SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: tekboy who wrote (51028)10/16/2002 12:37:44 AM
From: Jim DuBois  Read Replies (3) of 281500
 
TB - Concise is not something I am generally accused of. However, I was rushed for time. Otherwise, I am even capable of writing in full sentences. With regard to Pollack's book, I am surprised that there does not seem to be more discussion of it on this thread. I have not been able to keep up with the deluge of posts on this thread, but I do peek in on occasionally, and people's thoughts seem to be based only on cursory review. I find that interesting since I think Pollack guts about 2/3 of the rhetorical arguments from both right and left on the thread. Perhaps that explains the lack of discussion, but I still recommend folks read and consider the whole book.

If you don't mind, I would like to toss a couple of questions at you, since I seem to recall that you are a foreign policy wonk, and appear to be fairly well wired with other wonks. Such strange and mythological creatures are rare in my neighborhood.

First, Pollack believes that casualties will tend to the low side of his range. Do you agree, and why? Trying to put myself in Saddam's brain (yeah, I read the part about fallacy of mirroring -humor me), I assume that he still thinks we do not have a stomach for body bags. Further, assume he thinks that dead civilians will 'play well' in Paris and the ME, and increase pressure to back off. I also know that my army gets crushed in the open, and air power is most effective there, and supply lines vulnerable. So I am merrily planning urban war with short supply lines, air power limited, and carnage maximized. A stalemate is a win. What is to prevent this worst case scenario? If it is a coup, then what does that do to our reconstruction plans? Without a complete power shift our gain is temporary and uncertain.

Second, I note that we started planning the reconstruction of post-war Japan in 1942. In contrast, Bush's speech the other night spent maybe 20 seconds on "we'll clean up the mess afterward." Do you know/can you say whether well thought out planning is going on for the 'now what' when we win? I would be greatly reassured to hear that mature adults have a rational plan that goes beyond the next 6 months, and that this is not all an exercise in testosterone. Your thoughts on this aspect would be quite interesting. TIA. And so much for brevity.

Jim@bethankfultekbabyisnot17yearsolder.whew
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext