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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (193073)	1/16/2007 2:39:26 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793957

Barnett's comment on the previous Essay by "Spengler" Must-read article ARTICLE: If you so dumb, how come you ain't poor?, By Spengler Brilliantly written piece sent to me by fellow blogger who said he saw much confluence with my thinking (which, I admit, rarely gets packaged as densely as Spengler so effortlessly achieves--and yes, that makes me covetous, but in the best way). I would agree with that blogger's assessment only on my most optimistic, Bush-forgiving days. Then again, Spengler's arguments on Iran's endemic weakness, Israel's enduring strategic strengths, and America's and China's increasingly overlapping security and economic interests fit me any day of the week. So why do I regularly bash Bush, in addition to consistently entertaining (even touting) the inevitable long-term success of his Big Bang strategy (also implied here--in that butt-ugly, 5GW sort of way that I have indulged in the past, only to be condemned by some for my casually bloodthirsty arguments--as in, OPB)? First, there is a time and place for everything in terms of advancing my career, which interests me most in the venues provided for vision spreading and marketization (i.e., my work with Enterra). To pretend not to cover that square daily is disingenuous--or just plain stupid. Second, there is a time and place for everything in keeping the vision real. As soon as the consistent partisan appeal is discerned, your utility as a grand strategist is profoundly marginalized. Some dig that path, but to me, it smacks too much of a dog eating his own vomit (neat trick, but why bother?). Third, there's the intellectual honesty argument, a function of the second point but worth mentioning all on its own. Celebrity through partisanship is certainly an easier row to hoe, but it reminds me of the character Bernstein's line in "Citizen Kane": It's not hard to make a lot of money... if all you want to do is make a lot of money. Third and finally, there is sticking with your core audience, which for me is officers just below, and just moving into, flag rank (and no, I don't need any third-party validation on that, because these people have never been shy around me). For them, noting how Bush makes them fight under some of the worst strategic circumstances possible is important. Bush is not only burning his way through his political capital with voters, he's doing the same with our military's human capital. Ignoring that cost would be profoundly dishonest on my part, costing me connectivity with that core audience, so I don't care what it sounds like to everyone else. I know many readers would like a consistently pro-Dem or pro-Repub (and, for some dedicated die-hards, definitely a pro-Israeli) line from me, but this chess game is inevitably played on multiple levels, and so I simply lack the ambition to pigeon-hole myself so. Frankly, if I did, I'd get so bored I'd soon forgo the effort. Why muscle your brain up over a lifetime to use it like that? Ending this navel-gazing, this article is a must read. Brutally optimistic in a way that emphasizes the continuing importance of nation-states. thomaspmbarnett.com

To: LindyBill who wrote (193073)	1/16/2007 4:14:28 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 793957

Contrary to what almost everyone has maintained for years - that the solution to the problems of the Middle East lies in the resolution of the Israel-Palestinian problem - the present civil war in Palestine proves that no one cares about the Israel-Palestinian problem. The so-called Palestinian issue has been subsumed into the broader problem of containing Persian imperialism, and the Palestinians have been left to fend for themselves, rather like the Kurds - but without the Kurds' language, 3,000-year history, and success in creating institutions of self-rule. True and false. Nobody cares about the actual problems of Palestine, especially those who call themselves the leaders of Palestine, but very, very many people care deeply about maintaining the fiction of the importance of Palestine. It's just too damn useful to the leaders of the Arab world and everybody who wants to appease the leaders of the Arab world. But the Palestinian genius for self-destruction seems a bit much even for propping up the fiction of "Mr. Moderate" Abu Mazen. But everybody will keep mouthing the words, wait and see, even as the territories slide into civil war.