William S. Lind :collection (merged thread)

[Steve Blair]

While I agree that the only applicable defintion of "victory" that means anything in Iraq is restoration of the state---in other words putting it back to where it was when we started--I also believe the likelihood of that happening is small.

But Lind in his ever present push for 4GW theory now proposes putting Al Sadr in charge as the man most likely to succeed is stunning. Whether you find it stunning in its brilliance or its stupidty is up to you.

I would pick stupidity and suggest Lind link up with Diana West.

Tom

No! They might reproduce then...

I think Lind got a taste of the policy thing during the maneuver warfare push and really liked it. After that he's just been playing the "see what Generation I have TODAY" game.

[jcustis]

I need an emoticon that is holding its head in its hands...shaking.

It's no so much because I disagree with Lind on the Al-Sadr thing (and I do), but it's the fact that this is what the war has come to. We have begun to grasp at straws because there are so few options remaining.

I liked the analysis, and Lind may be spot on that a Christian invader may never be able to restore institutions in Iraq that have any chance of lasting. That is, not unless we develop a predisposition to violence and heavy-handedness that bends opponents and bystanders to our will, and in turn setting us back on that Catch-22 cycle.

[Old Eagle]

I like the final paragraph where he ponders the effect on the presidential debates if one of the candidates were to back his proposal.

Waiting with baited breath ...out.

[tequila]

I'd love to see a poll where we find out just how many presidential candidates could identify who Muqtada al-Sadr actually was, or what religious sect he was from.

I'm betting we'd see a pass rate under 50%.

[Merv Benson]

Metz said:

But Lind (and Luttwak) I would think actually want to be taken seriously by policymakers. Writing stuff like this erodes that possibility. What worries me is that while most people who are in a position to influence policy realize that West, Coulter, Limbaugh etc are entertainers and not policy analysts, there are people who take Lind (and Luttwak) seriously.

Unlike West and Coulter, Limbaugh actually supports Gen. Petraeus and the counterinsurgency strategy he is implementing in Iraq. He wants to see the military be given a chance to succeed. I am not sure what you would find wrong with that.

[Granite_State]

I'd love to see a poll where we find out just how many presidential candidates could identify who Muqtada al-Sadr actually was, or what religious sect he was from.

I'm betting we'd see a pass rate under 50%.

I think if you asked them to give you more than three or four sentences on him, you'd be under 25%. The rhetoric you see from virtually all of them, even in places like Foreign Policy, is incredibly simplistic and even stupid.

[Ski]

You noticed that as well?

I can tell you that he has met with at least one Presidental candidate.

Take that as you will.

I like the final paragraph where he ponders the effect on the presidential debates if one of the candidates were to back his proposal.

Waiting with baited breath ...out.

[Granite_State]

You noticed that as well?

I can tell you that he has met with at least one Presidental candidate.

Take that as you will.

I'm guessing idle speculation will not be rewarded with a name?

[Ski]

You seem like a politically tuned in type of dude, I'm sure you can add one plus one together to figure out who this might be...

I'm guessing idle speculation will not be rewarded with a name?