March 06, 2014
— Ace Well, if it weren't already apparent, I'd say that neocon idealism is officially dead.
Many people -- especially those on the left, of course, plus those who are bewitched by sharply-creased trousers -- call Obama's foreign policy "realist." It is nothing of the sort. It's the left's version of idealism.
For 50 years, the left endeavored to defend Soviet aggression by constantly casting it as defensive in nature. Read Howard Zinn, or listen to Oliver Stone's simpering apologism, and you'll hear the same claim a dozen times: Every evil, murderous act committed by the Soviets was caused by justifiable fears of US aggression.
Of course, we should note this fear-of-the-aggressor apologism is highly selective; Zinn, Stone, and fellow travelers never offer a defense of the United States based on the US' quite-legitimate fear of Soviet aggression. They excoriate the US, for example, for attacking the Taliban, despite the rather ample evidence of justified US fear of the Taliban and their guests, Al Qaeda. Thus, the Soviet Union is relieved of responsibility for brutally crushing the Czechs in the Prague Spring of 1968 -- an invasion of 200,000 Soviet troops with 20,000 tanks -- but America receives no such dispensation on the basis of the 3000 murdered Americans of 9/11.
If this pro-Soviet agitation were limited to the pages of The Nation, it would not be cause for great alarm. The problem is that Obama is so steeped in this Zinnian narrative that he conceives of virtually every dictator's viciousness of being, somehow, the product of American Imperial Sin, and has therefore cast his entire foreign policy as one of No Threatening Moves.
From the "Russian Reset" to blocking Polish anti-ballistic-missiles, Obama's Plan A for the defense of the United States is little more than "don't scare the Russians," or "don't scare the Iranians," or don't scare any country or non-state actor which is, itself, scary.
There's an inch of truth in the idea that countries act out of fear, just like there's an inch of truth in virtually everything. But Obama seems to read the Russian/Soviet narrative, issuing from its state propaganda organs and relentlessly re-transmitted by its reliable toadies in the US and Europe, as if is an honest account of Soviet/Russian intention. In fact, 90% of it is false. As Hillary Clinton recently observed, Hitler's pretext for invading Czechoslavakia was to save the German ethnics of the Sudetenland from the predations of ethnic Czechs and the untermenschen Slavs.
People are rarely honest about their actual motivations for committing horrific acts, and few are more dishonest than tyrannical politicians backed by a state media and a totalitarian system of punishing internal dissent.
So sure, some amount of Russian foreign policy is based on fear, and some of that fear can even be credited as rational; but so is part of the American foreign policy, and so is the foreign policy of the UK, and France, and Australia, and India and every other country on the face of the earth.
But most of Russian foreign policy is rooted in simple Want. Putin Wants something resembling the Soviet Union back. Putin Wants to surround his country with satellites and satrapies.
And the way to keep someone from acting on his more repulsive Wants is to assign a cost to achieving those Wants such that he will restrain himself from acting on every Want.
I don't actually fault Obama for speaking of an idealistic foreign policy, one in which peace is maintained largely by countries simply not threatening each other. It's a noble goal. I wish for that goal myself.
But it is extremely naïve, not to say dangerous, to act as if the meaningless action of Wishing for something to be wills it into existence.
My problem is that he not only has no Plan B -- the more realistic, tough-minded plan for when Plan A (almost inevitably) fails -- but that he slurs his fellow Americans by suggesting that they're too stupid and crude-minded to Wish for Plan A to work.
Nope. We do wish for Plan A. We do wish Putin would understand that real strength is demonstrated not by how many millions you can bully and dominate, but by how many millions you can set free.
I wish Putin would understand this. I wish every aggressive tyrant would understand this.
But wishing is not a plan, and it's a slur to claim that anyone who speaks of a realistic Plan B -- in which force and coercion are employed against those who only understand force and coercion -- is a "warmonger" who doesn't himself wish peace.
Thanks to @BenK84 for linking this in the morning news dump.
Update: Jim Geraghty makes the case for a robust Plan B.
Dear World beyond Our Borders,These are your choices:
A world where the United States government and its military, supplied by corporations you find distasteful, responds to aggression and provocations through shows of force and military interventions. These interventions — sometimes on a large scale and sometimes on a small scale — inflict regrettable but inevitable collateral damage on civilians. These actions are ones that in the past you have labeled “imperialist” and “aggressive” and that prompt you to lament that the world is being run by “cowboys” and — the post-millennial all-purpose pejorative label — “neocons.”
AdvertisementA world where the United States government and its military do not respond this way, and disputes about territory, ideology, and power beyond our borders are hashed out by the Russians, the Chinese, the Iranians, the Pakistanis, the Saudis, various jihadist factions (including those so violent and bloodthirsty that not even al-Qaeda wants to be associated with them), terror-for-hire groups like the Haqqani network, and anyone else who wants in on the brawl....
Pick one. There is no “Option C” where the United Nations suddenly becomes an effective, respected peacekeeping force. There is no “Option D” where the world’s strong men and brutes are talked into taking up yoga and become calm, mellow guys, eager to hug it out.
Posted by: Ace at
07:55 AM
| Comments (381)
Post contains 1057 words, total size 7 kb.
Posted by: troyriser at March 06, 2014 07:58 AM (V9ol4)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at March 06, 2014 07:59 AM (0z3kx)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at March 06, 2014 07:59 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: Citizen X at March 06, 2014 08:01 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at March 06, 2014 08:01 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: JJ Stone at March 06, 2014 08:01 AM (4oSMi)
With the conclusion of the war in 1865 the Peace Democrats were thoroughly discredited. Most Northerners believed, not without reason, that Peace Democrats had prolonged war by encouraging the South to continue fighting in the hope that the North would abandon the struggle.
In the state elections of Connecticut, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire, Republicans won major victories over Copperhead opponents. President Lincoln had arranged for Republican political boss Thurlow Weed to raise $15,000 among New York financiers to back Republican campaigns, thus assuring the victories.
Posted by: "Honset Abe" Lincoln at March 06, 2014 08:01 AM (e8kgV)
" justifiable fears of US aggression"
The South needed all those good ol' boy voters in Georgia, USSR.
Posted by: Count de Monet at March 06, 2014 08:02 AM (BAS5M)
Posted by: Judge Pug at March 06, 2014 08:02 AM (hJnUx)
Posted by: Mainah at March 06, 2014 08:02 AM (659DL)
http://tinyurl.com/jvgvvsx
Posted by: Vic[/i] at March 06, 2014 08:02 AM (T2V/1)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 06, 2014 08:02 AM (HVff2)
I'm fairly certain that the "sending a message" skittles and unicorns foreign policy construct has been adequately discredited at this point.
Posted by: LoneStarHeeb at March 06, 2014 08:03 AM (BZAd3)
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 06, 2014 08:03 AM (eoeps)
Posted by: Vic[/i] at March 06, 2014 08:04 AM (T2V/1)
Posted by: ace at March 06, 2014 08:05 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Barb the Evil Genius at March 06, 2014 08:05 AM (yE8uc)
Posted by: votermom at March 06, 2014 08:05 AM (GSIDW)
Also, great post as usual Ace. Glad to see you're back up to 100%.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at March 06, 2014 08:05 AM (8ZskC)
Posted by: Tom Friedman at March 06, 2014 08:05 AM (Q6pxP)
Posted by: eleven at March 06, 2014 08:06 AM (GXZgZ)
Posted by: Barky O'Bamastain at March 06, 2014 08:07 AM (Q6pxP)
From the "Russian Reset" to blocking Polish anti-ballistic-missiles, Obama's Plan A for the defense of the United States is little more than "don't scare the Russians," or "don't scare the Iranians," or don't scare any country or non-state actor which is, itself, scary.
