The Holidays are Here

That or the girls are here

Course, some folks are migrating out of the winter hemisphere to the tropics.

Target Focus Sale

I’m going to clue you folks in on something that isn’t commonly known or spoken of.

This here product does indeed provide you with the tools in which can and will use to save your life. I just got the Target Focus Nuclear Weapons package. I’ve been a subscriber to the newsletter, of course, but I like sales so I took the opportunity. The principles in the package I was already familiar with, the vocabulary not so much, but it was still common sense for those that study war. The advantage it provides you is that Tim Larkin has spent 2 decades on this. Obviously professional military experience is better than simply reserve training, but it is no indication of what kind of a person you are. It just means he has more experience and he is willing to sell that experience to me. I take the deal.

I hold the same philosophy as Tim Larkin, which is that if there is a threat, then you must take that threat out permanently. I remember watching Hercules the Legendary Adventures and I would be stunned by the ridiculousness of such a mighty man throwing his mortal enemies around, and not going for the killing blow. The fact that those enemies kept coming back for Herakles (Hercules), sort of vindicated my instincts. On one level, sure, I knew it was entertainment, but at the same time I simply could not tolerate the basic assumption that enemies are there for you to fight with instead of destroy.

Probably why I also hated all those fake liberal Hollywood movies and shows about how you should “obtain the moral high ground” by waiting to be attacked first, then reacting. You, the hero, are supposedly always faster, stronger, and better than the other guy. Supposedly, of course. Which, when your life is on the line or the life of your loved ones, isn’t so Hollywood fun then, now is it.

So take advantage, if you can. And if you believe as I do, that enemies are only defeated through attacking and destroying them, then this might suit you better than the alternatives.

Many people that support the Iraq front and have supported it since its inception, hold to the same philosophy. It is only right that you folks should acquire a leg up on the criminals and street thugs. Handy thing to know, if you ever plan on going to Europe, for example. You know what’s going on there.

If you disagree with Iraq in one or more ways, then reading more about TFT can give you a better understanding of why other people’s philosophies are different about pre-emptive attacks on a nation that may or may not be a threat. And of course, TFT can be applied and tested far easier than another Iraq. It is also far more useful to an individual, regardless of his politics, than Iraq ever could be.

Modern and Ancient Wars

People should study the 2nd Punic War between Carthage and Rome. It was the basis, or one of them, for the word “punitive” expedition, punishment, and punctuation. Rome ended Carthage. There’s a punctuation mark for you.

But the reason why you should read about the 2nd Punic War, more than the First and Third, is because of Hannibal Barca and his Barcid faction of the Carthaginian senate. There were two factions in Carthage, more or less. The one Hanno was part of, which prefered to make peace with Rome, take care of their estates in wealthy Africa (yes Africa), and perhaps defend the rich gold/silver pains of Hispania (Spain) which was conquered and colonized by hannibal Barca’s father, Hamilcar. Why is this of interest to Americans such as us? Why simply because Hannibal disagreed, he believed that Carthage will never be safe so long as Rome is unfettered on the Italian peninsula. He swore an oath to his father before he was 10, that as soon as age would permit, he would restrain Roman power.

“I swear that so soon as age will permit . . . I will Use fire and steel to arrest the destiny of Rome.” – Childhood Hanibal Quote

Can’t do that from Africa/Spain, you know. One must attack into the heartlands, the homelands, of an enemy…. like Iraq. But Hanno and the anti-Barcids disagreed. They believed Hannibal Barca’s strategy was… flawed, you may say. So when Hannibal was asking for reinforcements from Carthage after his victories at Cannae and when a Roman city, Capua, defected to the side of Hannibal, Hannibal didn’t get shit. Sure, the Carthaginian Senate agreed to send his brother, Hasdrubal, to Spain to “reinforce” Hannibal, but the two Scipio brothers were already in Hispania waging war. Did Hanno and the anti-Barcids really expect Hasdrubal to defeat the Roman legions in Spain, go over the Alps again like Hannibal (and lost a major portion of their army like Hannibal did too)? Or did they expect simply for Hasdrubal to defend the rich gold mines of Spain, wealth that flowed into the Carthaginian Senate’s hands year after year? (So much so that there was talk of it crashing the economy of the empires of Persia into a Great Depression due to the devaluing of gold/silver)

This left Hannibal’s forces stranded in Italy, only able to loot the country side. He could not even lift the siege of Capua, because his mercenary forces had become so attrited over the years. Years, I say, he was there for more than Ten years fighting. While Carthage’s Senate threw parties in Africa, of course. Remind you of another Senate per chance?

You might also be interested in the Carthage’s Mercenary Wars. The point of my comment here is not to convince you that Carthage was bad/good or Rome bad/good. None of that matters. They are dead empires. We are still alive, we matter, they only matter to the extent of how they can help us understand and kill our enemies.

Why did Carthage have a Mercenary War, you might wonder, if Carthage had enough gold in Spain to keep large mercenary armies up for indefinitely? Because they used mercenaries to fight the war against Rome. The Carthaginian citizens had no interest in fighting foreign wars. It was simply better to pay barbarian mercenaries to do the job. Hamilcar promised greater wages to his mercenary forces when things were going tough for Carthage in the 1st Punic War. Once peace was signed, the Carthaginian Senate repudiated Hamilcar’s promise and refused to pay the mercenaries. So the mercenaries rebelled and Hamilcar was sent to crush them.

Now which other Senate do you know of that refuses to reinforce soldiers fighting for them? Which other Senate do you know of that calls people mercenaries, hires them, and then refuses to honor their promises and debts to those “mercenaries”?

You want to know what happened to end the 2nd Punic War between Carthage and Rome? Scipio Africanus, the son of one of the Scipio family (this scion was at Trasimene and Cannae, presumably), took the war to Carthage itself. Scipio threatened Carthage with the veterans and survivors of Cannae itself (the survivors of those legions were exiled to Sicily for the disgrace of being routed at Cannae). Scipio gave these men, the only men who broke through the Carthaginian envelopment by going through the Carthaginian main battle line, a second chance to regain their honor and pride. Carthage saw an army at their doors. At their doors, for the Battle of Zama, the last battle of the 2nd Punic War, was right next door to Carthage. And guess what Carthage did? Carthage recalled Hannibal to Africa, from Italy. Through the single port that Hannibal was still able to hold, Crotona. (Capua was already taken and punished by the Romans)

Crotona

You might be wondering, if Hannibal held the ports of Capua and Crotona, why the mercantile empire of Carthage didn’t simply send naval relief expeditions, full of elite Sacred Band cavalry, in order to reinforce Hannibal’s army so that he could actually protect his allies, the Capuans, and thus sow more dissension between Rome and her allies. If it was possible to get Hannibal, with a few thousand of his veterans, quickly back to Carthage, then why did they have to send “reinforcements” to Iberia? Why… I suppose it was simply too expensive to send ships to Hannibal. After all, he was winning after Cannae, like Petraeus is now, right? So why should we need to send troops to Italy, the center of gravity for our enemies, when we can send troops to protect the rich gold and silver mines of Spain and to Sicily’s rich grain fields? Saddam didn’t attack us, Osama did. He is what is important, right? The Romans are attacking us in Spain, why should we attack Roman allies that haven’t attacked us?

So let us redeploy Hannibal to where he may be of greater use. Like protecting the Senate’s chances of breathing.

Carthage surrendered (lost Zama) due primarily to Hannibal being unable to bring most of his elite veteran troops from Italy. Short time frames, you know, given Scipio was at the gates. The anti-Barcid faction (the peace party) also kept many of the elite Sacred Band cavalry in Sicily, away from the Battle of Zama. You may think it irrational that when an enemy army is at the gates, the Senate of Carthage was more concerned with preventing the glorious victory of Hannibal than defeating the Romans. By all means, continue to believe so, for humans were never said to be entirely rational, now were they. Especially the rich and decadent ones.

Following the end of the war that established Rome as the supreme power in the western and central Mediterranean and left Carthage without a navy or the ability to wage war, Hannibal remained an influential figure in Carthage and became a Shophet, or chief magistrate between 200 and 196. Hannibal, an honest man who, despite his failures in the field, had only the best in mind for his country, launched a full-scale attack on the privileges and corruption of the ruling aristocrats. As a leader of the people he became so influential and listened to that the rulers of Carthage themselves wanted him gone. They denounced him as part of a plot involving Antiochus III of Syria to attack Rome again. Rome promptly dispatched a team of investigators to Carthage but Hannibal was more or less convinced that they were coming to shoot first and ask questions later.

To destroy Hannibal’s power and his influence, one might even ally with Rome, an enemy of Carthage. Anything is possible. Remind you of another alliance between the enemies of one’s own nation and the Senators of that nation? Ted “I killed me a woman” Kennedy and John “Murdering Marine” Murtha, perhaps? Just a possibility.

“For years past they have been trying to force me back by refusing me reinforcements and money; but now they recall me no longer by indirect means, but in plain words. Hannibal has been conquered not by the Roman people whom he defeated so many times in battle and put to flight, but by the envy and continual disparagement of the Carthaginian senate. At this unlovely and shameful return of mine it will not be Scipio who will be wild with triumph and delight, but rather Hanno, whose only way of ruining me and my house has been by ruining Carthage”-Livy’s reports of Hannibal’s response to Carthage’s recall order

Here’s a reference on the Battle of Zama if you require background reading material.

Inspired by this post of Subsunk‘s at Blackfive. In that vein of victory is with the persistent, not those resistent to fighting, here is something about Rome’s situation in the war.

Rome had about 250,000 citizens in the census around 10 or so years before the 2nd Punic War. By the end of the 2nd Punic War, Rome had suffered a quick estimate of 300,000 fatalities in both citizens and allied Italian city-state members. Citizenship weren’t granted to Italians, so most likely you would see a Roman legion with many Italian allied troops, resulting in the end total tally of perhaps as much as 50% of the gross estimates of Cannae were from allied city-states, not Roman citizen drafts. Even still, Rome lost 80 something thousand at Cannae. Their main field army disintegrated. By any estimate, this was a crushing defeat. And it came after Hannibal was already rampaging through the Capuan countryside looting and burning to try and get Rome to fight him in the field.

Did Rome give up and sue for peace like Carthage did after the Battle of Zama? No. Rome believed in victory and thus made it come true. evem after Cannae. How would history have changed if Carthage had Rome’s will? Can we ask the Carthaginians? Oh right, they don’t exist anymore. How quaint.

There’s a big difference between losing a war and being annihilated. (Japan and Germany are good examples) Carthage lost so many wars, they were annihilated. An Empire of Merchants obviously has no fortitude for long wars. So they will pay the price in the end. And if we don’t want to pay the price along with them, we need to make sure they can’t get in our way.

People have already seen the price America has paid for losing Vietnam. A few more of those and we will end up the way of Carthage. This is why ancient times were ancient, they did not have the advantages of technology, knowledge, or a past to learn from that we have today. We have no excuses people. And even if we did, so what. Nature and God would never accept our excuse that we lost because of badluck. The weak do not get pity from their overlords by complaining of reasons why they can’t pay their jizya, you know.

[UPDATE: Fixed a couple of things and added in the additional comment I made at blackfive.]

The matter of the Sacred Band cavalry is too controversial, so I crossed it out. There are no primary sources after the First Punic War mentioning any cavalry attachment to the Sacred Band, with some theorizing that the Sacred Band, both infantry or cavalry, were used up entirely in the First Punic War. Not exactly convincing, but it could provide one reason why the Sacred Band only existed afterwards as infantry, with no mention of cavalry. Then again, I’m not exactly sure if ancient historians really cared about this little detail once Carthage was destroyed, whether their Sacred Band, a volunteer force of Carthaginian citizens from the upper class, had a cavalry branch or not. The destruction of the library of Alexandria also has a good chance of factoring in relating to why there was no detailed descriptions of the Sacred Band left in recorded history.

Which does not really modify my point and perhaps will reinforce it as well. Whether Hannibal could have won Zama or not with the Sacred Band, is not really that important. What is important is that the decision was made not to give him reinforcements, whatever form those reinforcements took. Carthage tore up a peace treaty with Scipio once they knew for certain that Hannibal could be recalled. Perhaps it was simple arrogance for them to believe that Hannibal didn’t need any more reinforcements at Zama. A rather diastrous assumption in some ways.

Losing too many wars also doesn’t make preserve your memory or traditions, either. We remember the Spartans at Thermopylae in great detail. The same can’t be said for Carthage, precisely because the people who might have written about Carthage and its better qualities, were erased from the historical timeline by their military losses to Rome.

China’s Mercantile Empire

She calls it neo-colonialism and wonders why the African leaders don’t want to work with the Europeans. Distrust of European history in Africa was offered up as one reason. They miss the underlying factor. Africans see the history of European colonialism not just as Europe trying to squeeze resources from Africa, but as a bunch of nations that promised the moon and delivered dirt in the end. People can’t live for long on dirt, regardless of how promising the promises were to begin with.

So the Africans are glad to take the Euro’s money, but when the Euros start talking about freedom and anti-corruption, the Africans know that the Euros are too soft to actually keep such promises. So the Africans work with people they know will keep their promises, which is China. Africans don’t truly comprehend the need of Europes to lash themselves over their failed history. But they will use it to manipulate the guillible Euros into giving more moola.

The Africans have something that China wants, and China will pay good money and provide other support mechanisms. Such things count far more than words on European drafted paper.

There’s almost 4 versions of empire now a days. You have the European kind. The Islamic kind. The Chinese kind. And the American kind, both post 9/11 and pre 9/11.  Europe’s method is not philosphically much different from their olden days. The Islamic kind hasn’t changed at all really, except in adaptation to technology. The Chinese were always interested in wealth to begin with, that is why they never really tried to expand like Rome and Makedonia did. America has changed their military occupation policies to a counter-insurgency one, which differs from previous occupations in which most of the fighting was already over by the time US forces came in and occupied enemy territory.  Except for the Phillipines, once in Pershing’s time and once after Japan invaded in WWII, America has never needed local troop support. That is why Iraq, the ultimate in learning that local auxiliaries are really important, is such an improvement on American military and civilian foreign policy.

America was never going to challenge Rome’s greatness, without using auxiliaries.

Europe is not a country

Is Europe a country? It has a small irony given the situation with the European Union at this time. It may turn out to be that Europe will be a country. But what will happen to the real countries in Europe?

Open Source Intel: Iranian Qods Force

Read and enlighten yourself. It is not an opinion article. Nor is it an analysis. It truly does read like an intelligence assessment. This, one however, is actually reliable. More reliable than what you would get from the CIA, also.

Arguments by the Left and right

Some argument that went on at Neo-Neocon’s blog. There were a couple of explanations and distinctions, that I made, which I thought was worth saving.

The whole idea of the divide between the Left and the right is not so much political, although it is that, as it is philosophical. There are two different world views, but philosophy is more than simply metaphysics. It is more than simply the agreement on what is or is not “real”. Rather, philosophy also deals with how people know that they “know”. The theory of knowledge, or epistemology, also factors into how conservatives and the Left treats the same information. That is, in fact, why people look at the same problem and come up with different proposed solutions. It is also why two members of a team may see two different ways to solve a problem. One may be right, both may be right, or both of them may be wrong.

The divide is rather simple. Even if the intentions at the same, people come about their beliefs because of their personal experiences. Those that experience high gas prices and then see all these media stories about lost jobs, economy tanking, and Bush being corrupt or whatever, then what do you expect that person to start believing? Such things don’t require a propaganda master to figure out.

How to Deal with Violence: Also applies to violence in Iraq

Combat Training Principles Newsletter — Secrets For Staying Alive
When ‘Rules’ Don’t Apply How Getting Stabbed
Taught Him The Key To Survival

******************************************************
‘Never does nature say one thing and wisdom another.’

-Juvenal
******************************************************

An email came in a while ago from a client who had bought our
TFT ‘Nuclear Weapons’ package. In it this client talked about
how he loved the information, then he went on to say how he
‘…finally understood our approach to self-defense.’

He said it was the best ‘stuff’ he’d ever seen and explained how
he now really knew the role of knives, clubs, and firearms in
the world of asocial violence.

He told me he now felt so much safer, and was amazed how we
were able to break down information on this intimidating
subject and make it so clear and understandable.

Then he asked…

‘OK, so I get this TFT stuff. It really works great but what’ll
I do if I get carjacked? Do you have a video on that?’

‘Here we go again,’ I thought.

I shouldn’t be surprised. We get emails like this on a regular
basis from those buying one or two of our information products.
If this had been from an attendee at one of our live training
sessions… then I’d really be bummed. They know better!

See, I created TFT to educate clients on the PRINCIPLES for
using the tool of violence.

When you are versed in principles, you’re prepared for ANY
scenario.

It’s different from most approaches to ‘self defense’ and
‘reality’ training that use TECHNIQUES to respond to staged
attacks.

Now, don’t get me wrong… other ‘self defense’ instructors
using this approach are very well meaning… it’s just that
their attempt to predict how asocial criminal violence will
happen… is seriously flawed!

That’s because… violence is RANDOM. And to attempt to CONTROL
random situations is very dangerous.

One of our instructor staff likes to drive this home by sharing
a story of an attack he survived on the streets of Bogot??,
Colombia.

I’ll paraphrase his experience:

‘I’d been in country for a couple of weeks and knew I needed to
be aware of the potential of being targeted for asocial
violence. I found myself attempting to imagine how I’d handle
different scenarios as I walked the streets.

‘If they come at me this way, I’ll respond like this, or… if I
am attacked from this direction, I’ll do this.

‘This went on in my mind during my travels in the city. It got
to a point where I felt I was ‘covered’ for any eventuality.

‘Until it happened…

‘I heard the sound and felt the vibration of the attackers’ feet
as they ran up on me but never suspected a thing until I felt
the strike high on my back.

‘Then I was in action. I whipped around to see three attackers
and I began striking targets. I had the first two down when the
third helped the first one up and they all took off.

‘I pursued them like a maniac but couldn’t catch up. It was only
as I ran after them that I felt the warm wetness under my
jacket.

‘When I saw blood on my hand as I pulled it from under my coat I
realized… I’d been stabbed.’
……

I share this story with you because it hammers home to our live
training clients how the attack he survived was unlike ANY
scenario he had PREPARED for in his mind.

None of the ‘techniques’ he ‘created’ for these scenarios would
have ‘worked’ on the RANDOM violence that he had survived.

What saved his life… and allowed him to survive that attack…
were the PRINCIPLES he KNEW!

The cops told him the attackers were definitely out to murder
him and take what they wanted.

The cops made it clear… had he responded ANY other way… he
would’ve been gutted on the streets of Bogot?? like so many other
nameless victims of street violence in that country.

The fact that his first response was to find a target and cause
an injury on the other guy SAVED his life.

He didn’t waste time thinking about what ‘technique’ he needed
to use when being struck from behind on his upper left torso.

He didn’t worry about whether they had ‘weapons.’

He didn’t consider using a ‘multi-attacker technique’ because
there was more than one of them.

He simply applied the PRINCIPLES he knew for using the tool of
violence to survive a violent confrontation.

He used his training… and it saved his life.

I don’t sell you techniques… I educate… with principles!

Because we at TFT know you can never predict how violence will
enter your life.

If you get our TFT Seminar tapes, Nuclear Weapons package, Joint
Breaking, or our upcoming Striking products, you will be
educated not ‘trained.’

Each product instructs you on the principles of the specific
subject matter and NEVER strays from incorporating this new
knowledge on top of what you already know about using the tool
of violence for ANY event.

Does this mean I’ll never create a ‘TFT Car Jacking’ DVD?

Nope, not at all. But I’ll use that type of product to answer
once and for all the ‘scenario’ question… and drive home the
REAL answer to dealing with violence under ANY scenario!

Yeah, I know… I’m a sneaky bastard!

Until next time,

Tim Larkin
Master Close-Combat Instructor,
Creator of Target-Focus(TM) Training

PS: I can’t change human nature. People will always be
drawn to ‘violence scenario training’ and the self-defense
techniques to ‘deal’ with them.

But I’ll be damned if I won’t take these training opportunities
to educate you, to FREE you from reliance on that dangerous
solution to RANDOM violence.

Want to see the difference, to feel what’s it’s like when you
REALLY know how to handle ANY violent situation?

Then click on the following link and register today for the
next TFT Live Training.

People may remember all that talk about going to the UN for Iraq and such. When in doubt, let’s talk things over. Bhutto, the non former PM of Pakistan that was heard on Sanity Squad podcast, also mentioned that her first action in dealing with the Islamic Jihadist tribalists in the North of Pakistan would be to get down with them to have a talk.

Presumably, people wish to have a talk so that they can better understand the situation and thereby correct the social problems or the causes of violence. Tim Larkin advocates instantaneous mayhem and violence directed against your attacker, whether that be one guy or a team of guys.

Now do you see why the DoD and its military component is so against the peacetime generals and their Department of State allies? Talking is for before a war starts. It can actually harm you during a war. Decide one way or another. Are you trying to destroy people or are you trying to stop fighting. Just be aware that destroying people has a very predictable outcome while trying to stop fighting has a very unpredictable outcome.

America doesn’t start wars, but we do finish them. Which is how it should be.

Our McClellan in the American non-Empire

There are two good articles that should be read, courtesy of Watcher’s Council.

The American Non-Empire

I simply call it the American non-expansionist empire. It is more like Rome’s system of allied city states and provinces than true direct imperial governance and ownership. The only difference is, protectorate provinces like Japan or Germany don’t pay tribute (taxes) or provide troops for America, as they would have done under Rome.

Have Our Copperheads Found Their McClellan in Retired LTG General Sanchez?

Interview with David Weber on Off Armageddon Reef

I wouldn’t recommend that you read this unless you’ve read the novel itself.

I think I can quote this portion without spoiling the beginning.

Weber: Nimue … is charged with breaking the Church’s stranglehold on human freedom and technology and preparing humanity to re-encounter the Gbaba on terms which will at least ensure that the human race is not exterminated.

… [A] faction of the command crew which was horrified by the colony administrator’s decision to brainwash the colonists with his false religion. They believe in human freedom and human dignity…and that eventually, no matter what the Church of God Awaiting may do, advanced technology will reemerge on Safehold. In time, Safeholdian humanity will venture back into the stars, and without knowing that the Gbaba are out of there, they will run right back into the menace which almost exterminated the entire human race the first time around.

As I’ve told people at conventions, my hero doesn’t really do anything until she’s been dead for about 800 years. Nimue is a brilliant tactical officer, only about 27 years old at the time of her biological death, and has never known a time when humanity wasn’t fighting a losing battle for its very existence. She volunteers to serve on the escort force’s flagship, knowing it will be destroyed, rather than continuing to Safehold with the officer upon whose staff she serves. In other words, she chooses to die when there’s finally an excellent chance that she could actually live, marry, have children. She does this because her PICA is essential to the success of the people conspiring to defeat the colony administrator’s plans. Only by officially taking the PICA with her to a ship which is going to be destroyed can she and her fellow conspirators drop it off of the equipment list and allow it to be “lost” until it is needed.

I think the decision she makes in this regard pretty much sums up her character. One of the ironies of the book is that Nimue realizes at one point that she is the last Christian in existence … and that she’s a machine. Of course, she’s also the last person in the entire universe who’s ever heard of Islam, Shintoism, Hinduism, Buddhism or any other genuine religion, as well. Yet just as she doesn’t really know if she’s technically “alive” at all, she doesn’t know whether or not she has a soul? Or if Nimue took it with her at the time of her biological death?

