Letters to the Editor
casual_observer
Published Letters: 1253 Editor's Choice: 1
-
More Mao
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]A friend of mine who knows of such things reports the following:
I did a bit of searching, and it seems that Mao's earliest use of this quote dates to a speech he made in 1927, at which he said that:
"We [the Chinese Communist Party] used to criticize Sun Yatsen's military campaigns, and that we were just the opposite: we [the Communist movement] were not a military campaign, but a popular movement. Chiang Kai-shek and Tang Shengzhi all rose to power through the barrel of a gun, and no matter that we are independent, we must recognize that political power comes from the barrel of a gun."
-
@ondelette
[Read the article: Various items]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"The rule of law derives from the belief of the people that laws should be obeyed in order to have an orderly society."
I agree of course, and add another shade to the above, and that is not only to have an orderly society, but for the common good. Yes, an orderly society itself is a common good/mutual benefit, but there are many others, besides orderliness. Several of our earliest states are "commonwealths", embodying this principle of common good.
It is a principle I think somewhat opposed to libertarian sentiment, but the two are both needed, in opposition.
-
Some things can't be laid aside
[Read the article: The foreign policy community]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]These "scholars" have lost the right to judge anyone or to declare anyone else unserious. It is long past time to aggressively challenge their most precious orthodoxies.
OK, great.
Leave aside whatever views you may have about the wisdom of attacking Osama bin Laden or other Al Qaeda elements inside Pakistan because that is a separate question entirely. There are few issues more vitally important than destroying the supremacy and monopoly of our Foreign Policy Community...
I'm sorry, but I can't leave it aside. I can't leave it aside because the invasion of yet another sovereign nation is one of those "few issues that is more vitally important than destroying" the Embedded Wonks.
From the Power Memo:
But Obama made clear that as President, if he had actionable intelligence about the whereabouts of al Qaeda leaders in Pakistan – and the Pakistanis continued to refuse to act against terrorists known to be behind attacks on American civilians – then he will use highly targeted force to do so.
Nowhere here do I see working with the UN to justify, and make legal, such a military action. Nowhere do I see Obama will come to the Congress. And why is that. I believe it is because Obama needs to look tough. So he borrows a page from the Neocon book, with some window-dressing from a Harvard Professor. Who, by the sounds of it, appears as a frightening mirror-image of Condi Rice.
And the very concept of "highly targeted force" on tribal villages--for those villages are surely where Taliban and al Qaeda live among the people--is absurd.
Have. we. learned. NOTHING?
You say "put that question aside--that's not what I'm talking about". I understand that. But I can't.
-
Bomb the wonks
[Read the article: The foreign policy community]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"It's possible that getting rid of a few establishment foreign policy wonks might improve the situation with respect to Pakistan. "
I'm game. Why not? I suppose it depends on which wonks are being rid. All of them? Are we considering wonkicide?
Look--I agree that foreign policy should be discussed openly and publicly. I agree and celebrate the idea that the american people deserve this debate and should openly participate in it.
But replace the mandarins (good term WT) with something better than this: a woman who is the founding director of The Carr Center for Human Rights Policy advocating military force (but wait! this is better! It's "highly targeted"!) against the tribal areas.
If Obama
-
@ondelette
[Read the article: The foreign policy community]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't think war with Pakistan is at all inevitable, but if you want to explore that, I'll argue it with pleasure. And, we will be furthering the goals of GG's post by talking foreign policy while being public. (similar to driving while black, or flying while Muslim)
Re: Power, she has had a remarkable career already, and not even 35 yet. Very impressive and admirable. Sysprog says she's not a wonk. Fine by me. His posted article calls her "the new conscience of the U.S. foreign-policy establishment". Okiedoke, I wish her well.
But if our new conscience is recommending surgical military force in Pakistan, I want to go back and take a look at the old conscience. Maybe go real old-school like Walter Mondale, or George McGovern.
-
If you only read one thing today
[Read the article: The foreign policy community]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I suggest this piece by drational.
Karl Rove is Tricking You Again
by drational
Thu Aug 09, 2007 at 05:25:23 AM PDT
The FISA update was specifically pushed before the Congressional Summer Recess to generate exactly the reaction it has:
Remove Pressure from the Administration on purely domestic spying.
Fracture the Democratic Party, to create an issue of "more importance" to the progressives previously focusing their anger on the Administration.
If you have any doubts about why the Administration chose this time to ramrod FISA update through Congress, you should think hard and read below.
Furthermore, if you have bought into the current Democratic left-center schism, you are being manipulated by shrewd political players. You are a part of a media/issue framing exercise specifically designed to distract attention away from Administration illegality.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/9/63824/53794