Jessica's Environmental Law Problem

So, Jessica and I were talking about some of the research projects in my field that are located in Louisiana. Obviously, if I get the chance while I am at Fort Polk, I am going to try to get a 1-2 month internship to go there and follow on some of their studies. Especially the one concerning the invigorating the soils in the flatlands.

However, during that discussion, She posed a problem the should be answered by politicians and Lobbyists alike. They are all based on the premise that energy consumption is, in fact, contributing significantly to global warming. And on the assumption (scientifically proven, I might add) that if left unchecked, global warming could lead to catastrophic consequences for the world's population.

1. If we have the technology to produce energy efficient windows and appliances, why are the noncompliant ones so much cheaper?

2. Why do we have the technology to produce cars, like the Prius, that average 45 mpg, but it is still cheaper to get a car that averages 16?

Because the poor outnumber the other social brackets, and often, the only thing they can afford is the cheaper item, even though they will pay the difference within a couple years in heightened power bills (and power consumption). Let's go a step further and ask, if we know these things are contributing to a global problem, why is it still legal to sell them at all. I get a ticket for not wearing my seat belt, but the corporations get away unfettered for causing irreparable damage at an exponential rate.

I once had the idea of attempting to launch an initiative via petition. The initiative would have called for a 15 ¢ tax for fuel, to be used in the construction of wind turbines and other, truly green energy technologies, as well as research for conversion kits for heritage vehicles to use alternative fuels and alternative fuels did not produce twice as much carbon as gas (corn-based ethanol). Perhaps even to purchase or subsidize farms that could produce sugarcane-based ethanol. And also to began reforestation projects. It was a noble idea, because I accept that if I want to see change, that change carries a price tag and, unfortunately, as a taxpayer, I have to foot the bill. However, I would want the proceeds of the tax to be transparent and itemized as a matter of record for any taxpayer to reference.

On a less somber note, Jessica saw a t-shirt she wants to get me, because I assured her I would wear it. A simple shirt that says, "Obama is my Homey." I laugh every time. My voting preference is as follows. If Hillary beats Obama, I'm voting McCain without question. (One Clinton was more than enough for my taste; I hated deploying every time there was a controversy about that family.) However, if Obama wins the democratic ticket, then the debates between he and McCain, and whether he modifies his stance on Iraq, will be my deciding factors. I intend to write him [Obama] a letter while I am on leave to express this to him. Were he to stay the course on Iraq, and let us finish what we started, then I would have to vote for him. If he and McCain decided to partner up, (okay, that's rather silly, but if... ) no question. If Gore were to partner with Obama on the democratic ticket, I think I would have to seriously vote democrat this year.

My Mother-In-Law

I did a lot of writing today. But instead of trying to key it all in, I just thought I would type this entry about my mother-in-law, Melissa. She's as much one of my heroes as my father, though for entirely different reasons. My father, of course, set the standard for being a man in my opinion. He did three tours in Viet Nam, ultimately winning the Silver Star for heroism. Mildly shell-shocked and shot all up, he personified manhood for me from my earliest memories. Completing the mission, initiative in the absence of orders, do what you're told, being good is never good enough, and we do the difficult daily, the impossible takes a little more time. These are all axioms that I learned from my father, and internalized as I chased after my ideals of manhood.

Melissa (Mom) is a case study in the American virtue of perseverance. Two bad marriages each left her penniless and often in debt. Each time, she built herself up from bankruptcy for the good of her daughters, often working two jobs, full time so her daughters wouldn't want for anything. She never quit, though I imagine there were many overwhelming moments, when the stress was so powerful she couldn't even cry. And yet, she always fought the odds and clawed her way back to the top. She worked herself ragged, helping to pay Jessica's way through her Bachelor's Degree. She has also taken it upon herself to organize a "Support Her Troop" function with her church and workplace, ensuring a constant supply of cards and packages during my two deployments, both for me and for my men. It must be the most rewarding experience to look back on a life of struggle and know that by every standard, you have succeeded.

BBC Coverage

I just wanted to put the BBC coverage of my platoon's deeds on here for easy quick-linking. We had a great time with the reporters, Mark Urban and Mark McCauley. In May, we used to sit in "Doug's Diner" - named after our First Sergeant, Doug Maddi - and talk about our experiences. They had both been in numerous Arabic states, and spoke of 'the wave' and gaining rapport with the people. When we first deployed back into Tomah - where Gibson and Freeman were killed - me and the Lieutenant both laughed because we were throwing 'the wave' at everyone. It was a beginning.

