A GORGEOUS GORGE

May 20th, 2013

Note (20MAY2012): The past few postings have addressed the context and consequences of events on the Korean Peninsula. Context and consequences form the basis of biobehavioral science and, ultimately, govern all our actions. This posting also addresses context and consequences but in a different venue and in a different format.

The trim redhead of a certain age with a sharp tongue and an empty stomach arrived three minutes prior to the opening. The several, silver-colored, metal tables on the sidewalk outside were filled with enthusiastic customers-in-waiting; all but one, that is. The woman took a seat, motioning her husband, a self-described “fatty-in-disguise”, to place his slightly overweight body on the remaining, empty chair.

The springtime-sun shone brightly. The sky was blue. The air was clear. The temperature was temperate. A perfect day to partake of ice-cream at Leopold’s even though the hour barely was eleven o’clock. After all, the woman had partaken of no breakfast, whatsoever.

She sat silently, considering her program for the day. It was Sunday.

Previously that morning, she had arrived fifteen minutes early for the first of the two services at the Episcopal church founded in 1733 and currently billing itself as “The Mother Church of Georgia”. She found all doors locked. Bewildered, she backtracked to a nearby hotel.

Approaching the desk-clerk, a large chocolate-colored woman with processed, curly hair, she inquired about services at the nearby church. Initially puzzled by the question, the clerk then rolled her big, brown eyes and gave her pale-faced, freckled questioner a huge grin.

“Honey, yo’ be from up Nort’, ain’t yo’?”

“Yes.”

“Well, yo’ in de South now. We here operate on Suhdern time. Dey be op’nin’ de doors ‘bout five minutes befo’ de service.”

The self-admitted Northerner smiled and thanked her colorful fountain of information. Departing the lobby, she returned to the church.

As predicted, five minutes before eight o’clock, the doors opened. The woman entered, and, at eight o’clock precisely, the service began with a total of six worshipers in attendance. Times had changed theologically since 1733 . . . even in Savannah . . . even for “The Mother Church of Georgia”. The later religious service likely would be attended better although not as well as the concurrent service of ice-cream at Leopold’s.

Yes, times had changed . . . souls might be starving, but bellies were bulging. Besides, for this particular woman, the past was the past, even if the past was only three hours before. At the moment, it was the present, and the present was the time for ice-cream. She may not have found a throng celebrating the old-time religion of its choice at the church of its choice, but she would find a throng consuming the ice-cream of its choice at the ice-cream shop of its choice.

“Well, I went to church. Now, chocolate, here I come!” she whispered to herself as she guided her reluctant, weight-obsessed husband into the building. It had been re-styled into an old-time, ice-cream shop by a set-designer from Hollywood.

As events transpired, ice-cream for her became only an appetizer. With its customer having consumed its former contents in a flash, the fluted glass, once filled with “chocolate chocolate-chip”, sat empty. Before her dispirited, self-deprived husband sat a half-cup of coffee with skimmed milk, not cream.

As her husband was about to lift the cup from the saucer, a young man wearing a white apron with the now-archaic, white cap of a “soda-jerk” from bygone years, pranced towards the table. In the affected voice of those who indulge in that which Oscar Wilde once called the love that dare not speak its name but now is screaming its presence ubiquitously, he asked, “Who has the pimento-cheese sandwich and chocolate milkshake?”

Made speechless by the sight of the sandwich and milkshake, the self-described fatty-in-disguise, usually a man of many words with a ready answer, pointed towards his wife, who returned his feeble gesture with a look of spirited triumph. “Are you planning to eat all this now?” her husband whined weakly in disbelief.

“What do you think?” his wife fired back, licking her lips. “You know, the sandwich is an old-fashioned, Southern delicacy . . . and the milkshake? You know, like the old-fashioned ones . . . not too thick . . . not too creamy . . . just right.”

“No, I don’t know,” he mumbled to himself.

Feeling contrite, not from his wife’s dismissive retort but from the envy elicited by his self-imposed reluctance to imitate her ordering such an inviting repast, he merely stared blankly at the line of other customers rapidly forming to partake of the various flavors of ice-cream that he himself had forsworn. Several minutes passed in silence. His wife ate. He sulked.

Finally, he opined, “What I do know is that this really is a great table . . . right next to the line of enthusiastic customers. If Mad Magazine ever makes another movie, the opening scene should be shot here. What a conglomeration of the fit and unfit! The producers could recruit the actors right here as though they were from Central Casting in a Fellini-movie.”

With that observation and without an invitation, he reached for his wife’s milkshake. She shot him a second look of triumph.

“As Mark Twain said, the only thing I can’t resist is temptation.”

“I believe that it was said by Oscar Wilde,” his wife replied.  “Look, Dimples, I want you to enjoy whatever you want . . . no matter how fattening, but, frankly, don’t you think you’ve been putting on a little weight lately?”

Literarily corrected, physically maligned, but gustatorily unchastened, he returned to staring at the other customers lined before him, now stretching out the door, down the block. Then, undaunted by his wife’s observation, he sputtered, “I’ve . . . I’ve an . . . uh, an idea.”

“Can’t you keep it to yourself, Pericles . . . I’m eating?”

Never one to keep his opinions and ideas to himself, he ignored her request. “You know how Mayor Bloomberg . . . the guy who made a billion, so he’s decided that he should dictate everyone else’s lifestyle . . . has been trying to pass laws about dietary behaviors?”

“You mean the rich hypocrite who promotes ‘gun-control’ in New York City while his bodyguards carry firearms in Bermuda, where doing so is illegal for everyone else and even forbidden to the police? What about him?”

“Yeah, that’s the guy. Well, the City of Savannah could take a page from his book.”

“How?”

“Here’s the idea. Look around you. What do you see? Some fit, thin people amidst a sea of unfit fat ones.”

“So?”

“So, let’s say Savannah imposes a new, Bloomberg-type law. Before every customer gets served, he . . . or she . . . gets measured for obesity. The greater the obesity, the higher the price of the ice-cream.”

His wife looked at him as a loving mother would look at her retarded child. “Ignoring the astronomical odds against such a law ever being passed,” she asked, “wouldn’t the consequence be Leopold’s prodding its customers to get fatter . . . not that most of them seem to need much prodding? The fatter the customer, the fatter Stratton Leopold’s wallet.”

“Not necessarily. Leopold’s . . . or other similar shops . . . could keep only the basic price for the product. The remainder would be taken by the City to fund programs in public health. That way, instead of the thin subsidizing the medical care of the fat as they do now, the fat would subsidize the medical care of the thin and even might overeat less. Context and consequences, you understand (www.inescapableconsequences.com).”

It was his wife’s turn to shake her head in disbelief. “Do me a favor, Mr. Willpower. Give me back my milkshake then quietly eat the rest of the sandwich you stole from my plate. By the way, after we leave, I’m stopping at the cupcake-shop around the corner. Think you might like one . . . or two?”

IF YOU WERE POTUS

May 13th, 2013

The most recent three postings have addressed the situation on the Korean Peninsula and the attendant potential for a nuclear conflict involving The USA. Question . . . as President of the United States, what would you do?

Before you answer, take a moment or more to relax. “Good luck!” you say? Actually, the basic procedure is easy to perform. Simply, take slow, deep, regular breaths. Let all the anxiety . . . all the tension in your body . . . leave your body with each breath out. It’s a good feeling to be able to relax.

Relaxed as best you can?

Okay, conceive of yourself as President of the United States of America. You’re sitting in the Oval Office of The White House.

Now, as POTUS, consider the situation in the western Pacific . . . the particular situation-in-question involves the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (aka/North Korea) and the People’s Republic of China. The question is, What would you do?

