I was on Here and Now today…
Category: Robert Farley
I’m never quite sure whether it’s appropriate to wish someone a “Happy” Martin Luther King Day; the event seems to call more for introspection than celebration. But in any case, some links:
- On saving Martin Luther King’s life in 1958.
- On Richard Sherman. I’ll probably cheering for the Seahawks, but I’m really just glad for the opportunity to revisit a Classic AFC West Rivalry.
- A very good “Ten Myths of World War I” listicle. Snow does an excellent job of identifying particularly tenacious myths.
- Definitely interested in taking a look at the Clark volume.
- Adam Lowther delivers the latest response to Grounded. Should have a rebuttal up in a couple of days.
I have another listicle over at the National Interest, this time on submarines.
As with previous “5 Greatest” lists, the answers depend on the parameters; different sets of metrics will generate different lists. Our metrics concentrate on the strategic utility of specific submarine classes, rather than solely on their technical capabilities.
· Was the submarine a cost-effective solution to a national strategic problem?
· Did the submarine compare favorably with its contemporaries?
· Was the submarine’s design innovative?
And with that, the five best submarines of all time:
Editors love listicles because they generate mountains of page views. For writers, they’re fun and remarkably easy to write. Noodle a bit about something you probably noodle about anyway, then set off 250 words for each of the five, framed by the intro and conclusion. I predict that by the year 2016, listicles will constitute 96.23% of all web traffic. Good stuff.
My hopes for the updated Maritime Strategy:
Chatter suggests that the U.S. Navy will soon release an update to the Cooperative Strategy for 21stCentury Seapower. The Cooperative Strategy envisioned the maritime commons as a space for collective action, in which productive rules of the road could lead to partnerships that could help every player win. The Cooperative Strategy made provision for “bad” actors, but at its heart sought to include and acclimate, rather than isolate.
Thus, the strategy was, in some sense, dependent on the willingness of the world’s major navies to agree on several critical areas, including the reality of U.S. maritime leadership
Such a review is particularly necessary given that it has become apparent, over the last decade, that the Air Force itself has lost interest in its nuclear arsenal; a long series of incidents, from a nuclear weapon-laden B-52 taking off from Minot to the recent set of revelations about unpreparedness and unprofessionalism amongst missile crews.
A cynic, or a recently retired Secretary of Defense, might suggest that the USAF no longer sees its nuclear assets as a serious bureaucratic bargaining chip.
And so, given that the Air Force itself no longer seems to take its nuclear responsibilities very seriously, it might behoove us all to rethink how the United States ought to approach nuclear deterrence, especially in context of a threat environment radically different than the one that existed in 1963.
And now this:
The Air Force said on Wednesday that 34 officers responsible for launching the nation’s nuclear missiles had been suspended, and their security clearances revoked, for cheating on monthly proficiency tests that assess their knowledge of how to operate the warheads.
At a news conference, Deborah Lee James, the secretary of the Air Force, said the officers, at Malmstrom Air Force Base in Montana, either knew about or took part in texting answers to the routine monthly tests.
Eleven Air Force officers — including two accused in the Malmstrom cheating scandal, as well as one other nuclear missile officer — have also been the focus of suspicion in an illegal drugs investigation, defense officials said.
Although the Air Force has been plagued in recent years by scandals, the current revelations are particularly alarming because they involve America’s nuclear arsenal, where errors could be catastrophic.
It’s difficult to maintain discipline when no one in the command believes that they’ll ever have to actually perform their central duty. The three service system isn’t the only reason why it’s difficult to engage in serious reform (the nuclear labs themselves are influential), but it’s certainly part of the problem; the allocation of resources to modernization becomes a push-pull fight between the Air Force and the Navy instead of a sensible accounting of which Triad legs are most important and most survivable.
- The strategic bombing arguments made in favor of the founding of the USAF were empirically and theoretically problematic.
- The performance of the USAF in the first half of the Cold War demonstrated serious organizational deficiencies.
- Airpower and the Air Force are not the same thing.
That may sound restrictive, but there are a universe of arguments in favor of independence that can nevertheless satisfy all three. For example, technological change has remedied the (admittedly problematic) strategic bombing theories of the interwar period; the shift of the USAF in a tactical direction after Vietnam has remedied the (admittedly significant) problems of the early Cold War; and while having an independent USAF is not the only way to maintain American airpower, it’s likely the optimal institutional constellation.
I don’t believe those arguments, but I can take them seriously.
Megan MacKenzie has a good, long post on the ethics of casual teaching contracts:
For the last few years in particular, there has been a marked increase in the number of sessional, casual, teaching-only, adjunct, fixed term, temporary job ‘opportunities’ listed and circulated in the usual IR job venues. These various titles and categories point to one reality: precarious labor is a permanent reality within academia. The trend has been quantified and well documented: in US in the last 30 years the percentage of positions held by tenured or tenure-track faculty members fell from 56.8% to 35.1%. In an excellent post in the Chronicle, Peter Conn declares “Full-time tenured and tenure-track jobs in the humanities are endangered by half a dozen trends, most of them long-term.” The trend is not new; however, as the race to the bottom with regard to casual labor hits a new low, what is missing from the discussion is (1) the ways that permanent staff reproduce/support casual labor and (2)the myths associated with the ‘opportunity’ of casual labor for PhD students and unemployed academics.
On a related point, I appreciate that the economics and politics associated with the academic job market are complex, but it does seem that unless you can conceive of a viable political means to expand opportunities for newly minted Ph.Ds, you ought hold off on increasing the size of existing programs.
A moviegoer lost his life inside a Pasco County theater Monday afternoon after a dispute over texting with a retired police officer.
According to the sheriff’s office, the dispute happened before the 1:20 showing of ‘Lone Survivor’ had even gotten underway at the Cobb CineBistro at Grove 16 complex on Wesley Grove Blvd…
Charles Cummings told FOX 13 he heard the victim say he was texting his 3-year-old daughter before Reeves pulled out a pistol.
“Their voices start going up, there seems to be a confrontation, somebody throws popcorn, then bang, he was shot,” said Cummings, who was there to celebrate his birthday. “I heard the victim say, ‘I can’t believe…,’ then he fell on us.
Also, great use of the phrase “lost;” apparently he just misplaced his life, rather than having it taken from him by an angry old man who put a bullet through his chest. I’m reminded of Brockington’s very depressing argument; “if Newtown foments change in the direction opposite to good policy, I’m not sure what can be done.”
Meet Clark, the Chicago Cubs first official mascot. He looks like a first year graduate student who’s pretty damn sure that he’s in way, way over his head. This is altogether appropriate.
On this week’s episode of Foreign Entanglements, Matt speaks with Yousef Munayyer about John Kerry’s ongoing attempts to restart the Middle East peace process.
Read this and be legitimately appalled, but also note that the writers and contributors almost certainly viewed it as a progressive contribution:
In many cases parents either overtly or subtly encouraged the feminine behavior. But when parents actively discouraged it and took other steps to enhance a male self-concept, homosexual tendencies of the feminine boys were lessened, although not necessarily reversed. Neither did professional counseling divert a tendency toward homosexuality, although it resulted in more conventional masculine behavior and enhanced the boys’ social and pyschological adjustment and comfort with being male.
The study was conducted by Dr. Richard Green, a noted sex researcher who is professor of psychiatry at the University of California, Los Angeles and director of its Program in Psychiatry, Law and Human Sexuality. Details of the findings and implications are described in Dr. Green’s new book, ”The ‘Sissy Boy Syndrome’ and the Development of Homosexuality,” to be published in February by Yale University Press.
Although the study examined extreme cases of boyhood effeminacy, Dr. Green believes the findings may have relevance to lesser degrees of feminine behavior in boys. Such boys, who may, for example, be athletically inept or prefer music to cars and trucks, often have difficulty making friends with other boys and identifying with typically male activities. Dr. Green suggested that to help the boys think of themselves as male, parents might assist them in finding boy friends who are similarly unaggressive and that the fathers might share in activities the boys enjoy, such as going to the zoo or a concert, rather than insist on taking the boys to athletic events. Counseling to guide such parents and enhance the child’s masculine self-image may also be helpful, Dr. Green said.
The study did not examine the development of homosexuality in boys whose childhoods are typically masculine. About one-third of homosexual men recall such masculine boyhoods. Nor does the study suggest that all boys with the sissy-boy syndrome are destined for homosexuality. Indeed, one-fourth of the extremely feminine boys followed to maturity developed as heterosexuals.
The “athletically inept or prefer music to cars and trucks” line inevitably reminded me of this:
I’m digging this listicle game:
And thus the difference between a great fighter and a terrible fighter can be remarkably small.As with the previous list, the critical work is in determining the criteria. Fighters are national strategic assets, and must be evaluated as such:
- Did this aircraft fail at the tactical tasks that it was given? Did it perform poorly against its direct contemporaries?
- Did the fighter show up, or was it in the hangar when it was needed? Was it more of a danger to its pilots than to enemy fighters?
- Did it represent a misappropriation of national assets?
So what are the worst fighter aircraft of all time? For these purposes, we’ll be concentrating on fighters that enjoyed production runs of 500 or more aircraft (listed in parentheses); curiosities such as the XF-84H “Thunderscreech” need not apply.