Obligations of the Worlds Richest Man - Part 2

Have no misunderstanding that corporate warriors are in our future. When an enemy such as Al Qaeda or Hamas works its cause in the absence of nation, it is able to work outside of convention and military honor. It is safe to say George Patton never envisioned strapping bombs to the chests of American soldiers. Even Hitler was not capable of creating such a horrific tactic. A new breed, the paid corporate warrior will fight in the same manner, perhaps not with suicide bombers, but do not dismiss it as a possibility.

It is becoming increasingly clear that the nations of the world are at cross purposes on terrorism. I personally doubt China really cares if Al Qaeda desires to kill every Westerner on earth. This might seem dramatic on my part, and yet Al Qaeda has set this doctrine of ‘extermination of the western civilization’ into print. Does China care if China is not threatened? Does Russia really care? In the first part I discussed the ineptitude of the United Nations, which at this point is a Webster’s definition of greed and corruption. It is safe to say that even if appointed occupants of the UN actually cared they would be incapable of aligned agreements of substance.

When the dust settles over such apathy, confusion and political alignments we are left with the question of what natural law of cause and what natural law of need will surface to combat the spiritually ignorant forces of fanatical Islam? I have suggested the cause will be economic survival of worldwide business concerns; conglomerates that require stability and peace to function toward their stated mission. Stable and peaceful delivery of food, pharmaceutical, internet communications and building products are crucial to the world’s consumer citizens. They are necessary products of survival. Is the natural law of survival the tipping point in the fight against spiritual bankruptcy?

When the corporate warrior emerges to fight against terrorism it will not be a single unit controlled by a central authority. In fact, one of the hallmarks of the economic environment is the complexity of its working parts. It is complex because the affairs and needs of one giant corporation are different from another corporation. The terrorist influence on their well-being will be geographically and ideologically segregated. What matters to a corporation dependent upon labor and material in Indonesia is unlikely to matter to an oil producing concern such as Exxon. Being by definition bodies of economic profit, the corporation is highly unlikely to fight wars unimportant to their bottom line for honors sake alone. A nation can undertake a broader scope of fighting than can a corporation. It can print money and incur debt in ways a corporation cannot do. Proof of this lies in America’s efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq where US national debt has risen with barley a legitimate concern apart from the normal political posturing.

If my theory of corporate need and the segregation of that need is acceptable as a premise, and if their limited economic ability is accepted, it follows that the corporation’s mercenary forces will be controlled and specific in mission. They will also be invisible for obvious reasons. I do believe there will be a loose ‘banding together’ of resource and talent. What is vital to Chevron, Exxon and Shell is vital to each. What is vital to a food producer such as General Mills is the security of ports and shipping lanes. And to illustrate the complexity of these arrangements, the ports and shipping lines are also vital to oil producers. So there may be a combined force funded by oil and food producers jointly for the protection of ports, while the food producers are left out of the equation of protecting oil and gas refineries.

To imagine there is not great danger in these arrangements is naïve. To imagine that mercenary soldiers of ability and experience will not tender resumes to the highest bidder is also naïve. The stealth warrior division of the corporation is an excellent place for selling arms and ammunition to the highest bidder. To believe that worldwide conglomerates and their allies cannot at some point in the future threaten the sovereignty of a nation with stealth tactic is also naïve. You think the CEO of Mega Inc. irritates you today?

I see a future where the nations of the world face new challenges that extend beyond terrorism. I think terrorism will be defeated. I believe it will be defeated because it lies outside the functioning natural law and natural good with which the world is imbued. It will do a great damage, but the force of natural law can and will defeat its spiritual insolvency.

The more important question that lies in front of the world is not the fact of terrorism’s defeat, but rather, “who has fought the war to its conclusion and and thereby now understands how it was accomplished?”

The old saying “To the victor go the spoils” is worth some consideration as nations across the world withdraw in political fear and citizen forced isolation from the task. To whom will the spoils be dealt? Perhaps the old joke that Microsoft has purchased the US Government and intends to replace management is not so funny. I do understand that Mr. Gates desires to retain the Constitution with minor exceptions. That's a good sign, depending on the exceptions of course.