A pretty good return look at George Will’s ‘Men At Work’.
‘A lot of Will’s material is terrific—learning how Gwynn reads a pitcher’s delivery will change the way you watch the game, for one.’
We need to send more troops to Afghanistan because:
“The contingent is needed because other NATO countries still haven’t fulfilled their pledges to send their own troops to train the Afghan army and police.”
In order for us to engage the locals, push back the Taliban, and strengthen the central government to help meet basic security needs and some level of basic service soon afterwards, we need European and international support, military, political and moral.
A suggestion from our author:
‘Rather than frame the relationship with India using such ambitious but unrealizable multilateral goals, or drag Delhi further than it wishes to go into the Af-Pak mess, the Obama Administration needs to elevate the bilateral military engagement with India to a strategic level.’
Much of the will seems to be there…
See the previous post.
Full post here (a free registration is available)
“Summary: Thanks to the country’s favorable location on the map, China’s influence is expanding on land, and at sea, from Central Asia to the South China Sea and from the Russian Far East To The Indian Ocean.”
I suspect this is the kind of Cold War thinking we don’t necessarily need. We need facts on the ground, and various interpretations of them. Our relationship can put us in potential tension politically and culturally (militarily?), but it need not be like this.
Addition: As emailers point out, Kaplan is simply offering a concise, and profound strategic analysis of the forces that shape this part of the world. In so doing we can help to understand what our interests are in dealing with China.
Also: Robert Kagan’s book “The Return Of History And The End Of Dreams“ seeks to challenge Fukuyama’s thinking…does it succeed?: Obama’s Decision On Missile Defense And A Quote From Robert Kagan’s: ‘The Return Of History And The End Of Dreams’
Originally posted 07/21/07:
Clearly, Mexico does not have the political will to examine why so many of its citizens come here to work. Mexico has corruption, lack of education, and an enormous wealth disparity to deal with, among other things. They’re getting angry at us for not solving their problems to their satisfaction.
A wall could work as a deterrent, but personally, I don’t think think it’s the most effective long term solution. People climb around walls, or under them, or tear them down. Walls can get covered in resentment, graffiti and wasted dollars. I think it’s more of a way for some politicians to release the steam of their constituents at the moment.
Here’s a recent wall proposal:
Estimated cost: at least $2.1 billion dollars
Here’s some Robert Frost.
1. Perhaps we’re still suffering from the logic of excessive relativism and multiculturalism, the closest some elements of the left can get back to reasonable nationalism (at the moment, anyways), and enforcing the laws that illegal immigrant are breaking…is not close enough for my taste (or at least the other side…those who would take the law into their own hands and in their own mission statements). We’re losing our middle ground, and the more effective solutions that come with it.
This would not merely a problem of the left, of course…and that is if this is a proper analysis.
2. Sadly, this is politics, and once we leave it to the politicans, it will be used accordingly…from where I sit (generally center right, and libertarian) I expect Obama will use the broad middle ground election appeal (still!) but then end up having to fire up the base on immigration too. Such is politics. I would not likely be happy with the result.
I’ll leave the rest of the debate to those most directly affected who live with these issues every day (jobs, crime, safety, taxes, local government) and people who know more than I do (too many to count).
One Anna Badkhen travels through North Afghanistan and keeps a diary, discussing the culture, the people, and the current situation a bit.
Also On This Site: From Newsweek: ‘Meeting Of The Diplomats’
‘The posting on Revolutionmuslim.com says: “We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show. This is not a threat, but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them.’
No, I wouldn’t take that as a threat at all…
Update: Did Comedy Central censor the potentially offensive parts…as a result of the ‘threats’? What is insidious about a terroristic threat is how much it works. Also, how much (if there is a causal connection) of the decision might be fear of legal action, loss of revenue, pc related?
Comedy Central, by most accounts, doesn’t want to re-air the episode.
Related On This Site: From Kenanmalik.com: ‘Introduction: How Salman Rushdie Changed My Life’
Is Islam incompatibile with freedom as we define it here in the West, or is this a false choice?: From YouTube: Roger Scruton On Religious Freedom, Islam & Atheism…
Ayan Hirsi Ali has used the ideals of the West (especially women’s rights) to potentially confront Islam; which has served her politically as well: Repost-Ayan Hirsi Ali At The CSM: ‘Swiss Ban On Minarets Was A Vote For Tolerance And Inclusion’ Certainly, excessive relativism can create ghettoes of un-integrated Muslims in European society, and turn out more violence and threats of violence.
See Also: If you thought the cartoons were bad, more on the Fitna movie here. Libertarians stand firm on this issue: Repost-A Canadian Libertarian Making Noise: Ezra Levant