I remember my first patrol back into Wahdi/Wahlameen. My section was driving down 3rd Street, so I dismounted and just started walking by myself with the truck following me. A kid was leaning against the wall - he was maybe 7-10 years old - so I walked up to him. "Irfa Aydek," I said: Raise your Hands. The people were so used to us coming in stormtrooping, so he raised his hands and got ready for 'tefteesh,' or being searched. There were some women on the street, and their fear was so apparent. So I walked up to the kid, dropped my weapon to my side (it was on a sling) and started tickling the kid. Everyone that saw started laughing as he squirmed all over the place, laughing.  I chatted a few minutes with him, in Arabic, then continued on down the street, smiling, waving, and saying "Sabah al-Khayr," or, Good Morning. We still got attacked after that, a couple more times, but I think I showed them that, yes, you recognize us. Yes, the last time we were here, you couldn't walk the streets, safely. But, things are going to change; we're here for you.

That reminds me of something Jake told me. He was visiting a house and a woman said, quite frankly, how can you protect me if you can't protect yourself. When he and I spoke of the engagement, I told him, "We're not here to protect ourselves. If we wanted to be safe, we'd be back home. We're here to do what's necessary, even if it means getting killed, to make sure these people have a fresh start and a safe life." I think we agreed on that. 

And I think I really internalized his speech the morning we went back into the neighborhood. "No road is black. No house is off limits. This is our neighborhood. We're going to take it and we're going to make a difference." And we did.

'Can Do' Spirit of US Troops in Baghdad, 17 May 07

Video: US troops surge

Fragile Success for US Iraq Surge, 8 December 07

Video: Signs of success

Simon Wilder's Message

You shall no longer take things at

second or third hand, nor look through

the eyes of the dead, nor feed on the

specters of books. You shall not look

through my eyes either, nor take things

from me. You shall listen to all sides,

and filter them from yourself.

From With Honors

Tony Blair Part I

I'm reading an essay by Tony Blair, while taking a break between clearing appointments. The article, "What I've Learned," contains his reflections on his time as Prime Minister. The prevalent theme is the significance of foreign policy on politics.

During point one, 'Be a player, not a spectator,' I reflected on Robert De Niro's character, Sam, in the movie Ronin. To quote, "You're either part of the solution, or part of the problem, or part of the scenery." I have always loved this line, and related it to my own working philosophy. The majority of people make up the scenery; they sit idly and wait for someone else to come along and solve their problems and make their lives better. For them, the drudgery of their lives is always someone else's fault, and it doesn't matter what is going on, they are in full complaint, pointing the finger as though they might know a better way. Solution people are not necessarily the go-getters, they may also be found in the shadows of someone else's glory, pointing the way and guiding the path. They are the rare, proactive people who internalize change and problem solving; they look for solutions to difficult problems that generally do not present a conventional solution. And the bane of my existence are the problem people, those - too many - that serve as obstacles to progress. They are the spotlights, that generally steal undeserved praise for solutions they not only failed to support, but often tried to prevent. The one character flaw I have identified with this group is a fixation on past ways of doing things. They possess little, if any, initiative or insight, and are terrified by those that do for the inadequacy they feel in their presence. (I could throw a few names out there, but currently, that might be a little foolish; maybe in a later edit.)

What most impacted me in this single bullet was Mr. Blair's statement, "They are indicative of an attitude, of responsibility to others, an acceptance that international politics should not be simply a game of interests, but also of beliefs, things we stand for and fight for." This is such a powerful statement because all I could ponder was  my personal reasons for service in the Army.

In my youth, all I wanted was to HALO (parachute) into a foreign country, kick someone's door down, and shoot them in the face. Honor was death on the battlefield, and I childishly relished the idea of this sacrifice, for myself. Family was only the fellowship of the squad and platoon.

I have since crossed the precipice of maturity and manhood. I take responsibility for my actions, and my vision for the remainder of my life had evolved to bringing about a change, for the better, of Iraq, and the world in general. Was my previous goal naive? Was it childish? Yes, but I could not have developed my current views without it. I needed combat. I needed personal pains. I needed to suffer the grievous loss of my men, and I needed to crawl into that truck. I needed to know men like Doc Willer and LT Carlisle, and to make the acquaintance of Mark Urban and Mark McCauley. I needed to laugh with them and cry with them. All of these events contributed to my developed and heightened sense of perspective. Everyone thinks they understand, or that they can understand, but they can't. Just as I can't understand their perspectives. Our experiences are different.

So, in this heightened sense of perspective, I realize that Mr. Blair is absolutely correct. Politics - and life - are not simply a game of interests. And in realizing this, I realize that my service - to the Army now and to the World, later - is not about my Country, but about the beliefs that my country holds most dear. Those beliefs that she has sacrificed young men for time and again. Life. Liberty. Pursuit of Happiness. I internalized those beliefs and I hold them so sacred, that I would sacrifice myself for them, time and again. 