It's the same reason why LGBTBBQ Mafia leftists have no qualms about attacking Christian bakeries, but would never demand a halal caterer make them a wedding cake for their gay wedding.
The left are ultimately cowards, but they hide their cowardice by asserting their alleged dominance on otherwise friendly actors. This is why Obammy won't say boo to Iran, but will lean on Israel like a two-ton hammer to get them to cow to his will. He thinks it makes him look tough, when all it does is make him (and the US by extension) look feckless.
We are bereft of feck.
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/s][/u][/b][/i] at March 06, 2014 08:07 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 06, 2014 08:07 AM (84gbM)
Posted by: Mr. Dave at March 06, 2014 08:07 AM (ukhGS)
Posted by: Vic[/i] at March 06, 2014 08:07 AM (T2V/1)
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 06, 2014 08:07 AM (eoeps)
Posted by: eleven at March 06, 2014 08:08 AM (GXZgZ)
Wonder how that will square with Benghazi Barky's "reality"?
Posted by: B at March 06, 2014 08:08 AM (5OEha)
Posted by: Citizen X at March 06, 2014 08:08 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at March 06, 2014 08:08 AM (gBnkX)
Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at March 06, 2014 08:08 AM (Y/M/K)
Posted by: Citizen X at March 06, 2014 08:09 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 06, 2014 08:09 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: Brother Cavil at March 06, 2014 08:09 AM (naUcP)
Posted by: Madamex at March 06, 2014 08:09 AM (vaWdD)
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at March 06, 2014 08:09 AM (gOoFi)
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 06, 2014 12:03 PM (eoeps)
"Clap your hands, everyone! Let's all save Tinkerbelle!"
- Obammy Administration's Domestic and Foreign Policy Stance
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/s][/u][/b][/i] at March 06, 2014 08:09 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: Brother Cavil at March 06, 2014 08:09 AM (naUcP)
Well, derp. You also have to believe you deserve it.
Posted by: Oprah at March 06, 2014 08:10 AM (ZKzrr)
Posted by: JJ Stone at March 06, 2014 08:10 AM (4oSMi)
noun /nēōˈkän/
Def. JOOOOO lover or outright JOOOOOO
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at March 06, 2014 08:11 AM (8ZskC)
Gee, have not seen that in a while.
My neighborhood has, regrettably, gotten infiltrated with "Coexist" sporting eco-box cars. Damnation!
Posted by: backhoe at March 06, 2014 08:11 AM (ULH4o)
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at March 06, 2014 08:12 AM (gOoFi)
Posted by: X at March 06, 2014 08:12 AM (KHo8t)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 06, 2014 08:13 AM (84gbM)
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at March 06, 2014 08:13 AM (8ZskC)
Posted by: votermom at March 06, 2014 08:13 AM (GSIDW)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 06, 2014 08:13 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: hello, it's me also a creep-assed cracka.. at March 06, 2014 08:13 AM (9+ccr)
Posted by: HR needs a beer at March 06, 2014 08:13 AM (ZKzrr)
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at March 06, 2014 08:13 AM (659DL)
It's false equivalance in that at least the neocon ideal had some basis in historical fact (the US itself, at least prior to the early 1900s), while the Left's various theories amounted to trying to put frilly decorations on strongman worship.
Obviously both are incorrect; we proved that very thoroughly in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Posted by: Ian S. at March 06, 2014 08:13 AM (B/VB5)
Iraq might not be a UK quality ally but they they are far better than Saddam's Iraq and they owe us. Using their borders for whenever we need to put pressure on the Iranians is can be part of the repaying.
- JJ Stone
-
Which, I believe, was the true purpose of that incursion.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 06, 2014 08:14 AM (eoeps)
Everyone knows that the biggest threat is Climate Change.
Aggression amongst various countries is just a distraction.
Build moar windmills!!
Posted by: John Fancois Kerry at March 06, 2014 08:14 AM (aq/zi)
Def. JOOOOO lover or outright JOOOOOO
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at March 06, 2014 12:11 PM (8ZskC)
Expanded definition:
Def. JOOOOO lover or outright JOOOOOO who has the bad taste to not vote a straight Democratic ticket and make heavy donations to the Democratic Party instead of Jewish Charities or shudder, Israel.
Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes, think mink. at March 06, 2014 08:14 AM (kXoT0)
Posted by: We Are The Ones We've Been Waiting For at March 06, 2014 08:14 AM (Aif/5)
Wait - you mean go back to an actual America-centric foreign policy where we help our friends, punish our enemies, and do everything with an eye for how it will benefit US instead of a bunch of ungrateful foreigners?
I'm all for that.
To paraphrase, America has no permanent friends, only permanent interests.
Posted by: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus at March 06, 2014 08:14 AM (YYJjz)
Posted by: phreshone at March 06, 2014 08:14 AM (Q6pxP)
Becuase i have felt rather hostile lately to doing something for everyone else risking our people lives for a stab in the back later by our allies.
but i do see how it could go to much worse. becuae as we watch who will stand up in defense of a country or countries we promised security to?
Posted by: willow at March 06, 2014 08:14 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: jm at March 06, 2014 08:14 AM (j+qLQ)
Posted by: SH at March 06, 2014 08:14 AM (gmeXX)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 06, 2014 08:15 AM (84gbM)
Posted by: JJ Stone at March 06, 2014 08:15 AM (4oSMi)
Posted by: joncelli at March 06, 2014 08:15 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at March 06, 2014 08:16 AM (gOoFi)
Posted by: jm at March 06, 2014 08:16 AM (j+qLQ)
Posted by: tsrblke, PhD(c) (No Really!) at March 06, 2014 08:16 AM (hq5sb)
although stating we will War before trying many other things in the tool box.
how we find an effective tool after so many redlines and insincere commitments is another thing.
Posted by: willow at March 06, 2014 08:16 AM (nqBYe)
http://tinyurl.com/nohjfo2 (charlotte.cbslocal.com)
Uh oh
Posted by: Bitter Clinger and All That (Microaggressive SoCon) at March 06, 2014 08:17 AM (LSDdO)
Posted by: Lizzy at March 06, 2014 08:17 AM (aq/zi)
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at March 06, 2014 12:13 PM (659DL)
Damn right.
Afghanistan, for instance. If I had my way -- and it's probably good that I don't, because I'm not terribly kind when it comes to stupid people -- Afghanistan would have gone like this:
1) America bombs the living shit out of Kabul and every moderately populated area in Afghanistan, making sure to kill off as many Taliban and terrorist groups as possible.
2) America says, "Okay, Afghanis. Set up your new government. But keep in mind, if you harbor or export your terrorism again, we're going to come back and we're going to bomb you back to the stone age. Again. And we will continue to do this until you've set up a government that's smarter than a box of rocks and recognizes that actions have consequences."
3) Rinse and repeat.
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/s][/u][/b][/i] at March 06, 2014 08:17 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: Caliban at March 06, 2014 08:17 AM (DrC22)
"...few are more dishonest than tyrannical politicians backed by a state media and a totalitarian system of punishing internal dissent"
Racist.
Posted by: speedster1 at March 06, 2014 08:17 AM (v40Bj)
Posted by: SH
So you're saying we should arm the Mongolians and tell them to ride West?
Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at March 06, 2014 08:17 AM (Y/M/K)
Posted by: Mr. Dave at March 06, 2014 08:17 AM (ukhGS)
Posted by: ace at March 06, 2014 08:17 AM (/FnUH)
Totally serious question: Can anyone recommend some good (by which I mean "not using the 'Marxist-feminist lens' or Zinning it all up") historians to read about Russian history?
Posted by: HR needs a beer at March 06, 2014 08:18 AM (ZKzrr)
Posted by: hello, it's me also a creep-assed cracka.. at March 06, 2014 08:18 AM (9+ccr)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 06, 2014 08:18 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: SH at March 06, 2014 08:18 AM (gmeXX)
Posted by: ace at March 06, 2014 08:18 AM (/FnUH)
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at March 06, 2014 08:19 AM (yDmQD)
Posted by: backhoe at March 06, 2014 08:19 AM (ULH4o)
Posted by: JJ Stone at March 06, 2014 08:19 AM (4oSMi)
So if you believe that, then it follows that avoidance of war is only largely accomplished by a fear of it, not a retreat from it.
If an opponent believes you are willing to not only go to war, but annihilate them if it comes to that- they will attempt to avoid it. It is primal and existential. It is also logical. Save the occasional irrational maniac (which by the way strengthens this posture) that is demosntrably true. Where as people like Obama and the creased pants crowd proceed largely despite factual evidence that based on theory or pathos arguments. And it's failing miserably, yet the still make excuses and just keep marching into the abyss.
Nothing, and I mean nothing in the course of continuous world history suggests otherwise. In fact it suggests the converse.
Posted by: Marcus T. at March 06, 2014 08:19 AM (GGCsk)
This one skips the "work" and goes directly for the O.
Posted by: EC at March 06, 2014 08:19 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: SH at March 06, 2014 08:20 AM (gmeXX)
Posted by: Reggie the Love Machine at March 06, 2014 08:20 AM (gOoFi)
Posted by: Rand Paul's Garbage at March 06, 2014 08:20 AM (Q6pxP)
Posted by: Mainah at March 06, 2014 08:20 AM (659DL)
http://tinyurl.com/nohjfo2 (charlotte.cbslocal.com)
Uh oh
I thought that was already invented... It's called a dildo
Posted by: hello, it's me also a creep-assed cracka.. at March 06, 2014 12:18 PM (9+ccr)
Sybian. Or the fucksaw.
Posted by: Insomniac at March 06, 2014 08:20 AM (DrWcr)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 06, 2014 12:18 PM (HVff2)
They gave Up their tools to protect themselves because we Lied.
or our words , writings 'deals' mean nothing or however this administration wants it to be.
Posted by: willow at March 06, 2014 08:20 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 06, 2014 08:20 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Mainah at March 06, 2014 08:21 AM (659DL)
Posted by: Burn the Witch at March 06, 2014 08:21 AM (gBnkX)
Posted by: SH at March 06, 2014 08:21 AM (gmeXX)
Posted by: Caliban at March 06, 2014 08:21 AM (DrC22)
Posted by: Barack O'Stalin at March 06, 2014 08:22 AM (Q6pxP)
Posted by: Meremortal at March 06, 2014 08:22 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: JJ Stone at March 06, 2014 08:22 AM (4oSMi)
Posted by: NCwoof at March 06, 2014 08:23 AM (aUQgu)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 06, 2014 08:23 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: NCwoof at March 06, 2014 12:23 PM (aUQgu)
We have prog-left dipshits in charge, that's what happened.
Posted by: Insomniac at March 06, 2014 08:23 AM (DrWcr)
Posted by: Marcus T. at March 06, 2014 08:23 AM (GGCsk)
Totally serious question: Can anyone recommend some good (by which I mean "not using the 'Marxist-feminist lens' or Zinning it all up") historians to read about Russian history?
Posted by: HR needs a beer at March 06, 2014 12:18 PM (ZKzrr)
The standard is A History of Russia by Riasanovsky. Anything by Richard Pipes is good, though pretty dry and technical.
Posted by: joncelli at March 06, 2014 08:23 AM (RD7QR)
Who says it's not working?
They hate America and they're effectively destroying 70 years of American supremacy.
Posted by: Lizzy at March 06, 2014 08:23 AM (aq/zi)
***
The primal sin of human beings is the desire to dominate others - almost all individuals will do so when given the power to pursue such an end.
You see that clearly with Putin, and you see it just as clearly with Obama.
This is an incredibly rational desire and as you note can easily be checked. If Putin faced a real threat of negative consequences be they military, economic, or some other form that were greater then the advantages he would not currently be in the Crimea.
Likewise with Obama if he faced a Republican party that would impeach him or sabotage his agenda and power base over a certain level of outrage, he would stop at that point.
But the problem is there both Putin and Obama are in a situation where there is no effective opposition to them, largely by the choices of those that should be opposing them (Obama, Merkel, etc on the one hand and Boehner and McConnell on the other).
Posted by: 18-1 at March 06, 2014 08:23 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: SH at March 06, 2014 08:24 AM (gmeXX)
Posted by: Ricardo Kill at March 06, 2014 08:24 AM (gOoFi)
It's about trading Putin's chains for the EU's and IMF's chains
The IMF wants the resources in the Ukraine in exchange for loans which put the Ukrainians into a debtors prison similar to the PIIGS
There were stories this past week about the German homeschooling couple who were denied asylum by an appellate court this week. They should have gone to Russia, it's actually legal to homeschool there
America has proven that they'll happily exchange their freedom for free shit and trashy entertainment
In the end, it's just about who gets to control the money
Posted by: kbdabear at March 06, 2014 08:24 AM (aTXUx)
Posted by: DangerGirl and her Sanity Prod (tm) at March 06, 2014 08:24 AM (Ryac4)
Posted by: Adam at March 06, 2014 08:24 AM (Aif/5)
The Photoshop where Putin pulls it on Obama and TFG cries while Putin puts on sunglasses will never not be funny, sorry.
Posted by: Ian S. at March 06, 2014 08:24 AM (B/VB5)
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at March 06, 2014 08:24 AM (659DL)
Posted by: JEM at March 06, 2014 08:25 AM (o+SC1)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 06, 2014 08:25 AM (84gbM)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 06, 2014 08:25 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: jwpaine @PirateBallerina at March 06, 2014 08:25 AM (2oU2+)
Posted by: Bob's House of Flannel Shirts and Wallet Chains at March 06, 2014 08:25 AM (vgIRn)
Posted by: eleven at March 06, 2014 08:26 AM (GXZgZ)
HR, if you want to get a jist of the russian revolution forward you can get it from "the forsaken" although not a very happy read. There are quite a zillion books on the russian monarchy part.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at March 06, 2014 08:26 AM (gorVZ)
Then when someone does do something, they all freak out like a bee is in the car. Make up your minds and shut up about it. Which will it be? Geraghty shows the choice perfectly: let these horrors happen or let someone do something about them. Make a choice, and shut up.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 06, 2014 08:26 AM (zfY+H)
***
Just as the Republican leadership would rather a permanent minority status with the perks the governing class currently gets to rolling back Leviathan and giving up their own power, Obama would rather dominate a weaker America a la Chavez then spend a few years as a constrained president of a prosperous constitutional republic...
Posted by: 18-1 at March 06, 2014 08:26 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 06, 2014 08:27 AM (t3UFN)
Last minute change. They are allowed to stay indefinitely.
Posted by: EC at March 06, 2014 08:27 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: Meremortal at March 06, 2014 08:27 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: Janine garafalo at March 06, 2014 08:28 AM (Vxe+6)
They hate America and they're effectively destroying 70 years of American supremacy.
Precisely. Reinstating the Cold War with the US critically weakened is a big win for the Harvard faculty lounge types.
Posted by: Ian S. at March 06, 2014 08:28 AM (B/VB5)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 06, 2014 08:28 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 06, 2014 08:28 AM (84gbM)
The promoters really should have re-considered that lineup.
Posted by: Citizen X at March 06, 2014 12:09 PM (7ObY1)
You'd laugh, but it looks like Suicide by Jellyfish was the actual name of a rap album.
https://tinyurl.com/26jyr8n
Posted by: Armando at March 06, 2014 08:28 AM (5iuEW)
Posted by: ace at March 06, 2014 12:17 PM (/FnUH)
Your words to my stepson's ears.
"Round up. On the way...."
Posted by: EC at March 06, 2014 08:28 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: jwest at March 06, 2014 08:29 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: SH at March 06, 2014 08:29 AM (gmeXX)
Posted by: votermom at March 06, 2014 08:29 AM (GSIDW)
***
Right up until 9/11 feminists were railing that the only reason we didn't invade Afghanistan to remove the Taliban is that the west is controlled by a corrupt patriarchy.
When Bush went in and removed them from power though he became a war criminial for interfering with the rights of a country to self determination.
Much like the switch in leftwing views after Operation Barbarossa launched this should have damned feminism to irrelevance...
Posted by: 18-1 at March 06, 2014 08:29 AM (P3U0f)
But people need to make a choice which America they want to see, the sleeping dragon or the avenging angel. Pick one and then shut the hell up about what you get.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 06, 2014 08:29 AM (zfY+H)
Posted by: NCwoof
The Left's narrative overcame it with, "Why are you being mean, man?" and "If were nice to everyone, they'll be nice to us ... man."
GW didnt' help things with our Iraq war. It has given the Left's narrative just enough oxygen to allow Americans to return to the West's holiday from history.
Big, emotionally driven stories about political situations are far more powerful than any set of facts or cold understanding of human nature. We live in an age of fairy tales.
Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at March 06, 2014 08:30 AM (Y/M/K)
Posted by: maddogg at March 06, 2014 08:30 AM (xWW96)
Totally serious question: Can anyone recommend some good (by which I mean "not using the 'Marxist-feminist lens' or Zinning it all up") historians to read about Russian history?
-
'The Great Game' by Peter Hopkirk is a start
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at March 06, 2014 08:30 AM (eoeps)
Ok Chuck, now gut the Defense Department
Posted by: Barack O'Stalin at March 06, 2014 08:31 AM (Q6pxP)
Well this is a discussion on foreign policy and the shift away from neo-conservative policies on foreign affairs.
Posted by: lowandslow at March 06, 2014 08:31 AM (IV4od)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 06, 2014 08:31 AM (t3UFN)
***
Well, the "insurgency" was created by the efforts of a number of America's opponents and the treasonous domestic left - most notably the media.
Had the media covered the war the way it should have the "insurgency" would have died in its infancy.
Posted by: 18-1 at March 06, 2014 08:32 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 06, 2014 08:32 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 06, 2014 08:32 AM (84gbM)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at March 06, 2014 08:32 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: SH at March 06, 2014 08:32 AM (gmeXX)
It was replaced with "can I bend over for you and become a cavern for relief of your naked aggression."
Posted by: Marcus T. at March 06, 2014 08:33 AM (GGCsk)
So, they support the left leaning presidential candidates, and, now, they got exactly what they wanted. Result: buffoonery.
So, if the US goes down, they all switch to Russia or China? Seems to be a valid scenario. Not supporting us after all the blood and lives fought.
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 06, 2014 12:25 PM (IXrOn)
yeah that was where my burn-out focused itself. The stabs throughout Bush. But than we have Clinton that made commitments to Protect countries if they'd only give up their rights to have the ability to protect themselves.
Obama not following through on the missile shield, Then russia stepping in to get their stuff.
But, If we do nothing our word is trash to any sensible country paying attention.
anyway. we act schizophrenic
Posted by: willow at March 06, 2014 08:33 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: phreshone at March 06, 2014 08:33 AM (Q6pxP)
Posted by: Nip Sip at March 06, 2014 08:33 AM (0FSuD)
Posted by: JPS at March 06, 2014 08:34 AM (DZTUR)
Posted by: Meremortal at March 06, 2014 08:34 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: votermom at March 06, 2014 08:34 AM (GSIDW)
Hey that reminds me, has France ever thanked us? I mean officially, not just for the kind le sex for our boys after freeing Paris.
They seem all ''please defend us, now we hate you cowboys" schizophrenic.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at March 06, 2014 08:34 AM (gorVZ)
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at March 06, 2014 08:34 AM (659DL)
Who is being punished by big government, not the FSA, and they are out breeding the taxpayers. That's why the Democratic Party destroyed the Black family and are almost done destroying the rest. It may take them a few generations to overcome the average Hispanic devotion to family quotient, but, they got nuttin' but time and everyone's money to make it happen. In a lot of the very poorest Hispanic neighborhoods, the gangs have replaced La Familia to a great degree using money and violence.
Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes, think mink. at March 06, 2014 08:34 AM (kXoT0)
President Obama is, in so many ways, the opposite of President Bush. Bush was very capable at the job of president and commander in chief, he was qualified, a capable executive, and a can-do guy. By all accounts he was warm and personable, a very likable guy one-on-one, and great off the cuff. But he was terrible at making speeches (for a politician) and no good at all with selling his message and ideas.
With Obama we have a guy who's aces at selling his ideas and public relations, a powerful speech maker... and incompetent at actually getting anything done, while being a massive prick in person and a stuttering mumbler off the cuff.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 06, 2014 08:34 AM (zfY+H)
Posted by: RWC at March 06, 2014 08:35 AM (fWAjv)
thinking
***
If I was a political leader in either country I'd be looking as to where the best place to get enriched uranium is these days.
And if I was Israel right now I'd be letting Russia know that their support for Iran might prompt us to make such sales...
Posted by: 18-1 at March 06, 2014 08:35 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: SH at March 06, 2014 08:35 AM (gmeXX)
Posted by: RWC at March 06, 2014 12:35 PM (fWAjv)
It was surprising. Someone at State must have taken a second look at the optics and reconsidered.
Posted by: EC at March 06, 2014 08:35 AM (GQ8sn)
(as to the amount i am able LOL)
That Obama is here to help assist in our decline.
Posted by: willow at March 06, 2014 08:36 AM (nqBYe)
I disagree completely. He sent in the right military to do the job and it worked brilliantly. Where it went wrong was that the OCCUPATION was too light, and with the wrong philosophy on how to get the job done.
The surge worked not so much because of the raw numbers, but because of the change in approach. The numbers helped give the guys a rest and made it easier to accomplish, but it wasn't just "more guys will fix this."
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 06, 2014 08:36 AM (zfY+H)
THIS.
Nation building is not impossible we just tried to skip the step where you crush your enemy first.
Posted by: typo dynamofo at March 06, 2014 08:36 AM (IVgIK)
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA !
Sen. John McCain is the least popular senator in the country of those surveyed by Public Policy Polling, with low marks from his own party, independents and Democrats.
Just 30 percent of Arizona voters approve of the job the Republican senator is doing, with 54 percent who disapprove, according to a PPP released Thursday. That is the worst of any senatorÂ’s polling in the nation that PPP has found.
Posted by: The Jackhole at March 06, 2014 08:36 AM (nTgAI)
Posted by: Christopher Taylor
Binary choice, eh?
Yeah. No, it's not. We don't have to be World Cop to avoid creeping hegemony in the world. Power must be used selectively or it will be discredited when the results are not 100%. Iraq is a prime case of this; what % of the voters do you think would be willing to do it all over again ??
Me. I'd guess 15% tops.
Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at March 06, 2014 08:36 AM (Y/M/K)
Posted by: Lincolntf at March 06, 2014 08:37 AM (ZshNr)
Israel is banking on Obama's anti Semitic and anti-Israel sentiment being an anomaly among US presidents.
Obviously they can't wait until the next president is inaugurated before doing something about Iran. But Russia is firmly behind Iran, so there is no middle ground for Israel to take.
An attack on Iran is an attack on a budding vassal state of the new, expansionist Russia.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at March 06, 2014 08:37 AM (QFxY5)
***
He could have destroyed Iran's economy with the carrier groups he had available if he had wanted to respond in such a way.
Of course his original strategy for the invasion of Iraq had to be abandoned when Turkey refused to allow transit.
Posted by: 18-1 at March 06, 2014 08:37 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: SH at March 06, 2014 08:38 AM (gmeXX)
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 06, 2014 08:38 AM (zfY+H)
Posted by: Seems legit at March 06, 2014 08:38 AM (A98Xu)
Peter the Great by Robert K. Massie is an accessible, easy read that gives a nice bit of context for modern Russia. Peter Westernized the former collection of duchies and principalities that make up Russia and was the guy who made it a major player in the Western world for the first time.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at March 06, 2014 08:38 AM (8ZskC)
Posted by: tasker at March 06, 2014 08:39 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: jwest at March 06, 2014 08:39 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: eleven at March 06, 2014 08:39 AM (GXZgZ)
A lot has changed since the Cold War, and most have a more "it's their problem" attitude than the super-duper hawks .
The John McCain/Kristol "let's rush into every conflict with boots on the ground" reaction is bad for America and bad for conservatism.
What I interpret as "neoconservative" is the naive ideal that the American military should be responsible for spreading democracy and human right around the globe and engage in nation building.
I look at our military as something used to protect actual Americans from harm, not some sort of global strike force that is used for world peace.
Posted by: McAdams at March 06, 2014 08:39 AM (fHBDc)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 06, 2014 08:39 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: votermom at March 06, 2014 08:40 AM (GSIDW)
Yeah. No, it's not."
Yeah, ultimately it is. Either we go in and do things or we sit back and let them burn. If you do just a little of helping, you end up all in eventually. Either way, I can live with it, but there has to be a choice made, and made without whining and backtracking. Do it or don't but shut up about it.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 06, 2014 08:40 AM (zfY+H)
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at March 06, 2014 08:40 AM (yDmQD)
Posted by: RWC at March 06, 2014 08:40 AM (fWAjv)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 06, 2014 12:32 PM (t3UFN)
"Neo-conservative" is code for Teh Jooz.™
Posted by: Insomniac at March 06, 2014 08:40 AM (DrWcr)
Read Howard Zinn, or listen to Oliver Stone's simpering apologism, and you'll hear the same claim a dozen times: Every evil, murderous act committed by the Soviets was caused by justifiable fears of US aggression.
Jonah Goldberg:
My old boss, William F. Buckley, responding to claims that the U.S. and the Soviets were morally equivalent, said that if one man pushes an old lady into an oncoming bus and another man pushes an old lady out of the way of a bus, we should not denounce them both as the sorts of men who push old ladies around.
Posted by: CJ at March 06, 2014 08:40 AM (9KqcB)
PS: I like saying "satrapies". Sounds like someone is about to pull something out of "The Magic Suitcase" for some fun.
Posted by: Sharkman at March 06, 2014 08:41 AM (UB3/1)
Posted by: Mainah at March 06, 2014 08:41 AM (659DL)
Posted by: ejo at March 06, 2014 08:42 AM (GXvSO)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 06, 2014 08:42 AM (84gbM)
Posted by: votermom at March 06, 2014 08:42 AM (GSIDW)
Speaking of Russia, the Daily Mail had a great article yesterday about the early 20th century photographer Sergei Mikhailovish Prokudin-Gorskii, who was tasked by Tsar Nicholas II to take pictures all over the Russian empire. This was in the early 20th century, prior to the Bolshevik revolution. The photos are (for the most part) in color, and they're stunning. Some of them are so crisp you'd think they were taken yesterday.
The Library of Congress bought some thousand of his surviving negatives back in the 80s and they have a number of them on display in their online gallery. I really do encourage you to check them out. They're amazing.
Prokudin-Gorskii Exhibit: http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/empire/index.html
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/s][/u][/b][/i] at March 06, 2014 08:42 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 06, 2014 08:42 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at March 06, 2014 08:43 AM (g4TxM)
Posted by: EC at March 06, 2014 12:27 PM (GQ8sn)
Under conditions that are easily tripped.
They can stay indefinitely "unless convicted of a crime"
How hard would it be for cops to be ordered to arrest them on trumped up charges with fake evidence if needed?
I'd like to think we're the bastions of freedom here, but a majority of Americans now say "Freedom.. you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means"
When a feminist is considered to be oppressed because she has to buy her own birth control pills, the word freedom has completely been twisted in a way that Orwell told us it would be
Posted by: kbdabear at March 06, 2014 08:44 AM (aTXUx)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 06, 2014 08:44 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: votermom at March 06, 2014 08:44 AM (GSIDW)
Posted by: WalrusRex at March 06, 2014 08:44 AM (6E5vh)
Posted by: Tami [/i][/b][/u][/s] at March 06, 2014 08:44 AM (bCEmE)
Posted by: artisanal 'ette at March 06, 2014 08:44 AM (IXrOn)
Posted by: Tami at March 06, 2014 12:44 PM (bCEmE)
Thread winner.
Take a bow, Tami!
Posted by: EC at March 06, 2014 08:45 AM (GQ8sn)
***
I'd say he is trying for pretty much the same thing the European technocracy and Obama are.
Putin knows that it is dangerous to be a formal dictator or king, but that presiding over a state that has regular, meaningless elections with all the real power in his unaccountable hands offers most of the benefits at much less risk.
Posted by: 18-1 at March 06, 2014 08:45 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: WalrusRex at March 06, 2014 12:44 PM (6E5vh)
/Moo Cow
Posted by: Insomniac at March 06, 2014 08:45 AM (DrWcr)
Posted by: RWC at March 06, 2014 08:45 AM (fWAjv)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 06, 2014 08:45 AM (84gbM)
-----
I have heard that Massie's biography on Catherine the Great is excellent, but have not read it myself.
------
Anything by Massie is great for a glimpse into a totally different attitude and mindset and IMO done with as much honesty as humanly possible. There is also a good biography of Potemkin by Montefiore (maybe 10-15 years old?).
I hate faculty lounge "history" and actually blame that type of revisionist propaganda on our lame diplomacy in the past 20 years.
Posted by: Mustbequantum at March 06, 2014 08:45 AM (MIKMs)
"There's an inch of truth in virtually everything..."
Who ARE you people, and what have you done with the REAL commenters?
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at March 06, 2014 12:43 PM (g4TxM)
Slackers
Posted by: The Jackhole at March 06, 2014 08:46 AM (nTgAI)
And that really ought to be our foreign policy. We should be slightly more willing to take military action when someone does something awful to any of us, but then we leave. Don't do it again, if you want to avoid this happening, here's how to fix it. Good luck.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 06, 2014 08:46 AM (zfY+H)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 06, 2014 08:46 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: Tami [/i][/b][/u][/s] at March 06, 2014 08:46 AM (bCEmE)
Posted by: RWC at March 06, 2014 08:46 AM (fWAjv)
Posted by: Seamus Muldoon at March 06, 2014 08:47 AM (g4TxM)
[i216 NRO Headline:
Standing Ovation for Christie at CPAC
Posted by: CJ at March 06, 2014 12:43 PM (9KqcB)
He just closed one of the exit aisles is all.
Posted by: Tami at March 06, 2014 12:44 PM (bCEmE) [/i]
Thread winner!
I'd add, "And then let one rip," because that'd really get the stampede going.
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/s][/u][/b][/i] at March 06, 2014 08:47 AM (4df7R)
Christie can do that. He's often right on issues, but wrong on too many others for a conservative to vote for.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 06, 2014 08:48 AM (zfY+H)
This.
Talk is cheap. Deeds are important.
Posted by: EC at March 06, 2014 08:49 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 06, 2014 08:49 AM (t3UFN)
***
On the one hand Cruz is right, all serious people should be laughing at Obama for this crap, on the other hand Obama is remaking our society in a Orwellian manner, and this is a core part of that effort.
He, and the left, want to make it impossible to dissent from their world view, not only because of the threat of punishment, but also because individuals will not have the tools to do so...
Posted by: 18-1 at March 06, 2014 08:49 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at March 06, 2014 08:49 AM (zfY+H)
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at March 06, 2014 08:49 AM (8ZskC)
Posted by: Insomniac
I don't agree, I would certainly call John McCain a "neoconservative" and he's not Jewish. The same with Lindsey Graham.
Even though I believe Israel is an important ally and that they are surrounded by crazy lunatics, I don't think the US military should be some sort of strike force for Israeli security. I also think it's absurd we give Israel something like $30 billion a year in foreign aid. Your talking about trillions of dollars over several decades.
Some people like to throw around "anti-semite!" any time someone doesn't want to go along with Israel's interests, it's really no different than when the Left screams "RACIST!" anytime someone criticizes Obama.
I would of course side with Israel with any conflict with their neighbors, but Israel is not the 51st state of the US.
Posted by: McAdams at March 06, 2014 08:49 AM (fHBDc)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Mmmm. Blondies with whipped cream. at March 06, 2014 08:50 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: Grampa Jimbo at March 06, 2014 08:50 AM (V70Uh)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 06, 2014 08:50 AM (84gbM)
Now if we could just kill compassionate conservatism.
That was just Karl Rove’s line to get his guy elected twice. In reality, since we don’t have the support to actually cut much of the welfare state, all conservatism is “compassionate.” In that we won’t (can’t, really) roll much back, but won’t let it grow.
Posted by: CJ at March 06, 2014 08:50 AM (9KqcB)
___
But really isn't that how we all want to go out?
Posted by: Sen Robert Menendez at March 06, 2014 08:51 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: phreshone at March 06, 2014 08:51 AM (Q6pxP)
Posted by: Tami [/i][/b][/u][/s] at March 06, 2014 08:51 AM (bCEmE)
And then suddenly wake back up, refreshed and ready for the next pile of underage girls.
"Is noon already?"
Posted by: EC at March 06, 2014 08:51 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 06, 2014 08:51 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 06, 2014 08:51 AM (o9Rp5)
Posted by: Christopher Taylor
Unfortunately, 140+ million other voters have a say.
They aren't interested in a permanent state of war with every bad actor. And, no, they aren't going to be consistent in this age of fairy tale life and thinking.
You and I should hope they don't change their minds. Because it will require the death of millions of them to be converted into a populace who wants to go full Roman on the world.
Reagan pretty much thread the needle between projecting strength and not jumping into every conflict under the sun. I'm not totally convinced pulling out of Beirut was the best option but 20/20 hindsight and exceptions challenge no generality.
Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at March 06, 2014 08:51 AM (Y/M/K)
Posted by: votermom at March 06, 2014 08:52 AM (GSIDW)
Posted by: WalrusRex at March 06, 2014 08:52 AM (6E5vh)
Posted by: RWC at March 06, 2014 08:52 AM (fWAjv)
Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 06, 2014 12:51 PM (o9Rp5)
Congrats! Where are you moving from?
Posted by: Insomniac at March 06, 2014 08:52 AM (DrWcr)
Posted by: Mega, AoS Commenter of the Year at March 06, 2014 08:52 AM (hHFOx)
Posted by: Daybrother at March 06, 2014 08:52 AM (wRRM9)
Posted by: Tami [/i][/b][/u][/s] at March 06, 2014 08:53 AM (bCEmE)
***
Domestically we have patriarchy and institutional racism and internationally it is cowboy America.
The left can't handle complexity, let alone cold hard facts, and so the pattern gets repeated at all levels...
Posted by: 18-1 at March 06, 2014 08:53 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: Duke Lowell at March 06, 2014 08:53 AM (o9Rp5)
Nancy Pelosi sent a message that she regrets the hit that the economic recovery will take from this.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at March 06, 2014 08:53 AM (8ZskC)
Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at March 06, 2014 08:54 AM (yDmQD)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 06, 2014 08:54 AM (HVff2)
Scientists Build Orgasm Machine For Women
Is that what the 'ettes are calling me now?
Cool.
*winks*
Hey there ladies.
Posted by: Karl Urban at March 06, 2014 08:54 AM (BrQrN)
Posted by: rickb223 at March 06, 2014 08:55 AM (qc7at)
Posted by: JEM at March 06, 2014 08:55 AM (o+SC1)
***
I have to say his handling of the Iran-Iraq war was masterful...when two of our enemies decided to go to war he managed to give each side enough aid to keep going at it until they were exhausted...
Posted by: 18-1 at March 06, 2014 08:55 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: rickb223 at March 06, 2014 12:55 PM (qc7at)
You're not forgotten, rickb223.
Posted by: EC at March 06, 2014 08:55 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: NCwoof at March 06, 2014 08:56 AM (aUQgu)
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at March 06, 2014 08:56 AM (659DL)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 06, 2014 12:07 PM
An analogy would be a woman who is living with a violent drug addict who beats her. She stays with the thug until he's thrown in jail.
Then she attaches herself to another guy who is a violent drug addict
Rinse and repeat
Posted by: kbdabear at March 06, 2014 08:56 AM (aTXUx)
Posted by: RWC at March 06, 2014 08:56 AM (fWAjv)
We joke about it but the fact is neo-conservatism was in part a reaction to the post war Democrat Party's views on Israel, but that wasn't the sum of it. I think a bigger part was in reaction of the Democrats to the USSR. It's not all that much different then today, a lot of Democrats thought they they could reason with the Soviets. That's mainly where the split came. The Irving Kristol's of the Party left and joined the Republicans, to bad they brought their love of big government with them.
Posted by: lowandslow at March 06, 2014 08:57 AM (IV4od)
Posted by: rickb223 at March 06, 2014 08:57 AM (qc7at)
Posted by: RWC at March 06, 2014 08:58 AM (fWAjv)
Henry Kissinger is still kicking, and he's written a piece today for the WaPo on Ukraine. It won't surprise anyone to hear that he thinks the right outcome is for Ukraine to vote themselves into a Russian union. Presumably after the Russkies withdraw their troops.
Yeah, Putin will go for that Henry. An election.
Posted by: MTF at March 06, 2014 08:58 AM (LISuA)
ace, "neocon" isn't dead, it never existed.
One of the most abused strawmen there is (and that's saying something). And very often, as noted above, a codeword for "The Joos!".
What is naive - no, worse, idiotic and ridiculous - is the idea that you can do drive-by regime change in an area of vital importance, and then just go on your way and hope for the best. (if true, Amb. Bolton's above-referenced comment rather beclowns him, and contradicts his well-deserved reputation as a serious foreign policy guy)
We didn't bomb Germany and Japan into smithereens to give Japanese women the vote, and Germany a pristine representative democracy - but those are among the things that, as it turned out, directly followed from our bombing them to smithereens. Hell, we didn't even have any serious post-war plans for either place until very late in the game (in a way, we never did for Germany, we just shit-canned the Morgenthau concept quickly when reality made it obvious that was not a wise approach).
There's nothing "idealistic" about attempting to induce improvements in local civil society in places we conquer for other reasons. Iraq and Afghanistan both represented (totally different kinds of) unmanageable, intolerable threats in the post-9/11 world. They needed to be taken down. Regardless of the details of occupation and consolidating our success.
It gets too involved for a blog comment, but "idealistic" occupation, pacification, and consolidation activities are as practical as anything we can do. There is no magic separation between civilized values and ruthless, pragmatic strategy, none at all. They often overlap. What we think of as idealistic concepts are often weapons to be used against our adversaries.
The lazy, poorly thought-through sloganeering that issues from those who even use the word "neocon" seriously is just as disastrously clueless as the nonsense from the de facto pro-genocide, pro-tyranny "left".
Posted by: non-purist at March 06, 2014 08:59 AM (afQnV)
And the free-for-all begins at our expense.
Posted by: EC at March 06, 2014 08:59 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 06, 2014 08:59 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: votermom at March 06, 2014 08:59 AM (GSIDW)
***
Communism can't generate enough wealth for even the elites to live as they want to.
Capitalism makes everyone wealthy, but the political leadership gives up most of its control of the economy.
To smart would be despots these are both bad choice.
Corporate Socialism though enriches society enough that a Putin or an Obama can live like a king while still controlling the economy to the extent necessary to keep dominating the society as a whole.
Though the wrinkle here is that Putin is leading a poor state and is largely unconcerned about the fate of the average Russian's income as long as they will not riot over it. Obama, OTOH, leads a nominally rich country but has a personal ideological need to make most of its citizens poor.
Posted by: 18-1 at March 06, 2014 09:00 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: Adam at March 06, 2014 09:00 AM (Aif/5)
Posted by: eleven at March 06, 2014 09:00 AM (GXZgZ)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 06, 2014 09:01 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 06, 2014 09:01 AM (84gbM)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 06, 2014 09:01 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at March 06, 2014 09:01 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: votermom at March 06, 2014 09:02 AM (GSIDW)
Posted by: tasker at March 06, 2014 09:02 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at March 06, 2014 09:02 AM (ZPrif)
And the free-for-all begins at our expense.
Posted by: EC at March 06, 2014 12:59 PM (GQ8sn)
When in doubt, I whip it out!
I got me a rock and roll band
Posted by: Ted Nugent at March 06, 2014 09:02 AM (DrWcr)
Posted by: Mike Hammer at March 06, 2014 09:02 AM (aDwsi)
__
Putin really is a racist slaveowning racist evil racist not nice racist meanie head.
Posted by: Martin Bashir at March 06, 2014 09:03 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: tasker at March 06, 2014 09:03 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 06, 2014 01:01 PM (84gbM)
Or Chicago
Posted by: kbdabear at March 06, 2014 09:03 AM (aTXUx)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at March 06, 2014 09:03 AM (DmNpO)
Posted by: tasker at March 06, 2014 09:04 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: votermom at March 06, 2014 09:04 AM (GSIDW)
I understand the sentiment, I really do. But there are historical examples of how that strategy can backfire dramatically. Post WWI Germany was everyone's whipping post. They had huge economic sanctions against them and weren't allowed to prosper. The German people said "screw that" and went violent and ultra-nationalistic. Was it all external? Nope. There were lots of other factors, but I believe finances had a lot to do with it.
The second example is the post Civil War South. After burning out their crops, records, killing off a bunch of guys and setting the slaves free, giving them a hand in rebuilding might have helped the South not stagnate economically for 100 years. Again, lots of other factors, and not a Slavery apology. But the South as a region still has a lot of crime and poverty that might not be so with some building up.
Posted by: bonhomme[/i][/b][/i][/b][/s][/s] at March 06, 2014 09:04 AM (P7Wsr)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at March 06, 2014 09:05 AM (ZPrif)
I guess that what happens when Carly Fiorina becomes Chairman of the ACU Foundation
Posted by: phreshone at March 06, 2014 09:05 AM (Q6pxP)
I'm just wondering why we're regarding the borders of Ukraine as sacred and inviolate when we were perfectly fine with carving up Serbia on the exact same justification that Russia is now using?
FTR I think the split in both cases is the right course. These borders were not the result of careful planning, but arbitrary lines drawn by Kruschev at a time when they were utterly meaningless. A majority of Crimea obviously would rather be a part of Russia than Ukraine (which is now run by nationalists who removed Russian as an official language, so I think it's fair to assume that peaceful ethnic diversity is not high on their list of concerns), and I see no rational reason why they shouldn't be.
Posted by: Paul at March 06, 2014 09:05 AM (9qDRl)
Posted by: Ezra Klein ahs the hot cocoa and is ready to learn you. at March 06, 2014 09:06 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: NYC Parent at March 06, 2014 09:06 AM (HEo6y)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 06, 2014 09:06 AM (HVff2)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 06, 2014 09:06 AM (84gbM)
Posted by: Tami [/i][/b][/u][/s] at March 06, 2014 09:06 AM (bCEmE)
Yikes, so much disinformation here.
No, 18-1, the US was not material to EITHER side of Iran-Iraq in terms of their resources or war-fighting capacity. US involvement was limited to some intel and advice only in the last of the Iranian offensives down near the al-Faw peninsula. Every other bit of the (negligible) US trade or interaction with Iraq was fungible and would have been instantly/easily replaced by others if we didn't do it. And the (idiotic, inexcusable) sale of TOW missiles to Iran as part of the disastrous hostage nonsense made no difference.
What the US *did* do was block off Iran's attempt at horizontal escalation against Iraq's financial backers/fellow Sunnis (Saudi, Kuwait, et al). Summer of 1987. Reflagging Kuwaiti tankers. Op Praying Mantis (Iranian oil platforms, and several of their major surface units when they stupidly opened fire on our aircraft). THIS was outstanding execution of a good strategy. But the purpose was not prolonging the war. As with everything the US did during that entire war - the correct strategy, and obvious - was to *prevent an Iraqi defeat*. Period.
Posted by: non-purist at March 06, 2014 09:06 AM (afQnV)
Posted by: votermom at March 06, 2014 09:07 AM (GSIDW)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 06, 2014 01:01 PM (t3UFN)
That's hot
Posted by: Martin Bashir at March 06, 2014 09:07 AM (Q6pxP)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at March 06, 2014 09:07 AM (DmNpO)
Posted by: tasker at March 06, 2014 09:07 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Citizen X at March 06, 2014 09:08 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Flatbush Joe at March 06, 2014 09:08 AM (ZPrif)
Posted by: toby928© at March 06, 2014 09:08 AM (QupBk)
Who had 'on time' in the pool?
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at March 06, 2014 01:07 PM (DmNpO)
Given his record? Probably nobody.
Posted by: Insomniac at March 06, 2014 09:08 AM (DrWcr)
Posted by: RWC at March 06, 2014 09:09 AM (fWAjv)
Posted by: tasker at March 06, 2014 09:09 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at March 06, 2014 09:09 AM (t3UFN)
Posted by: Citizen X at March 06, 2014 09:10 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: Big T Party at March 06, 2014 09:10 AM (tE2TK)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 06, 2014 09:10 AM (84gbM)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at March 06, 2014 09:10 AM (DmNpO)
Posted by: Misanthropic Humanitarian at March 06, 2014 09:10 AM (HVff2)
Very tough talk.
Posted by: LoneStarHeeb at March 06, 2014 09:11 AM (BZAd3)
Posted by: jwest at March 06, 2014 09:11 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: Paul at March 06, 2014 09:11 AM (9qDRl)
Posted by: Tuna at March 06, 2014 09:11 AM (M/TDA)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at March 06, 2014 09:11 AM (DmNpO)
Posted by: Zorba the Greek at March 06, 2014 09:11 AM (RJMhd)
Posted by: HR needs a beer at March 06, 2014 09:12 AM (ZKzrr)
Posted by: Rustin Cohle at March 06, 2014 09:12 AM (zOTsN)
Posted by: Citizen X at March 06, 2014 09:12 AM (7ObY1)
Posted by: rickl at March 06, 2014 09:12 AM (zoehZ)
Posted by: WalrusRex at March 06, 2014 09:13 AM (6E5vh)
Posted by: Rustin Cohle at March 06, 2014 09:13 AM (zOTsN)
Oh, and I second Circa's "bullshit" (I think).
It was indeed true that - to no realist's surprise - State was in fact unable to induce sufficient numbers of career (foreign service) folks to go to Iraq. Which, blessedly, opened up a window for others to go (ahemmm). Even better, for the most part, you had a highly unrepresentative, self-selected group of FSOs who went, who were far less clueless, mush-headed Beltway types than sadly has become the norm (for the most part).
I recall talking with some of the better FSOs there how, after WWII, there was vicious, cut-throat competition to get to Tokyo or Bonn/Berlin - for obvious reasons, those were THE important places at the time. But for the current generation of foreign service people? Even with big inducements (primarily promises of plum assignments of their choice, to follow), State couldn't get the bodies. One reason that Condi Rice did one of the few useful things she did, by introducing big changes to the advancement/career system to reward, you know, things the country actually needs: difficult and relevant languages, service in conflict zones, etc. Oh, and reducing the footprint in western Europe, where beyond consular administrivia there's hardly any reason for a diplomatic presence.
Posted by: non-purist at March 06, 2014 09:14 AM (afQnV)
***
The Iranians had a problem dealing with Iraqi armor and aircraft and the Iraqis really wanted the intelligence we provided them.
That we were able to pinpoint the aid that we gave them to keep them killing each other (along with secondary goals such as arming the contras) was put brilliance.
One of the odd things about the modern interpretation of the late 80s is that the Left has gone from criticizing Reagan for supporting Iran, to criticizing him for support Iraq, to back to criticizing him for supporting Iran.
We should be studying his foreign policy here as an example.
Posted by: Martin Bashir at March 06, 2014 09:14 AM (P3U0f)
Posted by: Romeo13 at March 06, 2014 09:16 AM (84gbM)
Posted by: Tami [/i][/b][/u][/s] at March 06, 2014 09:17 AM (bCEmE)
Posted by: Rustin Cohle at March 06, 2014 09:19 AM (zOTsN)
Posted by: Nip Sip at March 06, 2014 09:19 AM (0FSuD)
#EU has agreed to quickly sign "political chapters" of integration treaty w/#Ukraine. That includes common security & defence measures.
Raymond Pritchett @Galrahn
EU is moving quickly on actual defense arrangements for Ukraine. This is new. Posted by: Flatbush Joe at
hmm, I think this is what they should facilitate? They wanted Ukraine to align withthem so they should be responsible ?
although this does remind me of history nd how that went down.
hmm.
Posted by: willow at March 06, 2014 09:19 AM (nqBYe)
Posted by: Rustin Cohle at March 06, 2014 09:20 AM (zOTsN)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at March 06, 2014 09:20 AM (DmNpO)
Posted by: JohnJ at March 06, 2014 09:21 AM (TF/YA)
No, Bashir sock, as I said, our involvement was not material to the outcome. Period. Limited intel to contain the last of the Dawn offensives down south. And the TOWs didn't make a difference (obviously - as their limited numbers, and the Iranian offensive posture of course would imply).
It was not "brilliant" to do the idiotic hostage/contra deal. It was idiotic - even if the contra aid made a difference (doubtful too), it was not worth the risk being taken on in a far more consequential arena.
Our biggest contribution may have been entirely inadvertent. When the USS Vincennes shot down the Iranian airliner, it ended up being sort of the final straw for Tehran. This incident played a big role in the leadership finally realizing they had no path to victory - even though their understanding of that incident was predictably insanely upside-down (that it was US ruthlessness, and not Iranian incompetence and the US's prudent lack of leeway granted to a crazy terrorist state like Iran, on display in the airliner shoot-down).
Posted by: non-purist at March 06, 2014 09:25 AM (afQnV)
Posted by: pj at March 06, 2014 09:28 AM (ZWaLo)
Posted by: JeffC at March 06, 2014 09:34 AM (TR6Cq)
Posted by: Chris_Balsz at March 06, 2014 09:38 AM (5xmd7)
___
Again, false, but feel free to keep grasping for straws.
It was not "brilliant" to do the idiotic hostage/contra deal
___
...and false again. With your Democrat friends holding up aid to anti-communist rebels Reagan got creative. The hostage part wasn't of much import, but weakening growing latin American communism was...
Posted by: 18-1 at March 06, 2014 09:44 AM (P3U0f)
Nip Sip?
The WX is so vile in the Golden Isles- bitter cold, rain squalls everywhere- I cut my errands short. Got necessities at Walgreen's, delivered my tax-related papers to my CPA's firm, and went home to sip part of a beer. Heated some Wendy's leftovers and feel 100% better after that, but did not visit CVS on US 341 to see if the lovely Miss Christine was working & say "hi!" like I usually do.
Posted by: backhoe at March 06, 2014 09:48 AM (ULH4o)
Posted by: OregonMuse at March 06, 2014 09:51 AM (I8YZX)
18-1, nonsense. It's grasping at straws to point out obvious facts? OK. US involvement was not material to the outcome, or timing, of the Iraq-Iran war. And you don't have to have been working on the topic to know that. If you don't understand that, you lack the factual basis to discuss the topic intelligently.
And my "Democrat friends" are who, exactly? Oh, the ones who all left the party in part because of the January 12, 1991 Senate vote, where the war resolution barely passed? The last straw for them on the Dem party? Yeah, those - but they weren't the ones voting against contra aid, either.
Latin American "communism" was growing? Where? Tide was already turning against the FMLN in El Salvador. Sandinistas were going nowhere fast. Biggest problem at the time was the disintegration of Colombia. And even if - contrary to fact, a hypothetical - the lack of the TOW-generated funds actually made a difference in the Sandinistas trajectory towards failure, it could have been relatively easily reversed. Iranian victory in 1987/88 would have been incomparably more important and disastrous, and extremely difficult to reverse.
But to assert that the situation in Central America was more consequential than preventing Iranian victory? Ridiculous.
Posted by: non-purist at March 06, 2014 09:58 AM (afQnV)
"It's a sad truth that people today don't read much history; but the entire 20th century can be summed up as follows: extremest ideology in nation state enables maniacs to come to power and then lots of people die until the US does something about it."
Posted by: Javems at March 06, 2014 09:58 AM (nTgAI)
Posted by: Judge Pug at March 06, 2014 10:11 AM (hJnUx)
Posted by: Czar Peter at March 06, 2014 11:48 AM (9HE3m)
Posted by: SamIam at March 06, 2014 01:55 PM (Lh8u2)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2689 seconds, 509 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: votermom at March 06, 2014 07:58 AM (GSIDW)