Don´t you love a paradox?

Submitted by Micky Love on Sun, 09/30/2007 - 12:51am. Tags:

I love a paradox, and I´m always happy to uncover one. I assume some of the readers here have similar tastes.

I was reading a thread of comments about the Middle East and the War there, and came across a series of comments by Ken White.

The ME has been doing its thing for 7,000 years; time has a totally different meaning there.
...
You're thinking like a westerner, logically and naturally. Though processes in the ME don't work the same way; not that they're bad, just different.

http://www.theforvm.org/diary/spartacvs/is-failure-and-its-author-so-har...

I could go on, I suppose, but I think you get the picture. The Middle East is a place characterized by almost an unspeakably alien and incomprehensible culture. I´m prepared to go along with this. bin Laden was bad enough to plan and carry out the 9/11 attacks, but not that evil so as to profit from his actions by manipulating the markets. Inscrutability goes a long way to clear away such questions.

The paradox how the US administration has been a success in Iraq. Bush´s inner circle is entirely composed of Americans who are typical elite products of their culture. There might be a ¨Russian expert¨ here, or a Jew there, but certainly no Arabs, nor even Arabists. Yet they´ve been able to craft and execute policy conceived within minutes of the 9/11 attacks that is known, understood and heeded by both the Middle East public and leadership. Indeed, so successful has this venture been that in a couple of years, moderate stability will be achieved.

This is the same crew that is universally excoriated here as the most ham fisted and inept administration in memory at putting their message across to the American public. How do we account for this paradox?
--

Nothing resembles virtue more than a great crime. Saint-Just

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
I recall an aphorism quoted by (#61401)
by Bill White on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 10:52am

BlaiseP -- lets see how well I remember:

The sandstorm shall pass while the stars endure.

If our mission is nation-building we at least need to acknowledge the monumental nature of our undertaking.

Otherwise we may spend a trillion dollars to build sandcastles that shall be washed away soon enough by a sequence of high tides.

--

Fence post turtles -- They don't get up there by themselves, some moron had to put 'em there.

( )
Excellent point, one that's easy to lose sight of. (#61415)
by tomsyl on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 1:37pm

Though not really related to this diary . . .

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
How so? Unrelated that is? (#61419)
by Bill White on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 2:02pm

Perhaps our cultural blindness will cause us to see purported "success" in Iraq that shall be ephemeral at best.

Such blindness lies at the heart of the diarist's paradox. IMHO.

--

Fence post turtles -- They don't get up there by themselves, some moron had to put 'em there.

( | parent )
I took the so-called "paradox" to be satire (#61425)
by tomsyl on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 2:34pm

and opposite to the diarist's real beliefs about stability in the MidEast.

(I also disagree completely with the supposedly alien/inscrutable nature of Arabaic thoughts and motivations. I think they can be readily understood by comparing them to various stages of Western civilization at different points in the past. Generally the distant past, fortunately for us.)

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
Various stages of Western civilization? (#61427)
by Bill White on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 2:41pm

Now that assumption will certainly lead to errors of analysis.

Thank you, much is explained by this comment.

--

Fence post turtles -- They don't get up there by themselves, some moron had to put 'em there.

( | parent )
Sometimes, If I Squint Real Hard, I Can Almost See Ken's.... (#61433)
by Traveller on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 3:00pm

...position on this. Maybe Bush & Co isn't the worst and most inept Administration ever. Maybe over time, a long period of time, the invasion of Iraq will...bear fruit.

But maybe not.

I still tend to see this mostly as the period and end point, self inflicted, of what could have been another American Century.

The Baton will pass, to China, India, whoever as we twitch in some Phantom agony that we should never have gotten so entirely wrapped up in.

To have made the mosquito existential was a grievous error.

Best Wishes, Traveller

( | parent )
To have made the mosquito existential (#61448)
by Bill White on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 4:53pm

Very, very well put

But remember, the ego of George W. Bush required that the mosquito be made existential.

For the same reason some on Rudy's campaign staff decided it would be cool to solicit small donations in the amount of $9.11.

--

Fence post turtles -- They don't get up there by themselves, some moron had to put 'em there.

( | parent )
Which of Ken's positions are you squinting at ? (#61436)
by tomsyl on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 3:06pm

Maybe he's just happy to see you.

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
The Dancing Girl Position! (from Last Night)....pic (#61440)
by Traveller on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 3:27pm

Moroccan

( | parent )
Wanna borrow my binoculars, Trav? (#61441)
by tomsyl on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 3:32pm

I'll understand if I don't get them back for a while. Nice smile.

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
Meaning you think the upheavals in Arab/Muslim society (#61430)
by tomsyl on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 2:52pm

at present have no parallels in Western history?

Do you really believe that Muslims are inherently different from Europeans, and share little or nothing in common in terms of history, governance, mores, repression and religious intolerance?

(An honest question, without any snideness,unlike your comment.)

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
History is not a train track (#61447)
by Bill White on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 4:51pm

with progress measured up and down that line of track even if human nature is pretty much constant throughout our species.

Western Civ arose from a blend of Athens & Jerusalem (a Leo Straussian POV I actaully embrace) while Islam also is based upon what Christians sometimes call the "Old Testament" and they have long been exposed to the ancient Greeks.

The Hindu religion is certainly no less "developed" than our own religions and Jesus Christ himself exhibited certain traits that have long been lauded by Buddhism.

Of course there are parallels.

But George W. Bush and our current GOP scarcely epitomizes the pinnacle of Western Civilization.

--

Fence post turtles -- They don't get up there by themselves, some moron had to put 'em there.

( | parent )
You were doing pretty good until your last sentence (#61741)
by tomsyl on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 7:08am

Is there any subject we can discuss without you needing to get in a rant on Bush and the GOP? It seems compulsive. Current politics is an insignificant blip in terms of the comparative historical perspective we were discussing up to this point.

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
I'm of the opinion (#61769)
by Spartacvs on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 11:34am

that the tenure of Bush and the current GOP will feature more prominently in the nations recorded history, and for all the wrong reasons, than perhaps you might now appreciate or would ultimately be comfortable with.

There is also the pertinent fact to take into account, given there is a full year of the Bush Presidency left to run its course, of the potential for things to get much worse with Cheney/Bush at the helm and the Senate in a filibuster stalemate before they ever get any better.

--

GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.

( | parent )
That still has nothing to do with what I was talking about. (#61785)
by tomsyl on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 1:34pm

I'm not interested in what future history might be, at least not in this thread. But If you want to start your own ranticle about how BushChimpHitlerCo is ruining this and all parallel worlds and hastening the entropic/heat death of the universe, be my guest. But be warned that I will say "Gore" as often as I can in response, particularly when it has absolutely nothing to do with what you are saying. %^>

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
I'm aware of the fact (#61789)
by Spartacvs on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 1:47pm

that Gore was elected President in 2000, but the fact remains that it was GW Bush who seized the reigns of government and not Gore, which would explain the relevancy of one and not the other to any such discussions.

--

GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.

( | parent )
That was a JOKE, Sparti. (#61802)
by tomsyl on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 2:47pm

a simple reference to repeated claims that I dump on Gore every chance I get. He and Bush have no more to do with the issues I originally raised here than Elmer Fudd has to do with the genesis of my thanksgiving turkey.

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
It's a way of... (#61851)
by Punditus Maximus on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 9:29pm

...burning off frustration with living in a country which was seized in a palace coup and then being forced to pretend that we don't.

--

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

( | parent )
I wonder, does Wes Clark rate such asides (#61763)
by Sulla on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 10:08am

with an A, B, or C?

--

"That Sam-I-am! That Sam-I-am! I do not like that Sam-I-am!"- Dr. Seuss

( | parent )
There is one fairly large difference. (#61432)
by Punditus Maximus on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 2:54pm

Relatively few Western nations are recently independent from colonial empires and/or did not manage to draw their own national boundaries.

Whether or not there are parallels between the two cultures and their overall states of being, that single change -- colonialism -- is pervasively present.

--

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

( | parent )
Ugh, more Guilt Ridden White Man’s Burden thinking (#61507)
by Sulla on Tue, 10/02/2007 - 11:47am

where excuses abound for the backwardness and barbarism of the so called victims of colonization.

--

"That Sam-I-am! That Sam-I-am! I do not like that Sam-I-am!"- Dr. Seuss

( | parent )
It weighs a ton. (#61524)
by Punditus Maximus on Tue, 10/02/2007 - 1:07pm

Those little brown savages should thank us, etc. etc.

--

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

( | parent )
Forget the thank yous (#61525)
by Sulla on Tue, 10/02/2007 - 1:09pm

I'd suggest they begin by stop blowing one another up.

--

"That Sam-I-am! That Sam-I-am! I do not like that Sam-I-am!"- Dr. Seuss

( | parent )
True - but the history of e.g. the KSA as a modern state (#61438)
by tomsyl on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 3:13pm

has very little to do with colonialism, and much to do with tribalism, religious fanaticism, greed and ambition. All of which played a large role in the history of the West at different points in time. Oversimplifying, I know, but I think that the greatest factor used to mark Muslims as foreign/alien to Western thought, religious dominance shading into fanaticism, has a number of close parallels in the West. Spain, England, Germany and Italy all were virtual theocracies at various points in their development; so was this country when it was still a colony.

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
KSA (#61450)
by Punditus Maximus on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 5:22pm

To which period are you referring?

--

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

( | parent )
Since its founding as a country in 1932. (#61666)
by tomsyl on Wed, 10/03/2007 - 10:22am

And if we start parsing what a "country is to avoid my original point about colonies, anywhere is subject to the same attack.

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
Before the "colony" sub-thread (#61694)
by Bill White on Wed, 10/03/2007 - 4:01pm

came this, from you:

I also disagree completely with the supposedly alien/inscrutable nature of Arabaic thoughts and motivations. I think they can be readily understood by comparing them to various stages of Western civilization at different points in the past. Generally the distant past, fortunately for us.

My point was to deny that Western history provides some sort of model by which we can predict the development of societies. One size does not fit all and the historical track we followed is very very far from having been pre-determined.

Human nature, however, is pretty much the same all around the world and all of the following (South Asians - Hindus & Muslims; Arabs; Persians; Chinese; etc . . . ) tend to strongly dislike:

(a) Foreign armies camped out in their lands; and

(b) Foreigners with attitude that their civilization is inherently superior.

See comments below by Mickey Love and Ken White to support this last point.

= = =

I agree with you concerning "alien/inscrutable" -- there is none of that, here. Many Iraqis are acting the same way Patrick Swayze did in that cheesy movie "Red Dawn" and I find it readily comprehensible.

Wolverines!

--

Fence post turtles -- They don't get up there by themselves, some moron had to put 'em there.

( | parent )
That may have been your point, but it wasn't mine. (#61742)
by tomsyl on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 7:15am

I said nothing about predictions, just about understanding by way of historical parallels. Without oversimplifying, many Western countries were at one time or another virtual theocracies. The damage that did to cultural diversity, personal freedoms, gender inequality and the like are readily apparent, and lead to the broad conclusion that any society that puts church before the individual welfare of its members has natural, recurring patterns of oppression.

Those examples are very illustrative of the inherent flaws of the religious-based society that many Muslims seek. And societies based solely or religious law, governed by priests and protected by holy warriors, are an lower step on the evolutionary ladder in terms of individual freedoms and personal security.

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
Tomsyl, I agree with you, here (#61755)
by Bill White on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 9:31am

Without oversimplifying, many Western countries were at one time or another virtual theocracies. The damage that did to cultural diversity, personal freedoms, gender inequality and the like are readily apparent, and lead to the broad conclusion that any society that puts church before the individual welfare of its members has natural, recurring patterns of oppression.

And because I agree with this, I assert that Saddam regime change rather than KSA regime change was at best a step sideways in our confrontation of theocratic Islam.

As I have said before, Saddam was an evil MF-er who deserved to be removed. However, that removal did not advance our civilizational confrontation with mullahs-in-government.

And, many of the people shooting at us in Iraq are not theocratic fanatics but ordinary people who do not like large numbers of foreign troops traipsing through their land. And the true theocratic fanatics ride piggy-back on that entirely predictable human response.

--

Fence post turtles -- They don't get up there by themselves, some moron had to put 'em there.

( | parent )
Bill, our continued support of KSA is shameful, (#61759)
by tomsyl on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 9:52am

hypocritical, demeaning, and completely counter to any long-term interests we have for oil independence. I can see what it would have done to our economy to have attacked (or at least severely sanctioned) Saudi Arabia after 9/11, and Prince Turki's strong, long-term friendship with and familiarity with bin Laden assures that he would have been turned over to us (or more likely, given the Saudis, his body would have been turned over) if we insisted and backed up our words with threats. I sincerely hope that day will come, and any candidate with a real plan and a genuine commitment to energy independence has my attention.

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
Indeed (#61765)
by Bill White on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 10:41am

But because of oil and a desire to balance Iran I suspect such support shall continue for the foreseeable future.

Another "parsing shades of gray" paradox.

--

Fence post turtles -- They don't get up there by themselves, some moron had to put 'em there.

( | parent )
KSA is NOT a modern state (#61449)
by Bill White on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 4:56pm

it is a very large extended family with a seat at the United Nations.

India, Pakistan, Iraq (especially Iraq, a fiction created in London) and even China are the products of colonialism.

--

Fence post turtles -- They don't get up there by themselves, some moron had to put 'em there.

( | parent )
What is that supposed to mean? (#61479)
by tomsyl on Tue, 10/02/2007 - 2:49am

Saudi Arabia was founded in 1932, which makes it pretty modern by my standards. Are you coming up with some sort of existential definition of a country in order to try to prove a point about colonialism by excluding KSA, which isn't a former colony?

And BTW, Pakistan is the product of India. And calling China the product of colonialism is really a stretch.

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
Saudi Arabia is not really a "state" (#61494)
by Bill White on Tue, 10/02/2007 - 9:44am

It is a kingdom. Certainly not a "modern state"

KSA is basically an extended family that owns a large tract of land and was given a seat at the United Nations despite being "not like the others".

Pakistan and India BOTH emerged from British rule and the recent transfer of Hong Kong (very recent in historical time scales) demonstrates the influence of colonialism on China.

The Opium Wars?

--

Fence post turtles -- They don't get up there by themselves, some moron had to put 'em there.

( | parent )
A country has borders, citizens, a UN seat, (#61668)
by tomsyl on Wed, 10/03/2007 - 10:25am

ambassadors, a standing army, treaties with other countries, exports and imports, and so forth.

OTOH, the Mafia is an example of an extended family that owns large tracts of land in New Jersey, Chicago, New York, Detroit, Boston et cetera.

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
Louis XIV had those things, too (#61690)
by Bill White on Wed, 10/03/2007 - 3:52pm

Not a nation and certainly not a modern nation.

Anyway, colonialism was PM's subthread, not mine.

KSA's "problem" in part is that Islam is supposed to be the one true global religion and it ain't. Also, insofar as KSA is the guardian of Mecca, it is a tad more like the Vatican City and a tad less like, say, Canada or Brazil.

Related, members of the ruling family have consolidated power by catering to those who are disappointed that Islam is not the one true global religion. And western domination of other nearby parts has influenced that.

--

Fence post turtles -- They don't get up there by themselves, some moron had to put 'em there.

( | parent )
State vs. Country (#61676)
by trouscaillon on Wed, 10/03/2007 - 12:12pm

You're missing Bill's point.

( | parent )
Well, some definitions are needed then (#61743)
by tomsyl on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 7:19am

to avoid this degenerating into an argument over semantics. Please tell me the specific, significant differences that you are drawing between "country" and "state" in this context, and why you think they are significant to the discussion. Thanks.

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
More specifically, (#61686)
by Punditus Maximus on Wed, 10/03/2007 - 2:34pm

state vs. nation-state.

--

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

( | parent )
China is a stretch, some. (#61481)
by Punditus Maximus on Tue, 10/02/2007 - 3:08am

China was colonized, but never fully and not for very long.

But Pakistan/India were colonies for hundreds of years until 1947. KSA wasn't a colony, but it is surrounded by them and endures many of the same dynamics. Afghanistan is in a similar place.

--

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

( | parent )
KSA is a stretch, too. (#61744)
by tomsyl on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 7:26am

Saying that KSA "endures many of the same dynamics" as a former colony, even though it's not a former colony, has no meaning in the abstract, and sounds a bit like an attempt to make a "one size fits all", victimization by dead white men argument.

Has anyone addressed the fact that the US was once a European colony (or a series of same), and had to fight a bitter, and sometimes hopeless-appearing, war to end that status? Do victimization points accrue to its citizens, and if so, with whom do we redeem them for washer-dryers, trailered pleasure boats and family vacations in Branson?

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
A couple of things: (#61773)
by Punditus Maximus on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 12:11pm

The US is different in two ways -- firstly, we are the descendants of the colonists, rather than the colonized, which is different. Upon independence, we were one of the wealthier nations in the world, per capita.

Second, it's been a couple hundred years. My point was regarding the recent nature of freedom from occupation. Even we had to fight a tremendously bloody civil war 70 years after independence, over issues which we deliberately put aside in order to achieve that. History moves faster these days, but still.

--

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

( | parent )
The US colonialists (#61764)
by Spartacvs on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 10:34am

fought to detach themselves from the mother country they felt was exploiting them or otherwise mistreating them. The War of Independence was not an uprising against foreign colonialists by exploited indigenous peoples, far from it. That the colonialists in the US succeeded in protecting their interests, where the Boers in South Africa or the French colonialists in Algeria did not, is our enduring reward. Plus we got a national holiday and an annual excuse to party like there's no tomorrow out of it.

--

GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.

( | parent )
So we're not victims because we fought the British (#61766)
by tomsyl on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 10:45am

instead of the French? Or because we were white?

I still demand victimhood and the free stuff that comes with it.

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
The British Monarchy (#61768)
by Spartacvs on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 11:18am

and the system of government over which it prevailed still has a lot to answer for, send your demands to them.

I doubt you will see much in the way of reparations though, since the real victims of their profligate ways managed to corral them some time back and now keep them on as a constitutional nicety and tourist attraction, though of relatively impoverished means in comparison to their status during the period in question.

Still you might get enough for a lick of paint for the WH to cover up the burn scars if you appeal to their vanity from bended knee. Worth a try.

--

GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.

( | parent )
The exact answer I was waiting for %^> (#61786)
by tomsyl on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 1:38pm

That means that the reparations movement should make its demands to the Africans and Arabs that enslaved them, every African-American who emigrated here after Emancipation (Haitians, say) should make his/her demands to the country they emigrated from or whatever European power colonized same, and so forth. Impeccable logic, wouldn't you say?

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
Your a lawyer (#61792)
by Spartacvs on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 1:50pm

Deep pockets, joint and severable liability.

--

GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.

