« George Washington, Valley Forge, and the Reification Fallacy. (By Matthew) | Main | Iraqi forces still s--k. »

29 December 2015


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

r whitman

Investor con game article.

Babak Makkinejad

Hobbes must have been channeling Muslim Thinkers when he came to the endorsement of absolutism.

Al Ghazali (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Ghazali) was the Muslim philosopher who disputed the efforts of other philosophers in establishing Faith on sound Aristotelean Metaphysical basis. From there he proceeded to advise the Muslims to "Not Think Rationally", lest they - like when he was younger - loose their faith.

And Muslims took to his advice like Fish to Water.

Many an ayatollah in Qum would tell you that none of the proofs for the existence of God are without blemish; yet those men continue teaching and working lest the entire edifice of civilized life (among Muslims) is destroyed.

Historically, until the Iranian Revolution of 1905 and then the later one of 1979, Doctors of Religion in Islam - Shia or Sunni - had always endorsed absolutism for this very reason.


“Iraq Threatens Military Action if Turkey Refuses to Pull Out of Country”

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20151230/1032522891/iraq-threatens-turkey.html#ixzz3vrGBWxgz

I wonder if Iraq attacks Turkey, would Turkey exercise NATO’ article 5, and then what? In that case, if they did, would US and her EU allies, fight themselves, ISIS and ISF, on both side of Iraqi boarders?

This thing is getting more interesting by the day, I don’t believe in recent history anybody else has ever piled up so much of the stuff. Needs turbines and not fans.

different clue

Babak Makkinejad,

I haven't read much Heinlein. But I kind of thought Heinlein was sort of a Conservative Libertarian, with a nostalgia for what he felt a frontier type of situation would be and would feel like.


I agree about Heinlein. Starship Troopers turned my stomach with its use of terror against civilians. Of course no different from the London Blitz, bombing of Holland by Nazis, the Tokyo firestorms which were worse than the A bombs, the rape of Nanking, Danzig, etcaetra.

Looks like war in the future will be the same as today. Wars involve fighting, fighting involves killing, and most of the damage is inflicted on civilians (collaterals). Sometimes it's necessary, but it should not be the first choice but the last. Apologies to Nathan Bedford Forrest.

Charles Michael

For 30 years there were talks of fantastic oil/gaz ressources in the Aegean Sea. Alas in a disputed area between Greece and Turkey (?). During the end of the EU- Greece financial stand off, these rumors were back in full force.
Same think between Sri Lanka and India, huge promisses but no action. Civil war there lasted 28 years.
Falkland Islands recently explorations were about Nil.
We can find the same Oil/Gaz expectations today in all the China Sea.

My point is that those wars or antagonisms are not based on thirst for Oil, that the Oil narrative is either a useful tool to worsen the situation or a tentative rational for those who don't follow closely the historical situation.

We all heard last year of a Huge discovery, somewhere South of UK. After some days the recovery capacity was 3 % of the previous claim.

Chris Chuba

"I wonder if Iraq attacks Turkey, would Turkey exercise NATO’ article 5, and then what?"

Kooshy, I am not directing this at you personally but I hear this statement a lot on message boards.
When I read NATO article 5, all I see is that a NATO member can bring up a request to the other NATO members. The point is that there is still a process, article 5 isn't like a 'get out of jail for free' card in Monopoly whenever a NATO member wants to use military force.

If Turkey is attacked while IN Iraq or IN Syria, I certainly hope that any expectation that they have for NATO support based on a right to collective self defense is disappointed.

Chris Chuba

There may or may not be recoverable oil in the Golan Heights but clearly the Golan Heights had rather obvious military value prior the the knowledge of any oil reserves. There is a problem solving principle called Occam's razor that stresses using the simple explanation before going to a more elaborate one.

On Golan I'll mention what I consider hypocrisy by the U.S. We are rather sanguine about Israel's annexation of the heights and quite frankly, I don't lose sleep over it.
They are strategic, Israel has been attacked, and there is not a practical difference between an occupation that lasts forever vs an annexation. However, on the Crimea we treat that as the worst thing since Hitler's invasion of Poland. How is this different? Crimea is of vital military importance to the Russian Federation but unlike the Golan which had no Jewish population to speak of, Crimea had a native Russian population of 65%+. Both situations were born out of stress and not capricious, neither are in the same category of China's annexation of Tibet.


Chris Chuba


We are quite familiar here with Occam's Razor. You might consider using the search engine in the archives before schooling us. pl



If memory serves the enemy in Starship Troopers are a race of arachnoid aliens. pl


CC thanks, yes I knew that, it was discussed here on SST a while back. But this Syiraq thing, is getting so multi facet, that one wonders where, how and when we will see the next phase.


Concervative Libertarian?

I am hesitant about certain strains or characteristics historically on my own ground, and seem to be suspicious as far as some (? at least some) US variants are concerned. But never really tried to disentangle the positions I share from the ones that make me wonder, both now and in earlier decades.

Hmmm? I have a fast google impression that this is what you tried to get at, or at least maybe you did ;)

"In 1980 Robert Heinlein was a member of the Citizens Advisory Council on National Space Policy, chaired by Jerry Pournelle, which met at the home of SF writer Larry Niven to write space policy papers for the incoming Reagan Administration. Members included Buzz Aldrin, General Daniel Graham, rocket engineer Max Hunter, North American VP and Space Shuttle manager George Merrick, and other aerospace industry leaders. Policy recommendations from the Council included ballistic missile defense concepts which were later transformed into what was called the Strategic Defense Initiative by those who favored it, and "Star Wars" as a term of derision coined by Senator Ted Kennedy. Heinlein contributed to the Council contribution to the Reagan "Star Wars" speech of Spring 1983."

Thanks, BM, interesting hint.


Thanks MM, yes, that was the idiot, whose name I apparently don't consider worth storing on one or the other synapse.

All: Sorry, for misusing my response for adding a private line of thought. ;)

Babak Makkinejad

You might find the following novel of interest:

Auf zwei Planeten, 1897, by Kurd Lasswitz - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Planets -

Prophetic ideas in this book include geostationary space stations, space travel, airplanes, US as the Savior of Mankind (from the Martians), optical communication as well as mass murder of undesirable populations (in this case the inhabitants of Earth) through biological weapons and other means.

Chris Chuba

Thank you for the reference, I will keep those principles in mind. I figured most were familiar with Occam's razor, I was addressing the OP. I was probably being presumptuous there as well.


Just a note, Col, with Holiday Best Wishes. This page shows up in today's links at NakedCapitalism.com (NC).
Not a small thing.

The more people who read this post, particularly coming hot on the heels of the LRB article by Hersh, the better.

alba etie

Yes David Frum the Dubya speechwriter - he was the one who penned the 'axis of evil " speech .

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad