Comments Posted By Dave Schuler
Displaying 11 To 20 Of 37 Comments
ELITIST SNOB DISSES THE AMERICAN VOTER
My take on this is here, Rick.
My problem with all technocrats is that they make two assumption:
1) their idea of merit will prevail;
Comment Posted By Dave Schuler On 27.05.2007 @ 14:53
2) they have merit.
DEMS TO VOTERS: "WE WERE ONLY KIDDING."
If this was a sop to appease their supporters, gregdn, it didn't work—they're hopping mad. Honestly, if this doesn't convince people that the Democratic Congressional leadership is not acting out of conviction but is simply posturing, I don't know what will. That was the case with the AUMF and that's the case now. Leopard, spots, etc.
Rick, I can't help but disagree with you. The Democratic leadership is deadly serious about regaining control of all the branches of government. That's what their actions have always been about.
Unfortunately for that point of view, there continues to be a world out there and real events continue to happen with real people killing and being killed. I wish the question that people were asking themselves was “How do we salvage something out of the debacle in Iraq” rather than “How can we get into the White House in 2009” but there you have it.
Comment Posted By Dave Schuler On 3.05.2007 @ 10:09
ANTI-WAR PROTEST: WHERE IS EVERYONE?
I have often written about how unserious the left is about what they believe.
It may not be a lack of seriousness, Rick, so much as a lack of belief.
Comment Posted By Dave Schuler On 28.01.2007 @ 10:15
Insofar as you mean that the Democrats should suit their actions to their rhetoric I agree with you, Rick. The problem, however, is, if we withdraw our troops from Iraq, then what? Bush's answer, lousy as it is, is that we're not going to withdraw from Iraq.
No one else seems to have much of any answer at all.
One of the things I hoped to start in my little colloquium a while ago was a discussion of that very question. That was one of the many things I didn't accomplish: those whom I could get to participate agreed that we shouldn't leave.
Comment Posted By Dave Schuler On 10.01.2007 @ 15:36
THE REFUGEE PROBLEM IN IRAQ: BAD TO WORSE
I probably should drop this comment over on Nadezhda's post, too.
I wish the NYT article had done a little finer breakdown on just who is fleeing Iraq. Their statistics are only raw immigration not net immigration.
Under Saddam thousands (I don't know how many) of Iraqis left Iraq, too. Assyrians, Chaldeans, Shi'a Arabs from the south of Iraq, many of those fleeing to Iran. Nearly a million Iraqis left the country fleeing Gulf War I. Was there immigration into Iraq as well under Saddam?
Note the small number emigrating to Shi'a Iran. What I suspect we're seeing is Sunni Arabs leaving Iraq and Kurds and Shi'a Arabs returning. This is apocalyptic if you're a Sunni Arab but probably somewhat less so if you're not.
I'm not saying that the situation in Iraq is not serious nor am I saying that this level of dislocation isn't sad. I'm just saying that it's difficult to tell much with what we're being given. It's a narrative rather than a report.
Comment Posted By Dave Schuler On 15.12.2006 @ 12:12
IS A REPUBLICAN COMEBACK IN THE CARDS?
In a closely divided race the secret of winning is peaking on election day. If the Democrats succeed in doing that, they'll take control of at least the House. That hasn't been their pattern in recent elections.
Comment Posted By Dave Schuler On 18.10.2006 @ 21:25
WINNERS AND LOSERS IN THE ISRAELI-ISLAMIST WAR
I wrote my version of this post on Saturday. We see things similarly with the exception of Olmert. I think whether he's a winner or loser from this remains to be seen. If, as I suspect, the Israelis come to realize that this was the best deal they could have reasonably expected, Olmert could end up a winner yet.
In my view the only way that the Israelis could have won this horrible mess was by not playing.
Comment Posted By Dave Schuler On 14.08.2006 @ 14:13
KERRY: US SHOULD HAVE INVADED LEBANON
Hey, what about the international test? I was studying so hard!
Comment Posted By Dave Schuler On 24.07.2006 @ 06:15
But it is highly unlikely that the French, the Germans, or any NATO country would shed blood in the Middle East for this or any other reason. There doesn’t seem to be the international will to fight a continuous guerrilla war with Hizbullah in order to disarm them.
Leave the matter of will aside for the moment. Do the Europeans have the ability to project that kind of power beyond their own borders? This isn't fighting rebels in the Cote d'Ivoire or police duty in Bosnia.
Iran has substantially upgraded Hezbollah's ground abilities as it has its rocket arsenal. Take a look at any of the various assessments of Hezbollah's ground capabilities.
The question, I think, is does anyone's army other than Israel's, ours, or, just possibly, the Russians' have the ability to disarm Hezbollah?
Comment Posted By Dave Schuler On 23.07.2006 @ 17:52
A LAZY FRIDAY AFTERNOON MILLENNIAL INTERLUDE
Tough call. I think some of the scientists' contributions were inevitable; maybe a few years later but inevitable. Einstein's contributions may well hve been unique.
I think the printing press was inevitable. The technology had been around for quite a while.
George Mason was probably as influential as Madison (without the political ambitions).
Put me in the George Washington camp.
Others to consider:
Zhu Xi. You've probably never heard of him but he was enormously influential in the Confucian world (most of the Far East).
Temujin. Without him we might well all be speaking Arabic.
Charles Martel. Ditto.
Comment Posted By Dave Schuler On 21.07.2006 @ 20:34
