Comments for Michael J. Totten

Comment on Why Obama Just Might Fight Iran by leo

leo — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 16:58:28 +0000

Mike,

I just noticed your new site came up.

Congratulations.

It looks like we have two sets of comments for the piece above.

Comment on Gallows Humor by Fnord

Fnord — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 09:56:14 +0000

Heh, Render, yes I am. To contextualize, it was in a period where we ran a studio in the somalian part of Oslo (wich is about 5 blocks) and went to visit a few of the local khat clubs in order to make our face known to the locals and gain some burglary insurance. Anyways, use has been effectively decriminalized, with posession of even large quantities leading to a minor fine. Ive broken the law in worse ways both before and since

Comment on Why Obama Just Might Fight Iran by Paul S.

Paul S. — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 07:35:09 +0000

"as if maybe ME terrorist organizations are aligning with certain drug cartels" I'm surprised Mexican car bombs haven't been in the news previously; intimidation doesn't require massive firepower. But terror overlays culture; a kamikaze mindset had no roots in Nazi Germany.

Comment on Why Obama Just Might Fight Iran by Paul S.

Paul S. — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 07:13:13 +0000

I see an extraordinarily, dangerously weak American "leader", hoping things sort themselves out, after which he can take credit for "patient prudence", or whatever cliches he and supporters come up with.

Comment on Why Obama Just Might Fight Iran by Paul S.

Paul S. — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 06:57:12 +0000

Ronald Reagan's resonant message was one of individuals with freedom to choose, not government to impose, a message I think makes the current American administration uneasy.

Comment on Why Obama Just Might Fight Iran by Michael J. Totten

Michael J. Totten — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 06:54:10 +0000

Gary, Mead's book about the four schools of American foreign policy is Special Providence: American Foreign Policy and How It Changed the World. Highly recommended.

Comment on Why Obama Just Might Fight Iran by crosspatch

crosspatch — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 06:41:49 +0000

Ali, maybe you are right that by itself the Green movement won't, in a single-handed manner, take down the regime, but it sure can keep it occupied with other things. Even offering moral support, words can be powerful things if they resonate in people's hearts, can be a significant force. Reagan always held out the beacon of hope to those behind the Iron Curtain and those people had hearts full of good will toward America for that when their regimes finally fell. No regime on the planet stands but at the pleasure of its population. When the people finally decide they have had enough, the regime will end. The regime can not kill them all.

Obama seems to be suffering from the paralysis of analysis. He seems afraid to be too confrontational to the regime, and he seems to be too timid to actively support the Green movement and wants to find passive-aggressive measures that make it appear as if he is doing something by not doing something.

Fish or cut bait, Mr. President. Standing there with both a fishing pole and a bait knife doing nothing with either of them isn't helping.

Iran right now has the global initiative. There is too much going on right for me to rest easy. The timing of Turkey getting cosy with Iran, Mookie's recent trip to Syria, the recent ratcheting up of violence in Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran appears to be making all the moves. The violence of the drug cartels in Mexico is starting to take on a Middle Eastern look (beheadings, car bombings) as if maybe ME terrorist organizations are aligning with certain drug cartels to eliminate competition.

Iran looks like it is making all the moves and I see nothing, not a word, not a sound, not a peep out of the White House. It does, indeed, look like the return of the Carter administration.

Comment on Why Obama Just Might Fight Iran by Gary Rosen

Gary Rosen — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 06:31:26 +0000

In my last post "thought" should have been "though"

Comment on Why Obama Just Might Fight Iran by Gary Rosen

Gary Rosen — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 06:29:24 +0000

"Mead, you'll recall, is famous for his thesis about how Americans can be divided into 4 different camps re foreign policy, each tied to a past American president or statesman" Gene, do you have a link for this? One of my all-time favorite pieces on foreign policy was by Charles Krauthammer who also posited 4 policy camps thought without the specific tie to a historical figure. I'm curious if one (Mead or Krauthammer) influenced or even sorta plagiarized the other. Krauthammer's piece was published in 2004.