tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post3285571414153363354..comments2024-03-28T14:52:13.218-05:00Comments on Stonekettle Station: What I want from an Obama Administration - Part 1, Foreign PolicyJim Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11259550121437562338noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-82901023588752445182008-11-14T09:19:00.000-06:002008-11-14T09:19:00.000-06:00Well said Jim. Brits and French have been fighitin...Well said Jim. Brits and French have been fighiting each other for centuries in the middle ages, Germans have been fighting everyone else. And all of that happened on a much smaller territory.<BR/><BR/>True that some might still despite each other, but it's more of the despite that Bears fans feel towards Packer fans, and vice-a-versa.<BR/><BR/>They live and work together now, peacefuly for a long time, even creating some sort of Unified Europe. And these are the people that have been fighting each other MUCH LONGER than the US existed. How can such a young country CREATE for themselves so many enemies in such a short time? <BR/><BR/>I think we can do it. I hope we can do it.Some dude stuck in the Midwesthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00852056495927941030noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-53610094821952941412008-11-13T22:17:00.000-06:002008-11-13T22:17:00.000-06:00Nor is Chamberlain understood all that well by the...Nor is Chamberlain understood all that well by the neocons and conservatives to start with: a case can be made (c.f. Overy and Wheatcroft's <I>Road To War</I>) that Chamberlain (1) reacted to Hitler the only way the leader of a war-weary democracy could have (the British public didn't want a war in '39 and would have voted in actual pacifists had Chamberlain tried to confront Hitler) and (2) managed, intentionally or not, to buy Britain valuable time to modernize the RAF and build up their military strength. I say "the case can be made" because this subject is a matter of ongoing debate and will be, and arguing both sides is easy (and fun!)--but the point is that it's pretty naive to take a matter that is really that controversial and use it to level what is meant to be an ugly attack. An intelligent student of history would consider that whether appeasement was right or wrong is not merely a moral question, but a complicated tangle of the military planning, domestic politics and economics of '30s Britain.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18275812152895151542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-63801713937362606252008-11-13T21:32:00.000-06:002008-11-13T21:32:00.000-06:00I wish I'd have thought of that quote, Nathan, whe...I wish I'd have thought of that quote, Nathan, when I wrote the post. That's just exactly outstanding. <BR/><BR/>And it's worth pointing out, especially to the neocons, there is an <I>enormous</I> difference between what Rabin did (and what I've said in this post) and the type of Neville Chamberlain appeasement that republicans attempted to pin on Obama for his stated willingness to at least talk to our adversaries - strangely, I think most Americans understood that - at least the non-ultra conservatives anyway.Jim Wrighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11259550121437562338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-47846712290034903142008-11-13T19:13:00.000-06:002008-11-13T19:13:00.000-06:00When Yitzhak Rabin was being raked over the coals ...When Yitzhak Rabin was being raked over the coals for who he was willing to sit down with, he said, "You don't make peace with friends. You make it with very unsavory enemies. "Nathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00648438549121320566noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8243351006478134285.post-61691530331093757122008-11-13T18:12:00.000-06:002008-11-13T18:12:00.000-06:00Well said, Jim.A comment about the position we wer...Well said, Jim.<BR/><BR/>A comment about the position we were in fifty years ago: one of the mistakes we made at the time (and are still paying for) is a habit of confusing what <I>could</I> be done with what <I>should</I> be done. That we were able to dictate terms was frequently used as sufficient excuse to do so--even if sowing resentments was a foreseeable result. We often remember T. Roosevelt's famous adage, "Speak softly but carry a big stick" without understanding it: yes, you have the stick, and that's great, but the first half of that is <I>speak softly</I>. Don't go around yelling about your damn stick all the time, or worse yet just go around whomping the hell out of everything that moves.<BR/><BR/>Of course, you said that when you pointed out that dictating terms doesn't work, but it's worth repeating.<BR/><BR/>And it's worth mentioning that you should <I>never</I> overestimate your power. Vietnam is the classic example: we didn't lose because of inferior force (obviously) and (contrary to what some people seem to think) we didn't lose because of domestic politics. We lost because we were going to lose regardless, because (as somebody at the time pointed out) <I>they</I> lived there and sooner or later <I>we</I> would have to go home. Another subject, perhaps, for another time--but I think the President-Elect seems to be somebody who understands that even economic and military superiority isn't always sufficient even if it's practically uncontested.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, great piece, Jim. Thanks.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18275812152895151542noreply@blogger.com