Orders to the USS NICHOLAS FFG 47

Well, I checked Bupers Online tonight and my orders to the Nicholas were there. There are a couple of interesting things on it, too. I have two intermediate stops. One of them is in Great Lakes for a 5 day trainer, the other is 47 days at ATG Norfolk for something, I know not what. I'm going to ask Kim to see if she can gather some information on that one. I know the one in Great Lakes is supposedly an FFG engineering mock up where they teach us casualty control procedures, etc. 5 days in Chicago, guess I can't complain. The 47 day one is the one that has me confused, but that's okay. Kim will find something out for me, I have faith in her. If not, coming from ATG it might be something important.

Not too much going on around here, been studying for the test tomorrow...and studying and studying! Wish me luck! After the test, I'm driving up to Walden where I'm going to meet Eric and Sheila and Jenny. Jenny and I will be getting on a plane to fly down to Norfolk for Thanksgiving, Eric and Sheila are going to Chicago (a little irony there). Other than that, nothing else is really going on. Well, I can't say that, I had a skunk problem yesterday morning on my run I forgot to mention. Seems that while I was running, there was a skunk in the middle of the street. I ran in place hoping he would leave, and he finally ran underneath a car and I passed by unscathed. I got to about the 1.0 mile point and another skunk ran out in the road, this one wasn't having anything to do with leaving. I ran a little closer and then backed off, but all he did was stand his ground and hiss at me. I ended up being the one who turned around and took an alternate route. So, I dubbed yesterday's run the skunk run.

Anyway, I need to get some sleep before my test tomorrow. Here are my orders for your perusal (forgive the Navy Type, that's the way they do messages, plus forgive it being jumbled, paste didn't accept the line breaks--sorry):

R 191118Z NOV 04 ZYB FM DEPCHNAVPERS MILLINGTON TN//PERS412/PERS455// TO SWOSCOLCOM NEWPORT RI//JJJ// USS NICHOLAS//JJJ// TRASUPPCEN GREAT LAKES IL//JJJ// COMAFLOATRAGRU ATLANTIC NORFOLK VA//JJJ// PERSUPP DET NEWPORT RI//JJJ// PERSUPP DET NTC GREAT LAKES IL//JJJ// PERSUPP DET NAVSTA NORFOLK VA//JJJ// INFO COMNAVSURFLANT NORFOLK VA//JJJ// RSO NORFOLK VA//JJJ// BT UNCLAS //N01321// MSGID/GENADMIN/CHNAVPERS// SUBJ/BUPERS ORDER// RMKS/ BUPERS ORDER: 3244 /1110 (PERS-4128) OFFICIAL CHANGE DUTY ORDERS FOR LT JEFFREY S CATHCART IV, USN XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX IN CARRYING OUT/PROCESSING THESE ORDERS, BOTH PARTS ONE AND TWO MUST BE READ AND LISTED INSTRUCTIONS COMPLIED WITH. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX P A R T O N E ------- DETACHING ACTIVITY (M) ------- WHEN DIRECTED BY REPORTING SENIOR, DETACH IN MAY 05 EDD: MAY 05 FROM STU SWOSCOLCOM NEWPORT UIC: 30465 PERMANENT DUTY STATION RI, NEWPORT FROM DUTY UNDER INSTRUCTION ACC: 342 PERSONNEL ACCOUNTING SUPPORT: PERSUPPDET NEWPORT RI UIC: 43099 ------- INTERMEDIATE (01) ACTIVITY (M) ------- REPORT NET 07 MAY 05 BUT NLT 09 MAY 05 EDA: 09 MAY 05 TO STU SERV SCH COMD G LAKES UIC: 30626 LOCATION: IL, GREAT LAKES FOR TEMPORARY DUTY UNDER INSTRUCTION ACC: 341 FOR APPROXIMATELY 5 DAY(S) PERSONNEL ACCOUNTING SUPPORT: PERSUPPDET NTC GREAT LAKES UIC: 43106 TO INCLUDE 5 DAY(S) AT D/GT PEO CLASS: CONV: 050509 GRAD: 050513 CDP: 276E UPON COMPLETION OF TEMPORARY DUTY UNDER INSTRUCTION AND WHEN DIRECTED, DETACH. EDD: 13 MAY 05 - REPORT NOT LATER THAN 0730 09 MAY 05 AND NOT EARLIER THAN 07 MAY 05 . REPORTING PRIOR TO NOT EARLIER THAN DATE WILL TERMINATE LEAVE STATUS AND RESULTS IN NON-PAYMENT OF PER DIEM FOR PERIOD PRIOR TO THE NOT EARLIER THAN DATE SPECIFIED UNLESS AUTHORIZED UNDER MILPERSMAN 1320-140. ------- INTERMEDIATE (02) ACTIVITY (M) ------- REPORT IN MAY 05 EDA: 16 MAY 05 TO AFLOATRAGRULANT ENG ASSESS TRG UIC: 35313 LOCATION: VA, NORFOLK FOR TEMPORARY DUTY ACC: 350 FOR APPROXIMATELY 47 DAY(S) PERSONNEL ACCOUNTING SUPPORT: PERSUPPDET NS NORFOLK UIC: 42574 UPON COMPLETION OF TEMPORARY DUTY AND WHEN DIRECTED, DETACH. EDD: 01 JUL 05 - BECAUSE ABOVE SHIP, OR SHIP BASED UNIT, MAY BE DEPLOYED AWAY FROM ITS HOME PORT, MEMBER DIRECTED TO PROCEED TO THE PORT IN WHICH ABOVE UNIT MAY BE LOCATED. UPON ARRIVAL REPORT CO OF UNIT FOR ABOVE DUTY. ------- ULTIMATE ACTIVITY (M) ------- REPORT NOT LATER THAN JUL 05 EDA: JUL 05 TO FFG 47 NICHOLAS UIC: 21199 HOMEPORT VA, NORFOLK FOR DUTY ACC: 100 BSC: 01510 PRD: 0701 PERSONNEL ACCOUNTING SUPPORT: FFG 47 NICHOLAS UIC: 21199 - REPORT AS ENGINEER OFFICER. - UNDER THE NAVY SPONSOR PROGRAM MEMBER ADVISED, TELEPHONE NUMBERS FOR FLEET AND FAMILY SUPPORT CENTERS OF HAMPTON ROADS, NORFOLK, VA ARE 24 HOURS, AUTOVON 564-6289, COMMERCIAL (757) 444-6289 AND 1-800- 372-5463 (1-800-FSC-LINE). VISIT US AT OUR WEBSITE: WWW.FFSCNORVA.NAVY.MIL (LOWERCASE LETTERS). ADDITIONALLY, PLEASE VISIT THE RELOCATION WEBSITE AT: WWW.NAVYNORFOLK.COM (LOWERCASE). - BECAUSE ABOVE SHIP, OR SHIP BASED UNIT, MAY BE DEPLOYED AWAY FROM ITS HOME PORT, MEMBER DIRECTED TO PROCEED TO THE PORT IN WHICH ABOVE UNIT MAY BE LOCATED. UPON ARRIVAL REPORT CO OF UNIT FOR ABOVE DUTY. ------- ACCOUNTING DATA ------- MAC CIC: 3N3E5 CIC: A83E53UF PCS ACCOUNTING DATA: N3E5 1751453.2251 T 068566 A8 3E5/3/U/F 3E5 TEMDUINS ACCOUNTING DATA FOR FY-05 1751804.22MB 000 00022/0 068892 3E5/3/U/F 3E5 P A R T T W O BUPERS ORDER: 3244 /1110 (PERS-4128) OFFICIAL CHANGE DUTY ORDERS FOR LT JEFFREY S CATHCART IV, USN ------- DETACHING ACTIVITY (M) ------- - DETACHING COMMAND AND PERSONNEL SUPPORT OFFICE DIRECTED TO ENSURE MEMBER COMPLETES, WITHIN THREE DAYS PRIOR DETACHMENT, APPLICABLE ITEMS ON BOTH SIDES OF TRAVEL INFORMATION FORM (NAVPERS 7041/1) AS REQUIRED BY BUPERSINST 7040.6 OR 7040.7. UPON COMPLETION SUBMIT FORM TO DIRECTOR, PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION, VARIANCE COMPONENT, 1240 EAST 9TH STREET, SUITE 967, CLEVELAND, OHIO 44199-2088. - IF DETACHING FROM OR REPORTING TO A UNIT WHEN IT'S AWAY FROM HOMEPORT/PDS, MEMBER IS AUTHORIZED TRAVEL VIA THE UNIT'S HOMEPORT/ PDS UNDER JFTR U5120F TO ASSIST WITH TRANSPORTATION OF DEPENDENTS AND/OR HHG, PICK UP PERSONAL ITEMS OR PERSONALLY DRIVE HIS/HER POV FROM THE HOMEPORT. - COMMAND DELIVERING ORDERS AND ULTIMATE COMMAND: DIRECTED TO COMPLY WITH MILPERSMAN 1740-010 REGARDING THE NAVY SPONSOR PROGRAM. MEMBER ADVISED: INFORMATION ON ULTIMATE DUTY STATION CAN BE OBTAINED FROM YOUR LOCAL FAMILY SERVICE CENTER. - MEMBER ADVISED: REQUIRED TO CONTACT HIS/HER NEAREST MILITARY TREATMENT FACILITY (MTF), MEDICAL DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVE, OR TRICARE SERVICE CENTER PRIOR TO TRANSFER FOR COUNSELING ON URGENT OR EMERGENCY MEDICAL CARE DURING PCS MOVES. UPON ARRIVAL AT NEW DUTY STATION, MEMBER IS REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE NEAREST MTF, MEDICAL DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVE, OR TRICARE SERVICE CENTER TO SELECT A PRIMARY CARE PROVIDER. THESE POINTS OF CONTACT CAN ALSO PROVIDE INFORMATION ON HEALTH CARE OPTIONS AVAILABLE FOR FAMILY MEMBERS NOT ENROLLED IN TRICARE PRIME. GENERAL TRICARE INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE ON THE WEB AT: HTTP://WWW.TRICARE.OSD.MIL. - FOR MORE INFORMATION ON YOUR NEXT PERMANENT CHANGE OF STATION (PCS) VISIT HTTP://WWW.HOUSING.NAVY.MIL/PCSHOUSE. THIS WEBSITE PROVIDES ON AND OFF BASE HOUSING AND GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT NAVY AND MARINE CORPS LOCATIONS WORLDWIDE. - DETACHING COMMAND: IF TRANSOCEANIC TRAVEL WILL BE PERFORMED BY MEMBER, PORT CALL ASSIGNED BY THE NAVY PASSENGER TRANSPORTATION OFFICE WILL CANCEL THE REPORT NOT LATER THAN DATE, AT RECEIVING COMMAND, AND SHALL CONSTITUTE THE SPECIFIC DATE MEMBER IS TO REPORT FOR TRANSPORTATION. IF THIS IS AN ORDER MODIFICATION, CANCELLATION OR MODIFICATION OF PORT CALL MAY BE REQUIRED. IF SO, IMMEDIATELY CONTACT SERVICING NPTO. OPNAVINST 4650.1S SERIES REFERS. - DETACHING COMMAND: ENSURE MEMBER HAS A COMPLETED AND DOCUMENTED HIV TEST WITHIN 24 MONTHS OF EDD. EVERY EFFORT SHOULD BE MADE TO ENSURE RESULTS ARE RECEIVED PRIOR TO TRANSFER. HOWEVER, IF RESULTS ARE NOT RECEIVED, ENSURE MEMBER'S MEDICAL/DENTAL RECORD REFLECTS THAT THE MEMBER'S TEST WAS COMPLETED AND AWAITING RESULTS. TEST RESULTS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO NEW DUTY STATION UPON RECEIPT FOR INCORPORATION IN MEDICAL/DENTAL RECORDS. - DETACHING COMMAND: IF AT THE TIME MEMBER IS BEING DETACHED FROM OR REPORTING TO A VESSEL/UNIT WHICH IS DEPLOYED AWAY FROM ITS HOMEPORT/ PDS, MEMBER MAY BE PAID PCS ALLOWANCES FROM THE LOCATION AT WHICH PCS TRAVEL BEGINS TO THE NEW/OLD PDS TO THE NEW/OLD UNIT VIA ITS OLD/ NEW HOMEPORT/PDS AND/OR ANY TDY STATION(S) JFTR U5120.F REFERS - DETACHING COMMAND: PRIOR TO TRANSFER OF MEMBER TO OVERSEAS ACTIVITIES OR DEPLOYABLE UNITS ENSURE THE FOLLOWING IS COMPLETED: A. PERSONNEL SUPPORT DETACHMENT OR PERSONNEL OFFICERS SHALL VERIFY DEERS ENROLLMENT VIA DEERS/REALTIME AUTOMATED PERSONNEL IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM (RAPIDS) CRT (WHERE AVAILABLE, TELEPHONE IF DEERS/RAPIDS CRT UNAVAILABLE), OR DD FORM 1172 VERIFICATION (WHERE CRT AND TELEPHONE ACCESS IS UNAVAILABLE). IN CASES WHERE A SERVICE RECORD ENTRY CONFIRMS THAT A DEERS CHECK WAS MADE WITHIN NINETY DAYS PRECEDING THE MEMBER'S TRANSFER, A NEW DEERS CHECK IS NOT REQUIRED. B. ADD, CHANGE OR TERMINATE ENROLLMENT DATA AS NECESSARY UNDER OPNAVINST 1750.2 C. A SERVICE RECORD ENTRY (TYPED OR STAMPED) WILL BE MADE ON NAVPERS 1070/613 CERTIFYING THE MEMBER'S DEPENDENTS ARE ACCURATELY ENROLLED IN THE DEERS DATA BASE. - MEMBER DIRECTED: CONTACT THE NAVY HOUSING WELCOME CENTER, HAMPTON BOULEVARD AND BAKER STREET, BUILDING SDA 337, NORFOLK, VA.(23505) PRIOR TO NEGOTIATING ANY RENTAL OR SALES AGREEMENT FOR OFF-BASE HOUSING. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CALL TOLL FREE 1-800-628-7510. (OPNAVINST 1101.13 AND OPNAVINST 11101.21 SERIES) - MEMBER ADVISED: WHEN MOVING TO THE SAN DIEGO OR NORFOLK REGION, MEMBER CAN UTILIZE THE NEW "NAVY EXCHANGE MOVING CENTER". THE NEX MOVING CENTER IS A FREE ONLINE SERVICE, WHICH ENABLES THE MEMBER TO SET UP HOUSEHOLD UTILITY AND OTHER NEEDED SERVICES. THIS SERVICE PROVIDES THE CONVENIENCE OF ONE STOP SHOPPING AND RATE COMPARISONS FOR UTILITIES I.E. ELECTRIC, CABLE, PHONE, GAS ETC. VISIT THE NAVY EXCHANGE WEBSITE AT: HTTP://WWW.NAVY-NEX.COM, AND CLICK ON THE NEX MOVING CENTER LINK OR HTTPS://WWW.MILITARYMOVINGCENTER.COM/NEXCOM/ (LOWER CASE). - DETACHING COMMAND: MEMBER IS DIRECTED TO COMPLETE OPERATIONAL DUTY SCREENING PER MILPERSMAN 1300-800 WITHIN 30 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THESE ORDERS. IF ORDERS ARE A RESULT OF COMPLETION OF LIMDU OR HAVING BEEN FOUND FIT BY PEB, UTILIZE MILPERSMAN 1300-801 AND REPORT RESULTS WITHIN 15 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THESE ORDERS. UPON COMPLETION, SUBMIT RESULTS VIA MESSAGE TO NPC PERS-40BB FOR ENLISTED AND RESPECTIVE DETAILER FOR OFFICERS. ------- INTERMEDIATE (01) ACTIVITY (M) ------- - MEMBER DIRECTED: FOR EACH INTERMEDIATE STOP(S), IF GOVERNMENT QUARTERS ARE AVAILABLE (BEQ, BOQ, OR NAVY LODGE) AND THE BASE HAS A GOVERNMENT MESS (APPROPRIATED FUND FOOD SERVICE ACTIVITY/GALLEY) AVAILABLE TO THE TRAVELER, USE OF THE GOVERNMENT MESS AND GOVERNMENT MEAL PER DIEM RATE IS DIRECTED. IF GOVERNMENT MESSING IS NOT AVAILABLE OR IS PARTIALLY AVAILABLE, OBTAIN AN ENDORSEMENT TO THAT EFFECT FROM THE HOST COMMAND. JFTR PARA U4400 AND CNO WASHINGTON DC NAVADMIN 223/96 (172134Z SEPT 96) APPLY. NO PERDIEM/ LODGING REIMBURSEMENT IS AUTHORIZED IF THIS INTERMEDIATE STOP IS IN THE SAME GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION AS ULTIMATE DUTY STATION. ------- INTERMEDIATE (02) ACTIVITY (M) ------- - MEMBER DIRECTED: FOR EACH INTERMEDIATE STOP(S), IF GOVERNMENT QUARTERS ARE AVAILABLE (BEQ, BOQ, OR NAVY LODGE) AND THE BASE HAS A GOVERNMENT MESS (APPROPRIATED FUND FOOD SERVICE ACTIVITY/GALLEY) AVAILABLE TO THE TRAVELER, USE OF THE GOVERNMENT MESS AND GOVERNMENT MEAL PER DIEM RATE IS DIRECTED. IF GOVERNMENT MESSING IS NOT AVAILABLE OR IS PARTIALLY AVAILABLE, OBTAIN AN ENDORSEMENT TO THAT EFFECT FROM THE HOST COMMAND. JFTR PARA U4400 AND CNO WASHINGTON DC NAVADMIN 223/96 (172134Z SEPT 96) APPLY. NO PERDIEM/ LODGING REIMBURSEMENT IS AUTHORIZED IF THIS INTERMEDIATE STOP IS IN THE SAME GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION AS ULTIMATE DUTY STATION. ------- ULTIMATE ACTIVITY (M) ------- - SAVE MONEY THE WELCOME CENTERS HAVE NEW PROGRAM INITIATIVES THAT SAVE MONEY ON RENT, SECURITY DEPOSITS, AND HOME BUYING COST. REDUCE TIME SPENT ON FINDING SUITABLE AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING. LEARN ABOUT PROGRAMS THAT WILL SAVE TIME AND MONEY BY VISITING THE LOCAL WELCOME CENTER. - MEMBER ADVISED: FOR NAVY LODGE INFORMATION VISIT WEBSITE WWW.NAVY- LODGE.COM CALL THE NAVY LODGE CENTRAL RESERVATION TOLL FREE (1-800- NAVY-INN/1-800-628-9466) TO DETERMINE NAVY LODGE AVAILABILITY IN THE VICINITY OF OLD AND NEW PERMANENT DUTY STATIONS. RESERVATIONS ARE REQUIRED TO ENSURE ROOM AVAILABILITY. FOR A MEMBER TRAVELING IN A "PCS WITH FAMILY" STATUS, RESERVATIONS MAY BE MADE ANYTIME. REFER TO SECNAVINST 11107.2 SERIES. - UNIT TO WHICH ORDERED IS DESIGNATED, BY SECNAVINST 4650.19 (SERIES), AS UNUSUALLY ARDUOUS SEA DUTY. FOR TRANSPORTATION ENTITLEMENTS OF DEPENDENTS AND HOUSEHOLD GOODS SEE JFTR, PAR. U5222-D AND U5350-D-E. ------- SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS ------- - MEMBER ADVISED: FOR QUESTIONS AND GUIDANCE CONCERNING SHIPMENT OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD GOODS, TRANSPORTATION SPECIALIST ARE ON DUTY TO SERVE YOU AND CAN BE CONTACTED AT 1-800-444-7789 MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY 0800-1700 EASTERN TIME. ARRANGE YOUR HOUSEHOLD GOODS SHIPMENT (S) ONLINE USING SMARTWEB MOVE (SWM) AT WWW.SMARTWEBMOVE.NAVSUP.NAVY.MIL SWM HANDLES MOST PCS MOVE ARRANGEMENTS AND ELIMINATES THE NEED FOR A PERSONAL VISIT TO YOUR LOCAL PERSONAL PROPERTY OFFICE FOR A COUNSELING SESSION. WHEN YOU KNOW YOUR NEW ADDRESS, YOU CAN USE THE FREE ON-LINE NEX MOVING CENTER AT WWW.NAVY-NEX.COM TO SET UP ESSENTIAL UTILITIES AND SERVICES FOR YOUR NEW HOME ANYWHERE IN CONUS AND HAWAII. - MEMBER DIRECTED: FOR INFORMATION REGARDING YOUR ULTIMATE DUTY STATION CONTACT THE NEAREST DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FAMILY SERVICE CENTER OR RELOCATION ASSISTANCE OFFICE. - COMMAND DELIVERING ORDERS: IF MEMBER WILL BE PERFORMING TRANSOCEANIC/INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL AT ANY TIME DURING EXECUTION OF THESE ORDERS THE FOLLOWING APPLIES: - TRAVEL VIA GOVERNMENT AIR/GOVERNMENT-PROCURED AIR DIRECTED OUTSIDE CONUS; - TRANSPORTATION MUST BE ARRANGED WITH THE NAVY PASSENGER TRANSPORTATION OFFICE PER NAVMILPERSCOMINST 4650.2 SERIES. FAMILY MEMBERS ARE AUTHORIZED TWO (2) PIECES OF CHECKED BAGGAGE, EACH PIECE NOT TO EXCEED 62 LINEAR INCHES NOR 50 POUNDS. MILITARY MEMBERS ARE AUTHORIZED ONE (1) SEABAG NOT TO EXCEED 70 POUNDS, AND ONE (1) PIECE OF CHECKED BAGGAGE NOT TO EXCEED 62 LINEAR INCHES NOR 50 POUNDS. COUNSEL MEMBER AND DEPENDENTS CONCERNING OVERSEAS TRAVEL SECURITY MEASURES AS ADDRESSED IN U.S. ARMED FORCES FOREIGN CLEARANCE GUIDE, CLASSIFIED SUPPLEMENT. - COMPLY WITH MILPERSMAN 1320-090 AND 1320-100 REGARDING TRAVEL AND AUTHORIZED PROCEED TIME IN EXECUTION OF THESE ORDERS. - WHEN PCSING, AN EXCELLENT AND VERY USEFUL SOURCE OF INFORMATION IS THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS LIFELINES SERVICES NETWORK (LSN) AVAILABLE ON THE INTERNET AT HTTP://WWW.LIFELINES2000.ORG. YOU'LL FIND TIPS ON MOVING YOUR HOUSEHOLD GOODS OR SHIPPING YOUR CAR, INFORMATION ON YOUR NEW DUTY STATION, HOW TO STAY CONNECTED WITH FAMILIES, MOVING PETS, HOW TO FIND HOUSING AT YOUR NEW DUTY STATION, AND A WEALTH OF RELOCATION AND SUPPORT RESOURCES FOR YOU AND YOUR FAMILY. - FOR COMMAND MAILING ADDRESS CONSULT THE STANDARD NAVAL DISTRIBUTION LIST (SNDL) ONLINE AT HTTP://NEDS.NEBT.DAPS.MIL/SNDL.HTM OR VISIT YOUR PSA, PSD OR ADMIN OFFICE. - COMMANDING OFFICER: ENSURE SERVICEMEMBER COMPLETES ARGUS QUESTIONNAIRE (AS REQUIRED BY OPNAV 1040.10) PRIOR TO EXECUTION OF ORDERS. WEBSITE: HTTP://WWW.STAYNAVY.NAVY.MIL/ (SIGNED) J. W. TOWNES, III REAR ADMIRAL, U. S. NAVY DEPUTY CHIEF OF NAVAL PERSONNEL PERS413A , PERS412 BT

Early Morning Thoughts

It's 0530, and I've already had a pretty good run this morning! The temperature was fantastic, and the run was pretty good. I ran 2 miles this morning, then did pushups and crunches and a few other calisthenics and then ran another half mile. I feel it this morning, too--the hills are what get me. That last half mile was up a hill, by the time I got to the top, I was a hurting unit. But, I grunted my way through it (breathing heavily muttering "Hail Mary's" under my breath). Now I sit here, mostly worn out, getting ready to take a shower and go to work. We have a test on Wednesday, so I have to be ready for it. I studied for almost 4 hours yesterday, and I plan on going in tonight and tomorrow night and studying some more. I have to get the info into my head so I can take the test with confidence. That way when I leave to go home for Thanksgiving, I won't have the test looming over my head. Besides, like I keep telling myself, going to school and learning this stuff is my job, so I have to do it and be ready for when I get to the fleet. I get a little negative every once in a while and say, why am I learning this stuff? I'm going to a frigate and we don't have ANY of these weapons systems, so why are they making me learn it?! Then, my rational side takes over and reminds me of one thing--this is the only school we get before TWO department head tours. That means on my next tour, I COULD be on a ship that has these weapons systems. If I don't learn it now, I'll never go back to another school that will teach me the tactics. So, when my rational side says that, I smile, and say (pardon me for using the same words as President Bush) "Bring it on."

I was thinking about a few things on my way home from studying last night. One of them was parochialism within the services. I was thinking, at first, about how bad it is. Then I got to thinking about it, and I realized something--parochialism isn't all bad. It does have good points to. Like anything else, moderation is the key. Parochialism is good because it keeps each of the services focused on what their specific job is. Parochialism keeps the Navy focused on ships and naval air warfare and submarines. We are the only ones who do that, therefore we must have some parochialism to ensure that we can continue to do it. Where parochialism becomes bad is when we get so focused on doing "Navy Things" that we forget about the overall objectives of the national strategy--you know, the one that requires all branches to work together for the common good. And yes, sometimes that will mean the Navy sacrificing funding or other things so the Air Force can carry out its role in the joint mission. But, for the Navy, that also means sometimes the Air Force giving up part of its funding, etc. to ensure the Navy can carry out its part of the nation's mission. It lead me back to thinking about what Captain O'Connor told me when I was in one of my mentoring sessions with her. She said the key to being a good department head is to realize that the mission of the ship is what is primarily important. Therefore, as Chief Engineer, I not only have to do my job, but I have to be there, offering my support to Ops, CSO and Suppo to ensure that they can carry out their portion of the mission, and vice-versa--if I have to sacrifice some of my optar to ensure that Ops gets what he needs, then I should if it will help the mission of the ship. That simple motto can translate into the branches of the service, too. Our overarching mission is to fight the nation's wars, to carry out the orders of the President, and to support the Grand Strategy of the United States. Like department heads on a ship, the branches of the military need to work together on this mission. Parochialism to the extent that it improves each branch as a warfighting element of national power, but parochialism goes away when we need to support each other to accomplish the national mission. It doesn't mean that I have to agree with what we are doing in the nation's mission, but I WILL do it, because I took an oath and I love this country.

I must refer you back to one of my previous posts when I was going to talk to Captain O'Connor for a mentoring session. I was working out my philosophy for my department. It was "Answer the Ordered Bell." Simple, but overarching. Sometimes answering the ordered bell means sending people out on the forecastle to help Ops with some piece of equipment, or sacrificing some of my Optar to ensure that CSO gets his consoles groomed prior to deployment. It means supporting my fellow department heads in carrying out the mission of the ship and the orders of the Captain. It also means them doing the same. Shipmates helping shipmates--what a concept. Hearkens back to the days of the tin can sailor :)

But, I have to get ready for work, time flies and I need to go get ready for another action packed day.

God bless America!

A refresher so you don't have to scroll down and find this ;)

My Motto is: "Answer the Ordered Bell" To accomplish this, I have three priorities. They are:
1) Readiness- 100% readiness both material and personnel
2) Support- Be on top of the game and provide as much support as possible to all other departments because I recognize that engineering is not the most important department on the ship--no department is. We are all a team and we must help each other out. There will be no "us vs them" mentality in Engineering.
3) People- Sailors are our #1 asset and we must treat them as such. Sailorize the juniors and mentor all.

For the troops I came up with this:
As Chief Engineer, I have 3 top goals or priorities:
1) Readiness, both training and material
2) Support- All departments, we're one ship, one team
3) Sailorization and Mentoring- Sailors are our #1 asset

My motto is "Answer the ordered bell" and these three priorities will help us do that.

Readiness: Training- not rote training but effective training both schoolhouse and inhouse. Train our sailors right, train them well and train them often. Material- I understand that things break, but we must be flexible and adaptive enough to corrects problems as quickly as we can and fulfill our mission--not only the ship's mission as a warship, but our mission of support for our fellow departments. We should always be striving for the Red 'E' which leads into the next priority,

Support: Engineering is the most important department on the ship. So is Ops, So is CS, So is Supply. (I made this a positive statement instead of the negative statement it used to be.) We're one ship, one team and we all work together. We will support our fellow departments so that not only will we strive for the Red 'E' but we assist the other departments so, as a team, we can win the Battle 'E'. There is no us vs them in engineering. Finally,

Sailorization and Mentoring: Sailors are our #1 asset and we need to mentor them to make them better sailors, and we need to make new sailors feel welcome and a part of the team, and teach them Navy ways--that's sailorization--but make the GOOD sailors.
posted by scott at 8/27/2004 08:44:45 AM

Blessed are the poor in spirit...

...for theirs is the kingdom of Heaven.

Not too much happening on the homefront today. I just finished watching Shrek 2 on the computer. DVD's are wonderful that way. Other than that, I'm not up to much. I went in and studied for almost four hours today (10 more minutes and it would've been 4 hours). I will probably be in studying again tomorrow because I have to get ready for this exam that is coming up on Wednesday. I'll take the exam and then I will drive up to MA and pick up Jenny and she and I will catch a plane down to Virginia. I'm looking forward to going home again...I would be lying if I said I weren't a little homesick.

I'm a little depressed for some reason tonight. I feel like I'm missing something in my life right now, and need to find it. The first thing that comes to mind is passion--I'm missing passion in my life. I need something in my life to drive me other than just waking up every morning and going through the same mundane routine. Banal would probably be the word I used for it. I need passion in my life. I have yet to figure out how to capture it, though. I am being more positive, though. I'm keeping a smile on my face and finding the good in everything around me. Now if I could just find the passion to go with it.

Not too much else is happening around here. I'm definitely looking forward to going home for Thanksgiving, and I'm looking forward to going home for Christmas, too (speaking of which, I need to put my leave chit in for that).

Nothing else to report on the homefront.

Non nobis, Domine...

Sunday Morning

I'm making my Sunday morning routine to read some of the world's newspapers to educate myself on the rest of the worlds opinions on things. I've found 3 that are particularly poignant, so I'll post them on here for everyone to read. One is from the New York Times, one from the Japan Times, and the other from The Times Britain.

I went out with Brennan (my roomate) and his brother last night. We bounced around different places, had a few drinks, played some pool, ate dinner, then ate a latenight snack. I had a pretty good time. It felt good to finally get out and do something with someone other than going out by myself! Other than that, not too much else is going on. I just finished reading through the papers, so I'll post the info. Maybe I'll do some more surfing through world papers and will post some more later. I do have to go in and study today, our test is Wednesday! Wish me luck. Here are the articles:

The New York Times
November 21, 2004
OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
A Doctrine Left Behind
By MARK DANNER

It seemed somehow fitting, and fittingly sad, that Colin Powell saw his resignation accepted as secretary of state on the day marines completed their conquest of Falluja, ensuring that the televised snapshots of glory drawn from his long public career would be interspersed with videotape of American troops presiding over scenes of urban devastation in a far-off and intractable war.
As I watched images from Mr. Powell's life flicker past, and as the fruits of the American victory became clear - a ravaged city; an elusive enemy, most of whom had escaped; a countrywide counterattack in which insurgents seized parts of Mosul - I felt a ghostly echo of words I could not quite grasp. Two days later, watching an American general declare that in Falluja our forces had "broken the back of the insurgency," I felt the sentences I'd struggled to recall suddenly take shape; I reached for Mr. Powell's memoir and found these bitter lines:
"Our senior officers knew the war was going badly. Yet they bowed to groupthink pressure and kept up pretenses. ...Many of my generation, the career captains, majors, and lieutenant colonels seasoned in that war, vowed that when our turn came to call the shots, we would not quietly acquiesce in halfhearted warfare for half-baked reasons that the American people could not understand."
Those plain words about Vietnam stand out with refreshing immediacy today, in this age of the destruction of the fact, when incontrovertible but unwelcome information is dismissed as partisan argument. What might the Colin Powell who wrote those words, or the younger officer in Vietnam who envisaged his future as a man who could never "quietly acquiesce," have said about our present war? What might "many of his generation" - who are indeed the men now commanding in Iraq - have said, had they not themselves quietly acquiesced?
They might have said that it is a deeply uncontroversial fact that the United States has from the beginning had too few troops in Iraq: too few to secure the capital or effectively monitor the borders or even police the handful of miles of the Baghdad airport road; too few to secure the arms dumps that litter the country; and too few to mount an offensive in one city without leaving others vulnerable.
They might have said that it is a deeply uncontroversial fact that the insurgency is spreading: when I arrived in Iraq 13 months ago, the insurgents were mounting 17 attacks a day; last week there were 150 a day. If the old rule of thumb about counterinsurgency warfare holds true - that the guerrilla wins by not losing and the government loses by not winning - then America is losing the Iraq war. The Iraqi insurgents have shown "outstanding resilience," as a Marine intelligence report compiled after Falluja put it, and "will continue to find refuge among sympathetic tribes and former regime members."
Finally, these imaginary officers who refused to "quietly acquiesce" might have said that it is a deeply uncontroversial fact that if indeed the war is going very badly, the fault belongs not with commanders in the field but with policymakers in Washington, who in conceiving and executing the war made a series of flagrant mistakes and then doggedly refused to acknowledge or correct them: the failure over many weeks to establish law and order in Baghdad and other cities; the failure to begin an effective reconstruction program, leaving many Iraqis without electricity, water and other basic supplies for months; and finally - according to James R. Schlesinger, a Republican and former secretary of defense, in his report on the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison - the failure not only "to plan for a major insurgency, but also to quickly and adequately adapt to the insurgency that followed after major combat operations."
It is a sad and familiar litany. But however widely these disasters are acknowledged, many Americans seem willing to treat them as if they were acts of God rather than the results of decisions that were made, and not made, by our officials - decisions that stem ultimately from a failure to coordinate the agencies and departments of American power.
This job falls, by statute and custom, to the national security adviser. And it is directly to that office that "the major interagency coordination problems between State and Defense and the striking ineffectiveness of the National Security Council" can be traced, in the words of Anthony Cordesman. Mr. Cordesman, a nonpartisan military analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, is one of many professionals who trace the disasters in Iraq back to failure to resolve conflicts between major government departments, as well as to debilitating "ideological efforts to shape the nation-building effort and personnel deployed to Iraq."
After Condoleezza Rice's elevation as Mr. Powell's successor, so much of the commentary seemed focused on her "closeness" to the president that it might have seemed the height of indiscretion to point out that she has been something of a disaster in her present job - a fact widely acknowledged among foreign policy professionals.
No one can say how many lives could have been saved had the responsible officials asked the right questions. As it happens, those questions had been laid out with courage and clarity back in 1992, by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the time, Colin Powell. While the Powell Doctrine is generally thought simply to prescribe the setting of clear objectives and the use of overwhelming force to achieve them, it also sets out a series of questions that policymakers must ask and answer before committing American lives to war. They make sobering reading today:
"Is the political objective we seek to achieve important, clearly defined and understood? Have all other nonviolent policy means failed? Will military force achieve the objective? At what cost? Have the gains and risks been analyzed? How might the situation that we seek to alter, once it is altered by force, develop further and what might be the consequences?"
Faced with the war in Iraq, how might Mr. Powell have answered these questions? The main "political objective" the United States sought in Iraq, insofar as the president identified it, was to deprive Saddam Hussein of his weapons of mass destruction. These always ghostly objects have long since evaporated; and no matter how often administration officials repeat that the French, Germans, Russians and the United Nations also judged that Mr. Hussein had weapons, this will not change the recalcitrant fact that these parties did not accept that they posed enough of a threat to support an immediate war.
Second, had "all other nonviolent means failed" to disarm Mr. Hussein? Though the president is still fond of declaring, as he did in the first presidential debate, that "Saddam Hussein had no intention of disarming," the rest of us have perhaps not entered too deeply into the post-factual age not to acknowledge what we now know: that in fact Saddam Hussein did disarm - and that the international inspectors on the scene, given time and sufficient diplomatic support, would eventually have confirmed this - just as David Kay, the administration's arms inspector, was able to do in the war's aftermath. As he allowed himself to say in a moment of near-suicidal honesty, in the matter of the weapons the Iraqis "were telling the truth."
But it is in posing his last several questions that the younger Mr. Powell becomes a truly heartbreaking figure - the questions about "gains and risks" and about consequences. How do we evaluate these? We can speak of the 1,200 Americans dead and 9,000 wounded, or even of the thousands of Iraqis who have died. But what objective do we weigh them against?
And finally: "How might the situation that we seek to alter, once it is altered by force, develop further and what might be the consequences?" The question is unflinching, but there is little evidence that the administration Secretary Powell served ever made a serious attempt to answer it. What would such an attempt have looked like? We know the answer; for in 1992 the general himself offered us an example of the "logical process" he had in mind, analyzing why President George H. W. Bush did not order our forces to take Baghdad in 1991:
"We must assume that the political objective of such an order would have been capturing Saddam Hussein," he wrote. "What purpose would it have served? And would serving that purpose have been worth the many more casualties that would have occurred? Would it have been worth the inevitable follow-up: major occupation forces in Iraq for years to come and a very expensive and complex American proconsulship in Baghdad? Fortunately for America, reasonable people at the time thought not."
These lines carry with them the whiff of far-off times, a lost world of pragmatism that pre-dated the religious trappings of the war on terrorism. Today, "the major occupation forces" Mr. Powell warned against are fighting a guerrilla war in a country on the Persian Gulf, through which half the industrial world's oil passes - a country far more strategically important than Vietnam.
Begun as an ideological crusade, the war has now settled into something bloody, murderous and crude, with no "exit strategy" in sight. The war's beginning, built on the threat of weapons that did not exist, and its ending, which flickered to life so temptingly on the flight deck of the aircraft carrier Lincoln 18 months ago, have disappeared, leaving American troops fighting and dying in a kind of lost, existential desert of the present. We may not have yet reached Colin Powell's vision of "half-hearted warfare for half-baked reasons that the American people could not understand." But we are well on the way.
Mark Danner is the author of "Torture and Truth: America, Abu Ghraib and the War on Terror."


Japan Times
Last gasp of U.S. hegemony
By KEVIN RAFFERTY Special to The Japan Times HONG KONG --
Sometimes it is difficult to fathom the mind of Mr. Market. After the Congress Party won the Indian election, the stock market plunged. After U.S. President George W. Bush's re-election was confirmed, markets everywhere were almost dancing with joy, seemingly oblivious to $50-a-barrel oil prices, the bloody mess in Iraq, the threats from al-Qaeda, America's jobless recovery and its yawning deficits.
TV's talking heads were jubilant, declaring that a victory for tax cuts that would boost economic growth and send Wall Street and other markets soaring. Perhaps it was the hallucinatory effect of the election slogans that had many voters believing that God and American guns could keep gays and terrorists at bay while restoring peace, harmony and prosperity to the world.
The reality is that Bush will be forced to make hard choices, and the American people will have to face pain for their profligacy. For the rest of the world, U.S. difficulties will bring hardships.
But while the rest of the world has the potential to recover, this is the beginning of the end of U.S. hegemony. It will be a tougher new world that emerges, but as with the British Empire or Ancient Rome, there is nothing God-given or eternal that says Washington must rule the world forever.
Perhaps the only good thing about the U.S. election was that it was over quickly and cleanly. However, the whole pantomime performance of the poll should raise doubts about the efficiency and validity of its contribution to democracy.
Bill Bonner of the Daily Reckoning said he had been hoping that both candidates would lose. He cynically noted that Americans are proud of their democracy: It gives them an opportunity to change leadership "by fraud, rather than by force. The candidates stir up the mob of lumpen voters however they can, dredging from the bottom of the pot the most sordid and titillating sentiments. One offers visions of apocalypse, and stands tall as the man who can protect them. The other says he will give voters more pills, at someone else's expense of course, and a whole new range of bribes while also cutting the federal deficit in half!
"No matter that the promises are implausible, impossible, oxymoronic or merely stunningly counterproductive, the crowd takes to it like a shot of Jack Daniels after escaping from a dry-out center."
Bonner does exaggerate, but the problem with this U.S. version of democracy is that the demos gets a single chance every four years -- or two years if you count the congressional elections -- to make their voices heard.
Since both houses of Congress now have stronger Republican majorities, there is little to stop Bush doing whatever he wants, especially now that he has the moral advantage of a 51 percent majority of the popular vote. In 2000 Bush lost the popular vote and won in the electoral college only after the intervention of the Supreme Court. But that did not stop him from opening a perilous second front in the war against terror on the basis of badly flawed intelligence.
As a European, I find it hard to understand how the American people can swallow Bush's contradictory claim that the war against terror is going jolly well but that, since the danger is greater than ever before, he is the leader to keep America safe. I pray that in the wake of his triumph, he listens to British Prime Minister Tony Blair's pleas that renewed efforts must be made in the quest for a Middle East peace as the key to defeating the terrorists.
The war in Iraq is more than a sideshow. Indeed, it is an expensive drain in both manpower and money on an already overstretched American economy. This is the real problem that Bush faces, and it will not go away even if he zaps all the terrorists from Iraq to Afghanistan.
Stephen Roach, Morgan Stanley's perceptive economist, drew attention to the fact that some of the numbers are nothing short of frightening. The U.S. currently has $38 trillion in debts, and there is a $54 trillion federal funding gap -- the difference between what the government is committed to pay out and what it will receive in tax revenues.
Not to worry, say cheerful economists who point to the fact that, although the 3.7 percent growth in the third quarter was a bit below expectations, consumers are still spending. In fact, consumer spending accounts for about 70 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product.
By many measures, Americans are far better off than they have ever been, with more electric devices and gadgetry crammed into even bigger homes. The average American house was 135 square meters in 1970 -- today it is 201 square meters. And of course those homes are worth more and more when measured in dollars -- the world's monopoly money.
But, Roach noted, America's net national savings rate fell to a record low of 0.4 percent early last year. It has risen slightly to just 1.9 percent. Roach warned that, with such low domestic savings, America imports foreign savings to fund economic growth. "The external deficit [has] risen to 5.7 percent of GDP." The U.S. is now absorbing more than 80 percent of the world's surplus savings, "requiring $2.6 billion of capital inflows each business day to fund its domestic saving shortfall."
The U.S. is spending at all levels like there is no tomorrow. The trade deficit is hitting new records. The budget deficit is growing and will grow faster while Iraq bleeds American money. Meanwhile, a demographic time bomb is ticking as aging baby boomers reach retirement age. The number of Americans aged 65 and above will rise from 12.4 percent of the total population to 18.2 percent over the next 25 years, though that's well after Bush leaves the White House.
When will the economic nuclear explosion occur? Like riding a bicycle, continuous momentum is important. The situation may continue as long as the rest of the world is prepared to accept dollar assets.
Roach concluded that savings is the sustenance of long-term growth for any economy. And yet America is lacking in savings as never before. It has finessed that shortfall by consuming the wealth generated by asset appreciation and by drawing heavily on the world's pool of surplus savings.
In my view there is nothing stable about this arrangement. In fact, there is a growing risk that America's savings shortfall will only intensify in the years ahead -- especially given Washington's total lack of fiscal integrity. As always, the flows will give the impression that this outcome is sustainable. In the end, nothing could be further from the truth.
Kevin Rafferty, a former managing editor for the World Bank, is author of "City on the Rocks, Hong Kong's Uncertain Future" (Viking Press, 1990).
The Japan Times: Nov. 15, 2004



The Sunday Times – Britain
November 21, 2004
Britain joins EU Army
BRITAIN is to commit more than 2,000 troops to a new 18,000-strong European Union army that will be deployed as a peacekeeper to the world’s trouble spots, write Adam Nathan and Nicola Smith.
Despite concerns within the military about overstretch, ministers will announce this week that at least one battle group will be ready by January.
They will also say the force will expand by 2007 to comprise a multinational force of up to 12 elite rapid-reaction battle groups — each with 1,500 soldiers. At least two of these groups will be ready to deploy at 15 days’ notice to humanitarian or peacekeeping emergencies, primarily in Africa.
Soldiers from the Parachute Regiment and the Royal Marines have been earmarked for the new force.
A British official said: “A commander could immediately draw on 1,500 troops who will be sitting in the barracks with their boots on, ready to go.”
The creation of the force was signalled earlier this year by Tony Blair following the crisis in Darfur, Sudan, and comes only a week after Britons had to be evacuated from fighting in the Ivory Coast.
Although it is not envisaged that the battle groups would be deployed to the Middle East, they could have a role in supporting policing and the rule of law. An EU team is to visit Iraq within the next fortnight.
The force — which would comprise the rapid-reaction units in an EU army that supporters want to expand to 60,000 — is already prompting some concerns that it could duplicate the role of Nato.
Nicholas Soames, the Conservatives’ defence spokesman, said: “We believe the EU defence contribution should be under the Nato umbrella. Anything that undermines Nato is damaging. We will be studying the details but this sort of duplication is an expensive waste of time.”
Some Nato planners are concerned that the new force should not be used as a cheaper substitute for the alliance and insist that EU military units must be trained to Nato standards. “It is right to pose the political questions, but at the moment we do not need to sound the alarm bell,” said a diplomat at Nato HQ in Brussels.
Any deployment would require an emergency meeting of the EU’s council of ministers. Membership of a battle group would not be compulsory and individual nations would retain a veto over deployment.
Military command in the field would lie with the country with the biggest contingent. Britain, France, Italy and Spain will each provide one battle group made up solely of its troops, while Britain will share a second battle group with the Dutch. Seventeen EU countries have committed soldiers.
General Jean-Paul Perruche, French head of the EU’s military staff, said the creation of the battle groups was a “significant” development.
“It is the adaptation of the capabilities of Europe to the new context of crisis in the world. To be able to commit at short notice a significant trained force, to intervene in an emerging crisis ,” he said.
It has also been mooted as an attempt to encourage European countries to investment more in military capabilities. There is growing concern within Britain’s armed forces about their ability to meet their commitments after it emerged that more than £1 billion is to be cut from “frontline” forces.
Senior officers — including, it is believed, General Sir Michael Jackson, chief of the general staff — are concerned that it will leave the army without the funding needed for 1,000 soldiers, about 1% of its force.
· Commonwealth troops working in sensitive positions in the British armed forces have been told to adopt British nationality or lose their jobs. Some 8,000 Commonwealth troops work for the services and the ultimatum will affect those with access to sophisticated equipment and sensitive information, particularly in the special forces.
The Ministry of Defence said: “There are various criteria that must be satisfied for personnel with access to sensitive material, one of which is nationality. The Home Office will fast-track dual nationality, but if they do not wish to take it we will endeavour to move them to another part of the service. We are not asking them to turn their backs on their countries.”

Sunrise, Sunrise :)

Well, the dreaded first test is over! I finished it in under 45 minutes, Thank God! My writing finger is now tired because of it, but my brain feels like it could leap a tall mountain. I studied, and studied and studied--and will continue to do so for the next sections. But at least the first giant hurdle is done. I didn't ace the test, but I don't think I failed it, either. The instructors did somewhat "focus" us yesterday for the test, but I believe even if they hadn't, I had studied enough--and enough of the right stuff--that I still would've passed it. I'm just glad it's over!

I'm home now, don't have to be back until 1230 to begin Air Defense (AD). I'm still a little concerned about the pace of everything, but I'm still going to "study, study, study" since that is my job for the next 6 months (give or take a week ;) I'm going to go back in tonight to study, too, because I feel that keeping a steady press on studying will help me not only memorize the information, but retain it for future use (assimilation versus regurgitation).

Since I'm home so early, I'm thinking about doing my run now. I skipped my run this morning to get a last minute look at my notes. Since I don't have to be back until 1230, I may just go running now.

Not much else to report. I talked to Kim last night--good conversation--I needed that! She gave me the low down on stuff that was happening at the TSC. Hopefully she is changing the world for the better there (knowing her, she IS!). Other than that, I'm just re-reading the ERNT (Executive Review of Naval Training) and annotating it (again--I gave away my annotated copy without thinking).

Everyone have fun, I'm going to put on some shorts and go for a run! (And don't forget the push-ups, sit-ups, crunches, leg lifts, and other calisthenics that go with it.)

Pax in Terra

Short Post---BIG Test Tomorrow

Tomorrow is our C4ISR test--the BIG one! This, supposedly, is the hardest test we will take while we are here, for no other reason than the amount of information that it encompasses. I've been studying, and I'm going back shortly to study some more. Can slack off, too much at stake here!

Anyway, the biggest reason I wanted to post this one is because I wanted to create a link to the ERNT--Executive Review of Naval Training. Everytime I look for it I spend more and more time trying to find it because it is slowly being phased out. I have my own suspicions about that, but that's another post ;) I copied it and have dumped it in my ftp account online. So, if you want to read it, here's the link: ERNT Enjoy!

Anyway, wish me luck on my test tomorrow--I'm going to need it!

Pax in Terra

Snow and Politics

I woke up this morning to the wonderful view of snow on the ground! Haven't seen snow in a while, and really, really like snow, so I'm not going to complain ;) Today is also Greg's Birthday...Happy Birthday; and my Mom and Dad's Anniversary...Happy Anniversary!

I found some articles in the Japanese Times that I thought I would post here for everyone to look at. There are 3 of them. The first one Democrats should really take heed of, it has some good advice in it. The second on is an article on how Conservatives sold their souls, and the final one is an article on China that is most interested. I really liked the political articles on the Democrats and Conservatives, it gave some good insight into politics. The final article gives some good info on China and the reshaping of the world. Good reads! If you want to go there, the website is http://www.japantimes.co.jp