( | parent )
So are you, right? Statute of limitations. Speculative damages. (#61806)
by tomsyl on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 3:10pm

Genealogical proof to demonstrate standing. Lack of non-speculative proof of actual injuries sustained. No recovery for emotional distress damages without concurrent physical injury or manifestation. Laches. Real party in interest. Failure to join indispensable parties. Contribution/offset in favor of descendants of Civil War dead on the Union side. No successor liability. No duty owed to plaintiff class except by descendants of slave owners. Sovereign immunity. Contributory negligence. Damages offset by financial value of US citizenship in the 21st century vs. citizenship in African country.

Whee, this is fun!

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
I think enslavement (#61818)
by Spartacvs on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 4:05pm

and continued repression until relatively modern times might constitute a more substantive basis for a cause of action than any lingering resentment over perceived injustices regarding the taxes of a long dead Monarch is all I'm saying.

--

GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.

( | parent )
Gotta love how the legal defense comes down to (#61815)
by Jordan on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 3:46pm

It wasn't us, and, hey anyway, we made up for it!

But yeah, there's no legal remedy for the enslavement an entire population for centuries. Rarely can you so clearly see "justice" parting ways with "system."

--

Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH

( | parent )
I have a much better defense: (#61819)
by tomsyl on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 4:11pm

My ancestors weren't born in this country, and never emigrated here. They didn't become citizens voluntarily, either. Heh, beat that.

Hey, wait a minute - surely someone owes me something for that - you, maybe?

"It wasn't us" is always a valid defense, particularly when true.

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
Oh and I didn't volunteer to be a citizen either. :P -nt- (#61824)
by Jordan on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 4:25pm

.

--

Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH

( | parent )
Trying to welch on your debt, eh? (#61829)
by tomsyl on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 4:35pm

I mean my forebears (who were actually human, not ursine) were adults when citizenship was bestowed upon them via annexation. Beat that. %^>

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
I never welch (#61834)
by Jordan on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 5:02pm

though I've been known to Tropicana of a Sunday brunch, especially when the citrus is cut with a nice champagne. Mmm hangover food.

Anyhow given my background, I don't welsh either; I'm far too "caj'ey" and would probably get off scot free. That's on the theory certain of my ancestors didn't assume new nationalities along with the new surnames; the old ones having been left for no doubt good reasons back in the auld country.

--

Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH

( | parent )
The US govt didn't know it wass inheriting my ancestors (#61843)
by tomsyl on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 7:08pm

otherwise I would be speaking pidgin Portuguese instead of pidgin English. And Hawaii would have been returned to someone - anyone - else to get rid of them. (They were legion.)

--

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

( | parent )
Just because you can't make something right (#61822)
by Jordan on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 4:24pm

doesn't mean it wasn't wrong. And I'd guess the federal government would be at the front of the line for liability, if it weren't for that sovereign immunity thing.

--

Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH

( | parent )
Not to mention descendents of native born slaves. (#61801)
by Jordan on Thu, 10/04/2007 - 2:47pm

Who require neither argument. :)

--

Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH

( | parent )
We can differ on this: (#61338)
by Ken White on Sun, 09/30/2007 - 12:52pm

"I could go on, I suppose, but I think you get the picture. The Middle East is a place characterized by almost an unspeakably alien and incomprehensible culture. I´m prepared to go along with this."

It is alien and comprehending it is difficult -- but it is not unapeakbly alien IMO, nor is it incomprehensilbe -- or evil -- it's just quite different.

That's a good diary, BTW. :)

--

The K Codes explained HERE.

( )
a chap doesn´t like foreign armies parked on his front garden (#61373)
by Micky Love on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 4:13am

I´m glad you liked the diary. It was a little tongue-in-cheek in parts, and there is one aspect of ME culture that I believe is congruent to all other human culture - a chap doesn´t like foreign armies parked on his front garden.