"The ultimate sacrifice for the ultimate value," Robert Heinlein.

My Vision of a Sustainable, Symbiotic Existence

I was exposed to sawdust toilets in 1999, while deployed to Sinai, Egypt. I patrolled feces-flooded streets in the Al-Rasheed District of Southern Baghdad, Iraq in 2007. I came home for R&R in June 2007, when my wife introduced me to Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth and I followed that up by watching The Day After Tomorrow. Two weeks of research and thoughts progressed - not a lot of time where scientists are concerned, but then, I am not a scientist. I had an epiphany one day as Doc Willer and I discussed the intricacies of composting and how the process might be used to aid the Iraqis. But there were still holes in my knowledge that needed answering.

I got online and did some web searches for composting, during which time I came across Joseph Jenkins and his Humanure Handbook. This was a pivotal work, for me, and I consumed his writing with zeal. At the same time, I ordered Farmers for Forty Centuries, a history of Asian organic farming that used night soil. These two works were the foundation for what is to become my major in college: Agricultural Engineering in Soil Sciences double majored with Microbiology.

To utilize our feces and urine, composted with the remainder of the organics we typically throw away to the landfills, as fertilizers to invigorate otherwise dead, or taxed soils to produce food or to aid in forest reclamation. In "Farmers," it becomes apparent that this is not a new technology, as the book is a journal of a scientist that travelled the orient in the early 1900's. However, in the name of technological advancement, even many of these sagacious, Asians have turned their backs on sound agricultural principles.

I am as guilty as all with my hydraulic flush contraption. I urinate, or defecate in a little bowl, flush it, and at the expense of 400 gallons of drinking water a week, do not have to pay my waste another thought. And at this point, it is waste. It is contamination. The very act makes me part of the virus that is killing the planet earth. If you knew, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that within 50 years the world would be populated with 9 Billion people contributing their share to the destruction of Earth, would you seek an alternative life? Do you even care if your children and their children even have a planet to call home?

Global warming is all part of the sickness that is reflective of our inability to live in a symbiotic relationship with our planet. Balance must be attained, if our children are to continue to exist in a manner similar to our own. Perhaps we are talking about extinction. Or, perhaps we are talking about small pockets of humanity that find a way to exist in spite of the odds. Or, maybe we take an active part in the healing of our planet.

My vision starts at the individual level and works its way up to the community. My vision is, perhaps, a bit on the radical side, but it is not technologically unsound. In fact, my vision isn't even technologically challenging.

At the individual level, I must concur with Pope Benedict that pollution is merely a contemporary variation on gluttony and sloth. So, I must find ways to balance my input (my gluttony, or selfishness) with my output (if done without consideration of future effects, this is sloth). Here, I am specifically talking about consumption and digestion balanced with defecation and urination.

Two points from "Farmers," page 194: (1) With each adult averaging 40 ounces of excreta per day, we can estimate the reutilization of 5,794,300 pounds of nitrogen, 1,825,000 pounds of potassium, and 775,600 pounds of phosphorous carried in 456,250 total tons of excreta per million of adult population per year. (2) In 1908, the Chinese government of Shanghai sold the privilege of collecting 78,000 tons of night soil (urine and crap) to a contractor for $31,000 gold - to be carried to the country for sale to the farmers.

And in "Humanure," Mr. Jenkins gives an in depth discussion of building a sawdust toilet, a compost bin, and how to use them at the personal level.

My vision is to incorporate these two examples, tie them to existing services, and in this one small way (to the tune of 80 percent of our total waste produced) return to the earth what she needs. Consider the house, and its occupants as a single entity. In the current state, as mentioned, we wastefully consume natural resources - water, food, fuels - without giving anything back. My vision, begins with the household. Water is piped in, as per status quo, for use in cleaning and drinking. (However, water is not piped in for sewage.) We drink the water. We eat the food. We urinate and defecate in sawdust toilets. We wash dishes and take showers (with organic, biodegradable agents), but the water is contained on the grounds in a reservoir that, perhaps, leeches into a water reclamation site (such as artificial wetlands). External spigots are fed off the reservoir, instead of with fresh water. The reclaimed product is used to water our yards - and compost bins if needed - and wash our cars, or whatever other task we have except consumption. The sawdust toilet is used until full (or 3/4 full, thereabouts) at which time a lid is fastened on and the bin is set outside. A waste management technician (the garbage guy), with a special truck, picks up the full receptacles and leaves empties, then drives to a composting facility where the product is added to a windrow or other naturally composting pile. Through thermophilic and mesophilic composting, the pile decomposes to about 1 to 2 percent in volume, at which point it is a mineralized soil. The compost is then utilized in forest reclamation and food production.

At the community level, I am thinking about advancing the green belt concept from Boulder, Colorado. We, the constituents, demand legislation that requires each community to maintain adequate carbon sequesters to consume carbon produced by power generation, vehicles, and industry. The logging industry must plant an acre of trees before it removes an acre of trees. Further, Boulder's beltway is an excellent idea to stop the sprawl. Instead of outward expansion, we could work vertically, so that more land exists to raise trees necessary to reduce the atmosphere's carbon content. In one concept I discussed with Jessica, housing would be shaped similar to the Mayan temples, with the terraced platforms serving as yards for trees and foliage all the way to the top. Each building would have several homes within it. (I kind of had a romantic notion of the hanging gardens of, Babylon, I think.)


There are still holes in my knowledge that need answering, but the holes in my understanding have been filled. David Ben Gurion, Prime Minister of Israel once commented that if the Israelis did not conquer the desert, the desert would conquer them. Thus, Israel has spent the last 50-some years working on desert agricultural practices to enhance their environment. That is the target. That is the goal. If we are to survive as a species and contribute to the balance of the planet, we must look for the methods to nurture earth, instead of polluting it.

(And for those that say that humans are too small to have any impact on the planet.... when was the last time you saw the ebola virus, or AIDS/HIV, or influenza. You didn't. Equally insignificant in size, but over time, they bring us to our knees and have the capacity to lay us in our graves - that's what we are doing to the earth.)

Assymetric Warfare Group

I tried out for a training advisory team several weeks ago, but regrettably, they did not select me. However, during my train up, during one of my grueling "run clinic" training days, I had the following thoughts.

Why do I want to go to Assymetrical Warfare Group? First, to see if I have enough to be there. All life is a challenge, and we only get better in life if we continue to seek out and overcome these challenges. Inevitably, the more challenges you overcome, the more fulfilled your life. Second, the future of the Army, and the country, is a locked door. The conventional Army is banging its head against a wall, using archaic, non-visionary tactics to fight a determined, intangible enemy. I see the AWG as the key that might unlock the future of the Army. But only if we meet adversity to change with intrepid resolution. I once had a friend, Stephen Parshall, who said that the Infantry, and the Army, refused to change. They must be forced to adapt and change, lest we face the peril of the Romans.

The Quarrelsome Sons of Abraham

US News and World Report
February 25, 2008

"Votes in an Era of Fear", Page 8, and "In Defense of Secularism" on Page 15

Maulvi Noor Mohammad commented, "I've wasted my time the last five years in Islamabad's Parliament. Western-style politics will not bring about a Sharia [Qu'ranic Law] system. Perhaps we have to try another way." I foresee a war in America between Muslims, Christians, Jews, secularists, and the other religions. It need not be a war with guns and bloodshed, though that is not outside the realm of possibility, but rather an idealogical war to transform America. This threat further reinforces the need to stay thr course in Iraq and Afghanistan. Quite simply, in a nonsecular government, the trend historically follows a pattern of, "if you're not with us, you're against us." Catholics against Baptists. Shia versus Sunni. Muslim versus Christian. The importance of separation of church and state cannot be stressed enough. Neutral government, void of religious consideration and concerned only with the welfare of it constituents, all of its constituents, is a demand for global evolution. The best way I can sum it up is to paraphrase Jesus' comment to "give unto Caeser what is Caeser's." Piety is for ecclesiastical, as secularism must be for government; morality and concern for the human element must be adhered by both.

Further, when Sheikh Mohammad commented, "Perhaps we have to try another way," I fear he was referring to another Sadr styled terrorist group. Of course, they all see themselves as freedom fighters. However, religion, unchecked by prudence becomes oppressive, and what began as a relationship to get closer to God becomes a movement to subjugate one's fellow man.

In our shrinking global community, with our diverse religions and ethnicities, how long can we progress at this rate before Muslims demand a Sharia system in America? Or before westerners demand a Christian state within the Middle East? How long before our opposed systems leap from the precipice of reason and the call to Islamic Jihad is answered by a call to Christian Crusade? How long until we as humans do what we do best and eradicate all life with the use of biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons?

And, while evaluating this slippery slope into Meggido, shouldn't all Christians, Jews, and Muslims really be asking of themselves, "Does thou shalt not kill" mean simply to not murder or, in true appreciation of our idea of a Loving God, does it mean exactly what it says, DO NOT KILL? Rather, as children of the God of Abraham (regardless of whehter we believe Issac or Ishmael is the chosen path), shouldn't we nurture humanity and life and strive to grow together in a symbiotic relationship: "all for one, and one for all."