Professor Bradley Smith asks some good questions:
We’re hearing a lot about the need to regulate and to prosecute private sector actors, but where’s the skepticism of big government? Where is the serious citizen oversight of President-Elect Obama’s plans, and President Bush’s actions, to “stimulate” the economy by essentially nationalizing huge parts of it? Why are so many people ready to think that turning to more government is the answer? Where is the skepticism that Barney Frank knows how to run the banking industry, or Chris Dodd the auto industry? What happened to those liberals who just a year ago were complaining about excessive presidential power and a government that was “shredding the constitution” to deal with a crisis (in that case, terrorism)?
Nowhere is the hypocrisy greater than in regard to the car bailout. From the get-go Hank Paulson and the President said that the executive branch lacked legislative authorization to use TARP funds for the car industry. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, vigilant defenders of their legislative branch said, “Oh, just do it!” Congress tried and failed to pass a bailout bill. In essence, the legislative body could not muster the will to vote for the bailout (or at least the version the Democrats were willing to put to a vote). So Reid and Pelosi, again our favorite critics of unilateral presidential power, said, “Your ball, Mr. President. Just do it!”
The concerns vigorously voiced for eight years about the proper balance of the three branches, the primacy of Congress in funding matters, and the extension of executive branch power have vanished. One wonders whether all that talk about separation of powers was just that — talk. And the MSM, which lambasted the Bush administration for “shredding the Constitution,” is only concerned that the Republicans are out to bury the auto workers. Presidential overreach –what’s that? No one is much concerned whether the Treasury Department can spend without Congressional authorization.
I suspect so long as there are Republicans able to filibuster in the Senate, and Blue Dog Democrats in the House ready to slow down the legislative train, the Reid-Peloisi duo will be happy to see President Obama exercise and extend executive powers. Perhaps, Pelosi should worry less about who Rahm Emanuel is calling, and more about what turf she is conceding to the executive branch. Unless, of course, her professed concern for the Constitution was all for show.
You should watch The Crossing starring Jeff Daniels as Washington:
http://lowtechtimes.com/2009/02/15/happy-presidents-day/
I have read both McCullough’s and Ferling’s book. I think McCullough gives a better account of the battle itself but Ferling puts it into a greater perspective of the overall strategic framework that Howe assessed at the time. Both great reads, highly recommend them both. And the truth of your statement I think is borne out over history. If you want to bring peace to the middle east let it play out militarily, in the end there will be peace.
I don’t know what they are teaching in schools either, but in my Navy courses (ROTC and War College) it was considered almost too obvious to emphasize: the choices are only two, and they are bi-modal.
Victory. Or defeat. Where victory means only one thing to a military officer: the complete defeat of the enemy, complete meaning to the point where he can not credibly continue to fight. What this means depends on the nature of the enemy and what his desired end state is. A war over a border dispute is quite different from a war started to conquer territory and commit genocide.
Speaking of the latter, genocide, Israel must completely defeat Hamas, which is intent on genocide. Completely means Israel must use draconian methods which seem harsh. They seem harsh because they involve significant collateral damage, but that damage is a necessary consequence of the cowardly methods employed by Hamas.
Absent compete and utter victory, Israel will remain under threat and its citizens will be killed by Hamas and other Muslim terrorists. A slow death, a twilight war that will, on occasion, result in a seemingly disproportionate response. But a response that does not finish the job by finishing Hamas.
Perhaps Netanyahu has learned this elemental military lesson. One can only hope so.
Yes, it is fashionable to call an unpopular conflict, like Iraq, immune to a military decision. Of course that is not so. With sufficient power and determination, even the most recalcitrant opponent, Japan and Germany are good examples, can be beaten and transformed.
But that point is not particularly well supported by General Howe’s reluctance to go for a decisive defeat of the American rebels.
Because, had Howe decided to throttle George W when he had the chance, and had he succeeded in aborting 1776 totally, there would have been subsequent pregnancies. One of those would inevitably have gone to term. The Atlantic Ocean and the limits on Britain’s strength and her inability to threaten the colonists with extermination, which is what it took to convince Japan and Germany, would have prevented Britain from prevailing.
And we see this again in the Israel/Palestine conflict. Israel has won every battle decisively, and yet she has not prevailed. Because she is unable and unwilling to use her might, conclusively, and her opponents know it. Whereas, if the Arabs get a chance to defeat her, it will be crushing and lasting.
Tamils are the world’s no 1 terrorists by strict definition . they have committed the most attacks over a long period with the highest casualties.
This is not to say that they do not /have not had significant reasons.
I am aware of the numbers & situation because I used to be in a “Muslim ‘ area which was close to the “”Tamil area. I thought about it every day on the train -that the focus was one community & not the other. The Tamils undoubtedly raised funds & supported the Tigers.
The Tsunami completely changed the dynamics inSri Lanka. Outside funds went 100% to the Sinhalese & govt agencies- Tamils could not access these .
I dont know the future nor the strength f support from Tamil Naidu in India.
A problemic part of the Colonial inheritance from the Brits.
The Tamils’ priority was a state. Hamas’s priority is killing Israelis. They want a state too, but they could have started to build one when Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005. Instead, they launched rockets. What message were the rockets bearing? They were saying “Reoccupy us! Reoccupy us!”
Israel has offered to free 1000 Palestinians in exchange for Gilad Shalit. Hamas is incorruptible. It will never release a living Jew, no matter what the ransom is.
George -maybe he is dead.
nacl: I wouldn’t be too sure about “subsequent pregnancies” if I were you. If we are playing the game of “what if” here, may I remind you that the rebels were only one faction among the American colonists and hardly the majority, either. Plenty of colonists weren’t in the least interested in becoming independent of Britain, and most simply kept their heads down and hoped they wouldn’t get caught in the crossfire. Had the insurgency been firmly put down early on, who is to say that the Loyalists would not have won the day? As it was, the rebels gained strength and support the longer the conflict went on (like the Taliban?), and the losing Loyalists were forced, often on pain of death, to flee their homes to start life anew in the remaining British colonies in what is now Canada. Around where I live, the land was settled by refugees from New York and New Jersey, and to this day their descendents haven’t forgotten where they came from. The very motto of this province, “Hope Restored,” reflects that historical memory.
don’t equate tamils with tamil tiger terrorists. this is a mistake that most westerners make. most tamils in sl do not support tigers and live peacefully outside their control. can’t say the same about tamils in west, tigers’ main support.
and yes tigers commit more terrorist acts ( meaning attacks against civilians including suicide attacks ) than any other group in world. that is why achievement of sl government is great. even with severely limited resources, they are achieving success, against terrorists (and despite pressure from west, influenced by liberal guilt complex and tamil diaspora).