cue in on one, to them, hot button word and then allow that to skew or even derail their comprehension of the actual point of a written piece.
Sigh. As they say, the internet is not a perfect medium...
The short answer is the same if it had incorporated the same material. regardless of title, the strategy at least as I read it said we--the US--are the stand alone imperial power in the world. I think anyone would have much trouble selling that inside the US and we got a pretty good slice of what the world reaction would be from JJ.Ken: I wonder how this thread would have run had Steve not titled it "The Israeli option on Strategy" and had not even mentioned Israel?
It would I suspect be somewhat different if it had incorporated more of what you put into it. A measured response is essentially a middle of the road strategy and one we are fairly comfortable with although we have had aberrations.
I do not, however, agree with the blanket assessment that everyone hates us and always will. That is a simplistic and flawed assessment. Everyone one does not hate us. Steve Blair is correct that we often want them all to love us. There have been periods where anti-American sentiments have run high. We are in one now. We have had periods where pro-American sentiments were strong. What really counts is when and where our interests and our pursuit of those interests are acceptable or in favor with other players on the strategic stage and where and when they are not.
Best
Tom
I never ceased to be amazed by how many people
cue in on one, to them, hot button word and then allow that to skew or even derail their comprehension of the actual point of a written piece.
Sigh. As they say, the internet is not a perfect medium...
Not really. All I said was that when we believe there is an extant threat, we disrupt the threat (with partners whenever possible) then leave rather than trying to transform the place from which the threat emerged into something it is not.Originally Posted by Tom Odom
Perhaps. We'll never know...
Where's Harry Turtledove when we need him...
Interesting. I read JJs comment with interest also. FWIW, I didn't take Steve's premise that way -- perhaps because I'm in broad agreement. In any event, I have no doubt many could and some would desire to take it that way as the Great American Empire, Act II. I just don't see that happening nor do I believe that most in the world, given a little reflection time would....the strategy at least as I read it said we--the US--are the stand alone imperial power in the world. I think anyone would have much trouble selling that inside the US and we got a pretty good slice of what the world reaction would be from JJ.
The British -- like most in Europe -- after all are basically Arab centric and goodness knows we've given them enough provocation to dislike us intensely so JJs reaction was unsurprising . It was also essentially fair; I could quibble a bit about events and interpretations but on balance, I understand where he's coming from.
Possibly my error as I assumed given what I know of Steve's background and his writing, it was sort of implied...It would I suspect be somewhat different if it had incorporated more of what you put into it. A measured response is essentially a middle of the road strategy and one we are fairly comfortable with although we have had aberrations.
As for middle of the road, yep -- and most Americans are essentially moderates; that's why it's acceptable...
Hate is a bad word, Penta used it and I did not. However, I didn't correct his over statement to a more accurate "while a very few hate us, many more are in a state of mild dislike, distrust or envy and the majority of the world doesn't care much unless we do something that effects them personally. the bad news is that due to our size, sometimes our minor efforts create a ripple effect that can exacerbate their perception into a state of active dislike..." or words to that effect. I'm wordy enough without over editing someone else's basically correct comment.I do not, however, agree with the blanket assessment that everyone hates us and always will. That is a simplistic and flawed assessment. Everyone one does not hate us. Steve Blair is correct that we often want them all to love us. There have been periods where anti-American sentiments have run high. We are in one now. We have had periods where pro-American sentiments were strong. What really counts is when and where our interests and our pursuit of those interests are acceptable or in favor with other players on the strategic stage and where and when they are not.
You are, of course, correct in saying that we are not resoundingly hated -- I've said here and elsewhere that dislike of the US today is not nearly as bad as it was during and directly after Viet Nam -- and there are some American who want "them to like us" (though not many IMO, most could care less). Still, other than that, Penta's points were valid, I thought.
To you too -- do you have an alternative?Best
Tom
Ken brought up a point I've been chewing on since I read it, about how the negativity seems focused in the North.
