Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
A terrific analysis, talos - thanks!

I read the Guardian article on the "New Grand Strategy for Nato" thingy when it first came out, then read it in pdf and hit the roof! I also got into a long indignant discussion on it with Cheryl Rofer of WhirledView over on the StrategyTalk forum: my screechings and growlings were way too messy and frothing-at-the-mouth to dare post over here but here's the gist of my conclusions:

Whole thing's the worst kind of "west-must-control-the-rest" doc., a "western" interventionist delirium containing every dubious cliché in the global hegemonist book (...)

Much of the form - at least in the pre-Grand Strategy chapters - is bland with pages and pages of what today passes as "western" thinktank standard-issue "world analysis" doublespeak, but behind the blandness the meaning that surfaces is straight from ATol's delirious Spengler: creeping islamisation of Europe along with low birthrates will reduce Europeans to helpless ageing wimps condemned to dhimmitude unless they attack-n'-invade-first all over the world... White-guys (...other than evil-Russians...) must unite under US leadership to imperial-police all those pesky beige-to-brown-to-black-guys in every corner of the globe, Europeans must provide the US with trusty Rapid Response foreign legions for mutual ethno-hegemonic profit-sharing benefit - which is bad/disgusting enough already ...but these guys are into pre-emptive nuking!

In other words, it's a scam: a slavering 2000-lb imperialist gorilla with blood-flecked eyes prancing around in a blandly professorial tweed jacket and flannel trousers... with nukes in its pockets and global larceny in its soul.

.........

P.S. Cheryl Rofer's a nuclear nonproliferation expert, she's currently making a heroic attempt to promote public and/or blogosphere debate on what a "sane US nuclear policy" ought to consist of, then stick the results to the US presidential candidates - Eurotrib contributions would be much appreciated.


"Ignoring moralities is always undesirable, but doing so systematically is really worrisome." Mohammed Khatami

by eternalcityblues (parvati_roma aaaat libero.it) on Sat Jan 26th, 2008 at 12:06:33 AM EST
couldn't-a put it better.

The difference between theory and practise in practise ...
by DeAnander (de_at_daclarke_dot_org) on Sat Jan 26th, 2008 at 02:19:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You have been so missed!  Post more often.

Our knowledge has surpassed our wisdom. -Charu Saxena.
by metavision on Sat Jan 26th, 2008 at 12:17:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
A slavering 2000-lb imperialist gorilla with blood-flecked eyes prancing around in a blandly professorial tweed jacket and flannel trousers, with nukes in its pockets and global larceny in its soul.

Priceless!

Before I read this (this article, not your response), I really thought that there was general agreement that a nuclear first strike was unthinkable, and all the talk about "all options being on the table" was just political yahoos shooting their mouths off. Even if a few demagogues preferred sounding tough to talking sense, I certainly didn't think generals would be on the wrong side of starting a nuclear war.

I guess I can at least take solace that they are retired.

Il faut se dépêcher d'agir, on a le monde à reconstruire

by dconrad (drconrad {arobase} gmail {point} com) on Sat Jan 26th, 2008 at 03:48:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series