Obviously, Nimue is a person adrift, outside the time and place which created her. She’s also effectively immortal, and … she has to deal with the mortality of those she allows herself to love. Not to mention the fact that however laudable her final objectives, and no matter how essential to the long-term survival of the species they may be, the consequences of her actions are inevitably going to lead to an incredibly bloody and vicious cycle of religious warfare.

Off Armageddon Reef could be read as an anti-religion book. Would that be fair?

Weber: I’m sure some people will read this book as an attack on organized religion. After all, the primary force for the restriction and manipulation of human freedom and character, not to mention corruption, on Safehold is to be found in a world-wide religion. I think, however, that reading this book that way would be a mistake. Yes, the Church of God Awaiting is a monstrous, deliberately fabricated, enslaving lie imposed upon the people of Safehold. But the very impetus for reform coming out of places like Charis is coming out of men and women who follow the logical implications of the Church of God Awaiting’s own moral teachings. Off Armageddon Reef is less about the evils of religion than it is about the use of any ideology or belief structure to manipulate, control and coerce. In the case of Safehold, it’s religion; it could have been communism, fascism or any other brand of authoritarianism or totalitarianism. I said that my books are about choice.

To my mind, anything which removes or denies the right, ability and responsibility to make choices is evil, destructive and a perversion. Religion that closes off, that demonizes or dehumanizes the “other” as the first step in destroying him in the name of some intolerant, oppressive, thought-denying process can be a terrible force for evil. The cynical use of religion, of man’s belief in God, as a self-serving means of manipulating others is despicable. And yet religion can be an equally powerful force for good. The people who support Merlin in Charis believe firmly and fervently in God; they simply can’t accept that God is as small and mean-spirited as the Church of God Awaiting’s current leadership apparently believe He is.

I am quoting only the parts that don’t give away too much about the book’s plot and occurences. After a small edit of course.

Most authors say all their stories are personal. If that’s true for you, and what way was this story personal do you?

Weber: In the most fundamental sense, almost all of my stories are about choices. I believe that the best measure of anyone’s character is to be found in the decisions they make in the face of adversity. Do they act responsibly? Do they place their own convenience or survival ahead of their moral obligations to others? Are they prepared to accept the consequences of their decisions and their actions? Are they prepared to pay the price of their decisions and their actions?

In my books, the heroes are almost always the responsibility-takers, the ones who step up when a problem has to be confronted. They don’t usually worry about who’s responsible for the problem in the first place—or, at least, that particular concern is completely secondary to the question of how they fix what’s wrong. Quite a few of my characters are not particularly safe people to be around, for a lot of reasons, but the villains are those who don’t care about their responsibility to others, or who simply don’t see that they have one at all. I suppose you could think of it as the conflict between those who are prepared to give whatever it takes to meet a recognized need and those who are simply prepared to take whatever they can get for their own personal benefit. That’s a gross oversimplification, of course, but it’s a pretty decent thumbnail of how it works.

Nimue Alban is pretty nearly the ultimate in responsibility-takers. Merlin is the electronic copy of the memories, beliefs and emotions of a young woman who voluntarily sacrificed her own life so that Merlin could be available to defend and restore human freedom and dignity. The allies Merlin recruits in Charis are also responsibility-takers, prepared to put their lives on the line for the things in which they believe. Indeed, the Charisians are prepared to confront the corruption of the Church and the restrictive manipulation to which they and everyone else on Safehold has been subjected without benefit of Merlin’s knowledge of what’s really happening and why. I think that actually requires even more moral courage than Nimue’s decisions do.

One of the funny and useful things about reading good fiction writers is that their fictional world already predicts the real world before the real world events even happen. I read David Weber’s account of anti-war sentiment in Honor Harrington before 2001-2, before the entire anti-war Democrat movement even got into full steam. Yet it might as well be a carbon copy description I had read in Weber’s book of what people do and say in war.