I linked in an earlier diary to a Chris Hitchens piece on why Iraq is not the new Viet Nam. It was generally OK, but he managed to get through the whole thing without mentioning that little fact. Maybe it´s coz he´s a Brit. Any American worth his salt will remember the aftermath of the Seven Years War when Americans, who didn´t fancy the prospect of hosting troops to face a non-existent foe, revolted.

Granted, when a foe does exist, foreign troops are easier to swallow. We know now that the French were not truly defeated and would return with a vengeance. But that´s not how things looked to the optimistic Americans at the war´s close. Personally, I think that if only Young Pitt hadn´t been so young, history would have been different. He was more than a match for hot-heads like Jefferson.

--

Nothing resembles virtue more than a great crime. Saint-Just

( | parent )
All true. Most people are familiar with the Huntington quote (#61399)
by Ken White on Mon, 10/01/2007 - 10:44am

that posits Western 'success' in other lands was achieved by force of arms and that westerners often forget this while non-westerners never do.

Take that thought and ally it to another Huntington quote:

"And Asian societies and Muslim societies are increasingly resentful of our efforts to induce them to adopt our values."

and you have the recipe for todays mess...

--

The K Codes explained HERE.

( | parent )
Obviously, (#61313)
by Punditus Maximus on Sun, 09/30/2007 - 4:59am

9/11 changed everything.

--

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

( )
Recent Diaries
more
Links

Conservative
Liberal
Moderate/Mixed/Non-Partisan
Non-Political/Reference

Related Sites -

Polisci Applied (Aaron)
Intrepid Liberal Journal (Intrepid Liberal)
Obsidian Wings (Bird Dog)
Open Hand/Open Eye (locutas)
Red State (Bird Dog)
Swords Crossed (brendanm98)
Wagster Speaks (Wagster)
WatchingAmerica (BlaiseP)
The Social Pathologist (TSP)

Foreign Affairs -

Abu Aardvark
'Aqoul
American Footprints
Council on Foreign Relations
CSIS
Democracy Arsenal
Intel Dump
The Fourth Rail
The Head Heeb
War and Piece

Politics -

Ace of Spades HQ
Andrew Sullivan
Balloon Juice
Belgravia Dispatch
Captain's Quarters
Crooked Timber
Curmudgeonly & Skeptical
Daily Kos
Democracy Arsenal
Eschaton
Firedoglake
Glenn Greenwald
Global Guerrillas
Hugh Hewitt
Instapundit
Jawa Report
Lawyers, Guns and Money
Liberals Against Terror
Matt Yglesias
Michael J. Totten
Michelle Malkin
Moon of Alabama
New America
OxBlog
Patterico
Political Animal
Political Wire
Publius Pundit
QandO
Reality Based Community
Talking Points Memo
The Agitator
The Belmont Club
The Corner
Truman Project
Winds of Change.net

War -

Counterterrorism Blog
Iraq the Model
Jihad Watch
Small Wars Journal Blog

Economics and Business -

Angry Bear
Brad DeLong
Daniel Drezner
Mahalanobis
Marginal Revolution
Roubini Global Economics
The Big Picture

Science and Tech -

Bad Astronomy
New Scientist
Real Climate
Science Blogs
Scientific American
The Panda's Thumb

Legal -

Balkinization
Conglomerate
Ideoblog
Jurisdynamics
Law and Letters
Overlawyered
ProfessorBainbridge
ScotusBlog
Talk Left
The Becker-Posner Blog
Volokh Conspiracy

Sports -

Baseball Crank
Baseball Musings
Baseball Reference.com
ESPN.com
NFL.com
Only Baseball Matters
The Sports Economist

Books, Film and Music -

Amazon.com
Internet Movie Database
All Music Guide

News and Aggregators -

Asia Times
Boingboing
CNN
Digg
English Russia
Fark
Los Angeles Times
Memeorandum
MSNBC
Politico
Poynteronline
Slashdot
The New York Times
The Washington Post

References -

Wikipedia
Your Dictionary