I know it’s not manly to admit but I avoid getting into fights.
I did get involved in a few school-yard scraps at school. However, after my
first-year at Churcher’s, fighting was done in the controlled environment of
the Karate Dojo, and my non-contact career ended in an inter-house tournament at
Charterhouse School, when my opposite number clipped me in the eye and the matron
refused to let me continue. The only period of my life where I had to deal with
physical violence was in my first marriage and that as they say was thankfully terminated.
So, while it may not seem manly to admit that I avoid fighting,
I will state that this position comes from experience of having been in fights
rather than any form of cowardice. Having been in a few school-yard scraps, I
quickly learnt that there are some key lessons about fighting; namely:
1. Fighting
is a two-way streak – just because you can throw a mean right hook, it doesn’t
mean the other guy can’t;
2. Nobody
wins a fight – both parties will get hurt; and
3. Fights
are damn easy to start – finishing them on the other hand is a different story.
I believe that physical force should only be used as a last
resort for those very simple reasons. Yes, sometimes you may not have a choice
and so, you fight with the full intention of eliminating the threat against you
but that should only be the last resort.
I talk about my school-yard scraps because what I learnt from
them has shaped my views on leadership and conflict. A good leader should
always look for every solution possible before going into conflict. Then, if
one goes into conflict, one needs to do everything possible to win it quickly
and to get out. Where possible, a good leader should never throw the first
punch and most importantly he or she needs to have an idea of how the fight finishes.
The two instances that come to mind are George Bush, the elder,
who handled the first Gulf War in a masterly fashion and Mrs. Margaret Thatcher
who set clear objectives for her military during the Falklands War.
Both leaders did not throw the first punch (Saddam invaded
Kuwait and the Argentinians moved into the Falklands, which is sovereign British
Territory). Mr. Bush, played it correctly by imposing sanctions via the UN,
trying to negotiate and building a coalition of Arab Nations (Saudi, UAE, Egypt
etc) to remove Saddam from Kuwait. While Mr. Bush was criticized for allowing
Saddam Hussain to butcher people in Iraq in the aftermath of the Iraqi withdrawal
from Kuwait, it turned out to be the correct legal (UN mandate only allowed for
the removal of Iraqi forces from Kuwait, not the invasion of Iraq), and in some
ways, moral decision (Iraq did not descend into ISIS led chaos).
Both leaders did what they needed to finish the fight.
Americans in particular have worked on the principle of “shock and awe” in
their military campaign, where American firepower has overwhelmed and won the
battle. In Gulf War I, this was exceedingly successful – the Iraqi forces
couldn’t respond to what hit them and the fight was finished before it was
over. Overwhelming force wins battles (in little Singapore, we always work on fighting
with a three-to-one advantage – so you can imagine how much more the Americans
bring to the table).
Intelligent leaders fight as a last resort and when they do
fight, the fight with the full intention of winning and knowing how to finish.
The opposite extreme are the stupid ones who enter fights
without an idea of the end game. Just as Bush the Elder who entered a fight in
Iraq with a clear objective, you had Bush the Younger rushing into Iraq with no
end game in mind. Yes, lots of said about getting rid of Saddam but there was
no after thought of what would come after. As bad as Saddam was, he had a
functioning state of sorts and Iraqi’s preferred him to what followed – namely ISIS.
While its no secret I disliked Bush the Younger’s eagerness to
get into fights without thinking, I abhor the current administration that picks
fights for the sake of it. There has been no clear objective of what any of
those fights were meant to achieve – think of the fuss made over NFL players
who kneel during the national anthem – who cares – haven’t you got better
things to do?
Seriously, how do you treat 70-year-old bully’s seriously? The
Donald will pick fights with allies because the fights are only verbal and
guess what – they don’t hurt him personally. The Europeans for example, are not
going to move against Trump Organization’s miniscule investments in Europe no
matter the times he berates them for not spending enough of defense or slaps a tariff
or two on them. His biggest fight is perhaps against China. Let’s take note
that this is a “trade-war” and not an actual war. He’s crowing about how he’s
screwed a telco company from China and US farmers pay the price. The costs of
the trade war are not coming from his pocket.
It’s a different story when it comes to people who have shown
a willingness to do real damage. The Donald become a sniveling sidekick to Mr.
Putin whenever they share the same stage. Why is that? Mr. Putin is physically
more menacing; the intimidation is not a bluff and Mr. Putin has shown a willingness
to spill human blood to get what he wants. Donald, who very keen to fight with
the disabled, migrants from shitholes and 16-year-old girls, suddenly craps in
his pants when in the presence of someone who is obviously quite happy to
strangle people with his hands.
Bush the Elder had a great America that not only had an
overwhelming amount of firepower but an uncanny ability to build coalitions and
got the world to unite behind America’s cause (the one and only time all permanent
members of the UN Security Council have agreed on a resolution).
The school bully by contrast, has all pissing with laughter at
America. The man is making America great by showing us that Americans are shit
scared of a group of peasants from the third world that they have to hide
behind the said wall and they need the world’s strongest military to point
everything it has against …..wait for it….a caravan of half literate migrants (I
can help but repeat myself-ad nauseum – they couldn’t get out of Syria fast
enough – the Syrians have declared their intention to shoot at them).
Donald is of course, only the most famous school-yard bully
who can only pick on people with disabilities. The world is filled with them and
managing them is a skill that has become increasingly necessary in today’s
world that celebrates impotence.
Appeal
Being an independent blogger, taking on and discussing issues is tough but important work. Keeping the discussion on issues that may not be popular but need to be discussed has a value, especially when it gets people thinking. In an age where everything is about the big collective voice, it has become more important to have platforms that allow independent voices to be heard.
In this regards, the Tangoland Blogs, would appreciate any donations so as to have funds to invest in a platform that does just that. We shall be exceedingly grateful for donations no matter how small, which can be made the following paypal.me link.
No comments
Post a Comment