The Problem of “Too Late”

A very good friend of mine, author of After Iraq, has written an article on ISIS. He sent me an advanced copy for review and critique. Because it is a pre-print copy, I can’t provide you with a link to it, but I thought I would post my reply to him.

Basically, my response states that the decision for peace or war is out of our hands now. We call such situations “intractable”. We like to think we have the freedom to choose one course of action over another, but there is a law of fatal consequence that cannot be so easily gainsayed. It is called the karmic law, and we will follow it whether we will or no.

So, here is my response to his article…

Owen Jones has an interesting article on ISIS in The Guardian

As we discussed on the phone… the roots of the troubles go back to WWI, and more directly, of course, to the Iraq War. But what’s to choose between? The petty-minded against the small-souled, the bigot against the fanatic. A pox on both their houses.

It was the inevitable consequence of the Iraq War, and it’s unfolding according to an iron law of consequence. Colin Powell was quite right in saying “you break it, you own it”. But he didn’t have the balls to act on what he knew to be right until it was too late.

There’s the problem: “too late”. That’s our general problem isn’t it? Why do we come to our senses only too late? Only the Buddha knew.

What’s the end game of “the war on terror”? The best that can be expected of it is mutual exhaustion and attrition. But the karmic law will be fulfilled — as ye sow, so shall ye reap. All this has become a fate for us. We simply missed the opportunity to avoid it and now it’s too late. We’ll all have to pass through the crucible.

Too late, too late, too late.


We have all, without exception, now become the tools and fools of fate. There is no controverting the law, and the law is that “the sins of the fathers shall be visited down to the third and fourth generations”. The law is not whimsy. The law is not arbitrary. It is also part of “fourfold vision” and is the karmic law. The “sins of the fathers” law also describes the mandala of time’s action.

I have no doubt that when people say they “know right from wrong” that they do in fact know it. That’s not the problem. The problem is they fail to act on the right they do know, and so their knowledge of right and wrong is not just useless. It’s worse than useless. It’s the tangled webs we weave of fateful quandry and quagmire.

If we weren’t such a narcissistic species, we would see clearly how our own thoughts and acts weave the fabric of such quandries and quagmires and intractable fate. But we always come to ourselves too late.



14 responses to “The Problem of “Too Late””

  1. Scott Preston says :

    By the way…

    If “the sins of the fathers” law were not, in fact, true, Nietzsche could not have forecast his “two centuries of nihilism” as a fate for us with any confidence. Nietzsche knew the law, in whatever way he chose to know it or describe it. It’s not difficult to prophecy once you gain insight into the karmic law of action and reaction, cause and effect.

    That’s the irony of Nietzsche as also conscious embodiment of the process of enantiodromia. The great “anti-Christ” was, in fact, thoroughly faithful to the Christian gospel. He may, in fact, have been the last Christian. Even his “overman” is Christian.

  2. alex jay says :

    “… the roots of the troubles go back to WWI, and more directly, of course, to the Iraq War.”

    The “constructive chaos” we are currently witnessing in the benighted region of the Middle East and North Africa has been on the cards since the demise of the Soviet Union by design. The beta test was – of course – the successufully executed break-up of Yugoslavia in the 90s. It’s somewhat rich for General Wesley Clark, one of the main characters involved in that agenda to make these admissions linked below. Still … it does give you an insight into the orchestrated mayhem perpetrated by the neo-con psychopaths and all the blow-back we are now witnessing. It has always been policy primarily directed against a resurgent Russia ala Zbiggy’s “Chessboard” and the architects are rubbing their hands in glee. You can say the same about the Ukraine …

  3. Scott Preston says :

    Leaving things to the proverbial “last minute” isn’t something you need to worry about. It’s leaving things until the minute after the last minute that we need to worry about.

    And that’s shaping up to be the story of our times. It is certainly shaping up to be this story,

    It’s very interesting that the entity named “Seth” warned about this very thing with the bees 40 years ago — forty years ago!.

  4. Scott Preston says :

    This article on the propaganda war cites the film-maker Eugene Jarecki,

    “In his 2005 documentary, coincidentally also entitled Why We Fight, he detailed the increasing appetite for conflict on the part of the US military-industrial complex. “A threat like Isis plays directly into the hands of our military lobbyists who want such behaviour because it’s good for business.”

    which is something I addressed in the posting titled “Late Modern Schizophrenia”. It’s what Naomi Klein referred to as “disaster capitalism”, or what is called by its proponents “creative destruction”.

