Comments on: Strategic Collapse at the Army War College

By: scholarships

scholarships — Fri, 02 Sep 2011 15:46:31 +0000

Thanks for giving your ideas. The first thing is that students have an alternative between government student loan as well as a private student loan where it can be easier to go for student loan debt consolidation loan than with the federal student loan.

One thing is that if you find yourself searching for a student loan you may find that you will want a co-signer. There are many circumstances where this is correct because you will find that you do not employ a past credit rating so the bank will require you have someone cosign the money for you. Interesting post.

Thanks for this article. I might also like to express that it can be hard when you find yourself in school and simply starting out to initiate a long credit standing. There are many learners who are only trying to make it through and have a lengthy or positive credit history can occasionally be a difficult element to have.

I have learned several important things as a result of your post. I might also like to express that there will be a situation that you will apply for a loan and don’t need a cosigner such as a Government Student Support Loan. When you are getting credit through a classic bank or investment company then you need to be made ready to have a co-signer ready to make it easier for you. The lenders will probably base their own decision on the few aspects but the most important will be your credit history. There are some loan providers that will likewise look at your work history and make up your mind based on that but in most cases it will hinge on your scores.

One other issue is when you are in a circumstances where you will not have a co-signer then you may want to try to exhaust all of your federal funding options. You can find many grants or loans and other scholarships and grants that will supply you with funding to assist with education expenses. Many thanks for the post.

By: Bill R.

Bill R. — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 22:45:02 +0000

Perry and Ricks are both a couple of isolationist Pentagon haters. They would dismantle our magnificent military piece by piece and turn the oceans into a moat. Perry is the guy who called our soldiers in WWII Europe cowards and rapists, and accused the US population of getting “tired” of WWII in 1944.

Either Perry and Ricks will really their vision of what America is and ought to be, or they won’t. I do hope they fail.

By: Steve Metz

Steve Metz — Sun, 22 Feb 2009 13:15:49 +0000

I want to correct a typo in my own post #175. In the second bullet, the second sentence should read “That was NOT specifically what Dr. Zuhur was hired to do.” As I noted above, people are hired at SSI for their broad expertise, not to write on a single topic or issue.

Again, I am not making these points as a representative of the Strategic Studies Institute or the Army War College. I have no position of authority over Dr. Zuhur. As someone who knows the truth, I am simply pointing out the false statements in less-than-honest abe’s post.

By: Steve Metz

Steve Metz — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 13:51:17 +0000

Just to add a few more points about less-than-honest abe’s post:

–the statement that “SSI folks were punished for anything they said to the press, and what they wrote” is false
–the statement that “She came to write about the insurgency in Iraq and he wouldn’t let her” is false. That was specifically what Dr. Zuhur was hired to do. While I at least (and I’m not speaking for SSI) would have welcomed a study from her on that topic, she never proposed writing one at SSI’s annual research plan development meeting. So the idea that a “wouldn’t let her” is false.
–the assertion that Dr. Zuhur “was forced to co-author a piece relating to Muslim doctrines” is false.
–the assertion that Dr. Zuhur was “treated like a piece of X… by Metz, and others” is false. Like everyone else in SSI, she was held accountable for following the policies and prcticing the values she agreed to by accepting a job at SSI.

I am in no way making these points as a representative of the Strategic Studies Institute or the Army War College. I now have no position of authority over Dr. Zuhur. As someone who knows the truth, I am simply pointing out the false statements in less-than-honest abe’s post.

By: Steve Metz

Steve Metz — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 21:02:09 +0000

“honest abe” knows not of what he (or she) speaks. Whoever that is was not involved in SSI’s hiring and therefore has no idea what people were hired to do. SSI does not hire people to write about a single topic. If “abe” were truly in the know, he or she would understand that. They might also know that Dr. Zuhur never proposed writing an SSI study about the insurgency in Iraq.

By: honest abe

honest abe — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 18:31:12 +0000

1. My colleague, Zuhur is not a foreign national.
2. It is true that the War College has a huge problem, but NOT in failing to cover “radical Islam” — the problem is that is the only aspect they cover [and very poorly].
3. Also true that there are huge problems with academic freedom and SSI folks were punished for anything they said to the press, and what they wrote.
3. Zuhur was not hired to “research and write about Islamic thinking” NB Metz’s post. She came to write about the insurgency in Iraq and he wouldn’t let her (tried to write it himself with no Arabic, and no background & no understanding of Iraq) SSI specializes in strategy, foreign policy as it relates to strategy, and the analysis of conflicts, not religous philosophy. But she was forced to co-author a piece relating to Muslim doctrines & treated like a piece of X… by Metz, and others.

I saw it.

By: nichevo

nichevo — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 14:38:23 +0000

I’m'a close this tab now, victorious. TT, Sharifa, consider yourselves negated now and forever.

Cya
Wouldn’t wanna be ya!

By: nichevo

nichevo — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 21:49:35 +0000

You won’t feel right unless I ask? Very well, Stew, what would you do?

By: Stew Gable

Stew Gable — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 19:38:01 +0000

The purpose of war is the break the WILL of your enemy. It has always been that way. one can attack an enemy within the sub-groups of the 4 Instruments of National Power until the WILL is broken. The Terrorists and our enemies are very effective using this strategy against America.
The 4 Instruments of National Power are;

POLITICAL;
ECONOMIC;
PSYCHO-SOCIAL
MILITARY;

Brief examples;
POLITICAL; Our POLITICAL system is in chaos, confusion, turmoil, in conflict with one another and corrupt.

ECONOMIC; We are buried in unacceptable debt and deficit right now and are adding to it by the hour. This will: make the U. S Dollar crash in terms of fiat money of the world; in turn this will cause world ECONOMIC chaos; in turn, there will be a world ECONOMIC collapse that will provide an enhanced environment to recruit terrorist against the scapegoat, Americana. [against American values and the USA‘s default to the entire world by going off the Gold Standard, [Nixon, 1971] .

PSYCHO-SOCIAL: AMERICA and the West can’t stomach the Cost of Freedom under the strategy being used today. Consequently their WILL is being broken; body bags of American Boys, economic costs of the war, inability to fight the Nation State Style of war like WWI, WWII, and our inability to use CBR weapons for political correctness; the terrorist commitment to die for their beliefs to break our WILL is stronger than the average military man or guy in the streets of America.

MILITARY; Conscription is against the American way, per Vietnam; desertions will follow, students will demonstrate, no effective strategy to fight committed killers among the populous of Western World citizens.

WHAT IS OUR COUNTER STRATEGY? I have one, but none is listening.

By: nichevo

nichevo — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 05:18:23 +0000

Or atheist, of course. Maybe my religion is America, Western Civilization, or Humanity. From that perspective she is even more clearly evil. At least as a theist I appreciate her striving for the divine. As a nonbeliever she’s just the more barbaric sort of fool.