In the Golan Heights, on the border between Israel and Syria November 9, 2009
Posted by Jeff Block in Bible Stories, Military, News, Politics and Culture, Travel.Tags: Damascus, Golan Heights, Image of the US Overseas, Israel, Megiddo, Richard Nixon, Syria, The Bible, United Nations
add a comment
We took a short detour on our way back to the Sea of Galilee (where we’d spend the rest of the day) to get a better view of the Golan Heights and the Syrian border. We stopped at a produce stand, where I purchased some local Olive Oil (which I hope holds up to the pressures of the cargo hold of a 777 during a transatlantic flight). While there, our tour guide gave us all manner of details about the Six Days war in 1967 and the general conflict that Israel has experienced with it’s neighbors to the north and east (Lebanon and Syria) over the years.
We learned about the conflict that had occurred in 1973 between Israel and Syria. The United Nations, assisted by the Nixon white house (Henry Kissinger), brokered a cease fire agreement. The deal was that Israel and Syria would symmetrically deploy troops and tanks to either side of the border the same distance apart. The UN then placed listening stations along the border on each side and built an administrative facility in one of the small valleys near the border in the Golan Heights, a mile or so off the main road that connects the junction in the Europe-Africa Intercontinental Bridge (also called the Via Mares, or “the Way of the Sea”) at Tel Megiddo and Damascus, capital of Syria. It’s amazing to see how close all these places are to each other and how strategic the various land positions and resources are. When you add the religious tensions, no wonder there is so much conflict in this region!
In addition to the UN listening posts, we also saw several military bases and other installations both where we were on the Israeli side and as we looked out across the valley at the Syrian side. Our tour guide told a really interesting story about an Israeli spy who had infiltrated the ranks of the Syrians before the 1973 conflict. Evidently the Syrians tried to copy a lot of things the Israeli’s do, and this spy convinced their military leadership to plant beautiful eucalyptus trees (which the Syrians liked but which only grew in Israel) around their military bases to camouflage them. But of course, he was leaking information to the Israeli army, so they immediately knew that wherever they saw eucalyptus trees there was a military base. So, that was as good as painting targets for Israel’s bombers when the war started. Isn’t that the kind of thing you only read in cartoons?
Another interesting fact that served as a fairly stern reality check. Evidently, there are areas of the Golan Heights that still have mines in them. Uh … not cool … staying on the bus.
BTW, our tour guide obviously has no love at all for the UN, and neither do many of the other guides, as I understand it. However, he loved the United States, and claims that most Israelis do too. Makes sense, but it’s nice to hear. I think it’s also important to point out that the instruction / information we were receiving with regard to these conflicts and the motives behind them were distinctly Israeli. Nowhere in this picture is anyone expecting to get an unbiased view.
Caesarea Philippi November 9, 2009
Posted by Jeff Block in Bible Stories, Military, News, Politics and Culture, Philosophy and Religion, Travel.Tags: Caesarea Philippi, Capernaum, Herod the Great, Israel, James MacDonald, Jesus, Lindsay McCaul, paganism, Peter, The Bible
add a comment
From Tel Dan, we headed east just a few miles to Caesarea Philippi – founded by Philip, one of the three sons of Herod the Great during the time Jesus walked the earth. Since then, it has been renamed Banius (after the Greek god “Pan”, but there was no “P” in the (I think it was) Arabic language, so they changed it to “B”).
Just outside Caesarea Philippi is the site of the second fountainhead of the Jordan river. A large rock face exists halfway up Mount Hermon, in the northern region of the Golan Heights. There, out of a large cave/opening in the rock face, flows a fresh water stream which feeds the Jordan. Beneath this cave is the largest underground fresh water reservoir in all of Israel. Yet again a good reason to not want to surrender this strategic territory.
Philip, being a fan of multitheism and Pan in particular (can’t remember what he’s a god of), also wanted to create a multi-cultural temple of sorts with a place for all manner of foreign gods. So, even today, if you visit the base of the rock face near Caesarea Philippi, you can see indentations in the rock wall. In Jesus’ day, each would have been home to a bust or figurine or other statue representing a false god. At one point during his ministry, Jesus took his disciples on a 30+ mile trip from Capernaum (home base to him for much of his ministry life) to Caesarea Philippi to teach them at the base of this cliff.
You can read about it in Matthew 16. Jesus walked boldly into one of the very centers of paganism at the time, and boldly asked the disciples who they thought He was. Peter answered correctly that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God.
While we were there, James taught on this passage in a powerful way, calling us to make the decision who Jesus is in our lives and then live like it. It was his first time he was with us as a group, having arrived late the night before from speaking at a marriage conference in California. Lindsay McCaul was also there leading worship, which I greatly enjoyed. I felt like I was one of the few in the audience who was also a musical leader, so I was helping to guide the group from within the audience. Especially since Lindsay didn’t have a mic.
The experience at Caesarea Philippi really was a powerful and interesting one. In fact it was James’ description of this setting and the impact it had on him when he came to Israel the first time last year that first got me thinking about wanting to go to Israel myself. If only Faith were with me.
In Whom Should Americans Trust? December 2, 2006
Posted by Jeff Block in Business, Military, News, Politics and Culture, Philosophy and Religion.27 comments
I had an epiphany the other day… That liberals and conservatives differ sharply in terms of whom they fundamental trust to have their best interests in mind. My observation was that conservatives generally trust the business world more than they trust the government, and that for liberals it’s the opposite. Libs would rather put their faith in the government than in business. Conservatives tend to trust the military more than liberals do. Liberals have much greater faith in human nature than conservatives do. Trust in God is all over the map, as is trust in self – probably not breaking down along liberal-vs-conservative philosophical lines. It seems to me that these fundamental “trust vectors” play a critical role in understanding where liberals and conservatives are coming from on a number of issues, including some of the hot spots we’ve discussed recently: universal (socialized) health care, social security, the culture war, closing the wealth gap in America, etc.
My first question… Do you agree with the above statements? My second is “why are these statements true?”
For instance, why do conservatives seem to ignore the concern that if a company is focused “only on making a profit”, then they could very easily be willing to step on the little guy, the environment, the law, etc in the proces? We see this happen all the time, and it’s getting worse. CEO’s are taking salaries 10x what they used to be, in comparison to their workers, for example.
Why do liberals seem to ignore the historical reality that when you trust the government with too much (socialism / communism) and undermine capitalistic forces like the free market, competition, etc then you end up with totalitarianism that oppresses just about everyone? (Well, everyone except the guy at the top taking everything for himself – through the governmental structure we were supposed to be able to trust.) They say they don’t want that, but they openly admit that they trust the government with their money more than business, use the word “profit” like a swear word (and in order to do away with it, you have to do away with competition), etc.
Why do conservatives feel that human nature is fundamentally corrupt, and constantly want to compensate for that? Can’t they have a little faith in people!?
Why do liberals (far more than conservatives) mistrust the military? The Iraq conflict has been an extremely clear indicator of this – when liberals over and over again assumed the military was guilty 5 minutes after suspicion of guilt was raised. From Abu Grab Prison to Guantanamo Bay to a dozen times when our troops were assumed to have shot innocent people in cold blood before a second of investigation had occurred. Some have even called the terrorists “freedom fighters” while calling our troops “oppressors”. Why is that?
So, my question to you… Are these stereotypes real? And if so, why?
I submit that one reason is a left-brained / right-brained thing. Typically, right-brained people are more emotional and heart-based. They’re creative, artistic, etc. These people have a tendency to be more liberal, because the decide by feeling. Typically, left-brained people are more rational and brain-based. They’re analytical, math and engineering types, etc. These people have a tendency to be more conservative, because they decide by analysis. This isn’t to say that left-brain people are smarter or more sane (not that definition of “rational”) than right-brain people, it’s just different … and a difference that seems to be important. Also, keep in mind that stereotypes are about the majority – not every single person. There are always exceptions.
An example… the trusting business vs. trusting government thing. I think much of the reason liberals don’t trust business and conservatives do, is that most conservatives understand business better. The average liberal, not very familiar with business, fears it and makes their decisions based solely on the fact that they’re seeing the little guy get screwed by the big guy … and that’s just not fair. They’re right, that is happening, and it’s not fair, but macro economic questions such as universal health care are about way more than that reality. However, I don’t think many liberals see it that way. They are “choosing sides” over a knee-jerk emotional reaction, not over a thorough understanding of the economic implications of their choice. They choose government, because it’s the opposing force to choose. Their choice isn’t so much “pro-government”, it’s “anti-business”.
Distrust of the military is another example. Guns are bad; they hurt people. I’m a pacifist; I believe we should not hurt people. We have no right to run around on other nations’ soil and shoot people. Etc. These are all very legitimate ways to feel, but they don’t make good governmental policy. This kind of thinking gets people killed. So, the military is chalk-full of hard-core-rational-analysis people who know what needs to be done to secure the nation, win the war, defeat the enemy, etc. Those who have the same perspective on the outside are their supporters, and those who think some of the bad-guns, pacifism, stay-out-of-their-business thoughts I described above not only don’t join the all-volunteer military, but are its detractors from the outside.
Okay, enough of my bloviating. Other opinions? Analysis of my comments?
Technorati tags: liberal philosophy, conservative philosophy, government, business, human stereotypes
George Bush’s Fatal Flaw November 9, 2006
Posted by Jeff Block in Military, News, Politics and Culture.5 comments
Everybody has an opinion about President George Bush. Most liberals view him as rigid and intractable, incompetent, stupid, a poor communicator, dishonest, a cowboy, etc. I’ve also talked to many conservatives for whom he can do no wrong… a man of integrity, strength, confidence, unwilling to change course even in the face of public pressure, etc.
It’s all spin. Everybody sees and hears what they want to see and hear.
So, I’d like to voice my opinion on what’s really going on with President Bush, as I look back on the last 6 years … in light of the Democrats’ rise to power in the congress.
Is Bush incompetent or stupid?
No. Despite his poor speaking ability, which gives an impression of “simpleness” or “slowness”, George Bush is actually a fairly intelligent man. In a flat out race, I think Clinton’s IQ would top his. But if you listen to him when he’s no longer reading the teleprompter, it becomes obvious to me that he’s not the dunderhead some make him out to be. He’s also surrounded by very smart people … one of the most educated cabinets in a long time.
Is Bush dishonest?
No. Every intelligence agency in the world said there were WMD’s in Iraq. Clinton believed it too. Once and for all, he didn’t lie about that stuff. The wire taps, the secret prisons, the military tribunals, Guantanamo Bay … all legal, according to most legal experts. The Democrats love to say that Bush lied, deceived the nation, cheated, stole the election, broke the law six ways to Sunday, etc … and the media has latched onto these sensational notions. (I also believe they’re biased, but I’ll get to that at some point in the future.) But their accusations don’t necessarily make it true. I’m sure there’ll be hearings, and we can let the judges decide once-and-for-all whether or not wrongdoing was in play. In the meantime, I really don’t believe he broke the law. Certainly not intentionally. I think he was doing what he felt he needed to do to protect the nation.
Is Bush rigid and intractable?
No. It isn’t that Bush was unwilling to change the course in Iraq, it’s that he honestly doesn’t know what else to do. He’s got the “stay the course” face on, because he (and his advisers) believe that’s what’s best for the country, for our troops, for the Iraqi people, and for our enemies to hear. That doesn’t make him dumb or aloof or incompetent, it makes him lost in an excruciatingly difficult position. And you know what, it makes him like everyone else. VERY VERY VERY few people, almost NONE in the political arena, have voiced any kind of plan. I ask again, where is the genius democratic plan that gets us out of Iraq and fixes the woes of the Middle East? It’s not there – neither with them, nor with Bush.
And that brings us to what I believe his fatal flaw was…
Was he overconfident and naive?
Yes. Bush believed that if we coyboyed into Baghdad on a white horse (followed by tanks) that the Iraqi people would throw parades in our honor in the streets. They’d turn in their neighbors who had been working for Sadam. They’d erect statues in our honor. They’d gladly adopt our way of life. Uh … guess again. We should have known better. We should have realized that these peoples’ way of life is as deeply entrenched with them as ours is with us. Actually, probably deeper. A piece of paper (constitution) doesn’t make a people self-governing, moral, free, ruled by law, etc. It’s a foundational philosophy that makes that possible.
George Bush should have known that; shouldn’t have over-calculated, shouldn’t have reached beyond our ability to chew what we were biting off. That he didn’t know, that he did bite off more than he could chew (and took the rest of us with him), was his fatal flaw.
Lastly, a couple caveats…
He didn’t go it alone. Congress approved all kinds of things. Many conservatives and some liberals were with him. I too thought this would be a lot easier. I think almost everyone did. Why didn’t we listen to Colen Powell?
Secondly, now that we’re in this mess, almost nobody has been focused on fixing it. The democrats, the media, all kinds of people have hammered him for every little thinghe’s done. To watch CNN or MS NBC or read the NY Times, you’d think Bush was the devil – completely incapable of making the slightest correct decision. Democrats have apposed every single measure Bush has implemented to try to fight the war on terror. Name one they’ve supported! Basically, they haven’t helped much; just made sure to be there to call people names and remind us how screwed up the president is. The war in Iraq has sucked, no question. And there’s no question in my mind that Bush is responsible to a large degree. But we as a nation absolutely could have been more positive over the last few years along the way.
