Redrawing the Map
War is a series of adaptations. Our military will not tell you about the changes they have made. Why give the enemy hints? OTOH you can start looking for the dogs that are not barking, and listen to the dogs that are barking, then make reasonable guesses.
The siege of Iran and Hamas are not in doubt. Hamas even calls it a siege. So we know that is on. We also know that despite the capability of destroying Iranian military forces, we do not wish to do so in a way that forces us to occupy the country.
Israel's forray into Lebonon is the prototype. Bloody nose the bastards and go home. Rinse repeat. Strengthen the weak side, weaken the strong side.
I think the new rule is: better to face warlords than warring nations. So the strategy is to create internal dissention (armed if possible) for our enemies.
Fatath/Hamas again is the prototype. A particularly good example of that is a Hamas operative grenading a demonstration in Gaza.
In effect we are redrawing the map the British made. They turned tribes into nations. We are turning nations into tribes.
Update: 02 Oct. '06 1958z
Eteraz has a more detailed look at the question and a map.
Winds of Change is discussing the map and what happened to liberals.
Posts
11 comments:
> They turned tribes into nations. We are
> turning nations into tribes.
that's insightfull, but also raises a lot of questions. Particularly, it reads as a divide and conquer strategy, which would leave us vulnerable to charges of imperialism. Maybe it could be described, instead, as a deconstruction - undoing the damage of british imperialism in order to create fresh opportunities. The Arabs have to run the ball on their own from there.
I agree about undoing British Imperialism.
I kind of implied it in the phrase I used.
Explicit it is a good talking point.
I also see it as a divide and conquer strategy. Except we are smart enough now to skip the conquer part.
[BEG]
Taking a page from the Liberal, Kumbaya play book? Helping them to "cherish (their own) diversity"?
Phillep,
What does [BEG] refer to?
see:
and
armed forced journal article
That's a cute phrase, but that's as far as it goes...
regarding the map ...
first, it's amazing how much fear there is. Rice says something about "a new middle east" and the hair on a few hundred million peoples arms stands up on end.
we obviously have tightened the screws on a lot of societies and the fallout from that is visible.
For tribal identity to arise as a solution to the 'problem' we've posed is natural. But how will they respond when it doesn't get them anywhere. I'd like to see them abandon it like an old prom dress that no longer looks so flattering. Lebanon is an important test in that regard.
Whether or not they pass that test, I fail to see the benefit to us in setting them against each other, except insofar as it buys time. Otherwise, how does it help us?
I personally don't make too much of this map, even though it's the first one of its kind I've seen that wasn't created by some palestinian post-doc. It's shocking, and very educational, but I think it serves more to show what phase of the conflict we're in than it's ultimate end.
The reaction to the map, however, is very interesting.
- from the Eteraz post
> "What I don’t believe in is that we should
> — accidentally or willingly — hand
> reform over to Western Governments.
> They will either engage in straight
> up re-structuring, occupation, or at
> best, make stupid gaffes as quoting
> 14th century Byzantines with an axe to
> grind. We call it “Muslim Reform”
> for a reason."
This is a good sentiment - indignation and calling for muslims to take the lead in their own reform - but I can't escape the feeling that it's all a night at the opera to these muslim moderates, and that they don't fully grasp that while talking about reform is nice, if they don't get on with it, it really is possible to lose the opportunity.
Shahar,
Setting them against each other does at least two things.
1. Buys time as you suggest.
2. Reduces their power
They are faced with local immediate problems. The far away great satan becomes a problem to be dealt with later.
What Eteraz doesn't get is that Israel's first Lebanon excursion and Gaza and Iraq show that occupation is worthless.
It is going to be jab and run. Guerilla tactics with divisions. Infrastructure - esp. electricity - is going to be reduced. It is difficult to run a country without enough electricity. Iraq is a prime example.
Where does it lead in the long run? I don't know. I'm going to have to see more events before I venture a guess.
> difficult to run a country without
> enough electricity
I can think of a lot of ways to disrupt our lives here that the terrorists seem uninterested in. For years I've wondered why.
shahar,
I have often wondered that too.
There are lots of easy to access vulnerabilities.
It means either:
1. They are not that smart: doubtful
2. The lack the infrastructure in tthe USA to carry it off.
> 2. The lack the infrastructure in
> the USA to carry it off.
I can believe that. in spite of the A.N.S.W.E.R. coalition and Michael Moore's best efforts to build a community of abettors.
so that's good. it seems we did good.
Post a Comment