jeffrey goldberg on brent sowcroft

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/051031fa_fact2

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 14:57 (twenty years ago)

im almost tired of the recent glut of articles about the neo vs paleo-con split on the war but this is smart, gripping stuff, though a bit ironic considering the source. i didnt know sowcroft and rice were buddies either!

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 15:01 (twenty years ago)

I'll read this here when I am more coherent.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 4 November 2005 15:10 (twenty years ago)

still hungover? ;-)

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 15:10 (twenty years ago)

I have some sympathy for Scowcroft. He's an old style conservative with a dim view of human nature. I have slightly more sanguine view of human nature but the article points out how the neo-cons, many of whom are converted liberals, brought with them a sunny universalist zealotry which is sometimes pollyannna-ish in its inability to foresee pitfalls. I think the 'realpolitik' vs. wilsonianism debate is a little artiificial - I view the choices as being on a continuum - and i think foreign policy options must be considered on a case by case basis with major, long-term goals in mind, but I think that '43' and co have wasted a great asset in not picking this man's brain a bit more.

I would love to be a fly on the wall when he and Condi have dinner.

― M. White (Miguelito), Friday, 4 November 2005 15:27 (twenty years ago)

haha i seriously almost said the fly on the wall thing but i didnt wanna sound like a nerd

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 15:29 (twenty years ago)

its serious debate porn

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 15:30 (twenty years ago)

if it would give my thread more responses we could also discuss the talk of the town piece about scooter's novel & "republican erotica"

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 15:33 (twenty years ago)

still hungover? ;-)

Goddamn time change!

scooter's novel & "republican erotica"

That one Newt Gingrich novel to thread.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 4 November 2005 15:35 (twenty years ago)

Hmmm, Kissingerian realpolitik vs. neoconservative utopianism.

As I said on another thread, no matter who wins, we lose.

― rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Friday, 4 November 2005 15:40 (twenty years ago)

Kissingerian realpolitik vs. neoconservative utopianism.

How dare you say that about Ethan and I. Er, wait.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 4 November 2005 15:42 (twenty years ago)

Keith Olbermann read a little excerpt of Scooter's book last night on his show. Bizarre. Terrible writing. Fineman from Newsweek claimed to have tried to read it & been unable to finish. (I don't believe anything Fineman says, but it was funny to see how he'd figured out it was, like, totally uncool to defend Libby on this point.)

― dar1a g (daria g), Friday, 4 November 2005 15:43 (twenty years ago)

Libby has a lot to live up to as a conservative author of erotic fiction. As an article in SPY magazine pointed out in 1988, from Safire (“[She] finally came to him in the bed and shouted ‘Arragghrrorwr!’ in his ear, bit his neck, plunged her head between his legs and devoured him”) to Buckley (“I’d rather do this with you than play cards”) to Liddy (“T’sa Li froze, her lips still enclosing Rand’s glans . . .”) to Ehrlichman (“ ‘It felt like a little tongue’ ”) to O’Reilly (“Okay, Shannon Michaels, off with those pants”), extracurricular creative writing has long been an outlet for ideas that might not fly at, say, the National Prayer Breakfast. In one of Lynne Cheney’s books, a Republican vice-president dies of a heart attack while having sex with his mistress.

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 15:43 (twenty years ago)

what i read of the writing wasnt terrible at all! it reminded me of sontag's novels

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 15:47 (twenty years ago)

what i read of the writing wasnt terrible at all! it reminded me of sontag's novels

Heh. Which are, with one exception, terrible.

As for the Goldberg article....you don't have to support the Bush administration to acknowledge that Scowcroft's foreign policy (which is heavily indebted to Kissinger) has been disastrous for other countries. The coddling of the shah, the embrace of Jeanne Kirkpatrick's authoritarian vs. totalitarian dictum, ignoring the chaos in Yugoslavia, northern Iraq, Rwanda, and East Timor. The article struck me as a misguided but rather touching attempt to examine whether Scowcroftian principles have any currency post-2003.

― Alfred Soto (Alfred Soto), Friday, 4 November 2005 16:07 (twenty years ago)

Alfred OTM.

― rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Friday, 4 November 2005 16:09 (twenty years ago)

I think that kind of narrow self-interest leads to more problems than it solves, but it's sometimes good to have a nay-sayer around to point out that life and the world aren't a made for TV movie with a happy ending every time. Bush and co have have not only lied to us, they've set out wildly unrealistic policy goals, IMHO.

― M. White (Miguelito), Friday, 4 November 2005 16:16 (twenty years ago)

well yeah but i thought it was a nice change from goldberg sucking cheney's dick and justifying the war with shit he made up about saddam's atrocities, you can acknowledge the relative benefits of a ruthless, utilitarian competence in foreign policy without endorsing amoral fucks like kissinger

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 16:17 (twenty years ago)

I don't accept the premises of Scowcroft's utilitarianism, and therefore don't view him as particularly competent. Is he a more lucid advocate for his particular worldview than anyone in the current administration? Undoubtedly. Does that mean I think he was a capable manager of U.S. foreign policy during his turn at the reins? Certainly not.

― rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Friday, 4 November 2005 16:38 (twenty years ago)

i dont think he was A++ WOULD BUY FROM AGIAN incredible but "capable" seems fair enough

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 16:41 (twenty years ago)

If only because he was slightly more restrained and had a better appreciation of the stabilizing effect of international consensus, he was miles better than this administration's foreign policy woanks.

― M. White (Miguelito), Friday, 4 November 2005 16:42 (twenty years ago)

"capable" seems fair enough

As much as I want to give the old guy credit for punching at W., I'm having a hard time remembering anything that the Bush I administration did that I would categorize as a demonstration of capable foreign policy. Building a fleeting consensus around the notion that it was a bad idea for Iraq to invade a smaller, nonaggressive neighbor doesn't count.

― rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Friday, 4 November 2005 16:50 (twenty years ago)

Why not?

― M. White (Miguelito), Friday, 4 November 2005 16:51 (twenty years ago)

Well for one thing, Bush I didn't really do anything to build the consensus. Neighboring countries were either a) terrified that Saddam would do it to them, too or b) positively salivating at the prospect of invading a weakened Iraq sometime in the not-too-distant future. Under those circumstances, Scowcroft & Co. would have faced more resistance in getting everyone to agree that water is wet.

― rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Friday, 4 November 2005 16:57 (twenty years ago)

youre right, that task wouldnt take a SPECTACULAR national security advisor, maybe just a... whats the word.... CAPABLE one

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 17:00 (twenty years ago)

If by "capable" you mean "awake during the conference call," okay.

― rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Friday, 4 November 2005 17:01 (twenty years ago)

i mean look nobody is arguing hes a great guy or made gains for liberty in the world but compared to others in the same position he didnt make nearly as many fuck-ups and mostly accomplished his stated goals, webster's definition of capable if i saw it

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 17:01 (twenty years ago)

sorry when did we stop grading administration officials on a curve?

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 17:02 (twenty years ago)

another politics thread where people who essentially agree with each other grapple over the evils of imprecise wording

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 17:04 (twenty years ago)

It's more than a question of imprecise wording, in my view. Talking about Scowcroft's competence to me is akin to saying, "Gee, it's a shame that guy hit you with his car and drove off like that, but man, he sure kept his hands at 10 and 2 the whole time."

― rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Friday, 4 November 2005 17:07 (twenty years ago)

so how did sowcroft fail to protect the security of americans, as national security advisor? we've established hes an unhumanitarian kissinger crony so dont tell me shit about 'ignoring the chaos' in countries which have no noticeable impact on our own

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 17:09 (twenty years ago)

in countries which have no noticeable impact on our own

This leads me to believe it's impossible for us to have a productive conversation on this issue. The conduct of foreign policy matters precisely because we don't know when problems in other countries are going to have a noticeable impact on our own.

― rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Friday, 4 November 2005 17:12 (twenty years ago)

was he more or less capable than sandy berger? he probably has fewer convictions from federal judges

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 17:13 (twenty years ago)

how has ignoring genocide in rwanda compromised the security of america? compare it to richard clarke's accusation that condi didnt know who al qaeda was (probably bullshit but lets take his word for arguments sake)

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 17:15 (twenty years ago)

when i read the thread title, i was like, wtf does jeff goldblum know about brent scowcroft?

― my name is john. i reside in chicago. (frankE), Friday, 4 November 2005 17:17 (twenty years ago)

how has ignoring genocide in rwanda compromised the security of america?

Do we know definitively that it hasn't, or won't in the future? It took 20 years for our "ignoring" Afghanistan to blow back.

― rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Friday, 4 November 2005 17:17 (twenty years ago)

what the fuck, we didnt ignore afghanistan!! didnt you see rambo iii??!

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 17:20 (twenty years ago)

when i read the thread title, i was like, wtf does jeff goldblum know about brent scowcroft?

Scowcroft was an on-set advisor on Independence Day.*

*may not be true

― jaymc (jaymc), Friday, 4 November 2005 17:20 (twenty years ago)

did we ever learn president pullman's party in that movie? was he a clinton stand-in?

― _, Friday, 4 November 2005 17:23 (twenty years ago)

The presidental reigns of Marshall, Thompson, Pullman and Douglas were a weird time for America.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 4 November 2005 17:24 (twenty years ago)

rasheed, it's my contention that we're still largely 'ingoring' Afghanistan.

― M. White (Miguelito), Friday, 4 November 2005 17:24 (twenty years ago)

I would agree.

― rasheed wallace (rasheed wallace), Friday, 4 November 2005 17:25 (twenty years ago)

The presidental reigns of Marshall, Thompson, Pullman and Douglas were a weird time for America

Which is why I thank god alive Presidents Sheen and Davis succeeded them.

― Alfred Soto (Alfred Soto), Friday, 4 November 2005 18:43 (twenty years ago)

I think on the days when the President would be like Christ when it came to movies -- you'd see the person in profile at most.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 4 November 2005 18:46 (twenty years ago)

When it comes to war and peace, foreign policy ''realists'' from Metternich to Kissinger have been seen as cold-blooded, calculating, and amoral. But there's another realist tradition - a distinctively American one - and it's time to revive it.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2005/11/06/the_realist_persuasion/?page=full

― _, Monday, 7 November 2005 15:41 (twenty years ago)

twelve years pass...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DRCQm4gVwAAi4dB.jpg

― mookieproof, Thursday, 14 December 2017 21:01 (eight years ago)

walked into that one

― El Tomboto, Thursday, 14 December 2017 21:14 (eight years ago)

been walking into it for decades

― mookieproof, Thursday, 14 December 2017 21:35 (eight years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.