    Nonetheless, it needs to be pointed out that there is very little enthusiasm for this present conflict, even in the boardrooms and hallways of the military-industrial complex. The situation is unpredictable, it’s uncertain, it’s unmanageable, it’s fraught with very high risk, and those are issues, risks, and gambles that even a business like the military-industrial complex likes to avoid. The politicians, in consequence, are entering into this fray with a good deal of reluctance and trepidation, in fear and trembling, because it’s a quagmire.

    It’s the issue of “blowback”, and what is blowback but a way of speaking of the karmic law of consequence? “O what tangled webs we weave!” And now we are all caught up in those webs like flies.

    At least, maybe we’ll learn something about the karmic law, which is the issue of “blowback” as it is of the ironic and ironic reversal, of unintended consequence, of perverse outcome, of revenge effect. Jung’s enantiodromia is just another interpretation of the karmic law, even if it was derived from Heraclitus. But then, Heraclitus was, as Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy called him, “the Greek Buddha”.

    • alex jay says :

      “Nonetheless, it needs to be pointed out that there is very little enthusiasm for this present conflict, even in the boardrooms and hallways of the military-industrial complex.”

      Come again!?!?!?

      Defense contractors, as the link below indicates, are making a killing and their share prices are going through the roof.

      Since when have the boardrooms of these vultures ever placed unpredictability, high risk etc.over sky-is-the-limit profits?

      Where did you get that flight of fancy from?

      • Scott Preston says :

        That’s a good article, and I don’t doubt that certain sectors of the economy will revel in the opportunities presented by another war.

        But defence industry contractors are only a specific component of the overall military-industrial complex Eisenhower originally wanted to say “the military-industrial-congressional complex” but was dissuaded from doing so by his advisors. Since then, of course, the “military-industrial” complex has expanded even further, and people now even speak of the “military-industrial-government-university-media-energy” complex. It’s a real octopus, and the actual makers of weapons are only one component of it.

        But after being burned in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, the broader political and economic costs of these interventions are rising. One only had to follow the debates, in both the press and in parliaments and congresses, to realise the uneasiness about this one. Obama was accused of waiting too long before taking on the problem. Ottawa has only committed the minimum. Almost nobody wants “boots on the ground” or the dreaded “quagmire”, except, of course, some speculators and capitalists for whom a permanent state of hot war would be just honky-dory. But they don’t constitute the entirety of the “complex”, which is why we call it a “complex”

        There is a sense that this intervention may be “a bridge too far”. You can tell from the worry in the press and the anxiety in the debates, that quite unlike the interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, this one is not “a war of choice” — too unpredictable, too uncontrollable, too unavoidable.

        Ironically, it was precisely because it is unavoidable that states tried to avoid it. There’s none of the bravado that attended the other wars. The agenda is being set by ISIS, not by others. But in broader terms, not even ISIS is setting the agenda either. They are just as much entangled by the logic of fateful consequence — the “unknown unknowns”, as Rumsfeld called it. That is “blowback”, which is, by definition, unintended consequence — the “gotchya’s” that arouse dread and anxiety just because they are the unpredictable “unknown unknowns”.

        • Scott Preston says :

          A couple of things in this morning’s press that illustrate the anxieties and doubts about getting involved in the war against ISIS. In fact, this CBC report specifically addresses those “unknown unknowns”

          Also, a lengthy article in The Fiscal Times also highlights the anxieties about this particular conflict,

          It’s not a fight anyone wanted, for a number of reasons. But it’s the fight they’ve been handed. It’s “blowback” from the Iraq War, and blowback is always something unplanned for.

          More to the point, perhaps, it’s blowback in terms not just of a “failure of intel”, but in some ways a failure of intelligence (in the sense of reason) itself — the deliberate avoidance of investigating “the root causes”. That was a fatal piece of ignorance, a fatal piece of delusion that in effect amounted to willful ignorance That willful ignorance is the issue of blowback. There’s a price to be paid for willful ignorance. And I take these events, also, as manifest symptoms of the breakdown of the mental-rational consciousness structure.

          “The gloves come off” was offered as the default policy once reasoning about “root causes” was proscribed. Those who tried to reason about “root causes” were officially and publicly ostracised. This is rather unprecedented in itself. It wassn’t just a lapse of judgement or the abandonment of reason — reason itself was proscribed.

