To Fly

To Fly

A child sees the world as new

Every day is filled with wonder

Why is the sky blue?

What Monster creates the thunder?

All these questions, and so many more

Too soon they grow and the world becomes old

No longer is there magic in the air

Their world is smaller, they do as they are told

But why?  Is that fair?

Growing up leaves so many answers untold

For some, just a few we all know

The answers don’t answer the questions so bold

What is on that other side of a rainbow?

Can I touch the moon, so cold?

They look to the sky and wonder why

Why do birds fly?

What Should We Do About Puerto Rico?

Edited to correct my poor geography -- confusing the Dominian Republic and Puerto Rico's relationship to Haiti.

My Senator, Bill Nelson, posted a criticism on FB of Governor Rick Scott his opponent in the upcoming election, saying he (Scott) wasn’t sure what he would have done differently to aid Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria’s devastation.  He (Nelson) then went on to talk about how the citizens of Puerto Rico are suffering still, while also pointing out the news is reporting the actual death toll from the storm could be 10-times greater than initially reported by the government of the island.  Clearly, Senator Nelson is playing to a significant voting block in Florida with these statements, but it started me thinking about the island and our relationship with it.

For those who weren’t there at the time, or who may have slept through Mr. Sanford’s 10th-grade history class let’s review how we came to be associated with this little island.

Back when we believed in Manifest Destiny and the sugar barons ruled the economy they argued the Spanish were a thorn in our side, so we found an excuse to go to war with them and hopefully resolve the whole “who’s in charge of what” in the Western Hemisphere.  We didn’t like what Spain was doing in Cuba, and we (mostly Republicans) thought we should have our own colonies.  Like any good war we needed a rallying cry, and, for some reason, the state of Maine was asked to blow up its battleship.  Fortunately for us, they did so in the harbor of Havana Cuba and off we went with the plea “Remember - The Maine.”

As wars go, it wasn’t much of a war.  Spain wasn’t really up to a big fight and when we defeated the Spanish fleets in the Caribbean and the Philippines, and they saw the whites of Teddy Roosevelt’s eyes (oh wait, wrong war), they gave up and gave us a bunch of stuff we could call our own.  In the treaty ending the war, they renounced all right to Cuba, ceded us Guam and Puerto Rico, and sold us the Philippines at the bargain basement price of $20 million[1].  The rest, as they say, is history.

To bring us up to modern times, the oppressive Spanish dictatorship of Cuba was overthrown and replaced by a few oppressive Cuban dictatorships backed by the criminal underworld we created with Prohibition, which in turn was overthrown by a communist (oppressive) dictatorship in the late 1950s and early 1960s.  The Philippines was granted their independence at the end of the Second World War and has had a kind of up and down experience with democracy and rebellions since then.  Guam and Puerto Rico have pretty much remained colonies (unincorporated territories if that sounds better) of the US since Spain moved out.  As such, they have limits on their self-rule and autonomy, but on the bright side are not subject to the same taxation requirements placed on the fifty states by the Federal government.

Although both Guam and Puerto Rico share common status, let’s forget about Guam for a while, they are way over on the other side of the world and except for an occasional Georgia (Democratic) Congressman’s concern over the island tipping over if we put too many military personnel on it we (the Congress) don’t give them too much thought other than to reflect on where America’s day starts.

But Puerto Rico is much closer with far more emigres settling here in the states than Guamanians.  As an unincorporated territory, the citizens of Puerto Rico have a legal right to come to the 50 states and settle down as full citizens.  They actually have more rights here than they do in their homeland, but they also are subject to that whole taxation thing.

The confusing thing is they seem to want it both ways.  They field their own Olympic team and want their own seat at the UN, but when it comes to voting for independence they don’t seem that anxious to change.  It is as if they want all the stuff the US government can do for them, but like most of us if they can get it for free why would they change?

The Congress and the US Courts have wrestled for years with what kind of relationship should exist between the US and its territory.  The citizens of Puerto Rico have held a number of referendums on the same subject.  Since WW2 there have been at least three referendums with regard to the island's status.  In the 1998 vote, the citizens were given the choice of statehood, commonwealth, independence and none of the above.  The majority voted for none of the above, effectively saying maintain the current status.  In 2012 they again voted, this time choosing statehood, but over 500,000 blank ballots left the vote in question so the Congress chose to ignore the vote.[2]

There are two parties today in PR, the Partido Popular Democratcio, or Popular Democratic Party (PPD) and the Partido Nuevo Progrsista, or New Progressive Party (PNP).  The PPD has been the party in power since at least 1998, and while promising to seek a change in status has actually worked to maintain the status quo.  One could speculate that the graft and corruption evident in the post Hurricane Maria recovery effort is one reason why.  The PNP has promised to push for statehood, but so far, as is seen in the 2012 referendum they’ve not really had much success.  Cynically, I would suggest even if they were to become the party in power there is a fundamental concept in the Caribbean and South American politics that would ensure little changes; specifically, the idea that family comes before all else. 

If the politician in power has the ability to skim off the cream for the family, or direct income or jobs to the family then that is what usually happens.  Whether it is good for the country is irrelevant, if it is good for the family it is what must be done.  It is not unique to PR, we see the same thing in Venezuela, or Jamaica, or Haiti as the worst-case example.  Heck, we see it here in the US as well so perhaps it’s not just a Caribbean thing.  The Clintons have long enjoyed the idea that if they can get people to give them money they will make sure the family prospers.

With our kind of “in limbo” relationship with the island where they have some autonomy and self-rule, after a disaster is it the U.S. governments job to come in and take over or should we just send them money and equipment to fix their own problems?  It appears we’ve sent them money and tools, but now a year later they are still struggling to repair their infrastructure and some believe we should send them more money and equipment, since the stuff we sent initially hasn’t solved all their problems. 

How much money will it take?  I am reminded of an old joke as the answer, “If you have to ask, you can’t afford it.”

---

[1] https://www.history.com/topics/spanish-american-war

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_status_of_Puerto_Rico

Organizational Needs versus Organizational Structure.

This is a question about the Air Force, the youngest of our military services which appears to be going through its mid-life crisis, brought on by a long war that offers no end.  It is, for me at least, a fundamental question upon which all other choices must ultimately rest.  What is the smallest force capable of sustained combat operations, the unit with the necessary operational personnel, maintenance personnel, logistics support, communications, and command and control to deploy and sustain combat operations for at least six months?  Whatever that is shouldn’t that be the type of unit we build our Air Force around.

The Army has wrestled with this same question for as long as I remember, and every time I think they have an answer some new General has a great idea and they reorganize.  Since we come from the Army maybe it is in our DNA that we would do the same thing.  At one point it was a regiment, then a division, and I think they’ve now settled on a Combat Brigade, but that could be outdated.

When I first came into the Air Force, just at the end of the Vietnam conflict, I was taught the wing was that unit, although our history in WW2 would suggest Groups were certainly capable of independent operations, but then Groups in WW2 were bigger than most wings in the post-Vietnam era.

It seems the consideration of sustainable combat capability always takes a back seat to the political, economic, or personnel considerations the CSAF and his staff find so much more interesting inside the beltway.

In the 90’s the CSAF, the SECAF and their staffs said Wing Commanders should be Brigadiers -- so they did away with the longstanding concept of Wing/DO and MA and created various groups so there were promotable O-6 billets who could justify promotion to BG and ultimately Wing/CC.  We did this with the knowledge we would be getting smaller as a service, although I doubt we knew how much smaller.  As we began to downsize and as much as we resisted eventually we ran out of Captains to RIF and ended up getting rid of O-6s and losing some of the O-7 billets they had worked so hard to justify.  So, we ended up going back to O-6 Wing Commanders, with a few high-vis and notable exceptions, but we retained all the Groups that had been created.

Somewhere along the line the AF came up with the belief that subordinate Commanders could only work for superior Commanders, unlike how it had been before we ran out of uniforms to change and began changing the wing organizational structure.  I imagine it was about the same time we came out with the “Commander Badge” that mimicked what the USN had.

As we move to this new “no Groups” concept – it will, I believe, create a real span of control issue for the Wing Commander.  What is their role now?  Do they focus on the air base and its infrastructure or do they spend their days in arbitration as the various squadrons compete for attention and endorsement?  His or her ability to actually know who a good commander is and who is toxic will be further masked as the squadron’s become more independent in their ability to disregard the wing staff, and the Wing Commander has to manage the Air Base as a whole.

The question then becomes does that squadron commander have all the resources necessary to accomplish their mission?  Will they “own” the aircraft, control the maintenance and have the logistics infrastructure necessary or will they have to negotiate for them with peer squadron commanders who have perhaps conflicting priorities?  When those inevitable conflicts arise will the Wing/CC be forced into the role of arbitrator?

Maybe this all isn’t a big deal, but as long as the exodus of officers of all ranks continues the number of qualified senior officers will dwindle and perhaps this is just a response to shrinking pyramid of qualified personnel.

Memorial Day, 2018

“I am a warrior, so that my son may be a merchant, so that his son may be a poet.”  

 John Quincy Adams

“Only the dead have seen the end of war.”   

Plato

We approach yet another Memorial Day, where we will remember those who’ve given their lives and their futures to keep the dreams of this country alive.  The Long War, or the Global War on Terrorism, continues and new names are added to the rolls of those we remember.

It would be nice if I could say we’ve added the last name and we’ve found a way to end the human conflict, but for now, that is only a wistful dream.  As you reflect on this day of remembrance think not only of the pain and emptiness of those we’ve lost but the joy and gladness they brought into the world by their simple presence.

Perhaps, and this is another wistful hope, perhaps accept that we are meant to be understanding as we deal with those who think differently than us.

The Great Questions of Life

1.     Who decided the earth should rotate on its axis?

2.    Why is water wet?

3.    What would have happened if Christopher Columbus had sunk (or sailed off the edge of the world)?

4.    What is it about the equator that causes people not to pick up their trash?

5.    The first Presidential Library was created in 1939 when Franklin Delano Roosevelt left part of his estate to the Government – why did he really do it?  Does that mean most Presidents before him didn’t have enough stuff to have a library?

6.    Does water go straight down the drain at the equator?

7.     What did NASA do with all the stuff they had left over after the Apollo program was cancelled?

8.    Speaking of Apollo, what have we learned from all the rocks they brought back?

9.    Why are belt loop holes spaced at ½ inch intervals?

10. Why do men’s and woman’s shirts button on different sides?

11.  If environmental protestors care so much for the environment why don’t they pick up their stuff after a protest?

12.  If the Antarctic ice cap melts completely where will South Africa get its fresh water?

13.  How many swords have actually been turned into plowshares?

14.  Who decides how long a woman’s skirt should be to be “fashionable?”

15.  If a man makes a statement in the forest and there are no women to hear him, is he still wrong?

The Rule of Law

There are few things as sadly funny to me as hearing a politician or celebrity come out against something, or someone, with a claim the thing they oppose will discredit or destroy “the rule of law” in this country.  Senator Feinstein is just the latest to claim that President Trump’s calling for an independent investigation of the investigators will undermine our faith in the rule of law.

To see her say we are a nation of laws reminds me she and all her peers believe we are really a nation that chooses what laws we enforce and what laws we ignore when there are political advantages to be gained.  We see that most clearly in the immigration debate, although it is also obvious in the on-going rants on gun ownership.

The civil rights movement in this nation began with the recognition we needed to make laws equal for all persons, not just the rich, the powerful, and the white.  When the civil war ended the winners set out to do that, but it took a renewal of effort in the post-World War II period to overcome the institutional resistance we had built to ensure the white majority could still dominate the minorities. 

Unfortunately, I am not sure we have or ever will achieve the ideal of “blind justice” and have complete equality under the law, for those who are charged with creating, administering, and enforcing the laws are human and subject to the shortcomings of being human.  The interesting outcome of this human condition is now the elite among the minorities appear to be setting out on a path of reverse discrimination where they believe “separate but equal” is a viable option.  I wonder what Thurgood Marshall would think of this approach?  It is almost as if they have come to agree with the whites who really are racist, not just the ones they accuse of being so.

So for the foreseeable future, we will remain a nation that follows the rule of law, kind of, when it’s convenient and self-serving to do so.

A Lesson Learned.

            In 2016 I cast a “non-vote” for all the candidates for President.  I understood at the time I was giving up my civic right, but I found all the names on the ballot either incompetent, criminal, or distasteful.  I shall not make that choice again.  The candidate I found distasteful has proven himself to be an effective leader, and if he had the traditional support most Presidents have from their party perhaps he would be even better.  The one thing that cannot be denied is he has worked to keep his campaign promises to a level unheard of in modern times.

            By their acts and actions, the Democrats (politicians, activists, would be social warriors, and loyalists), have proven their contempt for the Republic and the average citizen it is supposed to serve.  They have clearly shown their unwillingness to work with the legally elected representative of the people and choose instead to stand with the criminal gangs of the world while vilifying those who disagree with them as terrorists.

            We are becoming a one-party system where reaching a compromised middle-ground is increasingly unlikely.  If we are to be a one-party system then my vote will go to the party that supports capitalism over communism.