Would love to see a full album collaboration between Shires and Isbell.
Category: Robert Farley
Drezner shows how it’s done:
Third, the conference wasn’t an antiwar event, but rather an effort to expand the foreign policy conversation beyond the set of strategies proffered by, well, hawks such as Michael Goldfarb. I suppose Goldfarb’s relentlessly pro-war, pro-McCarthyite beliefs could lead him to believe that anyone who disagrees with him must be antiwar, but given that I spoke about the utility of military deterrence during my panel and didn’t get roundly booed, I suspect this is an exaggeration as well. Indeed, there was nary a pacifist at the conference.
In later tweets, Goldfarb doubled down on his claim that Lind was a Holocaust denier despite his reporter’s documentation stating otherwise. Which leads to a few questions: Was Goldfarb simply too lazy to read Goodman’s story/read through to her source material/care about the actual facts, or did he knowingly lie in an effort to smear Duss and me? Based onmy prior reading of Goldfarb’s work, as well as other reporting about his techniques, I strongly suspect it’s the former. Indeed, it is possible that Goldfarb is the exemplar for Harry Frankfurt’s thesis that there is, in fact, something worse than lying — there’s simply not caring all that much about the truth one way or the other. So long as Goldfarb can get someone he dislikes within the orbit of a despicable statement, he can wave the banner of “Mission Accomplished” in successfully besmirching his target. This is part and parcel of the conservative movement’s comparative advantage in trolling.
This week’s listicle looks at some of the more impressive systems still fielded by the Russian military:
The technologies of war developed since the end of the Cold War (and indeed, in the last decade of the Cold War) remain untested in high intensity combat against sophisticated, resourceful opponents. The NATO alliance (and its most powerful members, in non-alliance conflicts) have soundly beaten foes with aging air defense systems, non-existent air forces, and trivial offensive capabilities.
It remains to be seen, however, how effectively NATO would fight against a determined, well-trained opponent with relatively modern technology.
My latest at the Diplomat thinks through some of the implications of cruise missile diffusion in Southeast Asia:
Vietnam already has multiple platforms available for the deployment of cruise missiles. Su-30MKs can launch a variety of cruise missiles, as can the Kilo-class submarines recently acquired from Russia. Vietnam could also employ land based cruise missiles, and launch cruise missiles from its Russian-built frigates. Moreover, Vietnam could potentially acquire an arsenal of sophisticated cruise missiles from India, Russia, Europe, or the United States. The Philippines has fewer resources to draw upon, but could embark on a similar buildup.
Some Wednesday morning links:
- Gary Kasparov on computers in chess.
- There is no way in which US efforts to rebuild the Iraqi Air Force have avoided catastrophic failure.
- There’s a big, and instructive, difference between how the Army approaches helicopter names and how the Washington professional football team approaches its trademark.
- Yasir Abbas and Dan Trombly look inside the collapse of the Iraqi Army’s Second Division.
- Brett Holman lists some of the most important works on classical airpower theory.
- What China still wants from Russia in terms of arms transfers.
My latest at WiB examines the impact of climate change on Naval Station Norfolk:
What if the U.S. Navy’s main base in Norfolk, Virginia sinks? It could happen. And it’s not an isolated problem, as climate change alters coastlines all over the world.
A report from the American Security Project identifies Naval Station Norfolk as America’s fifth most endangered military base. The report also lists Eglin in Florida, Diego Garcia, Bahrain and Guam as being particularly vulnerable to climate change.
I have a new listicle at the National Interest on abortive Soviet wonder weapons:
For nearly seven decades, the defense-industrial complex of the Soviet Union went toe-to-toe with the best firms that the West had to offer. In some cases, it surprised the West with cheap, innovative, effective systems. In others, it could barely manage to put together aircraft that could remain in the air, and ships that could stay at sea.
No single weapon could have saved the Soviet Union, but several might have shifted the contours of its collapse. The relationship between technology and the “human” elements of war, including doctrine and organization, is complex. Decisions about isolated systems can have far reaching implications for how a nation defends itself.
This is a truly remarkable graphic on Commonwealth deaths in the Great War. I remember wandering the Pioneer Cemetery in Eugene, just off the University of Oregon campus, and occasionally finding a “Died in France” headstone, with a 1917 or 1918 date. The linked graphic serves to remind that most of those who died in France remain there.
100 years ago today, Gavrilo Princip (a member of a Serbian terrorist organization) shot and killed the Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the thrones of Austria-Hungary. Princip also killed the Archduke’s wife, Sophie.
After his arrest (which was, according to onlookers, brutal), Gavrilo Princip and his co-conspirators were given a trial in a civilian court, with access to defense counsel. The trial began less than four months after the assassination, and lasted two weeks. As he was a minor (just short of 20) at the time of the assassination, Princip was sentenced to the maximum allowable punishment, 20 years at hard labor. Five of his older co-conspirators were sentenced to death, with three of the five eventually executed by hanging.
Reputedly, the conspirators were subjected to solitary confinement once per year, on June 28. Princip himself contracted tuberculosis in prison, and died in April 1918.
Marking the eve of the centennial of the beginning of World War I in their own way, Bosnian Serbs on Friday unveiled a monument in their part of Sarajevo to the man who ignited the war by assassinating the Austro-Hungarian crown prince on June 28, 1914.
Kinda making Christopher Clark’s “It’s mostly the Serbs fault” point for him…
Latest at the Diplomat involves a brief tour of the fleets of Latin America:
Nevertheless, Latin American navies face the same problems as many other global navies: protection of legitimate commerce, management of drug and human trafficking, and even occasional piracy. Were U.S. naval hegemony to wane, the Latin American navies might have to take up a greater part of the maritime burden. Some signs suggest that the Pacific coast navies have become increasingly integrated into the Pacific maritime system. Chile, Colombia, Peru, and Mexico participated in the 2012 RIMPAC exercises, and each of the four is expected to participate again in 2014.
Lastly, ham-headed Sean Hannity asks her if she is going to make good on her threat to go third party with the Tea Party which is apparently a wholly owned subsidiary of Granny Grifter Bump-It Wholesaling Enterprises , LLC:
“Well if Republicans are going to act like Democrats, then what’s the use in getting all gung-ho about getting more Republicans in there? We need people who understand the beauty of…. the value of … allowing free market to thrive. Otherwise our country is going to be continued to be over-regulated, driving industry away, driving jobs away. We’re going to be a bankrupt, fundamentally transformed country unless those who know what they’re doing, and aren’t going along just to get along with those in power, it being today the Democrats. That does no good. So yeah if Republicans aren’t going to stand strong on the planks in our platform then it does no good to get all enthused about them anymore.”
I, for one, strongly believe in the political efficacy of third party movements, and heartily encourage Mrs. Palin to pursue this opportunity to transform the very structure of American politics.