All posts in category Wars and Rumors of Wars

The American Conservative (three issues)

The Republican primaries are as much a focus of attention here as are the Democratic primaries in The Nation (see below.) 

11 Feb: A terrific cover shows a cartoon of John McCain with a large globe, apparently about to eat it.  The text: “Invade the World, Invite the World” (ostensibly a summary of McCain’s hawkish foreign policy and liberal immigration policy.)  An editorial endorses Ron Paul for president (wonder how that worked out?); an article by antiwar.com’s Justin Raimondo documents McCain’s warlike intentions towards not only Iraq and Iran, but Russia and China as well; and Thomas Woods reviews Paul Gottfried’s Conservatism in America, praising Gottfried for debunking earlier writers’ attempts to gloss over the eccentric and sometimes alarming character of the older American right by claiming to find links between American conservatism and European conservatism. 

25 Feb: A cover depicts Barack Obama as Christ, but wearing ammo belts and a machine gun; an article by Brendan O’Neill documents Obama’s history of support for US military intervention everywhere but Iraq; and Nicholas von Hoffman investigates Bill Clinton’s post-presidential moneymaking activities.

10 Mar: Another arresting cover, this one with text: “Fuel imported into Iraq- 3 million gallons/ day  Cost to the US- $929 million/ week.”  Steve Sailer (your favorite blogger!) analyzes Hispanic voting patterns; Scott McConnell is slightly encouraged by Barack Obama’s apparent reluctance to grovel before the most extreme elements of American Zionism; Leon Hadar dismisses the foreign policy terms “realist” and “idealist” as empty, appealing to Walter Russell Mead typology of Jeffersonian, Hamiltonian, Jacksonian, and Wilsonian as somewhat more capable of carrying meaning; Eamonn Fingleton critiques the view, widespread among America’s elite, that a prosperous China will naturally become democratic (though strangely he neglects to mention James Mann, whose recent book provided a powerful argument exploding that view); Daniel Larison sounds the alarm about Kosovo’s “independence”; Neil Clark finds that refusal to join the European Union has strengthened the economies and preserved the liberties of Switzerland, Norway, Iceland, and (get ready) Belarus; Jesse Walker praises The Kinks; and Doug Bandow looks at Christian Zionism and sees a collection of crazies.

by acilius on March 16, 2008  •  Permalink
Posted in Balkans, Campaign 2008, The American Conservative

Posted by acilius on March 16, 2008

https://losthunderlads.com/2008/03/16/the-american-conservative-three-issues/

The Nation (five issues)

The Democratic primaries dominate the issues of 25 February, 3 March, 10 March, 17 March, and 24 March.  Interesting bits do slip in, though.  What are these bits?

 25 February: A long review of a biography of Joschka Fischer and Stuart Klawans’ review of the Romanian illegal-abortion drama 4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days. 

3 March: Alexander Cockburn declares that diverting Social Security taxes to Wall Street “was never a job for the Republicans, any more than was welfare ‘reform.’  Eradication of the social safety net is a job for the Democratic Party,” a job Bill Clinton would have completed had God not sent Monica Lewinsky to rescue us.  Kathryn Joyce writes on the New Natalists, right-leaning types who worry that too few white babies are being born.  Joyce identifies historian Allen Carlson as the intellectual godfather of this group.  I’ve read some of Carlson’s books and can attest that he is at once an excellent historian whose works anyone can benefit from reading and a far-right crackpot whose triumph in the realm of public policy would be catastrophic.  Jochen Hellbeck reviews two books on Stalin, tracing the development of Utopian plans into hellish institutions.  Ronald Grigor Suny reviews two other books about Bolshevism.  And from Charles Bernstein, a nifty little love poem called “All the Whiskey in Heaven,” which ended up in my Valentine’s Day package to Mrs Acilius.

10 March: Tom Hayden revisits Vietnam and is very uncomfortable with what he finds there; Daniel Wilkinson reviews four books on Hugo Chavez’ Venezuela and reaches far less rosy conclusions than have previous issues of The Nation.

17 March: Jeremy Scahill reports on Barack Obama’s stated willingness to continue using mercenary firms like Blackwater; and Daniel Lazare reviews two books on religious conflicts in early Modern Europe, arguing that secularism is older than the Enlightenment and defending it as the one tried-and-true means of overcoming religious conflict. 

