I have crossed the Rubicon into the Land of the Vulgarians

Upcoming "State of the World" piece includes my first printed use of the "f word."

Hoping my Mom will lose interest before getting that far in the piece...

Told'ya so

ARTICLE: Bush Seeks to Redirect Some Defense Outlays, By Jonathan Karp, Wall Street Journal

Now at least I hope I don't ever need to reiterate my long-standing argument that war isn't good for platform acquisition nor the contractors who provide them.

I remember some site going all ape-shit on my a while back on the subject, calling into question my alleged expertise. I wonder where that guy is now?

Halliburton move makes perfect sense to me

ARTICLE: Halliburton Chief's Move to Dubai Evokes Warnings on Hill, By Steven Mufson and Dana Hedgpeth, Washington Post, March 13, 2007; Page A02

Halliburton is a private-sector SysAdmin element. Dubai is emerging as a huge SysAdmin-style nation state that is beginning to engage in what I like to call "preemptive nation-building," not just in the Middle East (its emulation of Singapore) but increasingly in East Africa (send in the clones!).

As such, this evolution makes perfect sense to me.

Think horizontal and eliminate surprise.

Doesn't make you invincible or infallible. Just keeps you level and centered when the perturbations unfold.

Why important?

Everyone makes their hay/bucks/victories during the churn. If the churn disorients you, then you're shit outta luck.

Gentle reminder

Your (pertinent) comments add greatly to the value of this site, for the readers and for Tom.

Your impertinent comments can sometimes add humor when done intentionally. ;-)

But, please remember that comments on this site are intended to be brief interactions with Tom's material. Longer commentary about the subject matter Tom is addressing, but not about Tom's ideas, is not appropriate for our comments. We are happy for you to post links to your own posts on your own weblog on such topics in our comments.

It's the law ;-)

Correction

Stratfor writes to tell us that the graph we published in Chinese contribution to UN Peacekeeping Operations. They have graciously allowed us to keep it up. We apologize for the original lack of attribution.

Cal & Rudy

ARTICLE: The Maturing of the Right, By Cal Thomas, Real Clear Politics, March 13, 2007

This is VERY interesting and a very good sign for Rudy, especially when described by a conservative popularizer like Thomas.

Thanks to Kilngoddess for sending this one, too.

Too little, too late?

ARTICLE: Right Ideas, Wrong Time, By Fareed Zakaria, Newsweek, March 19, 2007 issue

Good piece by Fareed. Marries up nicely with my Everything must go! post.

Thanks to Kilngoddess for sending this.

Chinese contribution to UN Peacekeeping Operations [corrected]

Interesting chart showing how China is slowly but clarly trying to equalize its SysAdmin-style global presence with its burgeoning economic connectivity.

Remember when I sat down with the PLA long-range planners in Beijing and one had done PKO time in the Congo?

This is a trajectory to exploit.

Thanks to Renato for sending this.

Correction: Stratfor writes to tell us that this is their graph. They have graciously allowed us to keep it up. We apologize for the original lack of attribution.

Wal-Mart IS the bottom of the pyramid!

ARTICLE: "In Mexico, Wal-Mart Is Defying Its Critics: Low Prices Boost Its Sales and Popularity In Developing Markets," by John Lyons, Wall Street Journal, 5 March 2007, p. A1.

Wal-Mart keeps screwing up in affluent markets, like Germany, Japan, large U.S. cities, but routinely cleans up in developing or emerging markets, where it's sell to the bottom of the pyramid mentality meets an aggressive desire on the part of consumers for better economic connectivity ("My modest income is now connected to so many more choices!").

Turns out poor Central Americans like Wal-Mart for all the same reasons why the rural red states in America like it too.

It connects and empowers while, yes, simultaneously reconfiguring local markets--the essence of globalization.

OMYGOD! New technology + old wells = more oil!

ARTICLE: "Oil Innovations Pump New Life Into Old Wells: Industry Finding Ways to Extend Supplies," by Jad Mouawad, New York Times, 5 March 2007, p. A1.

In Bakersfield CA, where the Kern River field was discovered in 1899, the oil production, true to oil peak form, had declined to a stingy 10,000 barrels a day by the 1960s.

It's current output is 85,000 bpd.

In Indonesia, Chevron applies the same high-pressure steam technology to an oil field discovered in 1941, and the take goes from 65k (mid-80s) to 200k today.

