Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (21981)	3/23/2002 12:52:51 AM
From: frankw1900	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

John I read it again. I think it's more the gadfly thing than demonizing. 'Gadfly' isn't the right word because he's not very good humoured - 'horsefly' is more like it. A little chunk of flesh here, a little bit there. He definitely thinks there are mid east specialists who aren't very good and he even scarified an English type. But does he actually have a thing for American academics? The nature of the world is that most things are mediocre. I remember sitting in non American classes and thinking 'this guy isn't up to snuff.' Looking back, with more experience and background I think I was right in most cases.... Of course, I thought a couple were great and now I don't think so, etc., etc. But mostly they were ordinary and in the areas I specialized in, I can say fairly, they were commuters: they got on the same train every day and didn't even look out the windows much - the ones who weren't commuters scared the hell out of the others. It appears Kramer thinks a fundamental error has been made in how American mid east studies are pursued. I wonder if he's right, or, at least, right enough.

To: JohnM who wrote (21981)	3/23/2002 9:33:08 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 281500

From the New York Times Op-Ed today "The Soul of George Bush", By Bill Keller On tactics, he may be listening to Colin Powell," said Norman Podhoretz, the influential conservative editor and author. "But he's very clear as to his strategic objectives, not just to clean up Al Qaeda cells but to effect regime changes in six or seven countries and to create conditions which would lead to internal reform and modernization in the Islamic world." Whether the president will, in the end, take us to a multitude of wars in the cause of liberating the world from evil, or whether the mission will lose some of its energy when the cost (literal and political) grows, I can't tell. But I think Mr. Podhoretz correctly reads the president's heart. If you were hoping for the right-of-center moderate Mr. Bush campaigned as, or if you shared the patronizing view of the president as a good-natured boob tugged along by avuncular ideologues, this may strike you as chilling. But have no doubt, it is très sérieux. nytimes.com

To: JohnM who wrote (21981)	3/23/2002 3:41:42 PM
From: tekboy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Kramer definitely has an axe to grind, but that doesn't mean he's entirely wrong. Views like those he cites are indeed quite prevalent among academic Middle East specialists here, just as they are among lots of folk abroad. What he doesn't point out, however, are that a number of prominent Middle East experts spoke loudly and clearly during the fall in ways he would like or agree with. I mean, I doubt Bernard Lewis, Kramer's hero (and adviser), has ever had the blanket media exposure and mass audience he received in recent months. And certainly Fouad Ajami, Michael Doran, Fareed Zakaria, and a number of other people who wrote on these questions in important venues after 9/11 were more in agreement with Kramer than opposed to him... So, my problem is that he seems to need to feel like a beleaguered victim, and to see the omnipresence only of those he disagrees with... tb@arbiteroftruth.com