Before answering, how about adopting the biobehavioral orientation to structure your answer along lines based upon scientific methodology (www.inescapableconsequences.com)? Try formulating your answer according to the following format:

Context: Describe the context in which the Korean situation is occurring. (See Note 1 below.)

Antecedent: Describe a related event that occasions a behavior regarded by POTUS as provocative. (2)

Behavior: Describe the problematic behavior occasioned by the antecedent. (3)

Consequences: Describe the events following the problematic behavior. (4)

Now, as POTUS, how would you resolve the situation-in-question? Try formulating your answer according to the following format:

Problem: Define the problematic behavior as a behavioral deficit or excess then elaborate. (5)

Goals: Target specific and objective goals (states of being) to be fulfilled. (6)

Plan: Design a specific plan (action) to be put into play to fulfill the targeted goals. (7)

Measurement: Define an objective system, preferably quantitative, by which to determine your progress towards fulfilling your targeted goals. (8)

The point of this exercise is to demonstrate a framework based upon a foundation of scientific methodology that allows you to organize your thoughts into a reasoned, logical sequence.  Logical, well-reasoned thinking leads to effective, efficient behavior in resolving problems in living . . . be they societal or personal.

Notes

1. For example, Kim Jong-un . . . the new, young, inexperienced, Supreme Leader of North Korea . . . has a tenuous grip on power over a rump-state in desperate economic straits.

2. For example, a warship of the Republic of Korea (aka/South Korea) sinks a North Korean warship threatening it.

3. For example, in retaliation, North Korea launches a non-nuclear invasion of the South . . . you even might add China concomitantly launching a non-nuclear invasion of The Republic of China (aka/Taiwan).

4. For example, South Korea invokes the new military pact with The USA, requesting full-scale U.S. military involvement.

5. For example, a deficit of effective military behavior by South Korea in response to an excess of military behavior by the North. The same definition might be applied to the Chinese situation-in-question.

6. For example, to have unified the Korean Peninsula under South Korean control or, conversely, to have contained the Korean conflict to a regional, non-nuclear one with re-unification determined by the two opposing sides themselves, the RoK-USA military pact notwithstanding.

7. For example, . . . well, let’s leave it entirely to you with no prompts.

8. For example, area of territorial conquest by one side or the other.

ALL QUIET?

May 6th, 2013

Note (06MAY2013): Prior to perusing this posting, you may wish to peruse the previous two postings about Korea.

Of late, news about the Syrian civil war has been occupying the media. Meanwhile, all has been relatively quiet on the Korean front. Could that quiet represent the calm before the storm?

One piece of news about The Republic of Korea (South Korea) briefly did make a headline. Reuters (02MAY2013), for example, reported the following: “South Korean spies target Australian farm trade.” Some allies . . . those South Koreans for whom The USA is willing to risk nuclear war.

Oh yes, Financial Times (06MAY2013) reported the following: “Goldman exit exposes South Korea woes.” Apparently, foreign financial firms, with one or two exceptions, cannot compete in South Korea against entrenched, giant, domestic firms. As for exports of American-made automobiles to South Korea? Don’t bother asking. Some allies . . . those South Koreans for whom The USA is willing to risk nuclear war.

In Chapter 12 of the semi-fictional novel, Inescapable Consequences, full-scale war again ignites between North and South Korea. Thus far since 1953, in actuality, such a war has not re-ignited; however, during the interval, the roguish, rump-nation of the egregiously-named Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) has acquired nuclear weapons, developed long-range missiles, and rebuilt its military. The latest missile in the arsenal is the KN-08, which, if operational, might reach the western coast of North America.

In response, dithering as usual, The USA seems to have no coherent foreign policy with regard to the Korean Peninsula. In fact, Mr. Obama seems more concerned with the Syrian civil war than threats of potential nuclear annihilation by Pyongyang.

“Nothing we do seems to work,” says Richard Weitz of the Hudson Institute about Korea. Nicholas Eberstadt of the American Enterprise Institute agrees. For that matter, the same likely will be said of pending American military involvement in Syria, should agitators such as Senator McCain have their way.

Returning, however, to the Korean situation, given the context, one might consider the following, three scenarios:

1) A North Korean KN-80 strikes Andersen Air Force Base on the island of Guam, a U.S. territory. The non-nuclear explosion inflicts considerable damage as well as a number of killed and wounded. Immediately thereafter, the government in Pyongyang issues a statement claiming that the strike merely was the consequence of a test gone wrong, weakly apologizes, but defends its position that such tests are necessary in the context of an alleged, continuing threat of American aggression against it.

2) A torpedo from an unknown source sinks a warship of the South Korean Navy. The government in Pyongyang denies any involvement. A few days later, analysis of fragments of the non-nuclear weapon indicates that its manufacturer was located in Russia. The North is known to possess such torpedoes.

3) A well-dressed woman attending a news-conference detonates a suicide-bomb, killing, among others, the South Korean President. Subsequent investigation reveals that the assassin was a Mohammedan from western China, suspected of being in the employ of Pyongyang via Iran. In the meantime, Pyongyang has denied any involvement and sent weak, official condolences to the government in Seoul.

In each of these three scenarios, how should The USA respond? If the South advocates an all-out, non-nuclear attack against the North, how should The USA respond?

Consider the following alternative, more provocative scenario: Without warning and while talking peace, having returned to the so-called six-party-talks, North Korea launches an all-out, non-nuclear invasion of the South but does not attack U.S. military installations there nor American military personnel. Concurrently, China launches an all-out, non-nuclear invasion of Taiwan while Hezbollah, denying involvement, detonates a powerful, non-nuclear device in The Loop in Chicago, inadvertently killing the mayor, Rahm “Never Let A Crisis Go To Waste” Emmanuel.

Militarily, with newly-deployed, more deadly, Chinese DF-21D missiles covering the Strait of Taiwan, American aircraft-carriers dare not enter as they did during a preceding Chinese provocation, rendering American air-cover logistically less effective. Although Chinese anti-submarine capabilities remain weak, in the shallow Yellow Sea between China and Korea, U.S. boats would be vulnerable. In other waters offshore China, the boats would be less vulnerable but still open to attack.

As described in Inescapable Consequences, economically, Beijing covertly warns Washington that, should The USA involve itself militarily, China will dump all its U.S. Treasuries onto the open-market, forcing them to be bought by the U.S. Treasury and no longer would accept payment in U.S. currency. The consequential flood of hastily printed U.S. dollars likely would destroy the dollar as the reserve-currency, a process already in progress.

The preceding scenario would be the direct consequence of what passes for American foreign policy and of the military adventurism that has rendered the country increasingly impoverished with a central government increasingly tyrannical against its own citizenry. In this context, what would an acknowledged military genius such as the Swiss Baron Jomini (1779-1869) recommend? What would his German counterpart, Carl von Clausewitz (1780-1831), recommend?

For more contemporary points of view, ones that the American electorate actually has chosen, what would Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel recommend? What would Secretary of State John Kerry recommend? In the final analysis, what would Mr. Obama II, as Commander-in-Chief, order, if anything? Were you he, what would you order?

WHAT, ME WORRY?

April 15th, 2013

“I am all peace; But when I speak, they are for war.” -Psalms 120:7

A spark lights a match. The match lights a fuse. The fuse detonates a bomb. The bomb kills.

1914: A city largely unrecognized except on maps. An archduke largely unfamiliar except within royalty. An assassin previously unknown except to his mother. Brought together in what should have been an unfortunate but relatively trivial act, the consequence was millions of men dying, and Western civilization beginning its continuing decay.

2013: Despite the bellicose rhetoric, despite the nuclear weapons, the South Koreans and the international community seem to be regarding North Korean threats as mere bluster intended to extract increased “humanitarian aid” and international respect while firming the political position of its new leader . . . witness the lackadaisical response of financial markets, including in South Korea. In the famous words of Alfred E. Newman featured in Mad Magazine, “What, me worry?”