Neocon lessons for Democrats
By MICHAEL O'HANLON Special to The Japan Times
WASHINGTON -- As Democrats comb the 2004 election results for lessons, one should be obvious: we need bolder, newer ideas, particularly in this post-9/11 world in the realm of foreign policy. Just as neocons have provided much of the spark and intellectual energy behind modern-day Republicanism, Democrats need a "neoprogressive" movement to give purpose and vision to their party -- and political hope to their future candidates.
Big ideas are needed in a changing, challenging international environment. They are also good politics. Candidates with big ideas convey purpose and gravity. They also convey resoluteness and firm beliefs--traits that helped President George W. Bush appeal to voters on the grounds that he had character and shared their values.
Neocons have shown how to come up with big ideas in recent years. They provided some of the intellectual heft and vision behind President Ronald Reagan's outlandish belief that the Berlin Wall should come down. More recent notable examples are Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz's conviction that the overthrow of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein could help remake the Middle East, former foreign-policy adviser Richard Perle's willingness to confront Saudi Arabia over its internal policies and the beliefs of John Bolton, Bush's undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, that arms control can be used in a more confrontational way to put pressure on extremist regimes.
One need not agree with much of the neocon movement to admire its intellectual vigor and its ambitious approach. Indeed, neocons can be dangerous. Many bear considerable intellectual responsibility for trivializing the costs and difficulties of war in Iraq. And the doctrine of preemption, a classic neoconservative type of concept, contributed to an international image of an America unbound, to use Ivo Daalder and Jim Lindsay's phrase.
But big ideas are better than no ideas. The key is to ensure that they are debated and vetted, not to squelch them in advance.
Some might disagree with this assessment, at least in political terms, claiming that what Democrats need is simple credibility on foreign policy so that they can neutralize the issue and out-compete Republicans on domestic turf. This perspective, which seems to have guided much of the Kerry campaign this year, begs the question of how one obtains credibility in the first place. Purple hearts from Vietnam, however commendable, do not suffice -- which should be no surprise since Bill Clinton defeated two war heroes and Ronald Reagan defeated a Naval Academy graduate in their respective runs for the White House.
Nor is it enough to run on a platform of multilateralism, however right in principle that basic tenet of John Kerry's campaign may have been. Multilateralism is a means and not an end; it describes process more than goals or vision.
In preparing for 2006 and 2008, Democrats need to think about how they would like history books to look back on their tenures in office should they be so fortunate as to regain the White House and/or the Congress. Then they should work backward, fashioning concrete ideas to create those legacies and political strategies for how to sell them. Among the candidate ideas worthy of exploration:
* A long-term strategy to win the war on terror. Virtually all Democrats certainly agree with Bush that current al-Qaeda leadership and followers must be destroyed using all tools of American power. But as Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has noted several times, we have no long-term strategy to prevent the next generation of al-Qaeda and affiliated groups from being created. A few small programs to support nongovernmental organizations in the Arab world and similar efforts to date from the Bush administration do not suffice. Democrats need a vision to tackle this challenge, including elements such as a major push for educational reform and economic opportunity in Islamic countries, with U.S. resources to back up the efforts where appropriate.
* Energy policy. Kerry talked about getting the U.S. off its dependence on Mideast oil, and addressing the global-warming problem as well, but it was far from clear how he intended to do either. Tax subsidies for hybrid cars and greater research funds for alternative energies have their place. So might a major proposal to subsidize production of biomass fuels in the United States. It could gradually redirect existing farm subsidies away from food crops in the process. That in turn could provide the basis for breaking the logjam on global trade talks, and help create economic opportunities for farmers in developing countries as well.
* Training and equipping African militaries to stop civil conflict. The Clinton administration began a program to train and equip African militaries for peacekeeping; the Bush administration kept it on life support at about $10 million a year while advocating, but not accomplishing, a major expansion of the effort. Democrats should wholeheartedly promote this concept and work relentlessly to provide at least $100 million a year for it. The goal should be for Africans to handle most of their continent's many serious conflicts principally on their own, with the potential for hundreds of thousands of lives a year to be saved.
* A major child-survival initiative. Clinton and Bush have both rightly underscored the need to address the terrible scourge of HIV/AIDS. But if this threat merits a bold initiative, so do the traditional scourges of malaria, childhood diseases and malnutrition.
Moreover, all of these are linked; the effectiveness of HIV/AIDS programs is ultimately limited most by the quality of local health networks throughout the world, which are also relevant to increasing vaccination rates and countering childhood diseases. A broader health and nutrition agenda might cost the U.S. $10 billion a year instead of the $2 billion to $3 billion now planned for HIV/AIDS alone. If Democrats need an issue to show that they too care about morality, and want to back up Kerry's words that "faith without works is dead," there can be few more worthy ways to spend money.
Democrats used to be the country's greatest visionaries in foreign policy. And indeed many neocons came from their ranks. It is time now for the party to reclaim the best of its proud traditions. The easiest time to be innovative, and to take risks, is when you have little to lose. Democrats couldn't ask for a better moment.

Michael O'Hanlon is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution
The Japan Times: Nov. 9, 2004


Conservatives sold their souls
By DOUG BANDOW
WASHINGTON -- After Nov. 2 the Republican Party seems to have it all: continued possession of the U.S. presidency and expanded control of Congress. Ironically, however, President George W. Bush's victory has killed America's conservative movement. The Republican Party and conservative movement have lost their souls.
American conservatism grew out of the classical liberal tradition that gave birth to the United States. Republicans emphasized their commitment to individual liberty and limited constitutional government.
They believed Washington to possess only specific enumerated powers. The most important domestic issues were matters for the states. Internationally America needed to be strong but responsible: War was a tool to protect U.S. security, not remake the world.
Most important was conservative recognition of the limitations of political action. Economist Thomas Sowell observed how the right had a "constrained" view of mankind: No amount of social engineering could transcend humanity's inherent imperfections. In contrast, modern liberals held an "unconstrained" view, that is, they believed in the perfectibility of human beings and institutions.
Although Republican Party operatives and their conservative supporters often placed political expediency before philosophical purity, most of them formally resisted expanding government power. And occasionally -- during Ronald Reagan's presidency, for instance -- they actually rolled back one or another program.
In 2000 candidate George W. Bush ran within this conservative tradition. But he has turned the Republican Party into another vehicle of modern liberalism, little different from the Democrats.
Spending by the national government has raced ahead at levels more often associated with the Democratic Party. The Bush administration has pushed to nationalize local issues, expanding federal controls over education, for instance.
Bush engineered the largest expansion of America's welfare state in decades, a poorly designed but hugely expensive pharmaceutical benefit. And Bush's officials shamelessly lied about the legislation's cost. The GOP's spending excesses threaten to undo the president's celebrated tax cuts.
The administration terms its expansion of government as a form of "empowerment." But this is just another name for nanny-state regulation. White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card admitted that Bush "sees America as we think about a 10-year-old child," requiring Washington's benevolent guidance.
In international affairs Bush most dramatically diverged from traditional conservatism, advancing an international agenda breath-taking in its arrogance. First, he launched a preventive war based on bad intelligence, but offered no apologies for his mistake.
His substitute justification, that of promoting -- or really imposing -- democracy on a recalcitrant Islamic society harkened back to liberal war-making in the tradition of President Woodrow Wilson. Abandoning traditional Republican skepticism of foreign aid, Bush sought to win Iraqi hearts and minds by providing garbage trucks and creating a postal zip code system. Such utopian social engineering seemed more appropriate for liberal Democrats such as Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry.
Equally disappointing was Bush's commitment to executive prerogative. Administration supporters explicitly and administration members implicitly questioned the patriotism of anyone who criticized the president's Iraq policy. He brusquely dismissed fiscally responsible members of Congress who advocated trimming the administration's Iraqi aid program.
Although a decent person, he represents the worst anti-intellectual caricature of religious ones. He admits that he doesn't read or "do nuance." If religious broadcaster Pat Robertson is correct, the president didn't expect casualties in Iraq. Bush believes in presidential infallibility and exhibits an irresponsible, juvenile cockiness ("bring 'em on," he said, as American soldiers were being killed in Iraq). He holds no one in his administration accountable for anything, even lying to Congress and the public.
Alas, he has influenced much of the Republican Party and conservative movement. Leading GOP congressmen have given up attempting to eliminate even the most wasteful programs. Conservative intellectuals also want to make peace with Leviathan.
Although the Republican Party often violated conservative principles, there once was a real difference between the philosophies and parties. No one could mistake the governing philosophies of Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter.
That difference is no longer discernible. Under President George W. Bush, modern conservatism has become a slightly more faint version of modern liberalism. Both groups believe that the right application of spending, regulation and war can perfect people and their institutions.
Conservatism was the primary political repository of the classical liberal commitment to individual liberty in America. But Bush has destroyed the right's opposition to the growth of statism in the U.S. Conservatives have won power by embracing George W. Bush, but they have sold their souls -- along with the individual liberty that is so integral to the American experience -- for a mess of pottage.

Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and a former special assistant to President Ronald Reagan.
The Japan Times: Nov. 8, 2004


China pushes for new order
By GLYN FORD Special to The Japan Times
LONDON -- A new Chinese diplomacy is emerging from Beijing. Traditionally reactive to global events, China now sees itself forced to take on a proactive role in world affairs. The revolutionary phase of Chinese foreign policy is dead; now pragmatism has taken center-stage.
The sharp change is the consequence of the Bush administration's aggressive, unilateralist response to the 9/11 attacks, its "axis of evil" rhetoric and its willingness to pursue a "preemptive" defense.
With the United States painting North Korea into a corner, China brokered the six-party talks (with the U.S., Japan, Russia, North and South Korea) to try to resolve the nuclear crisis on the Korean Peninsula. Without a solution, the knock-on impact could have China in an arms race with its Asian neighbors and the U.S. An arms race would threaten to divert massive resources from the civil economy into the military and break China's economic surge toward key-player status in global diplomacy.
China is therefore pushing hard for a new institutional architecture for global governance and a reformed United Nations that will help control a U.S. administration re-elected for four more years. The idea is to promote counter-progressive globalization driven by a leftist international agenda.
The first stage is to reform the U.N. Security Council with the addition of five or six new members that reflect a better balance of the world's wealth, geography and theology. Candidates for elevation include Japan and India, Germany and Brazil, an Arab/Muslim state, and South Africa. It will require hard bargaining as regional rivalries are a crucial stumbling block.
China will block Japan unless Tokyo makes a Teutonic-style contrition for the occupation of China and its neighbors before and during World War II. A recommended political tour for visiting Europeans is: (1) the Nanking Memorial Museum, built to commemorate the hundreds of thousands of Chinese said to have been massacred in 1937-1938 by the invading Japanese Army, and (2) the Harbin site of Japan's Unit 731, which developed biological and chemical weapon capacity in the 1930s and '40s by experimenting on thousands of hapless Chinese "guinea pigs."
Pakistan will try to veto India, Argentina, Brazil, Nigeria and South Africa, while the German question pitches the U.N.'s third-largest contributor against Anglo-French vested interests. Three European Union member states are too many, but no French or British government -- even without the campaigns of the Tory tabloids -- can meekly surrender the spoils of World War II in favor of a Europe-wide seat. A dark horse is the world's largest Muslim state and restored democracy, Indonesia.
A compromise, even if it can be reached with the five permanent members and the major regional players, is still not sufficient. The 191 members of the General Assembly must endorse any plan for Security Council reform with a two-thirds majority. They will want something out of the deal, such as recognition that hunger, poverty and disease is the engine for terrorism and war. The number of people killed by terrorists in the world in a single day is less than those dying of AIDS in Africa, but where are the battalions fighting it?
The U.N. also needs more resources. It's unlikely to come from higher contributions by member states. One solution may be some version of the "Tobin Tax," where a very low tax is imposed on all capital transfers, to raise $50 billion to $150 billion for new U.N. spending. At the moment, the world's annual military budget is $800 billion, while development aid languishes at $60 billion. To put that in perspective, if development expenditures were paid at the same rate as the military's, development funding would be exhausted by Jan. 27.
Furthermore, pressure should start on parallel reform of the World Trade Organization when free trade is blended with the need for fairness and sustainability. Such a reform package would be hard to put together and sell. But when has anything worthwhile ever been easy?
China's new diplomacy has a regional dimension as well. Despite knowing that East German independence in the end proved no barrier to German reunification, they take an absolutist stance on Taiwan. The "one China" policy does not brook an independent Taiwan. U.S. neoconservatives encouraging Taiwanese independence are literally playing with fire.
Equally with North Korea, China is a determined not to have its interests threatened, so Beijing is pushing Pyongyang to bend a little. The recent state visit to China by North Korean head of state Kim Yong Nam saw him make a series of what the North Koreans considered conciliatory statements.
But the Chinese are preparing for the worst. Recent revisions of history have generated a spat with South Korea. Chinese historians have reclassified the ancient Korean kingdom of Koryo as once a part of the Chinese empire, a position that could justify deep Chinese interest in North Korea. China has made no claims to Korean territory; nor has it called for a boundary change. But its reconsideration of the ancient kingdom does establish a special relationship with the area.
Any violence, instability or collapse in North Korea could find China entering the territory under terms of the 1961 Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance. Even without a continual Chinese military presence, the North would not necessarily fall into the laps of the U.S. At the same time, though, the Chinese presence might deter U.S. adventurism if Washington tried to force a solution of the Peninsula crisis in a way that was perceived as directly affecting Chinese interests.
The message is clear. There is a new kid on the block of global diplomacy: China. It's in Europe's interest to help it integrate with the rest of the world. This means a new look at how to promote the new international and political order.

Glyn Ford, a European Parliament member, recently headed a Socialist delegation to China to attend a seminar on the "New International Order and U.N. Reform."
The Japan Times: Nov. 11, 2004

Friday---squared???

Yesterday was a holiday and we had the day off, so I have to question if this will be like Friday squared? Or if that is even possible! I don't know, I guess I'll find out today once I go back to work.

I had a rather pleasant run this morning. Yesterday I struggled through it for some reason, I'm thinking because it was supposed to be a day off and I got up late to run. Maybe that's what it was. No biggie, though, because today was a fantastic run. My first leg up the hill was a little tough, but after that, it all just seemed to smooth out for some reason. Maybe I'm finally starting to get my running legs back. I used to run all the time when I was in college and when I did my first 6 months here in RI for SWOS. Well, we all know how things like that go ;) So, I'm getting back into the swing of it again. Who knows, by the time I go back to VA, I might be ready to run some 5K's. Greg will be happy with that! Maybe he and I can run some together. We'll see. The pushups went really well this morning, too. The crunches, well, those never go very well--mostly because they are my least favorite exercise in the world. But I do them. I guess the only reason I'm writing about working out today was because it felt good this morning instead of feeling like a chore like it usually does. Maybe it's the attitude shift I'm going through, I just don't know.

I went into class and studied for about an hour last night. I couldn't take anymore past that, it was starting to weigh down on me. So I left. I think I'll probably go in some this weekend and study, I don't know, in the morning, maybe in the early afternoon, I'll have to see how I feel before I make that final determination. There is so much information to cram into my head that I have to go in to get it all there. Unlike college, you're not learning this stuff in class. They are presenting the information to you too quickly for that. For example, we can have someone come in and talk about a topic for 1-2 hours (giving us enormous amounts of information), then we go on a 10 minute break, and the next instructor comes in and does the same thing. This happens all day, so we don't really get a chance to try to learn the material. So, we have to come in after hours and get it into our heads. I'm beginning to get out of the mindset that it's just more work they're heaping onto us, and into the mindset that it is a part of my job--it is, after all--more of that attitude shift?! These are things we are going to have to know when we get to the fleet as TAO's, so I'm going to learn it. I don't particularly like the format they are giving it to us in, because it encourages rote memorization instead of actual learning, but that's what I have to work with, so I'm going to make the best of it. Hopefully I can get it to sink into my brain enough that when we actually go into the scenarios it will be there for my access and use. I'll let you know more about that when I get there!

Anyway, I'm going to cut this short and head off to school. I have a few errands I want to take care of. Hope everyone has a blessed day!

The Gestapo Chief Resigns

Well, looks like the White House is losing it's Gestapo Chief, Attorney General John Ashcroft. The only fear I have now is his successor; it could get better, or it could get worse. We'll know whenever we get a new one. Keep your fingers crossed! Here's the article from the New York Times Web Edition Wednesday November 10, 2004:

November 10, 2004
Ashcroft Quits Top Justice Post; Evans Going, Too
By ELISABETH BUMILLER
WASHINGTON, Nov. 9 - Attorney General John Ashcroft, one of the most prominent and polarizing members of the Bush cabinet, said Tuesday that he would resign, after a tumultuous tenure in which he was praised for his aggressive fight against terrorists but assailed by critics who said he sacrificed civil liberties in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
Commerce Secretary Donald L. Evans, a close friend of President Bush who spent years promoting the administration's tax cuts across the country, also submitted a letter of resignation on Tuesday.
The two were the first in a series of departures from the administration that are expected before Mr. Bush is inaugurated in January for a second term.
Leading candidates to succeed Mr. Ashcroft include Alberto R. Gonzales, the White House counsel, and Marc Racicot, the chairman of Mr. Bush's re-election campaign. Larry D. Thompson, who served as deputy attorney general until last year and is now the general counsel of Pepsico in Purchase, N.Y., is a personal favorite of the president but is said not to be interested in the job, a Republican close to the White House said.
In his letter of resignation, Mr. Ashcroft indicated that he would stay in the job to ensure a smooth transition until his successor was nominated and confirmed.
Mercer Reynolds, a Cincinnati businessman who was Mr. Bush's campaign finance chairman, is a top candidate to replace Mr. Evans, the Republican said.
In a handwritten resignation letter to Mr. Bush, dated Nov. 2, that was released by the White House on Tuesday, Mr. Ashcroft said, "The demands of justice are both rewarding and depleting."
He added: "I take great personal satisfaction in the record which has been developed. The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved. The rule of law has been strengthened and upheld in the courts. Yet, I believe that the Department of Justice would be well served by new leadership and fresh inspiration."
The resignation of Mr. Ashcroft, 62, had been widely expected, even as some Justice Department officials in recent days had suggested that he might want to stay on.
But Mr. Ashcroft had been sidelined for nearly a month last March when he underwent surgery to remove his gallbladder after a severe case of pancreatitis. In addition, he never developed a close relationship with Mr. Bush and annoyed some members of the White House staff who thought he was at times a grandstander who was overtly politicizing the Justice Department. One Republican close to the White House said on Tuesday night that Mr. Ashcroft had gotten a "strong signal" from the administration that his resignation would be accepted.
Mr. Bush, in a three-paragraph statement released by the White House, praised Mr. Ashcroft for his work over the past four years.
"I applaud his efforts to prevent crime, vigorously enforce our civil rights laws, crack down on corporate wrongdoing, protect the rights of victims and those with disabilities, reduce crimes committed with guns and stop human trafficking," the statement said. "I appreciate his work to fight Internet pornography. I am grateful for his advice on judicial nominations and his efforts to ensure that my judicial nominees receive fair hearings and timely votes."
But Mr. Ashcroft's critics were caustic. "We had an attorney general who treated criticism and dissent as treason, ethnic identity as grounds for suspicion and Congressional and judicial oversight as inconvenient obstacles," said David Cole, a law professor at Georgetown University. "He was a disaster from a civil liberties perspective but also from a national security perspective."
Republicans close to the administration said that the candidates to replace Mr. Ashcroft were still undergoing scrutiny by the White House.
Mr. Gonzales, who grew up in a poor Mexican-American family and attended Harvard Law School, was appointed by then-Governor Bush to the Texas Supreme Court. He has been central in the administration's debate over what interrogation techniques are permissible for prisoners held since the Sept. 11 attacks, and is the author of a White House memorandum in which he wrote that the Geneva Conventions were "quaint'' and not suitable for the war against terrorism.
Former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani of New York City was mentioned by some as a possible successor, but his spokeswoman, Sunny Mindel, said Tuesday night that he was not interested in the job.
The resignation of Mr. Evans had also been widely expected. Mr. Evans, who has known Mr. Bush for more than three decades, had made it clear to associates before the election that he wanted to step down even if the president won a second term. Mr. Evans's family had recently moved back to Texas, where Mr. Evans has been a Republican favorite to run for governor.
In his letter of resignation to the president, dated Nov. 9, Mr. Evans said, "While the promise of your second term shines bright, I have concluded with deep regret that it is time for me to return home." He added, "It is a blessing to have served America with such an extraordinary leader and a true friend."
Mr. Bush, in a statement released by the White House, called Mr. Evans "one of my most trusted friends and advisers" and "a valuable member of my economic team." Mr. Bush added: "To encourage job creation here at home, Don has worked closely with me to reduce taxes, open markets for American goods and services and promote a level playing field abroad."
Mr. Evans's departure is part of a broader reshuffling expected in the administration's economic team, which includes John W. Snow, the treasury secretary. A prominent Republican with close ties to the White House said on Tuesday that while Mr. Snow would remain for now at Treasury, he would probably step down after six months or a year.
Extending Mr. Snow's tenure would reward the treasury secretary, a 65-year-old former railroad executive who aggravated Bush campaign officials when he traveled to Ohio in October and called job losses under the president nothing more than "myths." But Mr. Snow has also been a tireless salesman for Mr. Bush's tax cuts and a cheerleader for his economic policies.
Administration officials are also contemplating a shift for Stephen Friedman, who is currently director of the White House National Economic Council. Mr. Friedman, a former top executive at Goldman Sachs, is under consideration as the United States trade representative and would be in charge of negotiating international trade agreements.
It remains unclear what will happen to Robert B. Zoellick, Mr. Bush's top trade negotiator for the past four years. Mr. Zoellick, who made progress on global trade talks and negotiated free-trade agreements with Chile, Australia and nations in Central America, had been looking for a new post in a second Bush term.
Administration officials said N. Gregory Mankiw, chairman of Mr. Bush's White House Council of Economic Advisers, was expected to return to Harvard University, where he is a tenured professor of economics. Mr. Mankiw, although well respected as an economist, badly rattled the White House and many Congressional Republicans last year when he said "outsourcing" American jobs to foreign countries was simply a new form of trade that would ultimately benefit the United States.
Republicans also said on Tuesday that Roland W. Betts, a close friend of the president and a Democrat, is a leading candidate to become chairman of the inauguration festivities in Washington in January. Mr. Betts, an owner of the Chelsea Piers sports and entertainment complex in Manhattan, has known Mr. Bush since their days together at the Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity at Yale, and spent election night at the White House with Mr. Bush.
Edmund L. Andrews contributed reporting from Washington for this article, and Adam Liptak from New York.