Cue the concern of the oil peak theorist:

"I am very, very seriously worried about the future we are facing. It is clear that oil is in limited supplies."

Cue the industry-funded analyst:

"Ironically, most of the oil we will discover is from oil we've already found. What has been missing is the technology and the threshold price that will lead to a revolution in lifting that oil."

Hmm, technology and price. Somehow that impacts the oil industry like all others.

Here's the underlying reality (no pun): for every three barrels of oil found, historical technology lifts only one, leaving two in the ground. New technology simply gets better at getting the other two barrels out.

Again:

In 1978, when he started his career here, operators believed the field [Bakersfield]] would be abandoned within 15 years. "That's why peak oil is a moving target," Mr. Hatlen said. "Oil is always a function of price and technology."

Price and technology.

Not exactly rocket science.

Qaddafi the philosopher of globalization

ARTICLE: "Qaddafi Heralds a Changing Libya, but Within Limits," by Michael Slackman, New York Times, 3 March 2007.

Love this bit from ol' Muammar:

Undoubtedly Libya is part of this changing world dominated by globalization. Libya is riding this wave, taking this and that. Libya cannot row against the current.

Naturally, Qaddafi's walk and talk will differ for as long as he rules and he will rule for as long as he lives.

Then we'll get the modernizing son, educated in the West, who, by all accounts, is the real push behind Libya rejoining the world--not a fear of U.S. invasion. The inside story says that the son basically asked Muammar, "What do you want to be remembered for?" Muammar looks at Saddam and takes a pass.

A pass into what? Well, at least he's smart enough to know what he's gotten himself into. Can't expect this old dog to learn any new tricks.

All you can hope for is just enough connectivity seeping in during the meantime that the floodgates can overwhelm the tinkering son once he sets the opening in further motion (the Gorbachev slippery slope).

Qaddafi's not dumb. He knows he's lived past his time. He just has nowhere to go.

Sad for now, better for later. Not our problem for now, and that's enough.

Connecting to an alien past to justify a present and anchor a future

ARTICLE: "A Chinese Orphan's Journey To a Jewish Rite of Passage," by Andy Newman, New York Times, 8 March 2007, p. A1.

Fascinating story my wife and I will eventually confront with our own Chinese daughter, Vonne Mei.

You don't want to run with the alien part too hard, because--hey--religion's going to be exploding all over China across the coming decades. And if a Jewish messiah in the Middle East can define my Irish Roman-Catholic faith, then I don't find a Chinese Jew to be particularly odd.

This story has additional twists (the parents are lesbians), but everything comes down to the same innate desire: a grounding in a shared past to forge personal connectivity in the present ("we are joined in this") that hopefully extends into a future involving still more people (when this child has children, how does she connect them back to her adoptive parents?).

It all seems very profound and philosophical, but a teenager is a teenager, and even if multitasking hurts homework, multiple and overlapping identities tend to be centering--additional grip holds on the steep ascent that is adolescence.

Me? I read the story and said: "We can pull that off if they can!"

Randy! Randy! Randy!

Count me among the clear-headed Packer fans who'd weep for joy if GB landed Moss in a trade. Forget all the whiny nonsense about past transgressions, past his prime or even character issues. Make the trade!

Anyone like Moss instantly elevates the O and makes every team play us and Favre very differently. Plus, his jump-ball capacity is perfect for gun-slinger Brett, and Favre is probably the one guy who can both command his respect and mentor his resurrection (a long-time mutual admiration society).

If I'm Ted Thompson, I make this trade in a heartbeat if only to keep Favre in uniform 2-3 more John Elway-career-ending-like years.

The great tragedy of the past decade has been our inability to get any HOF offensive players around Favre (Green was close). This may well be the last serious possibility to do so. If Belichek and the Pats wanted him, good enough for us.

Gambling is called for while Brett still wears the green-and-gold.

Comment upgrade: Same as it ever was!

I knew the minute I saw Peter's comment that Tom would love it:

I wouldn't presume to make a list of Dr. Barnett's methods for processing information, but I can suggest taking a close look at an ongoing thread in the blog that doesn't seem to be given much acknowledgement: music.