  5. alex jay says :

    “But defence industry contractors are only a specific component of the overall military-industrial complex Eisenhower originally wanted to say “the military-industrial-congressional complex” …”

    But Scott, congressmen don’t sit in “boardrooms” … not until they retire that is. : )

    • Scott Preston says :

      Congressmen don’t sit in boardrooms? What do you think is the meaning of the phrase “revolving door” then? Have you checked lately to see what congressmen, senators, etc did before becoming congressmen and senators (not just after they lose an election)?

      • alex jay says :

        What I mean is that congressmen DON’T sit in boardrooms. When they do they are NOT congressmen; they are either in the process of becoming congressmen or they have stopped being congressmen. When you enter congress you have to give up any executive position you may hold in any corporation. You may still own stock, but you may not actively participate in the decision making and management of any company. The revolving door issue (deals with past and future tenses of pre-congress/post-congress), which merges corporations with governance or influence within the governing process – Mussolini’s definition of fascism – is a strawman you’ve introduced to qualify the absurd (unwittingly it appears due to your dogged effort in qualifying “military-industrial” to include “congressional”, “academic” and everythng but the kitchen sink) initial claim of which I’ll remind you:

        ““Nonetheless, it needs to be pointed out that there is very little enthusiasm for this present conflict, even in the boardrooms and hallways of the military-industrial complex.”

        Present tense and no “congressional”, “revolving doors” or all the other strawmen you’ve introduced to skirt around and defend a silly statement.

        Military=Pentagon/industrial=defense contractors by Eisenhower’s definition, mine, and virtually everyone elses but your’s

        And on that note, I withdraw from this mole-hill turned into a mountain non-debate.

        • Scott Preston says :

          I think you have a need, alex, to overlook the obvious because you are a conspiracy theorist. It’s your gloss on things — the Rorschach inkblot test, as it were — that there are invisible puppetmasters pulling the strings, controlling and engineering events according to a rationale. Maybe even “the Committee of 300”, which is the most notorious of the conspiracy theories.

          But the truth is, nobody is in control. Events are almost completely out of control, now That’s a basic premise of this blog — the breakdown of the mental-rational consciousness structure into incoherence and the default response of a permanent state of “crisis management”. And the only question for me is, when did the Modern Era enter into this permanent state of “crisis management” and why, and what is “crisis” anyway? Also, whether our Age’s responses to the permanent state of crisis are at all adequate responses?

          “Risk Society” or “Liquid Modernity” are just alternate terms for this state of permanent crisis.

          You’ve been around the blog long enough to know my answer to those questions. No one is “steering” the breakdown. Everyone is scrambling to deal with the consequences and, in the process, confusing effect with cause, the reaction with the act (this confusion in itself being a symptom of the breakdown of the mental-rational). Conspiracy theorists are always confusing effect and cause.

          “Crisis management” is the default position because of “blowback”, which has become systemic blowback, which has become intractable. That’s what I referred to as the “sins of the fathers” law, which is just another interpretation of the karmic law of action and reaction. In fact, even the term “blowback” is of only very recent vintage, but at least it’s something of an awakening to the truth that something is very wrong with the dynamics of our thought and action. That is to say, with our consciousness. That’s in the nature of the systemic character of the contemporary crisis. Uneasy lies the head…

          And ending on that note, I just thought I’ld post a link to another article on the current intervention which also tends to highlight the anxieties about it, even a sense of futility..

          • abdulmonem says :

            I feel nauseated when the like of Harper talks about noble act or the like of Bush speaks about freedom, specially when I remember how the ill-made UN trusted more than 20 billions of the Iraqi money to the us USA and Britian to spend on the reconstruction of what they destroyed and how they stole the money, and how rotten the situation in Iraq is after ten years of the aggression and we get angry at each other, debating whether there is an ill-intended deeds and good-intended deeds as if the picture needs more clarity. Please let us be cool because the world is in a huge fire and it is in opportune to say farewell at this juncture when the need for each other is at its most. God is in charge and we will all feel his corrective measures soon , this sickness can not continue. Who designed the blowback which we are starting to feel its vibrations everywhere.