I live and work in New Jersey; my extended family is almost all in Boston or the near suburbs of Boston; my GF lives out in Chicagoland. Contrary to what Tequila says, I don't watch Fox News, haven't in years and years.
And the feeling I get among those I talk to is one of...Not Carteresque malaise. Worse. One of "The world seriously hates us now, but there is nothing remotely practical that will change that fact." Add to that a fair helping of "We. Are. Totally. Screwed." Economically, in foreign affairs, and just generally.
It cuts across party/generational/social lines, too. Hawk, dove, Republican, Democrat, old, young...It's a constant. This broad sense of, if not "We're doomed", then one of "We'll never recover."
But it doesn't seem to have penetrated the South; it's a Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, Midwest thing (and I can't say much about farther west than that).
I can't figure out -why-, but it feels like what Ken says has something to it - not because of the weather, but for some reason I can't grasp.
What's the difference? What has the Northern part of the country seemingly in need of mass prescriptions of Prozac, while the South (and maybe the West) doesn't have the same gloomy feelings about the world?
Warmth, sunshine, and happy hunting grounds (up here, they ain't so happy anymore). That, and not quite as much of the population is crammed into tense, dreary, big cities, like most people in North-East US and Canada are.
If you're like us, you're also in need of a big, honkin bag of rock salt about now.
(From Pictures-I-Like.com)
Take a look at the original settlers of both sections and you'll get an idea.
By the way, once you get clear of the midwest folks don't tend to be as gloom and doom. Until you hit the West Coast, of course.
"On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War
This thread has moved on apace.
I have an admission to make. I opened the thread just after steve started it, got distracted and then read the initial post without looking at the title, I then wrote my post. Net result I missed the Israel bit in the title and, despite being post #6, had only seen the opening post.
My second confession is that my previous anti-American rant comes from a place of love. I have always been a fan particularly of the founding fathers and the constitution and the idea of America they embody. I think this leads me to feel more let down by the direction of more recent trends: being let down by a friend being worse than betrayal by a stranger.
On a more Utopian note what do you think would be the effect of the US reducing its military expenditure to a point where its forces were only equal to Western Europe (as a block with similar GDP and population), any savings to be diverted into an enormous hearts and minds operation. What could you do with that kind of budget?
Reduce subsidies to US producers of cotton and rice which would kick start agriculture in some of the world’s poorest countries and shame Europe and Japan into following.
A foreign aid budget that would make friends for the US all over the world.
The US provides Israel with a subsidy of about $500/cap/year that kind of money extended to the Palestinians’ along with real pressure on Israel to give up enough land to make a viable state would do more to reduce the risk of Islamic terrorism than any size of military.
Is a stockade always the best way of protecting your population? Might making friends with them ‘injuns not be a better bet in the long run?
Ron, I did not mean to
imply that all IO is PSYOP. Rather, what I thought Gian was talking about was PSYOP. As Tom says, PSYOP is A component of IO. My comment then was directed at that part tof the equation. And, I would reiterate that you can't keep on selling snake oil if it doesn't work. If it does work, then it is much easier and legitimate to sell and we call it aspirin.
Cheers
JohnT
That makes sense. Just so long as the threat is certain and the damage to be done, grave - otherwise you may end up doing more harm than good. There is certainly a place for striking an enemy - such as Al Qaida and the Taleban in Afghanistan, but it just has to be one of a number of strategic possibilities. If it were the preferred one though, or even formed the basis of a strategy based upon pre-emption, removing what are perceived to be potential threats before they become actual ones, that's looking for trouble - even if it seems to work in the short-term.
JJackson:
If the US Armed Forces were not engaged in Iraq, the military budget could not be reduced by much, if any, in order to be diverted to other projects. Contrary to much popular opinion, the US military has never really recovered from the budget cuts of the 1990's, and much of the new equipment that has been acquired in recent years, along with equipment procured much earlier, is either worn-out, is wearing out sooner than planned, or just plain needed to be replaced even before the present set of wars. And that does not take into consideration the fact that pay and benefits (and housing, etc.) for many American troops has actually been cut-back in places in recent years - for which the troops themselves suffer.
On a more Utopian note what do you think would be the effect of the US reducing its military expenditure to a point where its forces were only equal to Western Europe (as a block with similar GDP and population), any savings to be diverted into an enormous hearts and minds operation. What could you do with that kind of budget? Reduce subsidies to US producers of cotton and rice which would kick start agriculture in some of the world’s poorest countries and shame Europe and Japan into following. A foreign aid budget that would make friends for the US all over the world. The US provides Israel with a subsidy of about $500/cap/year that kind of money extended to the Palestinians’ along with real pressure on Israel to give up enough land to make a viable state would do more to reduce the risk of Islamic terrorism than any size of military. Is a stockade always the best way of protecting your population? Might making friends with them ‘injuns not be a better bet in the long run?
The size of the US defence budget is admittedly enormous, and much of its is gobbled up by bureaucracy, interminable development contracts that fail to pan out, etc., - but that is money that properly needs to be spent elsewhere within the military. Hundreds of old F-15s that still form the Air Force's background are grounded because of age-related issues, and very few F-22 are likely to ever be bought to replace them; the Army has not bought a new tank since 1992; and the Navy can't even keep many of the ships it has in service, having to decommission its minehunters built in the 80's and 90's (useful in a place like the Gulf), and not even being able to afford reaching a fleet size half that of the 600-Ship Navy that was sought in the 80's. And none of this even goes into spare parts, facilities and infrastructure, various (but vital) odds and ends, and above all, training. Many US troops do not get as much training as many of their Commonwealth counterparts. Basically, much of the US defence budget would already have been spoken for even if much of the waste was cut out.
NATO countries would have to make up for a large reduction in US military capabilities, and take on major missions with at most modest US support in lots of dangerous places - like the Persian Gulf, Afghanistan, parts of Africa, etc., - if the US military were to be brought down to EU-level proportions.
You have a point about the Israel v. Palestine subsidy issue.
As a de facto Imperial Power, the US may lack some of Britain's strategic acumen when the latter was at the top of its game, but for all its faults, some serious, it is perhaps the mildest and most constructive such Great Power we could have.
Hi Penta, for the answer to your question just listen to Bocephus explain ithttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4s0n...eature=related
Steve, you wrote:
This is where I run the risk of being booted off this board under the "America Hater" label.I'm moving toward the conclusion that our problem is NOT that people don't understand us (and hence the problem is NOT poor strategic communications or information operations). Most people do have a reasonably good understanding of us. They just increasingly don't want what we want and plain don't like what we stand for.
It's the Bush Administration and the directions he and his supporters are taking America that the rest of the world doesn't like, and I absolutely agree with the rest of the world.
America's reputation stinks, period, it stinks with your friends as well as your real enemies, but because you happen to have the worlds biggest economy, we hold our nose and still deal with you.
I will not catalogue the various sins and practices that have led to this, it would take too long, suffice to say that we have reached the point where a Brigadier General, legal advisor to Guantanamo, refuses to answer a hypothetical question from the Senate Judiciary Committee, about whether Iranians waterboarding a downed American airman would be torture.
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/12/11/...boarding-iran/
Now this situation is recoverable, lower your blood pressure and please don't switch off yet.
1. First understand why your friends are deserting you. It has a lot to do with your non-observance of the golden rule. And the "my way or the highway" attitude. People in the rest of the world have other ways of organising and doing things that are just as good, if not better, than yours. Get some humility and follow the golden rule.
2. Understand that you cannot be the world's policeman, the world won't tolerate it, nor the robber baron economic attitude that goes with it. You will simply drive people into the arms of the next rising power, the Chinese, or the Indians or the Russians. Furthermore, as has been pointed out by others, empire is expensive. You think Iraq and Afghanistan is bad? Consider the entire world rebelling against you. If you start doing as you would be done by (Step #1) you can instead build alliances and enhance security that way.
3. That gets your friends back onside, now lets talk about the real enemies.In confronting your real enemies the first thing you have to do is understand whats bugging them. In the Middle East, they don't just "hate our freedoms". There has been a battle between western civilisation and the ancient religious power structures of Islam for the hearts and minds of muslims going on for at least four generations, and until George W. Bush came along, the West was winning - and it doesn't take an anthropologist to say it.
Stop doing things that alienate Muslims. Start doing the same things we did during the cold war - and here I am going back to the Fifties. These things include a massive campaign to prove to the world that we really are the good guys and start walking the talk, just like we did with the Communists. These were massive efforts (Not just IO and Psyops) to educate, demonstrate and convince wavering populations the world over that the American/ European model of free market capitalism and secular democracy was much better at creating human happiness than Communism.
Ask yourself this; If Muslims "hate our freedoms" why the heck do you think that many of them will do almost anything (legal and illegal) to migrate to Europe or North America, or Australia? They don't want to live under an oppressive theocracy, but of course if you invade, kill, bomb, jail and and torture people they will rally to their religion and stand up for their country like people anywhere would.
Then of course there is Putin's Russia, but how do we confront his rigged elections when the last but one American Presidential Election was a mess?
How do we confront Dictators around the world over human rights when America has trashed its own record in this area?
I could go on. America has done some hateful things and until you recognise it, give the Government a kick in the backside and tell it to start living up to the reputation America HAD as a beacon of hope then nothing will change, and you will keep wondering why.
Last edited by walrus; 12-13-2007 at 11:28 PM.
Sorry
I probably came off a little strong, but as I'm sure you can tell this has been a "hot-button" fo me for a while. It's not so much that it's not understood but that as Tom pointed out it's in the Joint Manual and I'm afraid for a lot of folks thats where it stays and the context in which it's taken.
Honestly I think this last post by walrus did more to point out why and how important it is for us to have our heads around it.
It's not that we may not disagree with what others from around the world say or that they are necessarily right, but in the end their perceptions are our reality when it comes to interacting with them. I think Ken brought this out in mentioning how often we ended up in fights do to lack of others truly
knowing what we're about(generalization)
We must focus on a greater understanding of the globe and it's peoples in order for either Full scale warfare, COIN, or inbetween to be effective.
Yes a soldiers job is a soldiers job, but work smarter not harder training never hurts.
Well, yeah...
Been true of many for many years. The fact that we're unduly arrogant, a bit insensitive and a trifle xenophobic doesn't help.
. . .
True, the first four years of this Administration were a cluster of diplomatic blunders of some magnitude. In fairness, they've done much better the past three. The damage will heal but it will take time. Not as bad as it was during Viet Nam.Now this situation is recoverable, lower your blood pressure and please don't switch off yet.
1. First understand why your friends are deserting you. It has a lot to do with your non-observance of the golden rule. And the "my way or the highway" attitude. People in the rest of the world have other ways of organising and doing things that are just as good, if not better, than yours. Get some humility and follow the golden rule.
We'd really rather not be the world's policeman. Honest. Read Bush's early speeches; we disavowed the job and Rumsfeld backed him up. Then they got caught in the crossfire; all the earlier placatory efforts with ME were for naught, it appeared.2. Understand that you cannot be the world's policeman, the world won't tolerate it, nor the robber baron economic attitude that goes with it. You will simply drive people into the arms of the next rising power, the Chinese, or the Indians or the Russians. Furthermore, as has been pointed out by others, empire is expensive. You think Iraq and Afghanistan is bad? Consider the entire world rebelling against you. If you start doing as you would be done by (Step #1) you can instead build alliances and enhance security that way.
Unfortunately, the UN seems to be marginal at the job and other then the Poms and you Strynes, no one else seems to want to help much. That's been true since WW II and it's a long standing problem; everyone is just more aware of it now because we communicate better.
True -- but George is apparently an impatient guy and decided to take a calculated risk and see if he could accelerate a probable four to six generation movement into a two generation movement. Many do not agree with that. It may or may not work. Probably will but some will never forgive him for doing it -- even those that benefit if it does work. Old world's funny that way...3. That gets your friends back onside, now lets talk about the real enemies.In confronting your real enemies the first thing you have to do is understand whats bugging them. In the Middle East, they don't just "hate our freedoms". There has been a battle between western civilisation and the ancient religious power structures of Islam for the hearts and minds of muslims going on for at least four generations, and until George W. Bush came along, the West was winning - and it doesn't take an anthropologist to say it.
Different time and different antagonists. Fractures in Society and excessive ideological divides in most western nations make the world a different place. Hard to orchestrate a bunch of hostile cats -- that means we have difficulty getting our act together to do what you suggest. the other side has their own cat herding problem as well. Neither they nor we are as monolithic as was the case in the 50s.Stop doing things that alienate Muslims. Start doing the same things we did during the cold war - and here I am going back to the Fifties. These things include a massive campaign to prove to the world that we really are the good guys and start walking the talk, just like we did with the Communists. These were massive efforts (Not just IO and Psyops) to educate, demonstrate and convince wavering populations the world over that the American/ European model of free market capitalism and secular democracy was much better at creating human happiness than Communism.
The average Muslim is not the problem, it's those who pervert the religion. However, the degree of solidarity between members of the religion males disavowal of those with ill intentions difficult. There's more -- but you know all that...Ask yourself this; If Muslims "hate our freedoms" why the heck do you think that many of them will do almost anything (legal and illegal) to migrate to Europe or North America, or Australia? They don't want to live under an oppressive theocracy, but of course if you invade, kill, bomb, jail and and torture people they will rally to their religion and stand up for their country like people anywhere would.
Same way the Commonwealth confronts Mugabe's? Or Fiji's...Then of course there is Putin's Russia, but how do we confront his rigged elections when the last but one American Presidential Election was a mess?
In the eyes of some; haven't noticed any real problems in that regard to US Citizens other than the occasional odd wad. There's that xenophobia again. There also is that fragmentation and divided electorate I mentioned.How do we confront Dictators around the world over human rights when America has trashed its own record in this area?
We've been doing hateful things for over 220 years in the eyes of a great many; no news there.I could go on. America has done some hateful things and until you recognise it, give the Government a kick in the backside and tell it to start living up to the reputation America HAD as a beacon of hope then nothing will change, and you will keep wondering why.
It'll change, everything goes in cycles. Ours last either four or eight years. Current one ends mid-January 2008. Not much will change but some people will be happier, some less happy.
Most of us don't wonder why at all, by the way...
Thank you for your well thought out and measured response to my post Ken. I apologise if I've offended anyone and my post is a bit over the top.
But from where I sit, the problem and the solution appear obvious and I get hot under the collar thinking about the years and lives we've wasted barking up the wrong tree.
We built a perfectly good strategy to confront and contain Communism while we whittled away at its economic and social credentials for thirty years until that tree fell down.
We need to dust off those old strategies and do exactly the same to radical Islam in my opinion, starting with building good relations with those countries that want to be our friends.
Honestly I've spent most of my life in the midwest
and throughout that time I've seen very little really bring the spirits down.
We had floods, ice, economic stress, but we just keep on smiling. I actually think it has more to do with the fact that most southerners and midwest don't really pay too much attention to what is said by who, when, and how. We just tend to take one day at a time and pretty much expect life to suck sometimes so we're never really surprised when it does.
Late starter
I am coming in late to this thread. I just wanted to throw something out for consideration.
I had a Spanish friend tell me that Americans are too hard on ourselves. That we are the greatest power on the earth and that we better get used to it instead of crying all the time that nobody likes us. That we need to embrace the responsibility that comes with the postion as the worlds greatest power instead of trying to deny what we are.
