Russia And Democracy

A wise professor of mine, Marshall D. Shulman, used to observe (in the 1960's) that the United States and the Soviet Union had a "limited adversary relationship."

His point was, that neither the United States nor the Soviet Union, even in the depths of the Cold War, was committed to the destruction of the other. In fact,the two countries cooperated in a number of efforts to limit the danger of war. One such effort was the agreement to limit incidents at sea. Concluded in 1972 under President Nixon, the agreement established an annual bilateral review of incidents and measures to lessen the possibility of conflict and misunderstanding. I had a minor role in hosting one of the meetings in Washington.

Measures to keep the relationship between the United States and the successor state of Russia a productive one, continues to be a challenge.

After the breakup of the Soviet Union, the United States Agency for International Development provided assistance to Russia in converting to a market economy. Among the most promising efforts was called the "rule of law" program. Other efforts included assistance in establishing democracy in the former Soviet Union.

These efforts are all in jeopardy, according to a report in the New York Times.

It isn't a surprise, but it doesn't help bilateral relations.

Even so, you do business with the countries that exist - not the ones you imagine.

On Starting Wars

I have observed elsewhere that starting a war is a mug's game. In general, not a good way to advance national security interests.

September 18, 1931, Japanese military personnel staged the Mukden Incident, also known as the Manchurian Incident, which served as the pretext for a Japanese invasion of Manchuria. Six months later, Japan established the puppet state of Manchukuo. The international uproar caused Japan to withdraw from the League of Nations in March, 1933.

In the long run, the invasion didn't work out so well.

It led to Pearl Harbor. And Hiroshima. And Nagasaki.

Seventy Years Ago: Japanese Stop Advance 30 Miles Short of Port Moresby

Japanese troops fighting their way overland toward Port Moresby, halted their advance at Loribawa, withing 30 miles of their objective. The next day, the nearly starving Japanese troops would begin withdrawing back over the Owen Stanly mountains.

They were halted because of the marines holding out on Guadalcanal. Japan planned to complete their conquest of New Guinea after completing their takeover of Guadalcanal.

It never happened.

Do Small Businesses Create Most Jobs? Not Exactly

This is one of those cases where it depends how you slice the data.

Specifically, it depends on whether you are counting firms or establishments.

Economist Jared Bernstein explains in a recent article here. In brief, smaller firms created fewer jobs than their percentage of the labor force and large firms (above 500 employees) created more new jobs than their percentage of the labor force.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics explains the difference between a firm and an establishment:

"An establishment is defined as an economic unit that produces goods or services, usually at a single physical location, and engaged in one or predominantly one activity. A firm is a legal business, either corporate or otherwise, and may consist of one establishment, a few establishments, or even a very large number of establishments. [Bernstein bold]"

The difference may seem subtle, but the statistical difference is substantial. It should become clear by reading the article.

Another issue that I surmise has an effect on the statistical outcome, but that Bernstein doesn't examine has to do with outsourcing. For tax and accounting reasons, many large firms in recent decades have decided to let direct employees go and hire contract firms to do the same work.

In many instances, the small contract business is formed for the specific purpose of hiring former employees of the large firm and continuing to do the same work at the same location. In such a case, there really are no new jobs, though it may appear that the new small business has created new jobs for its new employees. It is really sleight of hand.

History Update: Czechoslovakia Dissolved (Twenty Years Ago)

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble, it's what we know that ain't so.
 
Will Rogers

Note to national security expert Liz Cheney: There is no Czechoslovakia. For that matter, a lot of other things she talked about this morning on ABC seem not to exist.

I know that's just a technicality.

Meanwhile, Back At Oriental Town Hall

It has been a pleasure to watch the progress in rebuilding Oriental Town Hall.

We have been talking about modifying Town Hall for five or six years now. Glad to see the project seriously underway.

I'm sorry the town Board I served on made the obviously erroneous decision to let our flood insurance lapse. Bad idea, though it saved a bit of money for a couple of years.

I think the newly-designed layout will better serve the citizens of Oriental.

Campaign News Roundup For The Young

Sunday Review

The Strip | By Brian McFadden

September 9, 2012

This post is a bit late, but I thought it was kinda fun. I continue to be amazed at what the younger generation doesn't know or understand about American history and our political system. I think this is the sort of thing retired Supreme Court Sandra Day O'Conner has tried to address. Not apparent she is making much headway.

Ship Misidentification

During the Democratic National Convention, an evening was set aside to honor veterans and recognize their service to the nation. That's always a good thing to do.

But whoever put together the slide show included a dramatic photo of a group of Soviet warships, with what appear to be a formation of US aircraft flying over.

It was a good picture, but it would have been better to have a formation of American warships. Here's the account from the Navy Times.

 

 A bit embarrassing. Shouldn't have happened.

On the other hand, at least no one was killed, as happened in 1974 when the Turkish Air Force sank the Turkish Navy destroyer, TCG Kocatepe.

I've been reading a lot lately about WWII in the Pacific, and such episodes were not unknown. The truth is, identifying warships can be a challenge, even for a trained professional.

Now to the interesting part. The slide that was shown is in silhouette and the antenna arrays are pretty characteristic of Soviet warships. The hull and superstructure of the ships, though, look an awful lot like our Arleigh Burke class Aegis destroyers. There's a good reason for that. After years of study by naval intelligence and the Naval Ships Systems Command, our naval architects decided that the hull form used by the Soviets had much better sea keeping qualities in heavy weather than the shape we had used on destroyers and cruisers since early in the 20th century. So, for our newest combatant ship we borrowed heavily from Soviet Naval Architecture.

How do I know? Some of my friends did the research, and I saw the culmination of it when I worked on the details of the Arleigh Burke class combat system design.

It isn't a big secret, but I don't think the influence of Soviet designs on our ships is widely known. Compare the pictures, and you will see what I mean.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BCGN_Kalinin_1991.jpg

http://www.military-today.com/navy/arleigh_burke_class_l3.jpg

By the way, when it was formed in 1882, the Office of Naval Intelligence was formed for the purpose of seeking out and reporting developments in other navies. So we could copy the best. At that time in our history, we intended to modernize, but had not yet begun the "new steel navy." The first four steel warships were not authorized by Congress until 1883. We had a lot to learn about steel plating, assembly, modern steam plants, and large guns.

Why not learn from other navies? we thought then. Still not a bad idea.