Extracts from a piece in today’s NYT
As the guerrilla war against Iraqi insurgents intensifies, American soldiers have begun wrapping entire villages in barbed wire. In selective cases, American soldiers are demolishing buildings thought to be used by Iraqi attackers. They have begun imprisoning the relatives of suspected guerrillas, in hopes of pressing the insurgents to turn themselves in. …
“If you have one of these cards, you can come and go,” coaxed Lt. Col. Nathan Sassaman, the battalion commander whose men oversee the village, about 50 miles north of Baghdad. “If you don’t have one of these cards, you can’t.” The Iraqis nodded and edged their cars through the line. Over to one side, an Iraqi man named Tariq muttered in anger. “I see no difference between us and the Palestinians,” he said. “We didn’t expect anything like this after Saddam fell.” …
Underlying the new strategy, the Americans say, is the conviction that only a tougher approach will quell the insurgency and that the new strategy must punish not only the guerrillas but also make clear to ordinary Iraqis the cost of not cooperating. “You have to understand the Arab mind,” Capt. Todd Brown, a company commander with the Fourth Infantry Division, said as he stood outside the gates of Abu Hishma. “The only thing they understand is force — force, pride and saving face.” …
“With a heavy dose of fear and violence, and a lot of money for projects, I think we can convince these people that we are here to help them,” Colonel Sassaman said.
“You have to understand the Arab mind,” Capt. Todd Brown, a company commander with the Fourth Infantry Division, said as he stood outside the gates of Abu Hishma. “The only thing they understand is force — force, pride and saving face.” …
There must be an error in the interview transcription. From the context of the story, he clearly means “the American mind.”
With a heavy dose of fear and violence…, I think we can convince these people that we are here to help them.
I want to say something about that but I cannot figure out what…
I’d like to be the first to make the “just imagine if he’d said “black” or, especially, “Jewish” instead of “Arab” - and if he were, say, French…” point.
Timeless rules of human nature: fear, honor, and interest. For Saddamites and their fellow travelers, they fear what their fellows will do to those who cooperate with the new regime, their honor is impugned by an American occupation they feel has humiliated them, and so long as they believe we can be defeated, their interest calculations wish for a return of the old in some form (not necessarily Saddam himself, but his faction).
We’re undermining that calculation. We want them to fear us more than their fellows. We want their interest calculations to be informed by information regarding their inevitable defeat so that they turn around. Unfortunately, honor is the hardest one to reset.
Seems a parallel to what the Israel forces have been doing, like it or not, in order to clamp down on terrorism (if you are pro-Israel) or to intimidate and oppress the arabs (if you are pro-Palestinian)…will force work in either case? Not sure? Is there an approach that will? Not from what I have thus far seen. Of course all countries detest an occupying force. But then Israel occupies land taken in war to defend itself; Iraq seems to need a madman dictator to slaughter their citizens in order to make them obey.
With a heavy dose of fear and violence… I think we can convince these people that we are here to help them
When did the US military turn into a savage parody of itself?
I keep resisting Vietnam metaphors, and they keep trying to prove me wrong.
Here’s a policy that has the rare virtue of being wrong from both a moral and a practical standpoint. (From a practical point of view, converting Iraq from a country where people felt neutral to us to a country where everyone hates us isn’t really a net gain.)
“We are only killing you because we want to help.”
…”War is peace.”
It works in the short term. Over the long term, the cost that you pay would not be considered sustainable (both literally and figuratatively).
I was going through Amitav Ghosh’s archive earlier today (am happily linking to them everywhere). In an article he wrote earlier this year, he made an interesting comparison of Iraq with the British use of force in India in 1857 and talked about why the same method would not work now
There must be an error in the interview transcription. From the context of the story, he clearly means ?the American mind.?
With which Kiernan shows his lovely ability to lump 300 million people into a single slop bucket. Lovely high-minded behavior. Brilliant social satire. Deep-thinking analysis at its very best. Openness, generosity, insight, cleverness. So much insight in three little lines that I am truly beside myself in awe.
The road from Geneva to Berlin. There are so many options left to try out. For instance, we could bulldoze village orchards.
Folks, our America will have its place in history. We’ll all be there implicitly, that’s how it works.
BTW I’m sorry but I cannot take seriously the arguments of anyone who uses the term “Saddamites.” I imagine you lose other readers too.
Shorter Doug: Kieran is objectively Pro-Saddam.
Shorter Kieran: All Americans are evil.
Shorter Doug: Doug is a brain dead moronic idiot who doesn’t
know what he’s talking about.
Well, my response when I read that particular statement was, “And this makes them different from the Bush administration how?”
Is that narrower application acceptable to you, Doug? If not, please provide examples of the administration’s major initiatives not motivated chiefly by pride, saving face, or the desire to display force, physical or political.
Guys, guys. Cool it a little, this ain’t LGF or Atrios’ comment-board.
I thought that Kieran was making the point that Capt. Brown’s statement was racist, and that it seemed better applicable to Capt. Brown and to other official representatives of the U.S. than to Arabs, based on the activities described. I certainly didn’t take it as a blanket condemnation of all Americans. After all, some of his best friends are… oh, never mind.
Saddam and Gomorrah, how convenient.
The difference between Iraq and South Central Los Angeles is… I forgot. Wait, there it is. Strategic interests. Whose strategy exactly isn’t ever made explicit.
Maybe we could put the whole of Mesopotamia in prison. Just build a wall all the way around it, and rename it. Add on as needed. Privatize it too.
Or maybe we should build one tiny little section of wall that loops back on itself, at some ceremonial spot of ecumenical significance, with about a yard and a half of lawn in the middle, and say everything outside of that is now a prison.
The whole world as locked-down penitentiary. Arrest everyone just in case. Security is paramount. Not to be confused with United Artists, or Sony.
Somewhat more seriously, the semantic confusion that facilitated that powder-puff outburst, the “nominative aggregate” versus the “individual member with distinct attributes” thing, that’s at the heart of a lot of the logical collapse of current moral systems hmm? Both ways. Cowards hide in the group as they act against its best interest, concealing their independent culpability behind the group history, and zealots ignore the individuals within and attack the group in retaliation for the actions of a minority.
So Wolfowitz and Rove are Americans, US style, and act in the name of America, and some backpacking neo-hippie gets spit on in the souk, for having an Oklahoman accent.
There are of course far worse examples, saturated in violence and fear, occurring daily.
Nicht bin ein cowboy, dude.
Nina, indeed it does make a difference. Matt W., I can see that interpretation as well. Though I don’t think a good way of condemning a bigoted point of view is to make another sweeping, unsupportable generalization. Certainly not in a medium where the tone of voice is unknowable.
I’m Doug and I’m going to get awfully cross about a flippant remark on a blog comments thread. Because- get some perspective here, guys- that’s the real issue, not trivia like soldiers from my country bulldozing civilian houses. Gee, I’m not even gonna mention minor stuff like that.
We’re bringing democracy to Iraq, and we’ll shoot any Iraqi who disagrees . . . compulsory freedom.
Look, I don’t ask for much—just a foreign policy that isn’t an oxymoron. Is that too much to ask?
Personally, I much prefer democratic change by UN committee.
I know the Iraqis were quite grateful to the scores of academics who were were equally outraged by the tyrannical regime that ruled for the past 30 years. I know I enjoyed reading the pages and pages dedicated to ending the Hussain regime. Almost as much as I now enjoy reading the paragraphs of outrage they write about the plight of those living under theocratic tyranny in Iran. Or those who live under a brutal dictatorship in North Korea. Oh wait, perhaps they are just created in the imagination of the evil moron Bush?
Its quite tragic that the barbaric American forces had to go and derail the previously virtuous and peaceful path to freedom in Iraq.
I wonder what sort of commentary I would be reading if the US had not sat back and ignored Rwanda. I’m sure the same group of cynical self-admiring critics would be deriding the imperialist west and their love of force until they were blue in the face.
Ok, Darin, glad to hear you’re so well versed in “academics.” Would that be journals like Foreign_Affairs, or perhaps something more like cultural critiques to be found in Modern_Language_Quarterly? Just which “Academics” are you referring to? Political Science professors, or maybe just people with higher IQs than the average house pet?
We’re dying to hear more of your priceless insight, please share.
DocG
You can define “academics” any way you choose. Is it really critical to my point? How about “a member of an institution of higher learning.”
The fact is that volume of criticism and anger coming out of the intellectual classes that is aimed toward the Bush administration’s policies pales in comparison to the outrage that was aimed toward Hussain, or toward the horrible dictatorship in North Korea, or the tragedy in Rwanda for that matter. I say that in the aggregate sense. Obviously there are those who have been consistent throughout. In my experience, however, they have been in the minority.
Yes, a broad generalization. But it was also made in the context of a brief post on a message board. I’m sorry if my failure to spend a paragraph to define my terms somehow mislead you.
Darin, here is a very simple multiple choice for you:
1. I endorse the Geneva Conventions the US signed.
2. I do not endorse the Geneva Conventions the US signed.
Go ahead and pick either one. Take as long as you want. I pick 1.
Of course I endorse the Geneva Conventions. And of course there are valid grounds for criticizing some tactics of the military in Iraq. I think all involved hope such measures are only temporary in nature. All I ask is that it is put in perspective.
What is the alternative? It is a tragically complex situation in which many of the policy choices are ones that chose between two less-than-ideal options.
There are many dying for the hope of an Iraqi democracy one day. All I ask is that we remember that before we come to make such moral judgments against them. I think reducing what is happening in Iraq to comments like “We’re bringing democracy to Iraq, and we’ll shoot any Iraqi who disagrees . . . compulsory freedom” is both dangerous and simple-minded. Ultimately, I believe it undermines any case for humanitarian intervention in the future.
irane I am
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review