So I hope to God the Democrats, now that they’re in power, will stop blaming people and start having a plan. Let’s hope that doesn’t turn out to be their fatal flaw.
Technorati tags: bush
John Kerry’s Remarks November 6, 2006
Posted by Jeff Block in Military, News, Politics and Culture.10 comments
I know this has been all over the media, and I know it’s a bit aged now that Ted Haggard has taken center stage. But I wanted to weigh in with a few thoughts…
What happened? In a recent commencement speech before a graduating class, John Kerry made the following ridiculous comment, “you know education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.” Of course, many were outraged at the implication that our troops are all a bunch of dunderheads with no other (better) future, so they’re “stuck” in the military. Here’s my analysis of the situation.
First, remember when Mel Gibson made his asinine, drunken remarks about Jews being the cause of every war in history? Remember how people debated whether alcohol had caused him to say something stupid that he didn’t really mean or whether he was freed by the alcohol to say what he actually thought, with no inhibitions? Well, I view the John Kerry thing in the same light. I *do* believe that both Gibson and Kerry said what they were really thinking. Mel Gibson was freed up by the booze to spout off, and what came out was a glimpse of the dark anti-semitic thoughts in his heart. The Bible is clear, “out of the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks”. I think Kerry is in the same boat. No alcohol involved, but I think the principle was the same.
Kerry said this was a joke gone wrong, and he’s probably right. I’m also sure that he consciously intended the comment to be aimed more at Bush than at the troops (which is how many took it). I think if he had really thought through the impact that this would have, he wouldn’t have said it. But here’s the deal. I think John Kerry does have a pretty deeply ingrained belief that our military leaders are corrupt, and that we generally go to war for invalid reasons (not just to Iraq). I think he does believe that many of our troops are just that stupid. And I also think that he is so rich and so privileged and so superior (in his own mind) that he doesn’t really have much of a grasp on the reality of who most Americans are. Perhaps more inflammatory is this… I also believe that John Kerry is a man of very little integrity, as demonstrated by his recent run for the presidency. The whole “flip-flop” thing was very well-deserved. Never once did I hear him state a principle and then stand by it. I have very little respect for people, including politicians, who walk around with their finger in the air trying to determine which way the wind is blowing. This has defined Kerry … except in the case of this particular comment, one might argue. It’s also my experience that a man with little integrity will project that weakness onto others. He will assume that others have weak characters as well.
So, do I think John Kerry’s comments really matter that much? In most ways, no. In two senses, yes… First, they demean our military, which has for the most part fought with honor not only in this war but in many past wars. These brave men and women keep all of us safe and free, including John Kerry. That he would make such a dumb comment reflects badly on him and on his political advisers (who should never have let something like that make its way into a speech). Secondly, I think it has the potential to affect the outcome of this week’s elections. I think the average American is pretty fed up with this kind of talk. There’s just no reason for it. It betrays an underlying bitterness and hatred (of Bush, mostly) that’s so bad that it overrules way too many other things. Even people who are firmly against the war won’t want to hear Kerry demeaning the troops — even if that’s not really what he intended to do.
Technorati tags: john kerry, military
Step 7: Long-Term Economic Viability at Home October 26, 2006
Posted by Jeff Block in Economics, Military, News, Politics and Culture.3 comments
After a mere six weeks of hiatus from our far-from-legendary-but-still-interesting (at least to me) discussion about how to win the war on terror, I would like to return to the topic with step 7. It’s interesting to me (certainly not lost on me) that while we’ve been away from this topic, the US has actually implemented several of the suggestions I made. Obviously there’s no connection, probably not even worth mentioning, but I did so anyway. So there. Kinda makes me feel good. 
We started out long-term and strategic. So far, we’ve talked about ridding the nation of our dependence on oil as a dominant fuel source (step 1). Second, we talked about getting more human intelligence on the ground in the Middle East (step 2). Then we shifted to the more tactical… From fervent prayer (step 3), to making sure our leaders are casting a clear vision (step 4) for our involvement in the conflict (step 4), to cyber warfare (step 5), to getting much tougher in Iraq by declaring marshall law and cleaning up the insurgents (step 6). Maybe these aren’t so much “tactical” as they are “immediate”. Certainly, the next step is going to take awhile.