Over and over he references his passion for music, particularly that of the Talking Heads (I wonder if anybody else has noticed just how many passing references there are to David Byrne lyrics in the blog over the years). Another big favorite is Kraftwerk, and I'm not sure there are any posts that were as much plain fun to read (at least for me) as the ones about hanging out with Brian Eno. One of the things the musicians mentioned have in common is that a large part of their compositional method was/is to create a basic structure which is then layered with elements that are frequently of a more intuitive and immediate kind. Brian Eno in particular formalized (although the formality is ironic) a method for composing and recording music (along with the late Peter Schmidt) that he called "Oblique Strategies". Which probably is as good a name for Dr. Barnett's method as could be found.

And I think a case could be made for the song "Listening Wind" from the Talking Heads "Remain In Light" album to be the most coherent succinct description of what Dr. Barnett's work is ultimately about.

...at least that's the view from out here in left field!

Tom wrote:

That gets very close to the soul.

I have that album memorized (a real turning point for me), and "Listening Wind" is a particular favorite, although my all-time fav line from the THs is:

"And you may find yourself in a beautiful house, with a beautiful wife, and you may ask yourself, 'Well, how did I get here?"

I have learned to let the days go by,
I have let the water pull me under.

My wife's-and-my song is "Naive Melody," the only love song Byrne ever really wrote, for his wife, who had a modest role in "Beetlejuice." I have no idea if they're still married, but Vonne remains, "out of those kinds of people," my "face with a view," and so "home is where I want to be."

So I guess I think that's a very interesting and accurate observation: my favorite music is layered, rhythmic complexity, and I think anyone who's seen me brief will attest for my penchant for layered visual complexity in slides coupled with a highly syncopated staccato-like delivery. When my brief goes well, it feels very musical, and when it goes badly, I feel like I've lost the beat.

A side note: as college kid in Madison in the early 1980s (back, as Nick Cages notes in "Raising Arizona": "when that sumbitch Reagan was in the White House"), my dream concert was the Heads (followed by Clash and Psychedlic Furs--all three of which I saw in Chicago). Come my junior year, the "Remain in Light" tour comes round. I invite my girlfriend of a few months, Vonne Meussling, to come with me and my best friends from my old dorm, Spike and Jeff. We all drive down to Chicago (outdoor theater, name escapes but West side) and Vonne doesn't handle the tail-gating well. Just as we're getting ready to walk from the car into the ampitheater, so collectively pumped at our dream come true we're walking on air, Vonne pulls me aside and says it's a no-go and can I stay with her?

Suffice it to say, I am stunned, but there's no question (who'd leave their woman behind?), so we hang in the car the entire concert , hearing the music distantly. At the very end, Vonne tells me she's okay and I should head in for the curtain call, so I catch the last song. Spike and Jeff are in nirvana when I reach them, I less so. Still, it dulled the psychic trauma a bit.

Vonne later said she knew I loved her and that I'd stay with her forever after that night. To this day I pray it wasn't some devious test!

Needless to say, Vonne wasn't invited to the "Speaking in Tongues" concert the next year, which was the King King of the Heads' run, and the one that yielded the Demme movie "Stop Making Sense." Wore that long-sleeved concert tee like the shroud of Turin for years on end. Still have the Rauschenberg limited-edition LP of that album in my closet.

Very strong memories.

Thanks for reminding.

The Bush Administration: everything must go!

It's weird to skip papers for about 10 days and then pick back up. It's like getting a TV series in a season package: yesterday's conjecture-laden headline ("Will anything happen when Iran talks to Saudi Arabia") becomes the next day's ho-hum ("Nothing happens in talks between Tehran and Riyadh"). It's just so instantly grate-ifying ("Oh wonderful!" he says, between clenched teeth), like there's no waiting required, nor any cliffhangers to endure.

Show's over folks. Get your souvenirs right here!

And reading forward into days like that, mirroring my recent shifting of hours since 1 March (back one, forward six, forward four, minus one, minus two, minus seven, plus one [cursed daylights savings!], minus three--screw Waldo, I just want to find the sun!), I can't help but feel like the Bush post-presidency has begun to cannibalize itself.

You know how I've argued that, once Bush is gone, everyone's price for cooperation with America will be cut in half? Well, it's like the liquidation sale has already begun, with the bankrupt business conducting its own wake (sorry, the time shifts my metaphors).

It's like "Six Feet Under" and the corpse is not only carrying on, it's cozying up--to just about everyone.

"How come we never talked like this when you were alive?"

Bush tours Latin America to counter the hugely accurate perception that he's ignored the region his entire term. A new diplomatic push on Israel and Palestine, to counter ... you know. Ditto with the rest of the Middle East, Russia, North Korea--the whole shooting match.

It's like that game show with Howie Mandel (the name escapes) [Deal or No Deal - Ed.]: every few minutes another box is opened with meaningful randomness ("I like number six, because I've got that many toes on my left foot!" My daughter Em: "That's soooo random!") and the discounting begins. Bush's legacy will either be $100 or maybe $275,000, but the million-dollar baby seems long gone. We won the Iraq War in 2004 just like we won the Vietnam War in 1966. You just can't help the feeling that the massive correction is already well underway. Sure, most of the major pieces will be left to the next administration ("Bring on the solutions-based centrists--social whatevers be damned! [no, really, they will be damned]), but this White House is getting what pennies on the dollar it can, while the getting's mediocre.

Ironic, but a team so committed to restoring the presidency's power has done so much to diminish it's global standing. Hubris is self-correcting, after all.

As much as I like tidy endings, I fear few of these will be. Currency runs/panics begin when international money spots local money running scared on itself (shorting), and yet I don't think we're looking at anything too adventurous by anybody--save perhaps a Goddamn'er'um from a Dick Cheney with one foot stuck in ... wherever Bill Maher's sense of comedic timing disappeared (tragedy PLUS time, dear fellow-traveler).

In short, the timing seems good for intellectual recalibrations, as there's little sense you'll miss anything in the meantime (Wouldn't even an impeachment "crisis" seem like old hat? So why bother, Chuck Hagel?).

A big part of me just wants to disappear somewhere off-grid, only to return once the nominees are set, so the weird prelims can be superseded by the significant arguments and the serious end-of-termism that this weird interregnum only approximates.

Secretly (he types on his blog), I'd love to see Barack v. Rudy, or an almost purely post-9/11 fight (Barack has no record pre-9/11 worth arguing for or against, while Rudy was reborn on that date) that focused on solutions and skipped all the 90s-reruns (much less the Vietnam replays).

My time-shifting brain just wants a reset, I guess.

Tom around the web

Not a lot of links this time because Tom was out of town and I'm pretty well caught up.

+ Let's give pride of place to our old buddy Critt Jarvis. He working on some Grazr projects and using Tom's material for his subject matter: Two great tastes that taste great together! Check out his PNM: Widgets, Gadgets, and Gizmos! Oh, My!, The Pentagon’s New Map Glossary (in Grazr), and A Story of The Pentagon’s New Map.

+ Columbia University Military Community has Tom on their shortlist of links.
+ Hidden Unities linked Tom as promoting a 'hard kill' on North Korea.
+ The Penultimate Genius linked Tom's last talk with Hugh.
+ Dreaming 5GW made a couple of references to Tom.
+ Hot soup in my eye liked finding Google Gapminder over here and getting linked on Information processing.
+ New Yorker in DC references Tom's promotion of economic connectivity WRT Syria.

Information processing

Antonymous sent this email to Tom:

Tom - just a quick question, maybe it's worthy of a blog post. I figure
that now is the best time to ask, as you've just gotten back from your
trip. The question is: how do you reconcile all the information that gets
thrown at you constantly? I think many of your readers are probably into
their own pet theories about how to Shrink the Gap and build a better
planet, but there are so many nuanced subjects relating to these topics that
it's difficult not to get caught up in them. I guess info might stick to
your ribs more because you're out actively talking to flags and we're
passively behind computers, but I read lots of articles too - just wondering
if you have any good tips or tricks for unwinding your brain and sorting out
info. I appreciate your use of the blog as a "dumping ground"! Thanks

Tom writes:

Big question.

Worth pursuing.

But I plan to save for VOL. III vice blog. Will take thousands of words to explain, me thinks.

But thanks so much for asking. I will spend serious time exploring between now and then.

Self-censorship (i.e., reading that which seems to comfirm only) is the big risk on reading.

My salvation?

Provocative nature of my analysis invites criticism, which I lack not. I am regularly called an "idiot," "fool," "dangerous ideologue," etc., in addition to all the good stuff.

I guess I also get a lot of independent confirmation, especially from military, mush of that is F2F. Constant briefing, I would add, exposes me constantly to naysayers. In fact, I don't know anybody else in my genre who so routinely briefs skeptical audiences.

Then again, I've always loved the lion's den. I have, as 8 of 9, that inner drive to prove my elders wrong!

But great question from this reader. I could spend a whole chapter in Vol. III on that. Methinks some list of rules will be required. I begin amassing immediately.

If readers can suggest some based on perusal of blog, I would be most grateful for the pointers.

So what do you say, readers? How does Tom process information?

Hope: that Mark and Dan, who both specialize in cognitive processes, will weigh in here.

Positive press from... AlterNet?

ARTICLE: Connecting the DOP Dots, By Sean Gonsalves, AlterNet, March 9, 2007

This article is surprisingly complimentary of Tom's vision and the need for SysAdmin if any 'Department of Peace' is going to be successful:

In Thomas P.M. Barnett's "Blueprint for Action: A Future Worth Creating" -- a far cry from pie-in-the-sky pacifism and well-received among wonks and military officers -- he analyzes the "Core" states, like the U.S., and "failing" states who fill "the Gap."

"When a military intervention does occur, these adversaries simply do their best to lie low and wait out our mighty blow, knowing that they can do little about its impact ... in this way, they conserve their resources for the real fight ahead: our subsequent halfhearted attempts to impose peace and civil order."

That's what Gen. Petraeus was talking about last week when he said: "any student of history recognizes that there is no military solution to a problem like (guerrilla insurgencies) in Iraq."

Though I have deep disagreements with Barnett, he does offer some important observations. "As we take on new nation building challenges with regularity, our manpower requirements for waging peace will skyrocket."

If folks are serious about "shrinking the Gap" and winning this global war on terrorism, Barnett argues, then what he envisions as "our SysAdmin force" (peace-waging force) will have to "dwarf our Leviathan (traditional military) force."

Check out the question Barnett is raising: "Where will we find the civilians to join this SysAdmin force -- this pistol-packin' Peace Corps?... I seriously doubt that, absent a dedicated cabinet-level department, America's effort to shrink the Gap will succeed over time."

This "waging peace" talk also has striking parallels with Nobel prize-winning economist Amartya Sen's 1999 book arguing for the need to see "development as freedom" in dealing with nations filling Barnett's "Gap."

Connect the dots. Shrink the Gap. Development as Freedom. Department of Peace.

That's how to get from 'here' to 'there.'

Lesson on armored cars

Rode in some in Africa last week. First time in, I thought the door was locked somehow and I couldn't figure how to open.

Then realized it was just that the door was so heavy I needed to lean into it a bit to get it started swinging open. If I just pulled the handle and didn't put any muscle into it, it was so weighty that it felt like it was still locked.

The things you learn.

Another thing I learned: when approaching a field strip, military aircraft--by routine--do a low flyover to check the field and then pull back up and out to do the real approach. Makes perfect sense, since no ATC to be looking over the whole thing.

But inside the plane, if you don't know that, it feels just like an aborted landing. Last time it happened to me was Atlanta due to birds on the runway. Scared the begeezus outta me.

On the C-130, which you can't see out of, I just figured it was something that made sense to the military so I rode it out casually, like all the officers around me. Since none of them spoke about it in real time, I just waited and asked somebody later.

And if you thought about it like a roller coaster, it's really pretty fun.

It means the proposal for Vol. III will definitely get a read ...

Neil Nyren is THE MAN. In the world of bestsellers, he is the King Kong. Ain't no arguing. His record speaks for itself.

I had no idea who he was prior to his buying PNM. Now he seems like this looming figure in my career, which he is. Neil picking me changed everything, like everyone else who picked me before. If there's one thing I've learned in this career, it's that the visionary can "pick" the future, but what really matters is who picks him. There is no "go yout own way" nonsense. You are completely the product of others in terms of your access and renown. You just create the content, so know your place and appreciate the cast of thousands involved in making the vision happen (and don't even get me started on the implementation!). The visionary is all about connecting to others. The grand strategist is imagined as the solitary figure, figuring it all out on his own, but it's a complete myth. If your vision is that everything is connected to everything else (not exactly a new thought, eh!), then so is your career.

When you meet Neil, you can't help but be a bit underwhelmed, because his professional stature is so huge, but then he's this very normal looking guy who comes off as very unassuming and wonderfully soft-spoken (you expect him to be in Prada or something, yelling at everyone; in fact, you're tempted to say, "No, really, go and get me Neil Nyren! This isn't funny!"). He's just so relaxed and wry, instead of high-strung and outsized, you just want him to snap at somebody about getting him some coffee, or copy, or Tom Clancy on line 1!

