Flit

PUTS MADISON AND JEFFERSON IN

PUTS MADISON AND JEFFERSON IN A WHOLE NEW LIGHT, REALLY

"The relative influence of riches on politics was far higher in 1789, when the communications media of the day, pamphlet printing and pubic lecturing, strongly favored the well-to-do." -- Gregg Easterbrook, in the no-doubt-soon-to-be-corrected TNR Online, today.

CONJUNCTIONS ALWAYS MESS ME UP,

CONJUNCTIONS ALWAYS MESS ME UP, TOO

"The Geneva Convention is deliberately constructed to be tit-for-tat. It says explicitly that a nation is obligated to follow the convention only if the other nation is also a signatory and is also following it." -- Stephen den Beste, on the Geneva Convention and game theory. His argument is only somewhat marred by the fact that, according to Article 2, para 3 of the 3rd Geneva Convention, his sentence should really read: "...if the other nation is a signatory OR is following it." Signatories who don't follow the rules of war (one variety of game theory "sinners") must still be treated in a saintly fashion, if you wish to follow the Convention.

While we're on the topic, Grossman argues convincingly that while game theory tit-for-tat can work fine in decisions made by world leaders off the battlefield, it has no place in highly charged situations, particularly those involving atrocities committed by combatants. The possibility for confusion, of weakening your own side's will by a policy that in situations of imperfect communication and agreement can only seem inconsistent and hypocritical, is too high, he argues... and that the only alternatives that offer long term consistency are to be an aspiring saint, or a determined sinner.

By the way, den Beste is also wrong about nuclear deterrence, at least as it was practiced by the West. NATO's nuclear tripwire strategy (fight for West Germany, then resort to tactical nukes once defeat was inevitable) was always implicitly a "first use" nuclear strategy. If anyone was playing "tit-for-tat," it was the Soviets, not us.

A SPLENDID EXAMPLE OF CIRCULAR

A SPLENDID EXAMPLE OF CIRCULAR REASONING

"If you stipulate that these detainees are members of the Taliban and Al Qaeda then there is no fact-specific question for a tribunal to decide." -- Guantanamo apologist Ruth Wedgwood, in TNR, on why due process is not a requirement for the Afghan detainees.

True. But who has so stipulated? The Americans, in their position as the effective trier of fact, cannot... and the Taliban prisoners in Cuba have no lawyers to so stipulate to any such matter on their behalf. No, what Wedgwood really means to say there is that, if you assume these people are war criminals, then there is no need for further inquiry, is there? And you know, she's right. Just as if the government had just assumed Guy-Paul Morin or Hurricane Carter were guilty, then their trials would have been a waste of time and taxpayer money, too... think of all the money we'd save!

OH, COME ON, HOW NAIVE

OH, COME ON, HOW NAIVE IS THAT?

"If we practice diplomacy and military action creatively and forcefully, in the future we [Americans] can be far less visible and active in the Middle East than we are now." -- Victor Davis Hanson.

My children will be old and gray before the USAF leaves Incirlik, and the Navy stops patrolling the Persian Gulf, Victor. Surely you can see the oil itself guarantees that. I'll even go one further... Americans aren't leaving Bosnia, Macedonia and Kosovo any time soon either. For better or worse, you're a global empire now. Please get used to it.

DOES ANYONE REMEMBER SHAH SHUJAH

DOES ANYONE REMEMBER SHAH SHUJAH NOW?

A little known fact of wars in Afghanistan: the big defeats never come during the initial invasion. They always come during prolonged periods of using foreign military resources to prop up domestic regimes. In 1839, of course, it was Shah Shujah, installed by the East India Company, who had overthrown his predecessor, the Islamicist Dost Mohammed. The Company lost an army there, as we all know. Of course, in the 1980s, it was Babrak Karmal and later Najibullah the Soviets were propping up. Shujah and Najibullah both had painful ends.

That's why this is so ominous... and why Interim President Karzai might want to be thinking of checking out the St. Petersburg area condo market about now.

UPDATE: Good piece, this.

INTERESTING PIECE, THIS As a

INTERESTING PIECE, THIS

As a web and PR practitioner, I've really been impressed recently with defenselink.mil, the Pentagon's online communications apparatus. It's first-rate internal communications/online communications/PR: timely, thorough, effective. That's why this piece was surprising, alarming, and thought-provoking.

UPDATE: The Post's take. Andrew Sullivan, meanwhile, misses the point: the part of the office's mandate that's worrying people isn't the spreading of disinformation to America's enemies, but to its allies. To repurpose Sullivan's analogy, not about Churchill lying to the Germans... it's about Churchill lying to Americans.