|
 |
Sunday, April 25, 2004 |
 Tonight on NPR David Halberstam gave a talk about Iraq (There isn't a link to the show, but it is worth looking into if they post it later). He said something tonight that was a little disturbing. Here is my paraphrasing of his much more eloquent presentation:
In Vietnam, our enemy was essentially a nationalist movement. When we left, the victors focused their efforts on running their newly won country. In Iraq it is different. It's worse. Islam is aflame. By going into Iraq, we have turned ourselves into the lightning rod for everything that is wrong in the Middle East. The focus is on us, reinforced in real-time by global non-western media. At some point in the near future, we will leave Iraq. However it won't end there like Vietnam. This time, they will follow us back.
10:56:44 PM 
|
|
The return of mercenaries (real trigger-pullers and not outsourced logistics) to great power politics this last month poses a big, big picture question (free thinking here). Typically, mercenaries -- who were used for almost all wars prior to the 1700's -- appear in large numbers during periods of great transition (we must be seeing that now, but what is the transition?). They were also heavily used to build up the nation-state system we enjoy today. What does it mean if the greatest power in the world -- by several orders of magnitude -- cannot field enough military force to effectively occupy a relatively small nation?
Here is a question I am trying to answer: is a market-based military solution an effective way to fight terrorism globally?
What is interesting is that based on reports I hear, most of the senior staff at the DoD -- which means it is probably true for the White House too -- doesn't have a clue about what is going on in Iraq in regards to mercenaries. Many don't believe they are even there.
8:06:36 PM
|
|
How to analyze covert networks in the face of incomplete information. Read it here.
2:29:05 PM
|
|
© Copyright 2004 John Robb.
|
|
|