Warren's like that too. A couple of guys who really live in their skin, very down to earth.

Anyway...

A lot of people sent me this interview with Neil on the website Murderati. Neil's interviewed there because he has so many huge mystery writers. The part everyone gets excited about is the intro to the interview (which is worth reading because you get some interesting glimpses into how Neil thinks and how the business works), where I get mentioned in the stable.

The authors list is simply lifted from the "about us" page on G.P. Putnam's Sons, which is basically the same description one would offer for Neil himself, since he's been with Putnam for a while (since 1984 and Putnam's unrivaled run began about a decade later, meaning it takes a while to build up the stable), so the reputation of both are really one in the same at this point in history.

Here's the list in the Murderati interview:

Neil S. Nyren is senior vice president, publisher and editor in chief of G.P. Putnam’s Sons. He came to Putnam in 1984 from Atheneum, where he was Executive Editor. Before that he held editorial positions at Random House and Arbor House. Some of his authors include Tom Clancy, Clive Cussler, Jack Higgins, W.E.B. Griffin, John Sandford, Dave Barry, Daniel Silva, Ken Follett, Randy Wayne White, Carol O’Connell, James O. Born, Patricia Cornwell and Frederick Forsyth; nonfiction by Bob Schieffer, Maureen Dowd, John McEnroe, Linda Ellerbee, Jeff Greenfield, Charles Kuralt, Secretary of State James Baker III, Thomas P.M. Barnett, Sara Nelson, and Generals Fred Franks, Chuck Horner, Carl Stiner and Tony Zinni.

Here's the bigger bit from Putnam's page:

For the past fifteen consecutive years, G.P. Putnam's Sons has led the publishing industry with more hardcover fiction and nonfiction New York Times bestsellers than any other imprint in the publishing industry. Its impressive list of award-winning, bestselling authors is well-known around the world. With its rich history and unrivaled bestselling track record, G.P. Putnam's Sons continues to be one of the most respected and prestigious imprints in the industry. Today, Putnam has broadened its list with outstanding works that reflect contemporary interests. Among the distinguished roster of bestselling fiction authors Putnam publishes are: Dave Barry, Lilian Jackson Braun, Tom Clancy, Robin Cook, Patricia Cornwell, Catherine Coulter, Clive Cussler, Barry Eisler, Frederick Forsyth, Sue Grafton, William Gibson, W.E.B. Griffin, Jack Higgins, Jayne Ann Krentz, Steve Martini, Kate Mosse, Robert B. Parker, Ridley Pearson, Amanda Quick, Karen Robards, J.D. Robb, Nora Roberts, John Sandford, Daniel Silva, Amy Tan, Kurt Vonnegut, Randy Wayne White and Stuart Woods. In nonfiction, authors published by the imprint include Dr. Peter J. D'Adamo, Lance Armstrong, James Baker, Thomas Barnett, A. Scott Berg, Maureen Dowd, Goldie Hawn, T.D. Jakes, Spencer Johnson, Bob Schieffer and Neale Donald Walsch.

Funny, but the association I get the biggest kick out of is Ken Follett, because I'm such a WWII nut.

Anyway ...

It's nice to be on the list. By contract, I have to give Neil the first look on the proposal to Vol. III. Doesn't mean it'll work for him. It just means I get a nice, serious look.

I've got to get a bunch of material off my skull by mid-April, then I plan on writing up the proposal (short version) for Neil and sending it through Jenn Gates, with all her natural inputs. If that fails, I'd need a bigger proposal to send to other houses (not the same relationship, so more explaining), but no matter what, I think I write the beast, almost for mental health reasons (gotta clear the brain) late this summer. Worse comes to worst, I'd settle for less because I just want this marker down personally. I think Vol. III will be simultaneously more about me and less about me than anything I've ever written, but I think I need to write it before I can go on to other things (like editing the book about Emily that I penned years ago). There's just this sense of intellectual sequence, like I've gotta go through it or suffer the consequences.

And I guess that's the artist in me, which I indulge, because I honestly believe the whole visionary/grand strategist thing is more art than science, so it runs a bit more on the internal subjective than the external objective. That might seem counter-intuitive, and it is given the material, but there's what it is and then there's how it gets created, and like war v. peace, you have to be able to disaggregate those things.