A month ago in a review of Militant Tricks I dropped a reference to something that deserves more attention:
The 36 Stratagems stands out among the military classics of ancient China for its emphasis on deception as a military art; most other military classics are about battlefield tactics. Unlike many books of its genre, The 36 Stratagems focuses on the use of deception, subterfuge or hidden tactics to achieve military objectives. Hence its title, Secret Art of War: The 36 Stratagems.
The 36 stratagems are grouped into six sets; the first three are designed for use when one holds the advantage, and the second three when one is at a disadvantage. The categorisation, however, was never meant to be rigid. On the contrary, several millennia of practising and refining battle tactics have taught the Chinese strategists that the highest principle of all was flexibility.
Nevertheless, it may be argued that many of the stratagems are no longer applicable in today’s hi-tech world where technological superiority and sheer firepower would outweigh other factors.
That is not true. There are still many military operations today that uses variations of the 36 Stratagems. There has also been cases of the stratagems being used in the business world. As said above, the highest principle of all is flexibility.
Lesser known but more to the point than its sister work Sun Tzu’s Art of War both Chinese texts are a distillation of lessons learned during a millenium of warfare. Required reading for any modern student of strategy and tactics.
One of several traits the Chicom, Nork, Islamo, and Caribbean tinpots share is a talent for unscrupulous deeds. Deception and subterfuge. They lie, they cheat. Some wage proxy wars, fund terrorist attacks, toy with missles and nukes to blackmail neighbors. They sign treaties they have no intention of abiding. They mouth words of peace and democracy to disguise their polar opposite aims.
Here is some of what Hugo Chavez had to say to the UN today (via Drudge):
“Representatives of the governments of the world, good morning to all of you. First of all, I would like to invite you, very respectfully, to those who have not read this book, to read it. Noam Chomsky, one of the most prestigious American and world intellectuals, Noam Chomsky, and this is one of his most recent books, ‘Hegemony or Survival: The Imperialist Strategy of the United States.'” [Holds up book, waves it in front of General Assembly.]
“It’s an excellent book to help us understand what has been happening in the world throughout the 20th century, and what’s happening now, and the greatest threat looming over our planet. The hegemonic pretensions of the American empire are placing at risk the very survival of the human species. We continue to warn you about this danger and we appeal to the people of the United States and the world to halt this threat, which is like a sword hanging over our heads. I had considered reading from this book, but, for the sake of time,” [flips through the pages, which are numerous] “I will just leave it as a recommendation.
Well done Noam. You and Cindy Sheehan and Danny Glover and Harry Belfonte have befriended a real live dictator.
It reads easily, it is a very good book, I’m sure Madame [President] you are familiar with it. It appears in English, in Russian, in Arabic, in German. I think that the first people who should read this book are our brothers and sisters in the United States, because their threat is right in their own house. The devil is right at home. The devil, the devil himself, is right in the house.
“And the devil came here yesterday. Yesterday the devil came here. Right here.” [crosses himself]
“And it smells of sulfur still today.”
Hmmm. That kind of Devil talk would make the militant secularist moonbats bay for days if it came out of Bush’s mouth. Hugo? Crickets.
Yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, from this rostrum, the president of the United States, the gentleman to whom I refer as the devil, came here, talking as if he owned the world. Truly. As the owner of the world.
I think we could call a psychiatrist to analyze yesterday’s statement made by the president of the United States. As the spokesman of imperialism, he came to share his nostrums, to try to preserve the current pattern of domination, exploitation and pillage of the peoples of the world.
Yes, call that psychiatrist. For yourself Hugo. It could be reality inversion or simple transference. Chirac Syndrome perhaps, the drive to unite countries in opposition to the US. Hugo’s manifestation is a tad déclassé.
An Alfred Hitchcock movie could use it as a scenario. I would even propose a title: “The Devil’s Recipe.”
As Chomsky says here, clearly and in depth, the American empire is doing all it can to consolidate its system of domination. And we cannot allow them to do that. We cannot allow world dictatorship to be consolidated.
These taunts were well-received at the UN. The would-be Dictator of the World however not only lacks the gumption to smoke Osama out of Tora Bora, he can’t even muster the cojones to snatch Chavez and Ahmadinejad when they serve themselves up on a silver platter. A true student of the 36 Stratagems would have seized the opportunity to decapitate his enemies:
To catch rebels, nab their leader first
Destroy the enemy crack forces and capture their chief, and the enemy will collapse. His situation will be as desperate as a sea dragon fighting on land.
The Axis of Evil certainly knows the stratagems. With the UN they’re pursuing this one:
Host and guest reversed
Whenever there is a chance, enter into the decision-making body of your ally and extend your influence skilfully step by step. Eventually, put it under your control.
Not long from now I fear civilization will look back with deep regret at our missed opportunity.
Via LGF:Chomsky says “I’m not dead yet…”
Proving that he was still up for a lively debate, Mr. Chomsky then went on to talk about income inequality in Latin America, the history of the United Nations, Iraq, Iran, Fidel Castro and, finally, the man who so fervently admires him, Mr. Chávez.
“I have been quite interested in his policies,” Mr. Chomsky said. “Personally, I think many of them are quite constructive.” Most important, he said, Mr. Chávez seems to have the overwhelming support of the people in his country. “He has gone through six closely supervised elections,” he said.
So the feelings are mutal between Chomsky and Chavez. Where is the debate?
Chavez attracts Moonbat Heroes like moths to flame. Or jihadis to OBL.
You say, “Hmmm. That kind of Devil talk would make the militant secularist moonbats bay for days if it came out of Bush’s mouth. Hugo? Crickets.”
Appears that the likes of Charles Rangel, and Jesse Jackson have come out to say that Chavez’s words were uncalled for…so much for crickets.
Crocodile tears surely.