24 March: Mark Mazower wrings his hands about the implications of the Kosovo’s “independence”; Neve Gordon reviews work on Palestinians who collaborate with Zionism; and Stuart Klawans reviews Chop Shop, a film which he identifies as part of “a small but fascinating group of Iranian-flavored movies made in New York City.”

by acilius on March 16, 2008  •  Permalink
Posted in Campaign 2008, The Nation, Valentine's Day, Vietnam

Posted by acilius on March 16, 2008

https://losthunderlads.com/2008/03/16/the-nation-five-issues/

The Nation, 15 October 2007

Two pieces deal with the likelihood that rightists will spend the next few decades trying to convince themselves and the voting public that the reason the war in Iraq was such a disaster was that the left stabbed America in the back.  A column by Eric Alterman compares the rumblings to this effect that we have already heard to the Nazi movement’s claim that Germany’s defeat in the 1914-1918 War was due to a Jewish plot to stab the country in the back.  A review essay by Rick Perlstein takes on recent books claiming that the USA was at some point close to success in Vietnam, dismantling the scholarly pretensions of these books and using Elizabeth Kubler-Ross’ theory of the stages of grief to argue that when an American military intervention turns out badly, hawks “begin with denial, anger, and bargaining, just like you and me.  And that’s where they stay- forever paralyzed by a petulant refusal to acknowledge their fantasy’s passing, a simple inability to process reality.” 

 The article that made me the angriest documented a systematic effort on the part of the army to pressure doctors to misdiagnose wounded Iraq vets so that they would not qualify for disability benefits.  Hardly less angering was an article about the immunity that mercenary gangs like Blackwater Corporation enjoy for murders and other crimes committed in Iraq. 

The closest thing to light entertainment in the issue was Jane Smiley’s review of the memoirs of Frank Schaeffer, son of Francis and Edith Schaeffer, two of the founders of the contemporary Christian Right.  Schaeffer’s rebellion against his parents’ beliefs and his horrifying descriptions of the personalities of leading evangelists seem to be part of a lively, interesting personality.

by acilius on October 2, 2007  •  Permalink
Posted in Iraq, The Nation, Vietnam
Tagged ,

Posted by acilius on October 2, 2007

https://losthunderlads.com/2007/10/02/the-nation-15-october-2007/

The American Conservative, 8 October 2007

Andrew Bacevich, a retired colonel best known as the author of The New American Militarism, excoriates General David Petraeus’ recent Congressional testimony, pointing out that if Petraeus were correct and the “surge” were working, then his recommendation that it be discontinued would be preposterous.  Bacevich argues that the elite in Washington is driven chiefly by the fear of admitting that it was wrong.  After reviewing Petraeus’ arguments and contrasting his views with the more cautious pronouncements of other senior commanders, Bacevich concludes:

Politically, it qualifies as a brilliant maneuver.  The general’s relationships with official Washington remain intact.  Yet he has broken faith with the soldiers he commands and the Army to which he has devoted his life.  He has failed his country.  History will not judge him kindly.   

American debates on foreign policy are usually conducted in terms of two, and only two, historical analogies: Munich and Vietnam.  Not only do these analogies grow tiresome, but their use in debate rests on an absurd set of oversimplifications.  Those tired of this idiocy may welcome Paul W. Schroeder’s “Fire Fight.”  Schroeder compares the current position of the USA in Iraq to the position of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in Italy in the period 1848-1859.  Not only does Schroeder draw out intriguing parallels between the way the Hapsburgs weakened themselves by wasting their resources in an unwinnable war in Italy and the way in which America is weakening itself in Iraq, he also acknowledges what the Munich–Vietnam shouters usually overlook, that an analogy is a comparison between things which are in other respects dissimilar.  Given that definition, a “perfect analogy” is a contradiction in terms.  Schroeder specifies the limits within which analogy is useful. 

 Other highlights include Philip Weiss, keeper of the mondoweiss blog, on the apparent inability of the organization Freedom Watch to specify its relationship with the Bush administration or its policy towards Israel; Kelley Beaucar Vlahos on neoconservatives among the top advisors to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama; and Pat Buchanan on the future of Belgium.

www.amconmag.com

by acilius on October 2, 2007  •  Permalink
Posted in Iraq, The American Conservative, Vietnam
Tagged ,

Posted by acilius on October 2, 2007

https://losthunderlads.com/2007/10/02/the-american-conservative-8-october-2007/

Mahmood Mamdani on Iraq and Darfur

The following paragraphs began an article by Columbia University’s Mahmood Mamdani comparing Western attitudes to Iraq and Darfur.  The article originally appeared in the LONDON REVIEW OF BOOKS in March and was reprinted in THE AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE last month. 

The Politics of Naming: Genocide, Civil War, Insurgency

Mahmood Mamdani

The similarities between Iraq and Darfur are remarkable. The estimate of the number of civilians killed over the past three years is roughly similar. The killers are mostly paramilitaries, closely linked to the official military, which is said to be their main source of arms. The victims too are by and large identified as members of groups, rather than targeted as individuals. But the violence in the two places is named differently. In Iraq, it is said to be a cycle of insurgency and counter-insurgency; in Darfur, it is called genocide. Why the difference? Who does the naming? Who is being named? What difference does it make? (more…)

by acilius on September 4, 2007  •  Permalink
Posted in Iraq, Ogaden & Darfur, Politics
Tagged

Posted by acilius on September 4, 2007

https://losthunderlads.com/2007/09/04/mahmood-mamdani-on-iraq-and-darfur/

Newer Posts »