The "National Journal" has a number of "by invitation" blogs for supposed experts on various topics. This one deals with national security issues. I have been asked to comment there and will do so starting today. I will include links in SST to their day's business as appropriate. pl
Colonel,
I worry just how much 'influence' that Israel firsters/AIPAC stooges COS Emanuel and Senior Adviser Axelrod as 'gatekeepers' will have on Obama ordering a U.S. 'assist' to a dumber-n-dirt unwarranted/unnecessary Israeli first strike against Iran.
Israel govt. nutcases have been thumping their Iran war tinpans as hard as they can, hoping to 'goad' the U.S. into doing their 'dirty work' for them.
Posted by: J | 08 December 2008 at 07:53 PM
Col. Lang:
Glad to hear it. I'm pleased that your thinking will have a wider print audience.
I wonder to what extent this means that the vertical smokestacking that had been a notorious part of the communication process within the Bush administration is being taken down in anticipation of the incoming Obama administration's interest in a more horizontal approach?
Posted by: alnval | 09 December 2008 at 06:54 AM
alnval
I suspect that the NJ did ths on their own. What I have seen so far of the comments there is not encouraging. Bloviation and pomposity reigns. pl
Posted by: Patrick Lang | 09 December 2008 at 11:10 AM
Colonel:
What I have seen so far of the comments there is not encouraging. Bloviation and pomposity reigns.
There are some nuggets of wisdom there, scattered among the long-winded collections of muddled metaphor and self-promotion. As in most arenas of thought, quality varies widely.
I did enoy your 11:19 am post. Brevity and authority are such a powerful combination.
Posted by: Cieran | 09 December 2008 at 11:43 AM
'Bloviation and pomposity reigns'
That seems a fair summary
Posted by: Andrew | 09 December 2008 at 12:24 PM
This is the wrong model. Politico does it too-- get a number of experts and recognizable names to comment on the question du jour, usually in a hundred words or less.
It's like baseball cards for policy wonks! I even think you look cool in your shades!
(LOL good job taking them to task with "When manifesto and CV posting ends here...") Don't waste too much time there. Sic Semper Tyrannis is actually useful and needs your time and focus.
Otherwise, congratulations! I hope it's a paid gig!
Posted by: Ormolov | 09 December 2008 at 12:30 PM
When Biden speculated that president-elect Obama would face a major international crisis within 6 months, most people -- probably including the loquacious Biden himself -- assumed such a crisis would involve a terrorist attack by jihadists. Maybe so. But evidence warrants at least a consideration of the possibility of a pre-emptive attack by Israel against Iran.
Such a desire appears to spring deep from within the Likud mindset and certainly not from those who follow the way of Buber. And the Jabotinsky-Likud intent has long manifested itself within the USG. During the Bush administration, it was the Wurmser-Cheney option. As other bloggers reported, evidence suggests that Wurmser and Cheney desired a limited strike against Iran, either by the US or, more likely, Israel. This limited strike would lead to increased attacks against US personnel in Iraq, resulting in a massive US strike against Iran. And then a clash of civilizations -- Hagee’s greatest joy.
But if you follow that line of thinking to its logical conclusions, then you are left with the most unsettling questions. I just offer one. What about those US soldiers in Iraq who are suppose to maintain and preserve the supply routes from Kuwait to Baghdad?
One should continue to assume that this intent of a "limited strike still motivates some. No evidence suggests otherwise. To the contrary, all evidence supports this assumption.
So what exactly is meant by a limited strike? In my opinion, it would certainly behoove all the experts to review a particular US government document that arose during the Vietnam War era, titled “Tactical Nuclear Weapons in Southeast Asia”. It was declassified in approximately 2002 due to a FOIA request by the Nautilus Institute. Here is just one quote with a recommended link:
“The use of TNW in Southeast Asia is likely to result in greatly increased long-term risk of nuclear guerrilla operations in other parts of the world. U.S. security would be gravely endangered if the use of TNW by guerrilla forces should become widespread”.
http://tinyurl.com/56zajl
So once again, more evidence indicates a type of disconnect between certain policy makers and the those who rely on the US military experience, and at least some of its traditions, that wove its way through Vietnam War. So a life long civilian such as myself is left to ask, why have so many experts brushed aside the hard earned lessons learned from the Vietnam War? And while we are at it, why did a particular expert within the Pentagon call General Zinni a traitor back before Shock and Awe?
Posted by: Sidney O. Smith III | 09 December 2008 at 01:32 PM
"Bloviation and pomposity reigns."
"Invitation-only" blogs by design tend not to engender the fur-flying free-for-all that blogging has as its raison d'etre.
Posted by: Mad Dogs | 09 December 2008 at 02:09 PM
What I have heard from and about Rahm and Axlerod is so far reasonable. They are no Joe Lieberman or Colemans.
Posted by: Will | 09 December 2008 at 02:49 PM
Great to see a little more attention being paid -- but, at the risk of bastinado followed by defenestration or, worse, a Vesuvian riposte, esteemed Colonel, could you be (consciously?) reflecting Garry Trudeau's Duke in your portrait/avatar?
Or was/is Duke echoing you??
"Duke ran for the White House after a short stretch as a key advisor to Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura. His campaign, headquartered in a motel in Coon Rapids, Minnesota, was a resounding failure, despite corporate sponsorships by heavy hitters Lipton Tea and Absolut Vodka. (Through the magic of motion capture technology, Duke was able to announce his candidacy in the real world on Larry King Live.) A successful business trafficking in stem cells was followed by a lucrative involvement in the messy fallout from the Enron scandal. As conflict with Iraq loomed, Duke made a return to government work, taking up a post as Viceroy-in-Waiting.
"During the U.S. occupation of Iraq, Duke installed himself as mayor of the (fictional) Iraqi city of Al Amok. In late September 2005, Duke escaped Iraq and relocated to New Orleans to profit from the reconstruction efforts after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. After years of verbal abuse and neglect - with the 'final straw' being that she was living in a lifeboat while Duke occupied a first-class suite - Honey finally left Duke. As Duke interviewed new candidates for the position of love-slave and aide-de-camp, none of whom lasted more than a few hours, Honey partied on a Mardi Gras float...
"Duke spent the period from late 2005 to late 2006 as a high-powered K Street lobbyist under the direction of his son Earl. He was not aware of the fact, since he was also comatose during that period (Earl conjectures this had something to do with losing Honey; Duke denies it). Earl used Duke's knowledge of indigenous people to secure lucrative contracts with Native American tribes. Upon Duke's awakening he and Earl must renegotiate the corridors of power under the new Democratic Congress. Recently there have been signs that Duke is having considerable success, finding a niche as a lobbyist for the repressive Middle Eastern regime of 'Trff Bmklfrpzz, President-for-Life of Greater Berzerkistan,' strategically located between Iran and Russia... He is currently trying to deal with the problem of the Berzerkistan Olympic Team defecting in the run-up to the games, recruiting a team of ringers from athletes who didn't make the final cut for their own country's team and swearing them in as citizens of Berzerkistan. It appears that he could be heading for success in this effort, as his longtime sidekick and aide Honey Huan has reappeared on the scene, working for the Credentials Department at the Olympics".
Nuthin' wrong with any of this and I'm sure the Langistas will club together for the cigarette holder (if we can't tap into the Lipton/Absolut $$$).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncle_Duke
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raoul_Duke
(And "From Coon Rapids to Al Amok" as a title has a certain je ne sais quoi...)
Anyway, if the NJ commentariat is infested with bloviation and pomposity, a gonzo response may be by far the best. Mean-spirited, surreal ridicule has its place.
I hope you and all your readers (which clearly includes your resident Middle East expert) have joyous and glorious Christmases/similar festivities/2009s.
Posted by: pbrownlee | 09 December 2008 at 04:05 PM
Congratulations Sir. You're in good company there.
Posted by: confusedponderer | 10 December 2008 at 04:18 AM