Here’s a thoughtful piece that should be obvious but too often isn’t: just why it is that military occupation makes people angry, no matter how well-intentioned it may be.
“Why They Hate Us: Lessons from Civil War Reconstruction”, ForeignPolicy.com, Nov. 23, 2009
Although as the first commenter pointed out, the question is when it’s worthwhile to occupy another nation anyway. That’s the tricky part.
You heard it here first: Neverland is the new Graceland.
Man, what a week for news. It’s been a while since we had such a contrast of the important (Iran) and the junk-ridden (Transformers 2 = 2nd highest grossing opening ever).
As a tribute to the man, I will republish that in the style he knew best:
R.I.P. BILLY MAYS! AS I FELT THE NEED TO TELL ANYONE EACH TIME HE SHOWED UP ON TV, THE DUDE WAS FROM PITTSBURGH! THE GUY SOLD SOME BIZARRE PRODUCTS, BUT HE WAS THE RARE SALESMAN WHERE I ENJOYED THE PITCH!
The TV world lost a truly fun character. Vince from ShamWow just isn’t the same.
The hot-spot, Central Command phase of Barack Obama’s foreign-policy tour is winding down, and so far he seems to have hit all the right political notes. Hooping it up was a particularly swift move, but even more fortunate was the fact that Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki came right out and supported a timetable for withdrawal nearly in line with Obama’s 16-month plan. There’s plenty to the argument against a timetable and the realpolitik strategic importance of Iraq over Afghanistan, particularly the fact that the Iraqi Sunnis don’t support a timetable, but from a political point-scoring perspective that’s a little irrelevant. Arguments from McCain or Bush against an American-favored Iraqi leader’s statements about what’s best for his own country are now going to face criticisms of tone-deafness and arrogance.
I don’t envy anyone making the Israel / Palestinian political trip, but I think the best Obama can hope for is to play perhaps the only role that America can play towards Israel to improve the situation: that of the friend who takes the keys when someone’s too wasted to realize he’s going to mess himself up if he keeps going.
But to bring things back to the title: it’s still summertime, the public and the media have long since put the blinders on for Iraq and Afghanistan, and most voters are on a break until the real campaign starts with the fall. Obama managed to score himself plenty of presidential-looking video filler for newscasts about his foreign-policy experience this fall, and that likely counts for more with the TV-influenced voting public than anything else on this trip.
Two great moments in quotations today, both from men with the power to influence and shape America’s economic and political situation. The first comes courtesy of Aron Wilder, the CEO of HTFC, a small firm that takes loan applications and sells residential mortgages to larger lenders like GMAC. They’re one of many direct players involved in the subprime mess engulfing the economy. Here’s Mr. Wilder in response to a question from the lawyer representing GMAC, in GMAC’s lawsuit against HTFC for selling improperly underwritten loans [link]:
Q: This is your loan file. What do Mr. and Mrs. Fitzgerald do for a living?
A: I don’t know. Open it up and find it.
Q: Look at your loan file and tell me.
A: Open it up and find it. I’m not your fucking bitch.
Q: Take a look at your loan application.
A: Do it yourself. Do it yourself. You want to do this in front of a judge. Would you prefer to [do] this in front of a judge? Then, shut the fuck up.
Q: Sir, take a look—
A: I’m taking a break. Fuck him. You open up the document. You want me to look at something, you get the document out. Earn your fucking money, asshole. Better get used to it. You’ll retire when I’m done.
That’s usually not the sort of guy whose ilk you want as a huge force in your national economy.
Second, we have Vice President Dick Cheney, the No. 2 member of the United States executive branch. He is thus responsible for executing the will of the people, as written by the people’s representatives in the legislative branch. Here he is being interviewed by ABC News’ Martha Radditz about the Iraq war [link]:
Raddatz: Two-third of Americans say it’s not worth fighting.
Cheney: So?
Raddatz: So? You don’t care what the American people think?
Cheney: No. I think you cannot be blown off course by the fluctuations in the public opinion polls. There has, in fact, been fundamental change and transformation and improvement for the better. That’s a huge accomplishment.
That is an awful lot about the Vice President summed up in the one-syllable clause “So?” The man is concise!
Here is a link from the Boston Globe detailing ways the U.S. government could alternatively spend the amount of funds that has gone to the Iraq war.
I think I would take Forbes.com’s example and outfit 4,073,333,333 people in custom-made leather underpants. That way, nearly 2/3 of the Earth’s population would be just a little more rock ‘n’ roll.
I agreed with this sentiment from the war’s beginning:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/23/opinion/23galbraith.html
If people fear the bloodshed that will occur in federalizing the country, well hey, it’s been underway for quite some time now.
I just read this piece by Christopher Hitchens from Vanity Fair and thought I should post it:
It hit a little close to home, I think. I come from a liberal Irish family too and have a brother in the military, and as a result I really got the part about the existence of pure motives in a world of cynical sloganeering.
It’s a very serious responsibility to have to put guys like that in the midst of mayhem, and it’s a leader’s role to make sure that attitude is honored and used wisely. But lost amidst the yelling and screaming on both sides of the aisle, there are still people who take a position because of reason and good intentions. The hope that people like Mark Daily will get to positions of power is the only thing that keeps me believing in politics.
This column was deeply unsettling and thought-provoking:
For a President who believes so deeply in good, evil and the need for justice, why does he think a situation with no consequences isn’t going to bring out the worst in people? And for those who argue that counterinsurgencies—from the American West to Ireland to Malaysia to Kenya—have always involved (or even “require”) violent excesses by the occupiers, I think it’s obvious who deserves the blame for failing to learn that and promising the opposite in Iraq.
Understanding the logistical impossibility of maintaining the troop surge, and disregarding whether or not you really believe that the past few months’ effort has worked, I can’t quite wrap my head around this one.
When you say spend months arguing that a certain strategy will work, then you believe that the strategy does indeed work, why then do you abandon the strategy for the very reason that, well, it worked? Apparently the President is assuming the troops’ presence allowed some other societal facet to bloom that will provide ongoing stability. But it seems to me that other than the troop level, there aren’t other variables that have changed from spring 2007 to now: even if violence is down, we haven’t seen a big Iraqi government breakthrough (ask the White House), nor is there any kind of factional reconciliation to speak of.
This is like when a patient takes medication for a chronic condition, then after realizing he feels better, says, “Man, I feel great–looks like I no longer need to take my medication.”
This piece by Juan Cole ends on a perfect note: it’s one thing to make a disastrous mistake for the first time, but when the opportunity to predict the mistake’s consequences exists and one still undertakes the same disaster, then it goes beyond tragedy and into something worse.