Becuase of our roots we are uncomfortable in the roll of the last great colonial power. But until we reach utopia, there will always be the haves and the have nots.
That doesn't mean that we have to remake the world in our image, which seems to be the current purpose of our foriegn policy. I understand the argument that democracies don't fight other democracies, but not every country is ready for democracy. We labor under the delution that every person in the world wants what we have. Many people in the world just want to eat tomorrow.
Are we always going to be right, NO. We are just as feable as any other person. Will someone be able to find flaw in the way we handled a particular situation, YES. Comes with the territory. learn from your mistakes and move on. Don't whine that I am being nice and everyone should love me for it.
In a vast oversimplification, you never love the guy in charge, but if he is fair, leaves you alone as long as you play well in the playpen but slaps you (or your neighbor) if you screw up, then you will come to respect and admire him.
We could have a world of near-peer competetor militaries. Worked real well for Europe in the ninetenth and twentieth centruries. Or, we could be the Leviathan. Accept that roll. Keep the world from imploding on itself. and let the other regions of the world develop in thier own good time. Radical islam might be a threat, but it could be contained.
Once you determine this is what you are then you can start to determine what your foriegn policy ought to be.
"I can change almost anything ... but I can't change human nature."
Jon Osterman/Dr. Manhattan
---
I agree, but we need to recognize that we only slap one neighbor and never the other. The one getting slapped is going to feel different than the one never getting slapped. The one getting slapped is never going to think that we are fair. Like Steve says, it's not because they don't understand us. It's because they don't like being the only one getting slapped.
Where's Harry Turtledove when we need him...
Interesting. I read JJs comment with interest also. FWIW, I didn't take Steve's premise that way -- perhaps because I'm in broad agreement. In any event, I have no doubt many could and some would desire to take it that way as the Great American Empire, Act II. I just don't see that happening nor do I believe that most in the world, given a little reflection time would.
The British -- like most in Europe -- after all are basically Arab centric and goodness knows we've given them enough provocation to dislike us intensely so JJs reaction was unsurprising . It was also essentially fair; I could quibble a bit about events and interpretations but on balance, I understand where he's coming from.
Possibly my error as I assumed given what I know of Steve's background and his writing, it was sort of implied...
As for middle of the road, yep -- and most Americans are essentially moderates; that's why it's acceptable...
Hate is a bad word, Penta used it and I did not. However, I didn't correct his over statement to a more accurate "while a very few hate us, many more are in a state of mild dislike, distrust or envy and the majority of the world doesn't care much unless we do something that effects them personally. the bad news is that due to our size, sometimes our minor efforts create a ripple effect that can exacerbate their perception into a state of active dislike..." or words to that effect. I'm wordy enough without over editing someone else's basically correct comment.
You are, of course, correct in saying that we are not resoundingly hated -- I've said here and elsewhere that dislike of the US today is not nearly as bad as it was during and directly after Viet Nam -- and there are some American who want "them to like us" (though not many IMO, most could care less). Still, other than that, Penta's points were valid, I thought.
To you too -- do you have an alternative?
My alternative is very much like what you described, Ken. The things I would add to it all fall into the realm of balancing strategy with other elements of power including economics, political/IO, and soft power as described by Joe Nye. Finally I would also add that I firmly believe that unilateral action in any but the most dire or most immediate circumstances is laden with costs. Coalitions of interests--fleeting or semi-permanent--have their own costs but at the end of the day prove their worth. If you routienly act alone you will be alone.
Steve,
With what you said in clarification I am more at ease with the concept. As Ken is wont to say when someone uses the word "victory" in reference to briush fire wars or COIN, words are important. In this case, taging Israeli to it--yes Ken I am somewhat conceding your point--is not merely distracting. Israeli security strategy is not a rehash of TR's famous big stick. Again however I believe that discussing strategy in purely military terms is inherently limiting in the choices one can make.
Best to both of you. As usual, good discussion.
Tom
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks