Chaitanya Jyothi Museum Opening, 2000
RAMANAM
In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.
Countrymen,
ORBIS NON SUFFICIT
SOLUS DEUS SUFFICIT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUB3zLtPcgI
Counselor Paul Mirengoff today commits signature hand-wringing as a post titled Trump’s Dilemma. As is often the case, creative response occurred:
David R. Graham commented
This reasoning ricochets about endlessly under the strategic question of US interests in the region altogether. What is the point of any USA activity in the region? That Q has not been answered or even asked, so far as I can see, by anyone bearing high national responsibility in D.C. or elsewhere. The reasoning here avoids it altogether and is thus heat without purpose or issue.
And this . . . using military force is not the same thing as going to war. . . I freely confess, before God and Humanity, utterly subdues my patience.
dankleitman to David R. Graham
Preventing a fanatical and aggressive state obtain nuclear weapons and means of delivery that can threaten all of Europe and the Middle East seems like a goal worth pursuing. You think not?
David R. Graham to dankleitman
False premise. What USA interests are in Europe and MENA? Answer in thorough detail. And, have you signed up to carry a firearm in a combat formation? Has your son or daughter? Make it personal or you are spouting only.
mrdoug1 to David R. Graham
I agree with that statement, while recognizing there can be overlap and that the former can lead to the latter. So, e.g., a single cruise strike at an Iranian base would be military force, but may not mean going to war. What is so hard do [sic] understand about that?
David R. Graham to mrdoug1
Biff your neighbor and, when the police arrive, tell them it wasn’t a biff biff.
SigridInger commented
At West Point, one learns that there are four major elements of power to influence enemies, and military force is only one of them. The others are economics, politics, & information.
So, there are lots of possible tools in Prez Trump’s toolkit, yet too many people instantly go to punch them in the nose. No, I’m not thinking of Mr. Bolton, but the dunderhead Max Boot — it takes all kinds. While the Left will take delight if we should use military force, so they can cry[,] He got us into war!, Prez Trump [is] not ever going to listen to MB.
I, for one, am delighted to know that the president is judicious & measured. What is the rush? He excels at shaking the box & comes up with all sorts of unexpected ways to approach things. I trust that time will show that he handles this situation with equanimity.
Just as Israel has been reaching out to the Iranian people, rather than the mad mullahs, Prez Trump is doing the same — I expect that we will soon be having productive talks with the regime. The Iran problem won’t be one before very long, and not one of our soldiers will give their lives to slake Max’s fragile ego.
David R. Graham to SigridInger
Excellent! Thank you! Great to hear cool sense from Uncle Sam’s Rockbound Highland Home For … Soldiers!
The Mullahs, not Iranians per se, are the bad guys. POTUS Trump today hit the bullseye with a comprehensive Executive Order addressing those bad guys.
As you say, war-fighting is only one asset of statecraft. I regard information operations as tools inside each of three primal assets of statecraft: war-fighting, finance, and diplomatics. But that aside, your point that POTUS Trump has plenty of asset other than boomies to hurl at the Mullahs is the truth, apparently now set to its purpose of freedom.
FWIW: I see no US political support — i.e., the general electorate — for US full-spectrum, multi-domain warfare in Iran. Nor I think should there be. POTUS’ instincts are correct. There is, IMO, one place and circumstance where there would be US political support — in the general electorate — for US full-spectrum, multi-domain warfare: joint operations with Mexico to hose the cartels. That, among other consequences, would hit hard the Iranian Mullahs and their proxies as well as a casting call of Salafis, each and all of whom live largely from trafficking drugs, rare commodities, and persons.
But anything like that would have to be joint operations, with Mexico, for it to be politically acceptable to the USA electorate. They would be delighted to do it, but not on their own. I wonder who more supports/protects the cartels, Mexican Spanish or Mexican Indians?
Βασιλεία του Θεού
Kingdom of God
Update 1: U.S. Calls For A ‘Global Coalition’ Against Iran
Update 2: It would be possible and fairly easy to refute Trita Parsi on his own thesis that ME is about strategic matters rather than ideological ones. He wants to insinuate that the mullah’s strategic interests are misunderstood, benign, and do not conflict with USA’s (… Iran’s continued difficulties in translating its strength to regional acceptance … is a gorgeous dissembling).
Had USA a grand national strategic goal matched to her actual interests in the ME, Parsi’s thesis could be taken apart point-by-point.
But USA has no grand national strategic goal matched to her actual interests anywhere in MENA. The nearest such is POTUS Trump’s aversion to endless wars around the planet. But that is not a grand national strategic goal, much less one that comprehensively reflects actual USA interests.
The last strategic statement POTUS Trump’s administration produced was Mattis/Tillerson/USA foreign policy establishment (aka massed morons) boilerplate dating to the 1940s. Worse than worthless. With friends like the USA foreign policy establishment, who needs enemies?
The needed work actually has been done, however, even circulated, just not well-ruminated upon, yet.
AUM NAMAH SHIVAYA
