Replies

DAVID W. BARNO

© 2006 David W. Barno
From Parameters, Summer 2006, pp. 15-29.

“War is . . . an act of force to compel our enemy to do our will.”
— Carl von Clausewitz1

The strategic nature of war has changed, and our military and government are striving to adapt to fight and win in this new environment. Today we are engaged in a global counterinsurgency, an unprecedented challenge which requires a level of original strategic thought and depth of understanding perhaps comparable only to that of the Cold War. Our ongoing political-military actions to achieve success in Iraq and Afghanistan are simply subordinate efforts of this larger, complex world war.

Our enemies today clearly understand the value of asymmetrical approaches when dealing with the overwhelming conventional combat power of the United States military. Unfortunately, our unmatched conventional capability has slowed the US response to the changing, asymmetrical nature of modern war.2 We as a military are at risk of failing to understand the nature of the war we are fighting—a war which has been characterized as “a war of intelligence and a war of perceptions.”3 We must confront this dilemma and take our thinking to a new strategic level in this era to understand the tools and strategic approaches required to create victory in this very different 21st-century environment.

Fourth Generation Warfare: Global Insurgency

MORE AT LINK...

http://www.carlisle.army.mil/USAWC/parameters/06summer/barno.htm

WHY ARE AMERICANS IGNORANT OF 'AGENDA 21'?
Joyce Morrison
August 6, 2006
NewsWithViews.com

The United Nations Agenda 21 was signed by the United States in 1992 and 14 years later, people are still in the dark. If you were to ask at random the question, "Have you heard of Agenda 21?" the answer would be an over-whelming "No," although it is being implemented in every local community.

Agenda 21 is a 40 chapter document listing goals to be achieved globally. It is the global plan to change the way we "live, eat, learn and communicate" because we must "save the earth."

"Its regulation would severely limit water, electricity, and transportation - even deny human access to our most treasured wilderness areas, it would monitor all lands and people. No one would be free from the watchful eye of the new global tracking and information system," according to Berit Kjos, author of Brave New Schools.

Maurice Strong, Secretary-general of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro said, "...[C]urrent lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class - involving high meat consumption and large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and workplace air-conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable. A shift is necessary which will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system, including the United Nations.

In other words, the Global plan is for us to live on the level of third world nations. That means no box mixes or microwave meals, limited use of fuel of any kind, no air-conditioning and very little meat. When the cost of freon skyrocketed, when mad cow disease hit, the National Animal Identification System introduced, the price of fuel soared, it has become apparent that given time, these sustainable controls will be put into place - one way or another - and the Global Governance is powerful.

In 1992, Agenda 21 began to change our lives. In that same year, Al Gore wrote his book, Earth in the Balance. To advance his cause, he has now written another piece of fiction entitled, An Inconvenient Truth about global warming…..he even starred in the movie. He also thinks he invented the internet.

Although groundwork had been laid, it took a Bill Clinton to actually introduce something so invasive to our nation and get by with it without the public becoming aware. President Clinton appointed his "President’s Council on Sustainable Development" and he literally gave away the rights and freedoms the framers of the Constitution had provided.

People in the United States may not know about Agenda 21 and the President’s Council on Sustainable Development, but people around the world do. They know that Chicago has one of the greatest numbers of activities existing at the local, neighborhood and/or microregional level. They also know that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) monitors and promotes activities in this field through their Office for Sustainable Ecosystem and Communities.

Found on a Slovakian website: "To the leading countries in the field of development but especially of practical using of sustainable development indicators belong to the U.S.A. At the top level these activities are promoted by the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (1996), which defined a set of ten national goals toward sustainable development. These goals express in concrete terms the elements of sustainability. Alongside the goals are suggested indicators that can be used to help measure progress toward achieving them.”

Agenda 21 is certainly not a secret. The internet is full of how Agenda 21 has been fulfilled through Smart Growth planning, land use, sustainable development and extreme environmentalism. The so-called agenda is grant driven to your city council or county board in terms of sustainable, visioning, partners, tourism and stakeholders, along with consensus and other terms with the intent to make you believe we are running out of all our resources and we must do our part and "save for tomorrow. [See Agenda 21's Table of Contents.]

It has nothing to do about “saving anything” – it has everything to do with “control.” Sadly, very few congressmen even know Agenda 21 is actually running our country when they are voting to send grant money back home. Agenda 21 is incentive driven as the planners know that greed in the heart of man will be his downfall.

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, better known as ANWR, has oil we need to be drilling for the security of our nation. Environmentalists don’t seem to understand we are dependent on foreign oil from nations who do not like us and our nation’s defense is at stake. The area where drilling would occur is just a dot in this vast land, yet they would gamble the strength of our nation in behalf of their favorite word --"pristine."

At the same time, technology is advancing and we may not need the oil later. But we do need it now.

Henry Lamb of Eco-logic, Restructuring the U.N.,

The world changed on 9-11. No longer can the world tilt at the windmills of a fantasized "global village." No longer can visions of "sustainable development" be justified in a world where "sustainable freedom" is the only possible solution to the economic and power vacuum that foments acts of terrorism.

There is a better way.

Nations can and, ultimately, must learn to live as neighbors, free from the web of "international laws" that dictate which activities are "sustainable" and which are xenophobic and unacceptable. Nation-to-nation relationships, just like neighbor-to-neighbor relationships, should be fashioned voluntarily, driven by mutual benefit. For the first time in a century, the United States may be exploring this possibility.

Henry Lamb is right. We can live as neighbors with other nations but we do not need to live under a "web of international law." There are dedicated citizens in the United States who are wise enough to set our nation’s guidelines without following Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development as set forth by the United Nations. [See DVD: Liberty or Sustainable Development?]

One of the main goals of Agenda 21 is to redistribute the wealth to third world countries and to bring our great nation to its knees in the name of socialism, fascism, communism or some other “ism.” Our founding fathers founded this nation on the belief of a Sovereign God and we have been blessed. Do you know the Gods of the nations to which we would become equal?

http://www.newswithviews.com/Morrison/joyce36.htm