Heh. Diplomacy IS petty squabbling.
Nuance and stupidity countered by nuance and stupidity are the name of the game -- and that's what, generally, it is...:(
From all that I take it that we agree it's stupid
-- diplomacy as currently practiced, that is -- and that my sarcastic 'nuance' (a cover word for refusal to honestly state ones concerns and take care of ones interests) was perhaps itself too nuanced or too diplomatic. I also note that you (at least in that situation) and the UN (most always) seem to be equally ineffective? ;)
In short, I agree. Pity about the Foreign Office, the State Department and Turtle Bay living in a world that seem to have passed them by...
How to win allies and influence nations--Not!
Shouldn't the next step from the US be to use the force at Camp Lemonier to conduct some punitive cross border ops into Eritrea? Let's not forget to bring an AC-130 strike into downtown Asmara and maybe use some standoff ALCMs, launched from a B-52 loitering over, say, Libya, in violation of its air space. To ice it all, there needs to be a US press release with intimate details about the ALCM strike so that the rest of the Islamic world can join in the outrage over the Crusaders "invasion" of Libya or wherever the aircraft happened to be tracking at launch time. :eek:
That sounds like the typical
FSOs reaction to the suggestion, no more, from a military guy that his approach to diplomacy is just a tiny bit too conciliatory and thus is unlikely to achieve his aims.
There is a middle way... :)
US Considering Terror Label for Eritrea
US Considering Terror Label for Eritrea
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/s...857205,00.html
It's posturing and negotiation, but to me, this is poor diplomacy. Is the U.S. at the "diplomatic death sentence" stage yet with Eritrea?
Afewerki is no diplomat and is likely to either not respond or respond with anger. Does the US gov. really want to continue this pissing match and is it ready to slap the terror label on Eritrea, causing more unecessary suffering for ordinary people?
If anyone can explain the logic behind this move, I would appreciate it. From where I'm sitting, this is asinine.
Only, now as then, in the words of the
politicians. The Troops then and now use 'bad guys' or other less complimentary appellations regardless of the opposition's ideology which is essentially irrelevant or his tactics which the troops can easily adapt to -- if their seniors let them....