  6. alex jay says :

    Oh Dear …I would have walked away from this one gracefully, based on my initial surprise at your unbelieveable anti-historical claim that the forces that Eisenhower warned about were not “enthusiastic” about the current mess they have created and which has been a policy from “Operation Gladio” to the “Wolfowitz Doctrine” and Zbiggy’s “Grand Chessboard” (understandable Russophobe as a Polish aristocrat and which I have an anecdotal appreciation thereof – if you only knew my history – on an emotional plane). But, when you make the infantile accusation below straight from the CIA’s perception management manual to combat the public’s derision of the Warren Commission’s cover-up (look it up: the term “conspiracy theory” was coined by the CIA as a perjorative term to shut down any enquiry – critical thinking – deviating from the official narrative as implausible as it may be, like 3 steel-framed concrete skyscrapers defying Newtonian physics, dustified by fire and collapsing in their own footprints never witnessed in the annals of engineering until that day). So, when you my friend, as expert in abstract thinking, falls into my domain of researching and making sense of historical contraditions by stating the following (verging on ad hominem intellectual hubris) —

    “I think you have a need, alex, to overlook the obvious because you are a conspiracy theorist. It’s your gloss on things — the Rorschach inkblot test, as it were — that there are invisible puppetmasters pulling the strings, controlling and engineering events according to a rationale. Maybe even “the Committee of 300″, which is the most notorious of the conspiracy theories.” —

    You really diminish your credibility and unmask your vulnerability to system-group-think … in other words, everything that your lofty esoteric consciousness studies nourish are incapable of integrating with the real man-made (individuals, cartels, self- interest power structures on a Mafia-style model) problems that confront us in this civilisational decline. The closest thing I could whip up in a hurry from my archives to give you a small taste of where I’m coming from is this – with slight reservations:

    Chardin is still sitting on a bench feeding pigeons in Central Park waiting for the “Omega” point, so is Blake, Nietszche, Hussey, Gebser et al – myself included. Meanwhile, the system/the matrix has co-opted the actors that have made their Faustian bargain and turned this beautiful blue ball dancing in an insignificant appendage of a spiral galaxy the centre of what you talk about a gaze into the abyss. The rest my friend … get an education … and don’t rely on information you glean from the likes of the Guardian. : )


  7. LittleBigMan says :

    When I look back at the history of everything since WWI and the discovery of oil resources in the ME only a few years earlier, I can’t help but admit to myself that everything that has happened since then has been pretty much unavoidable, given the nature of people who occupy the seats of power in this plane of existence.

    When one thinks about the proportion of those who are incentivized by material possessions in this world versus those who are not, the sort of mess we are in now makes a lot of sense, actually.

    But I do disagree with Riyadh Mohammad’s hypothesis that a great threat from ISIS is if their foreign fighters return to the West with their passports and cause terror and havoc in the West.

    I happen to think that that is not a likely scenario, given the fact that that would be biting the hands that has fed them. I mean most people don’t realize that ISIS doesn’t have arms manufacturing industry and those cannons and tanks and machine guns they have been firing with will some day run out of ammo, and even before that the equipment they have been using will have lots of mechanical issues that ISIS doesn’t have the expertise to fix – not to mention as the territory they are capturing grows, so will the logistical issues their thugs will be facing.

    Many of all those wealthy Qataris and Saudis who have been supporting ISIS, live and frequent their lavish homes in the West often. Not to mention the heavy investments they have made in the West. So, it’s not in the interest of the ISIS’ benefactors for the West to be a target of their terrorist plots.

    The ISIS just wants a caliphate so they can keep beheading anyone they don’t like.

    At the same time, causing havoc in the West will most certainly piss off the public in the West enough to justify the awakening of Nato and its awesome power which ISIS will not be able to confront. On top of that, attacking the West and its allies will actually, I am quite certain, hamper ISIS’ recruitment of Westerners.

    So ISIS does not have any incentives to threaten The West, actually, but it has made it clear that it will pick bones with Westerners who enter areas that are controlled by its thugs. That ISIS is a threat to the West is manufactured by the Western media to maintain the cloud of psychosis that has been hovering over the Western populations since the beginning of the Cold War. This cloud of psychosis and the ever present fear of a brutal barbarous outsider has been beneficial to Western entities that do not have the best interest of the Western people at heart.

    I also think that Hisham al-Hashimis’ 7 bullets detailing ISIS’ strategy is a joke. ISIS’s only strategy has been to outnumber and kill and plunder the weak within territories where the majority of its inhabitants sympathize with them.

    Other than that, ISIS’s strategy is to master the art of beheading. Most anyone who claims ISIS has a strategy point out to ISIS’s use of social media. But these same people forget that many teenagers today are quite sophisticated in the use of the social media. So ISIS doesn’t have a strategy other than trying to avenge the past by killing the weak and ill armed.

    Just imagine what would happen to ISIS’s strategy if the Kurds had access to every type of arms they wished for from NATO’s arsenal.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: