times in which it was "written."
Sun Tzu said: "The art of war is of vital importance to the State.
It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence
it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected."
War, not business/industry.
Your earlier quote of the Art of War was taken out of context in a feeble
attempt to justify your suggestion. Let us look at the context in which it
was written.
Sun Tzu said: "In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take
the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so
good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it,
to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy
them.
Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence;
supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without
fighting.
Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans; the next
best is to prevent the junction of the enemy's forces; the next in order
is to attack the enemy's army in the field; and the worst policy of all
is to besiege walled cities."
Your misuse of Sun Tzu's words taken out of the context in which it was
written implies that Sun Tzu says we should never go to war. In truth, if
you truly study and understand Sun Tzu, that is NOT the case. War is a
serious undertaking, not to be taken lightly. That is his main point. If
however, war is to be undertaken, then he outlines "rules" to govern
preparations for, and the conduct of, the war.
Sun Tzu said: "There are three ways in which a ruler can bring misfortune
upon his army:--
(1) By commanding the army to advance or to retreat, being ignorant of the
fact that it cannot obey. This is called hobbling the army.
(2) By attempting to govern an army in the same way as he administers a
kingdom, being ignorant of the conditions which obtain in an army. This
causes restlessness in the soldier's minds.
(3) By employing the officers of his army without discrimination, through
ignorance of the military principle of adaptation to circumstances. This
shakes the confidence of the soldiers.
But when the army is restless and distrustful, trouble is sure to come from
the other feudal princes. This is simply bringing anarchy into the army, and
flinging victory away.
Thus we may know that there are five essentials for victory:
(1) He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight.
(2) He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces.
(3) He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its
ranks.
(4) He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared.
(5) He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by the
sovereign.
Hence the saying: If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not
fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the
enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know
neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle."
I suggest to you sir, that if we go by your suggestion, then we will lose
every battle.
No great nation, and by this I will use your implied definition that a
nation is great because of the mercantile richness of the nation, ever rose
to that status without a strong military that was able to protect the rights
of those merchants and to open up and maintain the markets for those
merchants.
This country was born with a rich potential for greatness, but this was not
achieved until Mahan, a naval Captain, was able to articulate the historic
facts that no great nation (and at the time of his writing the sun never set
on the English Empire, the richest and most powerful nation on earth at that
time) was able to achieve greatness without first commanding the sea. He
wasn't talking about "owning" the ocean, but being able to protect the sea
lanes through which merchant ships traversed thereby providing the valuable
markets necessary to obtain new resources and to sell the nation's finished
products. Because of Captain Mahan's influence in Congress and with
Presidents, most notable Teddy Roosevelt, America started building what
would eventually become the world's most powerful navy.
The world has evolved since Mahan wrote his seminal work, but despite the
vast amount of cargo that is moved through the air, the fact still remains
that most of the world's (to include the US) goods are still moved by sea,
and it is STILL our navy that ensures that sea lines are open and "free" of
pirates (and piracy still exists in the straits off Indonesia and in other
parts of the world).
The Roman Empire existed and flourished only because of its military.
The great city-state of Athens was great not because of it wealth (economic
and intellectual), but because its navy enabled it to spread it wealth.
This country would not enjoy the world leadership position it is in if it
was not for its military that fought two world wars on foreign soil to
protect the rights we believe in. Yes, our military-industrial complex
helped us to defeat the Nazis and the Fascists, but again, that was the
harnessing of the potential that country possessed. We were utilizing that
potential in the Lend-Lease Program with England and the Soviet Union, but
those countries were unable to turn the tide of Nazi Germany until American
men and women in uniform entered the conflict. It is only by dumb luck (most
notably Hitler's decisions to not invade England and to instead invade the
Soviet Union) and the efforts of a few courageous men (and here I will honor
the British and American airmen in the Battle of Britain) that we are not
speaking fluent German.
Yes, this country was made great because of people such as JP Morgan,
Westinghouse, William Randolph Hearst and other bankers, industrialists, and
media moguls. But I repeat: you can build all the widgets in the world that
you want, but if you don't have a market for the widgets, then you are just
as poor as those who are unable to build the widgets, and you don't get
markets without a military to ensure that your interests are protected.
You want to honor business men and women? By all means do so...on Labor Day,
a day dedicated to the men and women who broke their backs to build the
world's leading economy.
Memorial Day is a day to honor those who have sacrificed their families,
their wealth, potential wealth, and for some, their very lives in order to
provide a safe and secure environment in which to work, sell, and prosper.
I realize you differ in your opinion as to the importance of this day. Fine.
Your military has protected your right to do so. I leave you with this one
last thought: we are currently in a war for our very existence, whether you
choose to believe so or not. You may go hide your head in the sand and say
it is not so just as Charles Lindbergh and others did prior to the attack on
Pearl Harbor and the subsequent declaration of war against the US by
Germany. But the reality is that we are fighting an enemy that despises the
very life you hold so dear. Honor the business men and women who "made this
country great?" We are hated and attacked BECAUSE we are so wealthy. Our
wealth is not "winning" this war; it is not destroying our enemy. It is your
military that is taking on this mantle of burden, and it is this military
that will ultimately win out, providing you allow the military to do what it
is trained to do.
To quote Sun Tzu one last time: "It is only one who is thoroughly acquainted
with the evils of war that can thoroughly understand the profitable way of
carrying it on."
It is fortunate that our forefathers had the insight to ensure this new
country they created was able to protect itself so that it might flourish,
and that our great grandfathers had the wisdom to recognize the distinctly
unique contributions our military has made to the greatness of this country.
Rae A. "Bud" Williams, Col, USAF (ret)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brock Lorber
Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2008 11:07 PM
Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
You're welcome. However, Tuesday, please thank your grocer, your
accountant, your lawyer, your mechanic, your barber, your pharmacist, the
owner of the corner gas station, butcher, cashier, etc. These are the true
heroes that prove, each and every day, that peaceful cooperation, EVEN IN
COMPETITION, yields the riches of the world. While soldiers, sailors,
airmen, and marines may, at least for the time being, be called to safeguard
human wealth, they do so at the cost of human wealth and life. As Sun Tzu
noted in The Art of War:
"Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence;
supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without
fighting."
By that definition, the soldier, sailor, airman, and marine fails where the
grocer and mechanic excel. Please, celebrate their supreme excellence even
as you thank the soldier that is required to answer his calling because of a
failure of governments to achieve excellence.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of
yourtcfg@aol.com
Sent: Sun 5/25/2008 6:10 PM
Subject: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
lets all take a moment and offer a prayer for all those? who have served and
are serving our great nation.? I? travel a lot on the airline delivering
airplanes and ALWAYS tell EVERY soldier I see "Thank you".? I challenge all
of you to do the same.? jb
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: THOSE WHO SERVED |
Andrew,
I had never heard of Sugihara Chiune. That's fascinating stuff. I'll have to
learn more. Not much I've ever read of the Japanese would make it seem they
were capable of much compassion during the war. At least not the military.
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: <andrew.bridget@telus.net>
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 2:02 PM
Subject: Re: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
>
>> I have seen no credible evidence Germany was an occupying threat to the
>> United States, ... however, I stand to be corrected ....
>
> In Mein Kampf, while the US is not (as far as I remember) not specifically
> mentioned, it is clear that Hitler viewed the Aryan race was the superior
> and, again, if I remember correctly, Hitler directly states in Mein Kampf
> the Aryans had the right to subjugate the inferior and bend them according
> to the Aryan will. Of course, I'm assuming that the US and the rest of the
> world would have been within Hitler's sights had he succeeded in Europe.
>
> A counterpoint argument to this is the 1942 agreement Hitler reached with
> the Japanese to divide Asia amongst them: ergo, no world domination if
> they were to share the world with the Japanese, so therefore the Americas
> might have been left alone.
>
> But, as a counter-counterpoint, one could argue that Hitler was pretty
> ticked with the Japanese hosting several thousands of Jewish refugees,
> courtesy of Sugihara Chiune, a Japanese diplomat, who gave them visas to
> enable their escape. (As a result of his actions Sugihara Chiune was
> stripped of his post and served out the majority of his post-war life as a
> salesman in Russia. Sugihara Chiune is also the only Japanese to have been
> awarded the "Khasidei Umot ha-Olam" by the government of Israel.)
>
> Regards,
> Andrew
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brock Lorber" <blorber@southwestcirrus.com>
> To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 12:58 AM
> Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
>
>
> Col Williams:
>
> With respect, Sir, you misunderstand me. I, educated in the lower halls
> of the building named for Fairchild, learned philosophical lessons that
> invariably did not apply to the "real Air Force", but struck a chord in me
> nonetheless that fueled my appreciation for me and my fellow man that I
> carried into and applied with great success in the "real Air Force". Upon
> graduation, I learned that the ubiquitous saw that "grads had no
> applicable technical knowledge" was true, but found no more applicable
> knowledge in technical training.
>
> I found (as I am sure you did) that the "real Air Force" required
> experience in the "real Air Force", commanding Airmen, writing reports,
> and advocating the application of limited resources in the way I divined
> was the best way to complete the mission as outlined by those above me in
> rank and position. What never failed, however, was the philosophical
> premise upon which my service was based.
>
> It is rare, even among the officer corps, to find someone with an
> appreciation for the words of Sun Tzu that you obviously command. My
> knowledge of the General's words come from reading and re-reading his
> words, and striving to apply them to every endeavor, even if I have to
> fashion myself as the opposition - certainly anyone can imagine their
> worst enemy as themselves. I did not quote the General lightly, nor, I
> believe, out of context.
>
> You did not presume that I am anti-war, or pacifist in common parlance,
> and for that I thank you. However, you did suggest that I quoted the
> General in an anti-war context. You also suggest that Sun Tzu's sayings,
> as written, have no place in competitive endeavors other than war. I ask,
> Colonel, is war such a unique animal to be treated as a separate class
> other than competitive? Is not the competition between Company A and
> Company B subject to the same strategy and tactics as war?
>
> The answer is, in my opinion, no. Competition is competition, and the
> General's words apply equally to any form of competition. I can find no
> occasion where adversaries have taken the field that the General's
> admonitions did not apply. Sun Tzu was a wise philosopher whose words, as
> relayed, transcend time and place; they are as applicable now as ever.
>
> You, rightly, note that mercantile trade is proportionate to naval might.
> I ascertain that neither is precipitous; that is, naval might is worthless
> without mercantile trade and mercantile trade shall not long survive
> without a navy to keep her shipping lanes open. Although it may seem that
> we have no quarrel, I posit that a naval force, fully funded by the
> mercantile trade (and passed to customers through price), can accomplish
> the same ends. What's more, that system passes the cost of keeping the
> shipping lanes open to the end users in proportion to their consumption of
> the goods passed.
>
> As you mentioned the army, it should be noted that, per the Constitution
> of the United States, that a standing army (and, by extension, her child
> the USAF) is authorized to the congress but, "no Appropriation of Money to
> that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years". Luckily, for your
> career and my term, congress has seen fit to authorize that appropriation.
> It is by no means a foregone conclusion, however, since the inception of
> our constitution, that a standing army is either a fit or desired
> component of the federal government.
>
> Out of respect, Sir, I shall ask you to revise your farcical ascertation
> that German would be the predominant language if the US had not entered
> the European theater in WWII. I have seen no credible evidence Germany
> was an occupying threat to the United States, nor that the Third Reich
> held any disposition toward codifying the German language, however, I
> stand to be corrected on both counts.
>
> Defeating fascists is hard to define. Before, during, and after WWII,
> fascists were the leading political influence in the United States. It
> was presumed, in the US, that a council of knowledgeable businessmen in a
> given field could determine both the product and price of all producers in
> that field. It failed, of course, miserably, but for economic reasons
> totally separate from any war, yet that is the enemy we still face each
> and every day.
>
> It is not, in my way of thinking, disingenuous to compare the current
> ideological conflict to the conflict continuing since the 7th century,
> that is, control of Jerusalem. I really, really understand why the vocal
> minority has always felt that way. I just can not. I have my own parts
> of the world I'm working to control.
>
> General Sun Tzu is firmly in my camp, regardless of whom else chooses to
> believe it.
>
> Brock Lorber
> (If I could use such a signature block it would be:
> Capt, USAFR)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Bud Williams
> Sent: Sun 5/25/2008 10:16 PM
> To: commander-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO
>
> <rambud@windstream.net>
>
> Mr Lorber,
>
> Ordinarily I do not respond to posts in any given list, except where
> someone
> has asked for help or has made a comment that is so irritating that it
> begs
> a response.
>
> Your knowledge of Sun Tzu apparently comes from some misguided author's
> attempt to rationalize The Art of War into every day life, such as "The
> Art
> of War for Business," or worse, "Wikipedia."
>
> The Art of War is a compilation of a Chinese General's thoughts and
> teachings that were taught to emperors and military leaders. To attempt to
> apply this work to everyday life is only valid when taken into the context
> of the times in which it was "written."
>
> Sun Tzu said: "The art of war is of vital importance to the State.
>
> It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin.
> Hence
> it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected."
>
> War, not business/industry.
>
> Your earlier quote of the Art of War was taken out of context in a feeble
> attempt to justify your suggestion. Let us look at the context in which it
> was written.
>
> Sun Tzu said: "In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to
> take
> the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so
> good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy
> it,
> to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy
> them.
>
> Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence;
> supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without
> fighting.
>
> Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans; the
> next
> best is to prevent the junction of the enemy's forces; the next in
> order
> is to attack the enemy's army in the field; and the worst policy of all
> is to besiege walled cities."
>
> Your misuse of Sun Tzu's words taken out of the context in which it was
> written implies that Sun Tzu says we should never go to war. In truth, if
> you truly study and understand Sun Tzu, that is NOT the case. War is a
> serious undertaking, not to be taken lightly. That is his main point. If
> however, war is to be undertaken, then he outlines "rules" to govern
> preparations for, and the conduct of, the war.
>
> Sun Tzu said: "There are three ways in which a ruler can bring misfortune
> upon his army:--
>
> (1) By commanding the army to advance or to retreat, being ignorant of the
> fact that it cannot obey. This is called hobbling the army.
>
> (2) By attempting to govern an army in the same way as he administers a
> kingdom, being ignorant of the conditions which obtain in an army. This
> causes restlessness in the soldier's minds.
>
> (3) By employing the officers of his army without discrimination, through
> ignorance of the military principle of adaptation to circumstances.
> This
> shakes the confidence of the soldiers.
>
> But when the army is restless and distrustful, trouble is sure to come
> from
> the other feudal princes. This is simply bringing anarchy into the army,
> and
> flinging victory away.
>
> Thus we may know that there are five essentials for victory:
>
> (1) He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight.
>
> (2) He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces.
>
> (3) He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all
> its
> ranks.
>
> (4) He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared.
>
> (5) He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by
> the
> sovereign.
>
> Hence the saying: If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not
> fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the
> enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know
> neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle."
>
> I suggest to you sir, that if we go by your suggestion, then we will lose
> every battle.
>
> No great nation, and by this I will use your implied definition that a
> nation is great because of the mercantile richness of the nation, ever
> rose
> to that status without a strong military that was able to protect the
> rights
> of those merchants and to open up and maintain the markets for those
> merchants.
>
> This country was born with a rich potential for greatness, but this was
> not
> achieved until Mahan, a naval Captain, was able to articulate the historic
> facts that no great nation (and at the time of his writing the sun never
> set
> on the English Empire, the richest and most powerful nation on earth at
> that
> time) was able to achieve greatness without first commanding the sea. He
> wasn't talking about "owning" the ocean, but being able to protect the sea
> lanes through which merchant ships traversed thereby providing the
> valuable
> markets necessary to obtain new resources and to sell the nation's
> finished
> products. Because of Captain Mahan's influence in Congress and with
> Presidents, most notable Teddy Roosevelt, America started building what
> would eventually become the world's most powerful navy.
>
> The world has evolved since Mahan wrote his seminal work, but despite the
> vast amount of cargo that is moved through the air, the fact still remains
> that most of the world's (to include the US) goods are still moved by sea,
> and it is STILL our navy that ensures that sea lines are open and "free"
> of
> pirates (and piracy still exists in the straits off Indonesia and in other
> parts of the world).
>
> The Roman Empire existed and flourished only because of its military.
>
> The great city-state of Athens was great not because of it wealth
> (economic
> and intellectual), but because its navy enabled it to spread it wealth.
>
> This country would not enjoy the world leadership position it is in if it
> was not for its military that fought two world wars on foreign soil to
> protect the rights we believe in. Yes, our military-industrial complex
> helped us to defeat the Nazis and the Fascists, but again, that was the
> harnessing of the potential that country possessed. We were utilizing that
> potential in the Lend-Lease Program with England and the Soviet Union, but
> those countries were unable to turn the tide of Nazi Germany until
> American
> men and women in uniform entered the conflict. It is only by dumb luck
> (most
> notably Hitler's decisions to not invade England and to instead invade the
> Soviet Union) and the efforts of a few courageous men (and here I will
> honor
> the British and American airmen in the Battle of Britain) that we are not
> speaking fluent German.
>
> Yes, this country was made great because of people such as JP Morgan,
> Westinghouse, William Randolph Hearst and other bankers, industrialists,
> and
> media moguls. But I repeat: you can build all the widgets in the world
> that
> you want, but if you don't have a market for the widgets, then you are
> just
> as poor as those who are unable to build the widgets, and you don't get
> markets without a military to ensure that your interests are protected.
>
> You want to honor business men and women? By all means do so...on Labor
> Day,
> a day dedicated to the men and women who broke their backs to build the
> world's leading economy.
>
> Memorial Day is a day to honor those who have sacrificed their families,
> their wealth, potential wealth, and for some, their very lives in order to
> provide a safe and secure environment in which to work, sell, and prosper.