Indeed, why should the South Koreans worry? Don’t they have American military might protecting them, to some large degree, at American financial expense? Even better, few of us Americans seem to be questioning whether we should be placing our own country at nuclear risk to protect a commercially predatory, South Korean “ally” that, even after the so-called free-trade agreement known as KORUS, feasts on us as its prey.

Depend upon American intelligence-services to evaluate North Korea militarily and politically as a basis upon which to make our decision? Did they accurately predict the Indian bomb? No. The Pakistani bomb? No. Iranian nuclear development? No.

At the moment, the North Koreans are engaging in a war of only words. Yet, words are a form of behavior, including Kim Jong-un’s, and behavior has its consequences. Would that you could ask the millions who died in the trenches following that day in Sarajevo in 1914 in the midst of a war of words.

Invasion?

Given the context of dithering by Mr. Obama’s administration, if you were Kim Jong-un, what might you do? Launch a non-nuclear invasion of The South?

How formidable a military foe does Mr. Obama . . .  a man of uncertain origin who never was in the military, who never owned a business, and who never held a job in the private sector . . . appear to the tyrannical Supreme Leader? How formidable a military foe does Mr. Obama’s Secretary of Defense, Chuck Hagel, appear? How formidable a diplomatic foe does Mr. Obama’s Secretary of State, John Kerry, appear?

Would The USA commit ground-troops as it did in 1950, the consequence of which was the first war The USA failed to win since 1812? Now, after a pyrrhic victory in Iraq benefitting mainly Iran politically and Turkey economically as well as a pending defeat in Afghanistan with the religiously fanatical and anti-American Taliban regaining control, to what extent would the American public support sending hundreds of thousands of troops back to the Korean Peninsula, certain to suffer tens of thousands killed in action and many times that number wounded?

Without ground-troops, could the military of The South win with only air-support by The USAF and USN? The air-superiority of The USAF and USN failed against the North Vietnamese even with American ground-troops defending the South Vietnamese.

Would The USA be the first to use tactical nuclear weapons? A school of military analysts believes that the inescapable consequence of any tactical nuclear war is strategic nuclear war. Would the nuclear response from The North be only tactical? A worldwide strategic nuclear war will be catastrophic for most living creatures on this extraordinary planet, not only from radiation but from depletion of oxygen by firestorms raging worldwide . . . think Dresden in 1945 with non-nuclear bombs.

In the event of American military intervention, what might be the response from China? Even if it remained outside the fray, might it dump its U.S. Treasuries onto the open market as an economic weapon against us? If so, what would be the consequence on an already fragile American economy engaged in, yet, another massive military adventure?

A Further Consideration

Even today, South Korea remains a commercial predator with us Americans as its prey. How would it be in the national interests of The USA to defend South Korea? To what extent would a Korean Peninsula unified under Pyongyang represent a threat to The USA? Is the threat sufficient for us to launch an attack by air against North Korean military installations? After the momentary flag-waving of the Stars-and-Stripes, what would be the consequence?

Clearly, the North Korean military long has prepared for just such an attack. Would they, nevertheless, merely apologize, admit defeat, and promise to be good boys . . . or would they launch a strategic nuclear attack against The South and, to the extent practicable, against American military installations in the Pacific including Japan?

Ours To Make

At the moment, the decision is ours to make. Trying more talk leading to a militarily stronger North Korea while hoping against an invasion of The South by The North? Attacking the nuclear installations of The North? Continuing to obligate ourselves to defending The South then doing so should The North invade?

Given the context and contingent consequences, which option would you choose?  Before answering, consider less the provocative antecedents of Kim Jong-un but more the political context of Mr. Obama and his cohorts directing a war, potentially nuclear, and the horrific consequences of their making a miscalculation.

Is there better alternative to any of the above? Perhaps (www.inescapableconsequences.com).