Life's Lesson III

The saga of these lessons continues. I almost feel as though I'm pontificating now when I write these, but I am in no way trying to do that. Instead, I am expressing my feelings and what I have learned for myself, and to let my friends see it so they can help me grow. No man is an island, they say, even when you are alone.

Today's life's lesson is miracles and profundity (assuming that's a word, if not, it is now). I've always believed in miracles--profound miracles: the parting of the Red Sea, cancer patients who were miraculously cured, and the healings of Christ. But, I'm learning that miracles and profundity don't have to be massive events such as these. Reading a paper and experiencing an epiphany in one of the articles that awakens your mind, or, more importantly, your soul, is a profound miracle, too. I experienced that today. I got an email from Deb today after she had read yesterday's weblog, and I experienced an epiphany in it--a profound epiphany that has the potential to change my life; in fact it has already started. Deb told me that wherever I am, be there, and also that I am here in RI alone for a reason. The sooner I find that reason, the sooner I can start being happy and doing what I'm supposed to do. It was at that point I experienced a miracle, much like Cardinal Bernardin when he was given his gift of peace (dona paci). Mine was not a gift of peace, per se, although it will indeed lead to that. Instead it was a gift of wisdom, a gift that taught me a lesson in my life that probably won't apply to other people's lives, but it just might. That miracle led me to understand exactly why I am here in this place at this time in the circumstances that I am here. It is not to learn the stuff at department head school, that is just the cover story that got me here. No, there is a profound reason I am here, and I have to say Thank You, Deb, for your miracle of wisdom.

I am here, quite simply, to learn humility. I am here to put me in my place, to plant me into the ground and let me grow. This time I am here has taken me out of the comfortable environment I was in, has taken me away from all those people that I hold dear, and has stripped me of my purple robe. I am common, mortal, just like everyone else--just as I've always been, but now, leaving my comfort zone, has forced me to rethink people and life. People are life. Not politics, not television, but the beauty of the souls that share this magnificently beautiful planet with us. Humility leads to patience, patience leads to inner strength and calm, inner strength and calm lead to enlightenment, which leads to peace. So, in the end, I am getting the same dona paci that Cardinal Bernardin received. My suffering to attain it, though, will not be the same as his, but we all must suffer in our own way to reach the path.

There's my life's lesson for today. Thanks, Deb--I owe you a drink!

Life's Lesson II

I'm sitting here watching Touched By An Angel, the Christmas special from the first season I have on DVD. I figured Christmas was just around the corner, so why not watch the Christmas special.

I've been thinking--something I've been doing a lot of since I've been here in Rhode Island by myself. The life's lesson I've been thinking about, of all things, is love. I've realized that love is about the only thing we have in our lives. We have our friends and families, but we have them because of love. It's made me think about Christmas, and buying Christmas presents. First, let me caveat this by saying that I don't buy Christmas presents anymore, I buy someone something when I find something that I think they'll like. But, we don't buy people Christmas presents because it's Christmas and it's the chic thing to do (well, some people do, but that's another story), we buy people Christmas presents because we love them and we are buying them something that we think will make them happy. By making them happy, we make ourselves happy. It's love that does it. Love is the one thing in the world that transcends everything--space, time, emotion, it IS emotion, pure, simple and complete, it's the core of our existence, the core of who and what we are--it defines us. Without it, we'd wither away. I know for a fact that I would. I read Joseph Cardinal Bernardin's book "The Gift of Peace" today--yes the whole book. It made me realize the profound nature of life revolves around love--is love. We'll never take our material possessions with us when we pass from this life. The only thing we'll take with us is our soul. Our soul isn't fed by possessions, nor material things, it is fed by love, the love we give and the love we receive. Without it, our soul withers away, as does the very essence of our life. In this thinking, I've realized that perhaps my attitude is too negative. Greg always tells me that attitude is everything, and I'm beginning to realize the he is right. That's not true, I've always known he was right, it's just so hard to be positive in a negative world. I try really hard, and I'm going to keep trying really hard. I just wish the world weren't so negative around me. There I go, putting my own thoughts into it, my own already negative thoughts. I haven't quite figured out how to make them not so negative. But I am working on it. Working as hard as I can, and am beginning to realize that the only way to get out of the negative is to get back in touch with my spiritual side. People around me may say that it's easy to do that, but I don't believe them. Even in Cardinal Bernardin's book, he said it was easy to lose touch with the spiritual side. The theme of his book, though, was the gift of peace. The gift of peace was given to him, by God, when he was diagnosed with cancer and was dying. He said it wasn't easy to recognize that there was hope, but it was his spirituality that allowed him to accept God's gift, even realize that it was a gift from God. And it was that spirituality--and his love for his fellow man--that kept him in touch with God, made him realize that there was hope. Hope in a hopeless world, some might say--I say it isn't hopeless. As long as there are people out there like Kim, and Heather, and Greg, and Sue, and Mom and Dad, and Grandma and Grandma, hope is still alive, will always be alive. And it is that hope that I am counting on to bring me out of my negativity into hopefulness.

Anyway, I've babbled aimlessley for a while now. I'll stop and let everyone, including myself, digest the information. God bless.

Blog Probs

I've been trying to get into my blog for a couple of days now, but I've been having technical difficulties. You'll have to forgive me for not posting sooner, but I do the best I can ;)

We started hard and heavy today into our TAO stuff. We finished up our Intermediate Officer Leadership Course (IOLC), and then started, headfirst, into TAO stuff. The only problem is we dove in head first and forgot to check to see if there was any water in the pool. In this case, there isn't, and we'll be getting that water forcefed from a firehouse for the next little while as we learn TAO stuff. Yippee!

I'm sitting at home tonight without anything to really do. There is no one here I can call to ask if they want to go do something and I don't really want to go out to dinner by myself. You can only do that so many times before you get sick of it...trust me on this one. So, I'm sitting here thankful that I finally got into my blog, whether or not it will take this post is a different story, entirely.

I'm going to help Eric with his boat again tomorrow. We are going to start working on the car track on the port side, at least that's my plan. I made 2 new mooring lines yesterday (i.e. I took the 3/4" line, cut it into 2 38' long pieces, and then spliced an eye into either end. It took me about 2 hours to do it all together, and then I took it down to the boat and added them to the port side. Now, he has spring lines on both sides of the boat. I nearly fell in the water putting those lines on--I didn't have anyone to help me, so I was doing it myself. That meant I had to be creative in getting them on the boat, so I was--and I nearly took a dip in the drink for it. Fortunately, I didn't.

Other than that, there isn't really too much going on. I'm just trudging along day to day waiting for this all to be over so I can go back home. That's about all I have for now....

The Morning News

I managed to drive my 2 hours up and 2 hours back to New Hampshire last night to cast my vote in the Presidential Race. It is no secret that I voted for Kerry. The news, however, is looking like Bush may win it. That saddens me. It tells me that we've allowed ourselves to become so terrified by the terrorists that our fear drives us to support a candidate who uses fear as the primary motivator to get his job done. Bush couldn't lead his way out of a paper back with two hands, a flashlight and a map. The only reason people are voting for him is because his gestapo cronies have scared americans into believing that if Kerry wins we are all going to die in massive terrorist attacks. What they aren't telling americans is that if Bush wins, we will all lose because those gestapo tactics he and his cronies are using are going to undermine and destroy the very civil liberties that we've fought for so long to keep and protect. All of the people out there who have had a husband, wife, mother, father, brother or sister die in combat for this country will have lost their loved ones in vain, that's right, in vain, because the very freedoms they died for are being made a mockery of and being slowly taken away from us by this new conservative (nazi-istic) upswing. I'm sure the people in Germany were happy when Hitler took over, too.

Well, enough with the vitriol, as much as I would like to sit here and spew it out, the thought of Bush for 4 more years makes me want to puke. Besides, I have to get to work. Good luck, America, if Bush wins, we're ALL going to need it.

Election Day 2004

Well, today is finally the big day, the day we vote for the President of the United States. Myself, I am going to drive up to New Hampshire and cast my vote in person this time, instead of voting by absentee. I can't wait for that! It's going to be about a 2hr drive up there, but I think it'll be worth it. Other than that, today is just going to be another day in class.

We had a no-host social last night for everyone to get together and mingle and meet each other. I ended up hanging out with the prior enlisted guys. Not too much else happened. It was pretty much a quiet day with not too much going on.

Have gotten the final scoop on what is going to happen for Thanksgiving. Originally I was going to go to Greg's parents' house for Thanksgiving, but they are going to Chicago now. So I am going to drive down to Virginia for Thanksgiving and take Jenny with me so she can see her dad.

That's about all I have to report on the homefront today. Guess I'll cut it off here.

Here are the other pictures, hopefully they upload this time.... 

Well, I spent this weekend helping Eric fix some stuff on the boat. I added some pictures of the shrouds and their chainplates that we fixed so you can see what kind of problems he had on the boat. The guy who owned the boat before him was an electrical engineer at MIT, but he didn't understand water and boats. When the shrouds started leaking, he sealed the inside of the shrouds with silicon. That stopped the water from dripping out of the false overhead at the shrouds, it just made it run down the inside of the false overhead and drip out along the bulkhead. If he had sealed them at the top, well, it wouldn't be a problem. So that's what Eric and me did this weekend. I've included some pictures of that, and what the damage looked like (notice the mildew--mildew=leak). I also posted a picture of the boat for you to see. Talk to you all later, I've gotta go to work.