>
> I realize you differ in your opinion as to the importance of this day.
> Fine.
> Your military has protected your right to do so. I leave you with this one
> last thought: we are currently in a war for our very existence, whether
> you
> choose to believe so or not. You may go hide your head in the sand and say
> it is not so just as Charles Lindbergh and others did prior to the attack
> on
> Pearl Harbor and the subsequent declaration of war against the US by
> Germany. But the reality is that we are fighting an enemy that despises
> the
> very life you hold so dear. Honor the business men and women who "made
> this
> country great?" We are hated and attacked BECAUSE we are so wealthy. Our
> wealth is not "winning" this war; it is not destroying our enemy. It is
> your
> military that is taking on this mantle of burden, and it is this military
> that will ultimately win out, providing you allow the military to do what
> it
> is trained to do.
>
> To quote Sun Tzu one last time: "It is only one who is thoroughly
> acquainted
> with the evils of war that can thoroughly understand the profitable way of
> carrying it on."
>
> It is fortunate that our forefathers had the insight to ensure this new
> country they created was able to protect itself so that it might flourish,
> and that our great grandfathers had the wisdom to recognize the distinctly
> unique contributions our military has made to the greatness of this
> country.
>
> Rae A. "Bud" Williams, Col, USAF (ret)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brock
> Lorber
> Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2008 11:07 PM
> To: commander-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
>
> You're welcome. However, Tuesday, please thank your grocer, your
> accountant, your lawyer, your mechanic, your barber, your pharmacist, the
> owner of the corner gas station, butcher, cashier, etc. These are the
> true
> heroes that prove, each and every day, that peaceful cooperation, EVEN IN
> COMPETITION, yields the riches of the world. While soldiers, sailors,
> airmen, and marines may, at least for the time being, be called to
> safeguard
> human wealth, they do so at the cost of human wealth and life. As Sun Tzu
> noted in The Art of War:
>
> "Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence;
> supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without
> fighting."
>
> By that definition, the soldier, sailor, airman, and marine fails where
> the
> grocer and mechanic excel. Please, celebrate their supreme excellence
> even
> as you thank the soldier that is required to answer his calling because of
> a
> failure of governments to achieve excellence.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of
> yourtcfg@aol.com
> Sent: Sun 5/25/2008 6:10 PM
> To: commander-list@matronics.com
> Subject: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
>
> lets all take a moment and offer a prayer for all those? who have served
> and
> are serving our great nation.? I? travel a lot on the airline delivering
> airplanes and ALWAYS tell EVERY soldier I see "Thank you".? I challenge
> all
> of you to do the same.? jb
>
>
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: INTERESTING DELIVERY |
Any pics? That trip would have been fun to follow along.....
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: yourtcfg@aol.com
To: commander-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 12:56 PM
Subject: Commander-List: INTERESTING DELIVERY
HI KIDS
As some of you know, I deliver all types of airplanes all over the
country, even around the world. I recently delivered a 500B from
Commander Services, Stockton CA to Central Air in Kansas city. The trip
started with he delivery of a new American Champion Scout, on 31" tundra
tires, from Caldwell ID to Moab UT. I checked the new owner out (great
fun flying in the spectacular canyons!), then flew the "crowd killer" to
CA. The 500B was just out of an extensive annual and had a new long
shrike nose as well as the Central Air boost pump mod. The boost pumps
are removed from the fuel sump and installed in the engine nacelle,
great improvement!!
John Vormbaum had already test flown it so when I got there it was
"squawk free". I blasted off and headed east, into a headwind, yep, a
headwind eastbound, lucky me!! Crossing the Sierra Nevada range was
spectacular. Still plenty of snow. The weather deteriorated as I
pushed east. Through Utah, I had to do a bit of unexpected scud
running. The clouds became broken again, but flying in the haze and
mist was putting some airframe ice on. it is pretty unusual to be VFR
and icing?? It has only happened a few times in all my flying.
Still into a headwind, I pressed on to Moab UT, where just the
previous day I had flown the Scout. I fueled ($7.50 per gallon, self
serve!! Yikes!!). I then crossed the Rockies. Crossing in a straight
line ment flying at 14K over 13,999' mountains for about an hour and a
half. Crossing high mountains in a normally aspirated twin, means
flying it like a single. If an engine fails, you will land the
airplane. Even the valley floors were well above the single engine
ceiling. I kept a close watch on roads, valley floors and even frozen
lakes as a possible landing spot. The airplane however worked perfectly
and I was soon looking at the great plains. It was then things began to
get very interesting. The forecast had been for only minor, widespread
T showers that day. The next day was to be (and was) much worse. I was
12 hours ahead of the storms that just ripped Colorado!!&n bsp; The
weather forecast was way off (funny how people believe that we can
predict what the weather will be like in 100 years i.e. "global warming"
when we cant predict, with any accuracy, what the weather will be in a
week, or even tomorrow!! amazing) anyway. All I could see in front of
the airplane was water from the sky and lighting. I made a half hearted
attempt to work my way through it, but quickly gave up. The storm scope
in the airplane had so many lightning strikes it looked like it was in
the test mode!!
I called center and was told that the unexpected development was 180
miles to my south and 100 miles north, moving north a 40kts. I turned
north and enjoyed the first and only tailwinds of the trip, 235kts. I
could see lots of lightning both on the storm scope and out the window
but keep a distanced and finally was able to turn back east. The speed
immediately went from 235kts to 119kts!! I had used up my fuel
reserves and made a precautionary fuel stop in N.Platt NE just to be
sure. Then on to KC without incident landing a little after midnight.
There are few things more beautiful than flying over a big city, in a
Commander, at night. Breathtaking!! John Towner runs a first class
freight operation there and I spent a comfortable night in his "bunk
house" to be awakened the next morning by the loudest clap of thunder I
ever hear. The rain on the hangar roof was so loud I could not use my
cell phone. The storm had made it to KC. man was I glad to be on the
ground!! Just another day in the life of a "Delivery Dog"!! jb
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
Stay informed, get connected and more with AOL on your phone.
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: THOSE WHO SERVED |
I always liked Lao Tzu, better than Sun Tzu.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brock Lorber" <blorber@southwestcirrus.com>
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 3:58 AM
Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
Col Williams:
With respect, Sir, you misunderstand me. I, educated in the lower halls of
the building named for Fairchild, learned philosophical lessons that
invariably did not apply to the "real Air Force", but struck a chord in me
nonetheless that fueled my appreciation for me and my fellow man that I
carried into and applied with great success in the "real Air Force". Upon
graduation, I learned that the ubiquitous saw that "grads had no applicable
technical knowledge" was true, but found no more applicable knowledge in
technical training.
I found (as I am sure you did) that the "real Air Force" required experience
in the "real Air Force", commanding Airmen, writing reports, and advocating
the application of limited resources in the way I divined was the best way
to complete the mission as outlined by those above me in rank and position.
What never failed, however, was the philosophical premise upon which my
service was based.
It is rare, even among the officer corps, to find someone with an
appreciation for the words of Sun Tzu that you obviously command. My
knowledge of the General's words come from reading and re-reading his words,
and striving to apply them to every endeavor, even if I have to fashion
myself as the opposition - certainly anyone can imagine their worst enemy as
themselves. I did not quote the General lightly, nor, I believe, out of
context.
You did not presume that I am anti-war, or pacifist in common parlance, and
for that I thank you. However, you did suggest that I quoted the General in
an anti-war context. You also suggest that Sun Tzu's sayings, as written,
have no place in competitive endeavors other than war. I ask, Colonel, is
war such a unique animal to be treated as a separate class other than
competitive? Is not the competition between Company A and Company B subject
to the same strategy and tactics as war?
The answer is, in my opinion, no. Competition is competition, and the
General's words apply equally to any form of competition. I can find no
occasion where adversaries have taken the field that the General's
admonitions did not apply. Sun Tzu was a wise philosopher whose words, as
relayed, transcend time and place; they are as applicable now as ever.
You, rightly, note that mercantile trade is proportionate to naval might. I
ascertain that neither is precipitous; that is, naval might is worthless
without mercantile trade and mercantile trade shall not long survive without
a navy to keep her shipping lanes open. Although it may seem that we have
no quarrel, I posit that a naval force, fully funded by the mercantile trade
(and passed to customers through price), can accomplish the same ends.
What's more, that system passes the cost of keeping the shipping lanes open
to the end users in proportion to their consumption of the goods passed.
As you mentioned the army, it should be noted that, per the Constitution of
the United States, that a standing army (and, by extension, her child the
USAF) is authorized to the congress but, "no Appropriation of Money to that
Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years". Luckily, for your career
and my term, congress has seen fit to authorize that appropriation. It is
by no means a foregone conclusion, however, since the inception of our
constitution, that a standing army is either a fit or desired component of
the federal government.
Out of respect, Sir, I shall ask you to revise your farcical ascertation
that German would be the predominant language if the US had not entered the
European theater in WWII. I have seen no credible evidence Germany was an
occupying threat to the United States, nor that the Third Reich held any
disposition toward codifying the German language, however, I stand to be
corrected on both counts.
Defeating fascists is hard to define. Before, during, and after WWII,
fascists were the leading political influence in the United States. It was
presumed, in the US, that a council of knowledgeable businessmen in a given
field could determine both the product and price of all producers in that
field. It failed, of course, miserably, but for economic reasons totally
separate from any war, yet that is the enemy we still face each and every
day.
It is not, in my way of thinking, disingenuous to compare the current
ideological conflict to the conflict continuing since the 7th century, that
is, control of Jerusalem. I really, really understand why the vocal
minority has always felt that way. I just can not. I have my own parts of
the world I'm working to control.
General Sun Tzu is firmly in my camp, regardless of whom else chooses to
believe it.
Brock Lorber
(If I could use such a signature block it would be:
Capt, USAFR)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Bud Williams
Sent: Sun 5/25/2008 10:16 PM
Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO
Mr Lorber,
Ordinarily I do not respond to posts in any given list, except where someone
has asked for help or has made a comment that is so irritating that it begs
a response.
Your knowledge of Sun Tzu apparently comes from some misguided author's
attempt to rationalize The Art of War into every day life, such as "The Art
of War for Business," or worse, "Wikipedia."
The Art of War is a compilation of a Chinese General's thoughts and
teachings that were taught to emperors and military leaders. To attempt to
apply this work to everyday life is only valid when taken into the context
of the times in which it was "written."
Sun Tzu said: "The art of war is of vital importance to the State.
It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence
it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected."
War, not business/industry.
Your earlier quote of the Art of War was taken out of context in a feeble
attempt to justify your suggestion. Let us look at the context in which it
was written.
Sun Tzu said: "In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take
the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so
good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it,
to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy
them.
Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence;
supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without
fighting.
Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans; the next
best is to prevent the junction of the enemy's forces; the next in order
is to attack the enemy's army in the field; and the worst policy of all
is to besiege walled cities."
Your misuse of Sun Tzu's words taken out of the context in which it was
written implies that Sun Tzu says we should never go to war. In truth, if
you truly study and understand Sun Tzu, that is NOT the case. War is a
serious undertaking, not to be taken lightly. That is his main point. If
however, war is to be undertaken, then he outlines "rules" to govern
preparations for, and the conduct of, the war.
Sun Tzu said: "There are three ways in which a ruler can bring misfortune
upon his army:--
(1) By commanding the army to advance or to retreat, being ignorant of the
fact that it cannot obey. This is called hobbling the army.
(2) By attempting to govern an army in the same way as he administers a
kingdom, being ignorant of the conditions which obtain in an army. This
causes restlessness in the soldier's minds.
(3) By employing the officers of his army without discrimination, through
ignorance of the military principle of adaptation to circumstances. This
shakes the confidence of the soldiers.
But when the army is restless and distrustful, trouble is sure to come from
the other feudal princes. This is simply bringing anarchy into the army, and
flinging victory away.
Thus we may know that there are five essentials for victory:
(1) He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight.
(2) He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces.
(3) He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its
ranks.
(4) He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared.
(5) He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by the
sovereign.
Hence the saying: If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not
fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the
enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know
neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle."
I suggest to you sir, that if we go by your suggestion, then we will lose
every battle.
No great nation, and by this I will use your implied definition that a
nation is great because of the mercantile richness of the nation, ever rose
to that status without a strong military that was able to protect the rights
of those merchants and to open up and maintain the markets for those
merchants.
This country was born with a rich potential for greatness, but this was not
achieved until Mahan, a naval Captain, was able to articulate the historic
facts that no great nation (and at the time of his writing the sun never set
on the English Empire, the richest and most powerful nation on earth at that
time) was able to achieve greatness without first commanding the sea. He
wasn't talking about "owning" the ocean, but being able to protect the sea
lanes through which merchant ships traversed thereby providing the valuable
markets necessary to obtain new resources and to sell the nation's finished
products. Because of Captain Mahan's influence in Congress and with
Presidents, most notable Teddy Roosevelt, America started building what
would eventually become the world's most powerful navy.
The world has evolved since Mahan wrote his seminal work, but despite the
vast amount of cargo that is moved through the air, the fact still remains
that most of the world's (to include the US) goods are still moved by sea,
and it is STILL our navy that ensures that sea lines are open and "free" of
pirates (and piracy still exists in the straits off Indonesia and in other
parts of the world).
The Roman Empire existed and flourished only because of its military.
The great city-state of Athens was great not because of it wealth (economic
and intellectual), but because its navy enabled it to spread it wealth.
This country would not enjoy the world leadership position it is in if it
was not for its military that fought two world wars on foreign soil to
protect the rights we believe in. Yes, our military-industrial complex
helped us to defeat the Nazis and the Fascists, but again, that was the
harnessing of the potential that country possessed. We were utilizing that
potential in the Lend-Lease Program with England and the Soviet Union, but
those countries were unable to turn the tide of Nazi Germany until American
men and women in uniform entered the conflict. It is only by dumb luck (most
notably Hitler's decisions to not invade England and to instead invade the
Soviet Union) and the efforts of a few courageous men (and here I will honor
the British and American airmen in the Battle of Britain) that we are not
speaking fluent German.
Yes, this country was made great because of people such as JP Morgan,
Westinghouse, William Randolph Hearst and other bankers, industrialists, and
media moguls. But I repeat: you can build all the widgets in the world that
you want, but if you don't have a market for the widgets, then you are just
as poor as those who are unable to build the widgets, and you don't get
markets without a military to ensure that your interests are protected.
You want to honor business men and women? By all means do so...on Labor Day,
a day dedicated to the men and women who broke their backs to build the
world's leading economy.
Memorial Day is a day to honor those who have sacrificed their families,
their wealth, potential wealth, and for some, their very lives in order to
provide a safe and secure environment in which to work, sell, and prosper.
I realize you differ in your opinion as to the importance of this day. Fine.
Your military has protected your right to do so. I leave you with this one
last thought: we are currently in a war for our very existence, whether you
choose to believe so or not. You may go hide your head in the sand and say
it is not so just as Charles Lindbergh and others did prior to the attack on
Pearl Harbor and the subsequent declaration of war against the US by
Germany. But the reality is that we are fighting an enemy that despises the
very life you hold so dear. Honor the business men and women who "made this
country great?" We are hated and attacked BECAUSE we are so wealthy. Our
wealth is not "winning" this war; it is not destroying our enemy. It is your
military that is taking on this mantle of burden, and it is this military
that will ultimately win out, providing you allow the military to do what it
is trained to do.
To quote Sun Tzu one last time: "It is only one who is thoroughly acquainted
with the evils of war that can thoroughly understand the profitable way of
carrying it on."
It is fortunate that our forefathers had the insight to ensure this new
country they created was able to protect itself so that it might flourish,
and that our great grandfathers had the wisdom to recognize the distinctly
unique contributions our military has made to the greatness of this country.
Rae A. "Bud" Williams, Col, USAF (ret)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brock Lorber
Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2008 11:07 PM
Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
You're welcome. However, Tuesday, please thank your grocer, your
accountant, your lawyer, your mechanic, your barber, your pharmacist, the
owner of the corner gas station, butcher, cashier, etc. These are the true
heroes that prove, each and every day, that peaceful cooperation, EVEN IN
COMPETITION, yields the riches of the world. While soldiers, sailors,
airmen, and marines may, at least for the time being, be called to safeguard
human wealth, they do so at the cost of human wealth and life. As Sun Tzu
noted in The Art of War:
"Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence;
supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without
fighting."
By that definition, the soldier, sailor, airman, and marine fails where the
grocer and mechanic excel. Please, celebrate their supreme excellence even
as you thank the soldier that is required to answer his calling because of a
failure of governments to achieve excellence.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of
yourtcfg@aol.com
Sent: Sun 5/25/2008 6:10 PM
Subject: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
lets all take a moment and offer a prayer for all those? who have served and
are serving our great nation.? I? travel a lot on the airline delivering
airplanes and ALWAYS tell EVERY soldier I see "Thank you".? I challenge all
of you to do the same.? jb
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | THOSE WHO SERVED |
The german missle program included an ICBM phase (the A9/A10) which was planned
before the first missile left the ground. Components of the first batch of A10s
were found at Nordhausen when it was liberated by the allies. Had Heisenburg
succeeded in the bomb effort (which probably only failed because of the allies
destroying the heavy water plant in Norway put the project back at a critical
time, when the early work on charaterising plutonium was happening), it would
have been a nuclear tipped ICBM in 1946.
The messerschmidt me264 bomber project first flew in 1943, but the project was
requested before American entry into the war, in the later 30's before even lend
lease. The Japanese (a german ally) had active plans until the battle of midway
to occupy Hawaii, then use it and the Aleutians (alaska, also occupied American
territory) to serve as the base for an invasion of the American west coast.
Hilter made it extremely plain that he felt that blacks were an even more "degenerate"
bloodline than us jewish folks, and a bigger threat to "Aryans". The
entire position of the Nazi ideology pointed to America as fundamentally an enemy
of his concept of blood purity by its very existence. And there was more
than a small group of Americans (including the likes of Charles Lindbergh and
Joseph Kennedy) who were for the united states either remaining aloof, or even
joining the war on the german side. Lindburgh's loyalties were so much and object
of concern that he was denied a security clearance and kept away from the
European theater during the war.
I suspect had Germany won, they would have settled with the Japanese as soon as
the birthrate and gas chambers could handle them. Remember, "Heute Deutchland,
Morgen die Welt!". Doesn't really sound subtle to me.
Bruce
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of andrew.bridget@telus.net
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 11:02 AM
Subject: Re: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
> I have seen no credible evidence Germany was an occupying threat to the
> United States, ... however, I stand to be corrected ....
In Mein Kampf, while the US is not (as far as I remember) not specifically
mentioned, it is clear that Hitler viewed the Aryan race was the superior
and, again, if I remember correctly, Hitler directly states in Mein Kampf
the Aryans had the right to subjugate the inferior and bend them according
to the Aryan will. Of course, I'm assuming that the US and the rest of the
world would have been within Hitler's sights had he succeeded in Europe.
A counterpoint argument to this is the 1942 agreement Hitler reached with
the Japanese to divide Asia amongst them: ergo, no world domination if they
were to share the world with the Japanese, so therefore the Americas might
have been left alone.
But, as a counter-counterpoint, one could argue that Hitler was pretty
ticked with the Japanese hosting several thousands of Jewish refugees,
courtesy of Sugihara Chiune, a Japanese diplomat, who gave them visas to
enable their escape. (As a result of his actions Sugihara Chiune was
stripped of his post and served out the majority of his post-war life as a
salesman in Russia. Sugihara Chiune is also the only Japanese to have been
awarded the "Khasidei Umot ha-Olam" by the government of Israel.)
Regards,
Andrew
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brock Lorber" <blorber@southwestcirrus.com>
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 12:58 AM
Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
Col Williams:
With respect, Sir, you misunderstand me. I, educated in the lower halls of
the building named for Fairchild, learned philosophical lessons that
invariably did not apply to the "real Air Force", but struck a chord in me
nonetheless that fueled my appreciation for me and my fellow man that I
carried into and applied with great success in the "real Air Force". Upon
graduation, I learned that the ubiquitous saw that "grads had no applicable
technical knowledge" was true, but found no more applicable knowledge in
technical training.
I found (as I am sure you did) that the "real Air Force" required experience
in the "real Air Force", commanding Airmen, writing reports, and advocating
the application of limited resources in the way I divined was the best way
to complete the mission as outlined by those above me in rank and position.
What never failed, however, was the philosophical premise upon which my
service was based.
It is rare, even among the officer corps, to find someone with an
appreciation for the words of Sun Tzu that you obviously command. My
knowledge of the General's words come from reading and re-reading his words,
and striving to apply them to every endeavor, even if I have to fashion
myself as the opposition - certainly anyone can imagine their worst enemy as
themselves. I did not quote the General lightly, nor, I believe, out of
context.
You did not presume that I am anti-war, or pacifist in common parlance, and
for that I thank you. However, you did suggest that I quoted the General in
an anti-war context. You also suggest that Sun Tzu's sayings, as written,
have no place in competitive endeavors other than war. I ask, Colonel, is
war such a unique animal to be treated as a separate class other than
competitive? Is not the competition between Company A and Company B subject
to the same strategy and tactics as war?
The answer is, in my opinion, no. Competition is competition, and the
General's words apply equally to any form of competition. I can find no
occasion where adversaries have taken the field that the General's
admonitions did not apply. Sun Tzu was a wise philosopher whose words, as
relayed, transcend time and place; they are as applicable now as ever.
You, rightly, note that mercantile trade is proportionate to naval might. I
ascertain that neither is precipitous; that is, naval might is worthless
without mercantile trade and mercantile trade shall not long survive without
a navy to keep her shipping lanes open. Although it may seem that we have
no quarrel, I posit that a naval force, fully funded by the mercantile trade
(and passed to customers through price), can accomplish the same ends.
What's more, that system passes the cost of keeping the shipping lanes open
to the end users in proportion to their consumption of the goods passed.
As you mentioned the army, it should be noted that, per the Constitution of
the United States, that a standing army (and, by extension, her child the
USAF) is authorized to the congress but, "no Appropriation of Money to that
Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years". Luckily, for your career
and my term, congress has seen fit to authorize that appropriation. It is
by no means a foregone conclusion, however, since the inception of our
constitution, that a standing army is either a fit or desired component of
the federal government.
Out of respect, Sir, I shall ask you to revise your farcical ascertation
that German would be the predominant language if the US had not entered the
European theater in WWII. I have seen no credible evidence Germany was an
occupying threat to the United States, nor that the Third Reich held any
disposition toward codifying the German language, however, I stand to be
corrected on both counts.
Defeating fascists is hard to define. Before, during, and after WWII,
fascists were the leading political influence in the United States. It was
presumed, in the US, that a council of knowledgeable businessmen in a given
field could determine both the product and price of all producers in that
field. It failed, of course, miserably, but for economic reasons totally
separate from any war, yet that is the enemy we still face each and every
day.
It is not, in my way of thinking, disingenuous to compare the current
ideological conflict to the conflict continuing since the 7th century, that
is, control of Jerusalem. I really, really understand why the vocal
minority has always felt that way. I just can not. I have my own parts of
the world I'm working to control.
General Sun Tzu is firmly in my camp, regardless of whom else chooses to
believe it.
Brock Lorber
(If I could use such a signature block it would be:
Capt, USAFR)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Bud Williams
Sent: Sun 5/25/2008 10:16 PM
Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO
Mr Lorber,
Ordinarily I do not respond to posts in any given list, except where someone
has asked for help or has made a comment that is so irritating that it begs
a response.
Your knowledge of Sun Tzu apparently comes from some misguided author's
attempt to rationalize The Art of War into every day life, such as "The Art
of War for Business," or worse, "Wikipedia."
The Art of War is a compilation of a Chinese General's thoughts and
teachings that were taught to emperors and military leaders. To attempt to
apply this work to everyday life is only valid when taken into the context
of the times in which it was "written."
Sun Tzu said: "The art of war is of vital importance to the State.
It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence
it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected."
War, not business/industry.
Your earlier quote of the Art of War was taken out of context in a feeble
attempt to justify your suggestion. Let us look at the context in which it
was written.
Sun Tzu said: "In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take
the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so
good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it,
to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy
them.
Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence;
supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without
fighting.
Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans; the next
best is to prevent the junction of the enemy's forces; the next in order
is to attack the enemy's army in the field; and the worst policy of all
is to besiege walled cities."
Your misuse of Sun Tzu's words taken out of the context in which it was
written implies that Sun Tzu says we should never go to war. In truth, if
you truly study and understand Sun Tzu, that is NOT the case. War is a
serious undertaking, not to be taken lightly. That is his main point. If
however, war is to be undertaken, then he outlines "rules" to govern
preparations for, and the conduct of, the war.
Sun Tzu said: "There are three ways in which a ruler can bring misfortune
upon his army:--
(1) By commanding the army to advance or to retreat, being ignorant of the
fact that it cannot obey. This is called hobbling the army.
(2) By attempting to govern an army in the same way as he administers a
kingdom, being ignorant of the conditions which obtain in an army. This
causes restlessness in the soldier's minds.
(3) By employing the officers of his army without discrimination, through
ignorance of the military principle of adaptation to circumstances. This
shakes the confidence of the soldiers.
But when the army is restless and distrustful, trouble is sure to come from
the other feudal princes. This is simply bringing anarchy into the army, and
flinging victory away.
Thus we may know that there are five essentials for victory:
(1) He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight.
(2) He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces.
(3) He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its
ranks.
(4) He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared.
(5) He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by the
sovereign.
Hence the saying: If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not
fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the
enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know
neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle."
I suggest to you sir, that if we go by your suggestion, then we will lose
every battle.
No great nation, and by this I will use your implied definition that a
nation is great because of the mercantile richness of the nation, ever rose
to that status without a strong military that was able to protect the rights
of those merchants and to open up and maintain the markets for those
merchants.
This country was born with a rich potential for greatness, but this was not
achieved until Mahan, a naval Captain, was able to articulate the historic
facts that no great nation (and at the time of his writing the sun never set
on the English Empire, the richest and most powerful nation on earth at that
time) was able to achieve greatness without first commanding the sea. He
wasn't talking about "owning" the ocean, but being able to protect the sea
lanes through which merchant ships traversed thereby providing the valuable
markets necessary to obtain new resources and to sell the nation's finished
products. Because of Captain Mahan's influence in Congress and with
Presidents, most notable Teddy Roosevelt, America started building what
would eventually become the world's most powerful navy.
The world has evolved since Mahan wrote his seminal work, but despite the
vast amount of cargo that is moved through the air, the fact still remains
that most of the world's (to include the US) goods are still moved by sea,
and it is STILL our navy that ensures that sea lines are open and "free" of
pirates (and piracy still exists in the straits off Indonesia and in other
parts of the world).
The Roman Empire existed and flourished only because of its military.
The great city-state of Athens was great not because of it wealth (economic
and intellectual), but because its navy enabled it to spread it wealth.
This country would not enjoy the world leadership position it is in if it
was not for its military that fought two world wars on foreign soil to
protect the rights we believe in. Yes, our military-industrial complex
helped us to defeat the Nazis and the Fascists, but again, that was the
harnessing of the potential that country possessed. We were utilizing that
potential in the Lend-Lease Program with England and the Soviet Union, but
those countries were unable to turn the tide of Nazi Germany until American
men and women in uniform entered the conflict. It is only by dumb luck (most
notably Hitler's decisions to not invade England and to instead invade the
Soviet Union) and the efforts of a few courageous men (and here I will honor
the British and American airmen in the Battle of Britain) that we are not
speaking fluent German.
Yes, this country was made great because of people such as JP Morgan,
Westinghouse, William Randolph Hearst and other bankers, industrialists, and
media moguls. But I repeat: you can build all the widgets in the world that
you want, but if you don't have a market for the widgets, then you are just
as poor as those who are unable to build the widgets, and you don't get
markets without a military to ensure that your interests are protected.
You want to honor business men and women? By all means do so...on Labor Day,
a day dedicated to the men and women who broke their backs to build the
world's leading economy.
Memorial Day is a day to honor those who have sacrificed their families,
their wealth, potential wealth, and for some, their very lives in order to
provide a safe and secure environment in which to work, sell, and prosper.
I realize you differ in your opinion as to the importance of this day. Fine.
Your military has protected your right to do so. I leave you with this one
last thought: we are currently in a war for our very existence, whether you
choose to believe so or not. You may go hide your head in the sand and say
it is not so just as Charles Lindbergh and others did prior to the attack on
Pearl Harbor and the subsequent declaration of war against the US by
Germany. But the reality is that we are fighting an enemy that despises the
very life you hold so dear. Honor the business men and women who "made this
country great?" We are hated and attacked BECAUSE we are so wealthy. Our
wealth is not "winning" this war; it is not destroying our enemy. It is your
military that is taking on this mantle of burden, and it is this military
that will ultimately win out, providing you allow the military to do what it
is trained to do.
To quote Sun Tzu one last time: "It is only one who is thoroughly acquainted
with the evils of war that can thoroughly understand the profitable way of
carrying it on."
It is fortunate that our forefathers had the insight to ensure this new
country they created was able to protect itself so that it might flourish,
and that our great grandfathers had the wisdom to recognize the distinctly
unique contributions our military has made to the greatness of this country.
Rae A. "Bud" Williams, Col, USAF (ret)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brock Lorber
Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2008 11:07 PM
Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
You're welcome. However, Tuesday, please thank your grocer, your
accountant, your lawyer, your mechanic, your barber, your pharmacist, the
owner of the corner gas station, butcher, cashier, etc. These are the true
heroes that prove, each and every day, that peaceful cooperation, EVEN IN
COMPETITION, yields the riches of the world. While soldiers, sailors,
airmen, and marines may, at least for the time being, be called to safeguard
human wealth, they do so at the cost of human wealth and life. As Sun Tzu
noted in The Art of War:
"Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence;
supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without
fighting."
By that definition, the soldier, sailor, airman, and marine fails where the
grocer and mechanic excel. Please, celebrate their supreme excellence even
as you thank the soldier that is required to answer his calling because of a
failure of governments to achieve excellence.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of
yourtcfg@aol.com
Sent: Sun 5/25/2008 6:10 PM
Subject: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
lets all take a moment and offer a prayer for all those? who have served and
are serving our great nation.? I? travel a lot on the airline delivering
airplanes and ALWAYS tell EVERY soldier I see "Thank you".? I challenge all
of you to do the same.? jb
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: THOSE WHO SERVED |
RIGHT ON BRUCE. WAR STORIES FROM A FORMER LUFTWAFFE PILOT I SERVED
WITH IN 1953 IN USARMY VOUCH FOR THEIR PLANS TO HIT THE USA.
On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 7:32 PM, Bruce Campbell
<brcamp@windows.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> The german missle program included an ICBM phase (the A9/A10) which was planned
before the first missile left the ground. Components of the first batch of
A10s were found at Nordhausen when it was liberated by the allies. Had Heisenburg
succeeded in the bomb effort (which probably only failed because of the
allies destroying the heavy water plant in Norway put the project back at a critical
time, when the early work on charaterising plutonium was happening), it
would have been a nuclear tipped ICBM in 1946.
>
> The messerschmidt me264 bomber project first flew in 1943, but the project was
requested before American entry into the war, in the later 30's before even
lend lease. The Japanese (a german ally) had active plans until the battle of
midway to occupy Hawaii, then use it and the Aleutians (alaska, also occupied
American territory) to serve as the base for an invasion of the American west
coast.
>
> Hilter made it extremely plain that he felt that blacks were an even more "degenerate"
bloodline than us jewish folks, and a bigger threat to "Aryans". The
entire position of the Nazi ideology pointed to America as fundamentally an
enemy of his concept of blood purity by its very existence. And there was more
than a small group of Americans (including the likes of Charles Lindbergh and
Joseph Kennedy) who were for the united states either remaining aloof, or even
joining the war on the german side. Lindburgh's loyalties were so much and
object of concern that he was denied a security clearance and kept away from
the European theater during the war.
>
> I suspect had Germany won, they would have settled with the Japanese as soon
as the birthrate and gas chambers could handle them. Remember, "Heute Deutchland,
Morgen die Welt!". Doesn't really sound subtle to me.
>
> Bruce
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of andrew.bridget@telus.net
> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 11:02 AM
> To: commander-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
>
>
>> I have seen no credible evidence Germany was an occupying threat to the
>> United States, ... however, I stand to be corrected ....
>
> In Mein Kampf, while the US is not (as far as I remember) not specifically
> mentioned, it is clear that Hitler viewed the Aryan race was the superior
> and, again, if I remember correctly, Hitler directly states in Mein Kampf
> the Aryans had the right to subjugate the inferior and bend them according
> to the Aryan will. Of course, I'm assuming that the US and the rest of the
> world would have been within Hitler's sights had he succeeded in Europe.
>
> A counterpoint argument to this is the 1942 agreement Hitler reached with
> the Japanese to divide Asia amongst them: ergo, no world domination if they
> were to share the world with the Japanese, so therefore the Americas might
> have been left alone.
>
> But, as a counter-counterpoint, one could argue that Hitler was pretty
> ticked with the Japanese hosting several thousands of Jewish refugees,
> courtesy of Sugihara Chiune, a Japanese diplomat, who gave them visas to
> enable their escape. (As a result of his actions Sugihara Chiune was
> stripped of his post and served out the majority of his post-war life as a
> salesman in Russia. Sugihara Chiune is also the only Japanese to have been
> awarded the "Khasidei Umot ha-Olam" by the government of Israel.)
>
> Regards,
> Andrew
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brock Lorber" <blorber@southwestcirrus.com>
> To: <commander-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 12:58 AM
> Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
>
>
> Col Williams:
>
> With respect, Sir, you misunderstand me. I, educated in the lower halls of
> the building named for Fairchild, learned philosophical lessons that
> invariably did not apply to the "real Air Force", but struck a chord in me
> nonetheless that fueled my appreciation for me and my fellow man that I
> carried into and applied with great success in the "real Air Force". Upon
> graduation, I learned that the ubiquitous saw that "grads had no applicable
> technical knowledge" was true, but found no more applicable knowledge in
> technical training.
>
> I found (as I am sure you did) that the "real Air Force" required experience
> in the "real Air Force", commanding Airmen, writing reports, and advocating
> the application of limited resources in the way I divined was the best way
> to complete the mission as outlined by those above me in rank and position.
> What never failed, however, was the philosophical premise upon which my
> service was based.
>
> It is rare, even among the officer corps, to find someone with an
> appreciation for the words of Sun Tzu that you obviously command. My
> knowledge of the General's words come from reading and re-reading his words,
> and striving to apply them to every endeavor, even if I have to fashion
> myself as the opposition - certainly anyone can imagine their worst enemy as
> themselves. I did not quote the General lightly, nor, I believe, out of
> context.
>
> You did not presume that I am anti-war, or pacifist in common parlance, and
> for that I thank you. However, you did suggest that I quoted the General in
> an anti-war context. You also suggest that Sun Tzu's sayings, as written,
> have no place in competitive endeavors other than war. I ask, Colonel, is
> war such a unique animal to be treated as a separate class other than
> competitive? Is not the competition between Company A and Company B subject
> to the same strategy and tactics as war?
>
> The answer is, in my opinion, no. Competition is competition, and the
> General's words apply equally to any form of competition. I can find no
> occasion where adversaries have taken the field that the General's
> admonitions did not apply. Sun Tzu was a wise philosopher whose words, as
> relayed, transcend time and place; they are as applicable now as ever.
>
> You, rightly, note that mercantile trade is proportionate to naval might. I
> ascertain that neither is precipitous; that is, naval might is worthless
> without mercantile trade and mercantile trade shall not long survive without
> a navy to keep her shipping lanes open. Although it may seem that we have
> no quarrel, I posit that a naval force, fully funded by the mercantile trade
> (and passed to customers through price), can accomplish the same ends.
> What's more, that system passes the cost of keeping the shipping lanes open
> to the end users in proportion to their consumption of the goods passed.
>
> As you mentioned the army, it should be noted that, per the Constitution of
> the United States, that a standing army (and, by extension, her child the
> USAF) is authorized to the congress but, "no Appropriation of Money to that
> Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years". Luckily, for your career
> and my term, congress has seen fit to authorize that appropriation. It is
> by no means a foregone conclusion, however, since the inception of our
> constitution, that a standing army is either a fit or desired component of
> the federal government.
>
> Out of respect, Sir, I shall ask you to revise your farcical ascertation
> that German would be the predominant language if the US had not entered the
> European theater in WWII. I have seen no credible evidence Germany was an
> occupying threat to the United States, nor that the Third Reich held any
> disposition toward codifying the German language, however, I stand to be
> corrected on both counts.
>
> Defeating fascists is hard to define. Before, during, and after WWII,
> fascists were the leading political influence in the United States. It was
> presumed, in the US, that a council of knowledgeable businessmen in a given
> field could determine both the product and price of all producers in that
> field. It failed, of course, miserably, but for economic reasons totally
> separate from any war, yet that is the enemy we still face each and every
> day.
>
> It is not, in my way of thinking, disingenuous to compare the current
> ideological conflict to the conflict continuing since the 7th century, that
> is, control of Jerusalem. I really, really understand why the vocal
> minority has always felt that way. I just can not. I have my own parts of
> the world I'm working to control.
>
> General Sun Tzu is firmly in my camp, regardless of whom else chooses to
> believe it.
>
> Brock Lorber
> (If I could use such a signature block it would be:
> Capt, USAFR)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of Bud Williams
> Sent: Sun 5/25/2008 10:16 PM
> To: commander-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO
>
>
> Mr Lorber,
>
> Ordinarily I do not respond to posts in any given list, except where someone
> has asked for help or has made a comment that is so irritating that it begs
> a response.
>
> Your knowledge of Sun Tzu apparently comes from some misguided author's
> attempt to rationalize The Art of War into every day life, such as "The Art
> of War for Business," or worse, "Wikipedia."
>
> The Art of War is a compilation of a Chinese General's thoughts and
> teachings that were taught to emperors and military leaders. To attempt to
> apply this work to everyday life is only valid when taken into the context
> of the times in which it was "written."
>
> Sun Tzu said: "The art of war is of vital importance to the State.
>
> It is a matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Hence
> it is a subject of inquiry which can on no account be neglected."
>
> War, not business/industry.
>
> Your earlier quote of the Art of War was taken out of context in a feeble
> attempt to justify your suggestion. Let us look at the context in which it
> was written.
>
> Sun Tzu said: "In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take
> the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so
> good. So, too, it is better to recapture an army entire than to destroy it,
> to capture a regiment, a detachment or a company entire than to destroy
> them.
>
> Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence;
> supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without
> fighting.
>
> Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans; the next
> best is to prevent the junction of the enemy's forces; the next in order
> is to attack the enemy's army in the field; and the worst policy of all
> is to besiege walled cities."
>
> Your misuse of Sun Tzu's words taken out of the context in which it was
> written implies that Sun Tzu says we should never go to war. In truth, if
> you truly study and understand Sun Tzu, that is NOT the case. War is a
> serious undertaking, not to be taken lightly. That is his main point. If
> however, war is to be undertaken, then he outlines "rules" to govern
> preparations for, and the conduct of, the war.
>
> Sun Tzu said: "There are three ways in which a ruler can bring misfortune
> upon his army:--
>
> (1) By commanding the army to advance or to retreat, being ignorant of the
> fact that it cannot obey. This is called hobbling the army.
>
> (2) By attempting to govern an army in the same way as he administers a
> kingdom, being ignorant of the conditions which obtain in an army. This
> causes restlessness in the soldier's minds.
>
> (3) By employing the officers of his army without discrimination, through
> ignorance of the military principle of adaptation to circumstances. This
> shakes the confidence of the soldiers.
>
> But when the army is restless and distrustful, trouble is sure to come from
> the other feudal princes. This is simply bringing anarchy into the army, and
> flinging victory away.
>
> Thus we may know that there are five essentials for victory:
>
> (1) He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight.
>
> (2) He will win who knows how to handle both superior and inferior forces.
>
> (3) He will win whose army is animated by the same spirit throughout all its
> ranks.
>
> (4) He will win who, prepared himself, waits to take the enemy unprepared.
>
> (5) He will win who has military capacity and is not interfered with by the
> sovereign.
>
> Hence the saying: If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not
> fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the
> enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know
> neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle."
>
> I suggest to you sir, that if we go by your suggestion, then we will lose
> every battle.
>
> No great nation, and by this I will use your implied definition that a
> nation is great because of the mercantile richness of the nation, ever rose
> to that status without a strong military that was able to protect the rights
> of those merchants and to open up and maintain the markets for those
> merchants.
>
> This country was born with a rich potential for greatness, but this was not
> achieved until Mahan, a naval Captain, was able to articulate the historic
> facts that no great nation (and at the time of his writing the sun never set
> on the English Empire, the richest and most powerful nation on earth at that
> time) was able to achieve greatness without first commanding the sea. He
> wasn't talking about "owning" the ocean, but being able to protect the sea
> lanes through which merchant ships traversed thereby providing the valuable
> markets necessary to obtain new resources and to sell the nation's finished
> products. Because of Captain Mahan's influence in Congress and with
> Presidents, most notable Teddy Roosevelt, America started building what
> would eventually become the world's most powerful navy.
>
> The world has evolved since Mahan wrote his seminal work, but despite the
> vast amount of cargo that is moved through the air, the fact still remains
> that most of the world's (to include the US) goods are still moved by sea,
> and it is STILL our navy that ensures that sea lines are open and "free" of
> pirates (and piracy still exists in the straits off Indonesia and in other
> parts of the world).
>
> The Roman Empire existed and flourished only because of its military.
>
> The great city-state of Athens was great not because of it wealth (economic
> and intellectual), but because its navy enabled it to spread it wealth.
>
> This country would not enjoy the world leadership position it is in if it
> was not for its military that fought two world wars on foreign soil to
> protect the rights we believe in. Yes, our military-industrial complex
> helped us to defeat the Nazis and the Fascists, but again, that was the
> harnessing of the potential that country possessed. We were utilizing that
> potential in the Lend-Lease Program with England and the Soviet Union, but
> those countries were unable to turn the tide of Nazi Germany until American
> men and women in uniform entered the conflict. It is only by dumb luck (most
> notably Hitler's decisions to not invade England and to instead invade the
> Soviet Union) and the efforts of a few courageous men (and here I will honor
> the British and American airmen in the Battle of Britain) that we are not
> speaking fluent German.
>
> Yes, this country was made great because of people such as JP Morgan,
> Westinghouse, William Randolph Hearst and other bankers, industrialists, and
> media moguls. But I repeat: you can build all the widgets in the world that
> you want, but if you don't have a market for the widgets, then you are just
> as poor as those who are unable to build the widgets, and you don't get
> markets without a military to ensure that your interests are protected.
>
> You want to honor business men and women? By all means do so...on Labor Day,
> a day dedicated to the men and women who broke their backs to build the
> world's leading economy.
>
> Memorial Day is a day to honor those who have sacrificed their families,
> their wealth, potential wealth, and for some, their very lives in order to
> provide a safe and secure environment in which to work, sell, and prosper.
>
> I realize you differ in your opinion as to the importance of this day. Fine.
> Your military has protected your right to do so. I leave you with this one
> last thought: we are currently in a war for our very existence, whether you
> choose to believe so or not. You may go hide your head in the sand and say
> it is not so just as Charles Lindbergh and others did prior to the attack on
> Pearl Harbor and the subsequent declaration of war against the US by
> Germany. But the reality is that we are fighting an enemy that despises the
> very life you hold so dear. Honor the business men and women who "made this
> country great?" We are hated and attacked BECAUSE we are so wealthy. Our
> wealth is not "winning" this war; it is not destroying our enemy. It is your
> military that is taking on this mantle of burden, and it is this military
> that will ultimately win out, providing you allow the military to do what it
> is trained to do.
>
> To quote Sun Tzu one last time: "It is only one who is thoroughly acquainted
> with the evils of war that can thoroughly understand the profitable way of
> carrying it on."
>
> It is fortunate that our forefathers had the insight to ensure this new
> country they created was able to protect itself so that it might flourish,
> and that our great grandfathers had the wisdom to recognize the distinctly
> unique contributions our military has made to the greatness of this country.
>
> Rae A. "Bud" Williams, Col, USAF (ret)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brock Lorber
> Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2008 11:07 PM
> To: commander-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
>
> You're welcome. However, Tuesday, please thank your grocer, your
> accountant, your lawyer, your mechanic, your barber, your pharmacist, the
> owner of the corner gas station, butcher, cashier, etc. These are the true
> heroes that prove, each and every day, that peaceful cooperation, EVEN IN
> COMPETITION, yields the riches of the world. While soldiers, sailors,
> airmen, and marines may, at least for the time being, be called to safeguard
> human wealth, they do so at the cost of human wealth and life. As Sun Tzu
> noted in The Art of War:
>
> "Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence;
> supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without
> fighting."
>
> By that definition, the soldier, sailor, airman, and marine fails where the
> grocer and mechanic excel. Please, celebrate their supreme excellence even
> as you thank the soldier that is required to answer his calling because of a
> failure of governments to achieve excellence.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com on behalf of
> yourtcfg@aol.com
> Sent: Sun 5/25/2008 6:10 PM
> To: commander-list@matronics.com
> Subject: [BULK] Commander-List: THOSE WHO SERVED
>
> lets all take a moment and offer a prayer for all those? who have served and
> are serving our great nation.? I? travel a lot on the airline delivering
> airplanes and ALWAYS tell EVERY soldier I see "Thank you".? I challenge all
> of you to do the same.? jb
>
>
--
LLOYD
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | INTERESTING DELIVERY |
I published it on the site: http://www.aerocommander.com/tales.asp?m=08
<http://www.aerocommander.com/tales.asp?m=08&lid=08&mtitle=Tales>
&lid=08&mtitle=Tales
_____
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
yourtcfg@aol.com
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 9:57 AM
Subject: Commander-List: INTERESTING DELIVERY
HI KIDS
As some of you know, I deliver all types of airplanes all over the country,
even around the world. I recently delivered a 500B from Commander Services,
Stockton CA to Central Air in Kansas city. The trip started with he
delivery of a new American Champion Scout, on 31" tundra tires, from
Caldwell ID to Moab UT. I checked the new owner out (great fun flying in
the spectacular canyons!), then flew the "crowd killer" to CA. The 500B was
just out of an extensive annual and had a new long shrike nose as well as
the Central Air boost pump mod. The boost pumps are removed from the fuel
sump and installed in the engine nacelle, great improvement!!
John Vormbaum had already test flown it so when I got there it was "squawk
free". I blasted off and headed east, into a headwind, yep, a headwind
eastbound, lucky me!! Crossing the Sierra Nevada range was spectacular.
Still plenty of snow. The weather deteriorated as I pushed east. Through
Utah, I had to do a bit of unexpected scud running. The clouds became
broken again, but flying in the haze and mist was putting some airframe ice
on. it is pretty unusual to be VFR and icing?? It has only happened a few
times in all my flying.
Still into a headwind, I pressed on to Moab UT, where just the previous day
I had flown the Scout. I fueled ($7.50 per gallon, self serve!! Yikes!!).
I then crossed the Rockies. Crossing in a straight line ment flying at 14K
over 13,999' mountains for about an hour and a half. Crossing high
mountains in a normally aspirated twin, means flying it like a single. If
an engine fails, you will land the airplane. Even the valley floors were
well above the single engine ceiling. I kept a close watch on roads, valley
floors and even frozen lakes as a possible landing spot. The airplane
however worked perfectly and I was soon looking at the great plains. It was
then things began to get very interesting. The forecast had been for only
minor, widespread T showers that day. The next day was to be (and was) much
worse. I was 12 hours ahead of the storms that just ripped Colorado!!&n
bsp; The weather forecast was way off (funny how people believe that we can
predict what the weather will be like in 100 years i.e. "global warming"
when we cant predict, with any accuracy, what the weather will be in a week,
or even tomorrow!! amazing) anyway. All I could see in front of the
airplane was water from the sky and lighting. I made a half hearted attempt
to work my way through it, but quickly gave up. The storm scope in the
airplane had so many lightning strikes it looked like it was in the test
mode!!
I called center and was told that the unexpected development was 180 miles
to my south and 100 miles north, moving north a 40kts. I turned north and
enjoyed the first and only tailwinds of the trip, 235kts. I could see lots
of lightning both on the storm scope and out the window but keep a distanced
and finally was able to turn back east. The speed immediately went from
235kts to 119kts!! I had used up my fuel reserves and made a precautionary
fuel stop in N.Platt NE just to be sure. Then on to KC without incident
landing a little after midnight. There are few things more beautiful than
flying over a big city, in a Commander, at night. Breathtaking!! John
Towner runs a first class freight operation there and I spent a comfortable
night in his "bunk house" to be awakened the next morning by the loudest
clap of thunder I ever hear. The rain on the hangar roof was so loud I
could not use my cell phone. The storm had made it to KC. man was I glad
to be on the ground!! Just another day in the life of a "Delivery Dog"!!
jb
_____
Stay informed, get connected and more with AOL on your phone
<http://mobile.aol.com/productOverview.jsp?productOverview=aol-mobile-overvi
ew&?ncid=aolmbd00030000000139> .
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: INTERESTING DELIVERY |
Sorry, nope.? jb
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve W <steve2@sover.net>
Sent: Mon, 26 May 2008 11:39 am
Subject: Re: Commander-List: INTERESTING DELIVERY
Any pics? That trip would have been fun to follow along.....
?
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: yourtcfg@aol.com
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 12:56 PM
Subject: Commander-List: INTERESTING DELIVERY
HI KIDS
As?some of you know, I deliver all types of airplanes all over the country, even
around the world.? I recently delivered a 500B from Commander Services, Stockton
CA to Central Air in Kansas city.? The trip started with he delivery of a
new American Champion Scout, on 31" tundra tires, from Caldwell ID to Moab UT.?
I checked the new owner out (great fun flying in the spectacular canyons!),
then flew the "crowd killer" to CA.? The 500B was just out of an extensive annual
and had a new long shrike nose as well as the Central Air boost pump mod.?
The boost pumps are removed from the fuel sump and installed in the engine nacelle,
great improvement!!
John Vormbaum had already test flown it so when I got there it was "squawk free".?
I blasted off and headed east, into a headwind, yep, a headwind eastbound,
lucky me!!? Crossing the Sierra Nevada range was spectacular.? Still plenty of
snow.? The weather deteriorated as?I pushed east.? Through Utah, I had to do
a bit of unexpected scud running.? The clouds became broken again, but flying
in the haze and mist was putting some airframe ice on.? it is pretty unusual
to be VFR and icing??? It has only happened a few times in all my flying.
Still into a headwind, I pressed on to Moab UT, where just the previous day I had
flown the Scout.? I fueled ($7.50 per gallon, self serve!!? Yikes!!).? I then
crossed the Rockies.? Crossing in a straight line ment flying at 14K?over?13,999'
mountains for about an hour and a half.? Crossing?high mountains in a normally
aspirated twin,?means flying it like a single.? If an engine fails, you
will land the airplane.? Even the valley floors were well above the single engine
ceiling.? I kept a close watch on roads, valley floors and even frozen lakes
as a possible landing spot.??The airplane however worked perfectly and I
was soon looking at the great?plains.? It was then things began to get very interesting.?
The forecast had been for only minor, widespread T showers that day.?
The next day was to be (and was) much worse.? I was 12 hours ahead of the
storms that just ripped Colorado!!&n bsp; The weather forecast was way off (funny
how people?believe that we can predict what the w
eather will be?like in 100 years i.e.?"global warming" when we cant predict, with
any accuracy, what the weather will be?in a week, or even tomorrow!!? amazing)?
anyway.? All I could see in front of the airplane was water from the sky
and lighting.? I made a half hearted attempt to work my way through it, but quickly
gave up.? The storm scope in the airplane had so many lightning strikes
it looked like it was in the test mode!!
I called center and was told that the unexpected development was 180 miles to my?south
and 100 miles north, moving north a 40kts.? I turned?north and enjoyed
the first?and only tailwinds of the trip, 235kts.? I could see lots of lightning
both on the storm scope and out the window but keep a distanced and finally
was able to turn back east.? The speed immediately went from 235kts to 119kts!!??
I had used up my fuel reserves and made a precautionary fuel stop in N.Platt
NE just to be sure.? Then on to KC without incident landing?a little after
midnight.? There are few things more beautiful than flying over a big city,
in a Commander, at night.? Breathtaking!!? John Towner runs a first class freight
operation there and I spent a comfortable night in his "bunk house" to?be
awakened the next morning?by the loudest clap of thunder I?ever hear.? The rain
on the hangar?roof was so loud I could not use my cell phone.? The storm had
made it to KC.? man was?I glad to be on the ground!!
??Just another day in the life of a "Delivery Dog"!!? jb?
Stay informed, get connected and more with AOL on your phone.
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Thank you Col. Williams |
Bud;
I do not know you but hope to meet you in the near
future. Thank you for your article setting the the
facts straight. Thank you for saying what I wish I
could.
dan farmer
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|