Without further adieu, it’s time to move on to step 7… Restoring America to a place of true economic strength. Why do I think we’re not already at that point? Well, several reasons. Here they are…
1) We are managing an insane level of debt
Both personally and nationally, America is way too far in debt. We use credit cards like they’re water, have a negative savings rate as a people, and can’t seem to get our government (either Republican or Democrat) to stop spending like there’s no tomorrow. I submit that the average household in the average suburb has a mortgage totalling > 80% of the value of their home, 2 car payments, a few thousand on a credit card, several department store cards, and 2-3 pieces of furniture on buy-now-pay-later plans. If we don’t bring down the national debt, tear up the credit cards, and start putting some cash in the bank, I fear for how it will eventually weaken our country.
2) We are absorbing Mexico’s poverty problem
Illegal immigration is totally out of control. This is, of course, a matter of some debate, and contains more than enough punch to stand as its own blog entry. And maybe someday I’ll address it directly. Until then, an abbrievated discussion will do…
As a nation, we need to gain control of (notice that I didn’t say “stop”) the flow of people across the border and return order to the chaotic immigration situation. There are too many drugs, too many diseases, too many criminals, and too many people who aren’t loyal to our country (who just want our money even without assimilating into our culture) pouring across the border at record levels. Of course, there are some great people making their way here as their always have been — hard working, honest folk. But there’s too much unwanted baggage coming with them. Plus, it’s both our government’s duty and right to secure its borders and control the flow of immigration across them.
The fact is that we’re absorbing Mexico’s poverty problem (because their “government” doesn’t want it). All you have to do is make it here, and social services galore are yours — to say nothing of the kids that immediately become citizens when born here. Not enough taxes are being paid, too many social services are being taken for granted, and the system is getting worked a bit too hard for my taste. Add to this that these hard working people are afraid all the time of getting caught and are being exploited by workers who have no reason to give them a fair shake, and I’m forced to conclude that we have to do something … immediately.
America simply cannot absorb endless streams of foreign-borne, mostly poor people. No economy can, no matter how strong it is.
3) We are too focused on entitlement
We’ve talked about this before, but America’s entitlement system is hugely broken. Way too much money gets spent (exacerbating #1 above) on way too many people who don’t need it or who don’t deserve it (in the case of illegal immigrants). Some do, of course (both need- and deserve it), and we have an obligation to care for them — since we are indeed a very wealthy society. But unfortunately, the effect of our entitlement mindset in America does far more harm than good. More than anything else, it saps the iniative of people who would otherwise have to work to survive. It drains them of their motivation to work hard, to innovate, to appreciate what they have, to be generous. And on and on. And what’s worst is that it does so generationally — creating entire classes of people who have only known living on the public till.
This fundamentally weakens the nation, and makes us vulnerable in the face of enemies like Al-Qaeda. While the terrorists will do absolutely anything to see America defeated, far too many of us would sacrifice NOTHING to defeat them. Many of us think that we deserve to have whatever we want, whether we work for it or not. Frankly, this is where the negative savings rate and the credit card problem (again back to #1) comes from too … “I deserve it! How dare anyone tell me that I have to wait to have it, or (God forbid) that I can’t have it!” It’s the same mindset that allows someone sit at home watching reality TV on the Social Security dime. (Obviously this isn’t everyone, but you can’t deny that too many of those folks are out there.)
If everyone in America thought like JFK (“Ask not what your country can do for you! Ask what you can do for your country!”), we’d have far fewer problems.
4) We have a failing education system
This is huge. We are spending record cash on education in this country, and it’s quite disheartening to realize that our school system is getting worse not better. The option to discipline kids has been taken away from teachers. Parents are too busy making money to even police their kids, let alone effectively raise them. The value system that made our country great is eroding (we want less and less to do with God; I guess we’re assuming kids will pick up civility and virtue from the TV, right?). The television and daycare raise kids more than parents do. And kids have absorbed the same message adults have — that the world owes them whatever they want. There are other factors, but I’m getting a headache. At the end of the day, one (in my mind) undeniable result of all this is that the education system is failing. Most teachers try hard, and certainly work a LOT, but too many kids make the classroom situation impossible — especially in the big cities. Got any friends that teach in the inner city? Ask them what they think about education.
Where this leads us…
There are many important results of these factors. But the one I’m focused on today is economic instability. Our nation’s great industrial, creative, entroprenurial engine is losing steam. In time, we will be more like Western Europe — with a stagnant economy, high unemployment, few values, and generally quite weak … and probably a socialistic perspective on how to fix things which will just make matters worse, if Europe is any model.
If this indeed becomes our fate, then we will be in no position to defeat the blood-thirsty terrorist killers we’re facing. Without strong moral fiber, deep integrity, an industrious work ethic, and a willingness to sacrifice, we simply can’t defeat an enemy like this one.
Technorati tags: war on terror, debt, welfare, entitlement, immigration, education
