Bob,

while I've not yet red your book, although most likely some previous articles you may have contributed to, I think it's great of you to present your work here - and at other places.

That some commentators have embarrased themselves should hopefully not be your lasting impression. Your work ought to be judged as for what it is, not for what it's not. The grand analysis can not be successful until the detailed examinations, like the one you've attempted to, are done.

The big question for me, at least, is why the German assessment of this source's credibility wasn't given more weight in the processing by American agencies. I will read through what you've written once again - maybe I'll find an answer.

/Tuomas

Posted at October 26, 2007 10:06 AM in response to Some final thoughts

Domestically, it may be perceived as Bush's war, but internationally that train left long ago. It is and will remain the America's war. Supported by a substantial, influential and important share of the opposition in Congress and by most of the national mass media.

/Tuomas

Posted at February 26, 2007 1:40 AM in response to Opposite World

My work will be unusually demanding the next week or so, why I'll have to limit my commenting to:

1. I'm very grateful for your reference to Virginia and New Jersey. Beside being important as such, I must admit that it is of particular value also for me personally/professionally.
:-)
Thank you.

2. I've had a lot of discussions with Danes in the last days, after the expected announcement of troop withdrawal from Iraq. The ones I've met send their regards, so to say, that they (the Danish nation) didn't support Bush, they've only supported America and The Western World ...and its survival as a unity. And now many start to fear that no-one appreciated their, the Danes', support.

Somehow, I think Democrats in general advantageously may ponder such aspects of international relations.

/Tuomas

Posted at February 26, 2007 1:14 AM in response to Sad State of Italian Politics

It may also be important to ponder that the wish to get the holy places of Islam cleansed from infidels is widely shared, that what often is labeled as al-Qaeda ideology, extremist views or terrorist demands to a certain extent is shared by mainstream Arabs (and also mainstream Muslims around the world). The connection to generic anti-imperialism currents also oughtn't be underestimated.

The way the occupation of Iraq has been (mis-) handled, it's not surprising if the locals there want all and every foreigner to disappear. That, however, doesn't relieve the occupation forces of responsibility for the security of the civilians. Also if they leave, the blame for detoriating security will rightfully fall on the former occupants. It's their duty to ensure intensely promote stabile conditions and security.

/Tuomas

Posted at February 25, 2007 12:54 AM in response to Opposite World

In some parts of Europe, there is fairly broad consensus that immigrant currents from Africa (or possibly soon also from the Mideast) is a substantial threat that maybe best is seen as a kind of security threat.

In other parts of Europe, the eyes are directed towards Russia and their expected revanchism and reignited imperial aspirations.

In most parts of Europe, Climate Change is impossible not to fear being the most challenging threat against our common security on the Earth.

This boils down to a rather different approach than what's dominant in the Americas: Military power is only one of many important tools to prevent and preempt these dangers.

/Tuomas

Posted at February 25, 2007 12:09 AM in response to Sad State of Italian Politics

A difference, though, is that these weren't elected
- and were often not particularly popular around Europe, if you get my drift.

/Tuomas

Posted at February 24, 2007 11:59 PM in response to Why Are We So Lousy at Foreign Policy?

Having family members who are in touch with American (and other) diplomats weekly or sometimes daily, I do not for a second believe that American diplomats should be less skilled than other nations'.

Unfortunately with one-and-a-half exception:
The United States appears to more than most other governments be using special envoys and other missions that leave the official diplomatic representatives in the dark. That is a bad habit favored by Stalin and Hitler. The Washington government ought to know better.

Secondly, the heads of embassies, the very ambassadors, are frequently appointed due to other merits than their skill in diplomacy. This is not unique for the U.S., but for a nation that heavily interacts with foreign governments and electorates it has many times proven disastrous.

But, these are exceptions. Much of the real work at embassies is done by career diplomats, and they are no less skilled if they are American than if they are from other parts of the Western World.

/Tuomas

Posted at February 24, 2007 11:53 PM in response to Why Are We So Lousy at Foreign Policy?

"Europe" do not hate America, neither as a nation nor as anything else.

No research of scientifical value published in the last half of a century shows anything halfways in that direction.

There may, however, be a loss of feeling of unity with regard to values that for much of the 20th century were believed to be shared, a loss that has been enhanced by anti-European remarks by the American diplomatic corps, its top official the Secretary of the State Department, and plenty of mass media remarks.

...and, besides, it's nothing wrong with paying taxes to an oppressive regime if that may save your life. Paying taxes doesn't make you more or less responsible for that government's atrocities. However, the United States are held to be a democracy, and hence the voters' degree of responsibility is different by a couple of magnitudes, or so.

My personal judgement (but this is strictly that, my personal stand!) is that the relative lack of political opposition against the core of U.S. behavior on the diplomatic stage, and in the world at large, has caused a lot more of disappointment and despair among nations that are the first candidates to feel aligned with America than the actual atrocities in Latin America, Afghanistan or on the Arabian Peninsula.

Thus America as a nation appears to stand united behind its government when it misbehaves around the world. The political opposition appears to represent marginal adjustments when qualitative changes would be what allied democratic nations are looking for.

/Tuomas

Posted at February 24, 2007 11:30 PM in response to Sad State of Italian Politics

However, it may be discussed whether it's a sign of the democracy's health when political campaigns are commonly understood as marketing enterprises.

/Tuomas

Posted at February 24, 2007 11:15 PM in response to Final thoughts

It's nothing wrong with your knowledge of history, as the experienced and knowledgeable individual you are. But since the U.S. aren't ruled by an elitist buraucracy advicing an enlightened despot, it matters a lot if the electorate is fed propaganda that is about as trustworthy and educating as the Soviet Union's and the Third Reich's. In theory, the common people is admittedly allowed to search for information that may be contradicting the governmental narrative, but what difference does it make when there are no authorities representing the alternative perception of reality. People, ordinary people in particular, follow their authoritative leaders.

One difference could be, though, that the individuals in the U.S. have a great deal more of a personal responsibility for what's done (in their name) by their government than had the subjects of different politburos.

/Tuomas

Posted at February 24, 2007 10:13 PM in response to Sad State of Italian Politics