Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
United States

Journal pudge's Journal: Sunday Thoughts 13

Journal by pudge

This week in politics was fairly boring, oddly enough. More of the same boring stuff about Perle and the two campaigns. So here's something a little bit different: a book review!

I just finished listening to An End to Evil by David Frum and Richard Perle. If you want to really understand (as much as possible) the "neocon" view of the world today, this book really is a must-read.

I don't like saying "must-read" because, well, there are so many good sources of information and entertainment out there, why single out one in particular? In this case, it is because Richard Perle is the only one who seems able to lay out the "neocon" case fully and clearly, and this book is the most full and clear exposition I've yet seen.

The book explains the terrorism and other related international challenges facing America, and argues for why our past actions were right or wrong, and why various proposed future actions are right or wrong. It's a roadmap, from the perspective of halfway along the journey.

Agree or disagree with its assessments and conclusions, the book is intensely important, considering many of America's top leaders subscribe to much of what the authors say. And while being respectful of those whom they disagree with, they pull no punches in explaining why everyone who disagrees with them is wrong.

It's fairly comprehensive, so it'd be hard me to sum up the book using specific conclusions, because they have conclusions for everything from national IDs to policy with China. I suppose the most basic explanation of the views contained therein is that American policy should look out for Americans first, and that our policy abroad should be proactive, though not uniform, as every situation with every country is different.

Especially in light of the recent book from Richard Clarke about what Bush did wrong -- much of which Frum and Perle would agree with, in the time leading up to 9/11 -- this book provides an insight into where our leaders are taking us. Both Clarke and Perle were inside government for years, warning of the gathering storm. Both were right. But both have very different views of what to do next.

I bought it from iTunes Music Store, though I plan to get it in hard copy at some point.

This discussion was created by pudge (3605) for no Foes, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sunday Thoughts More

Sunday Thoughts

Comments Filter:
  • It's weird I mostly use my iPod to listen to Howard Ster (which I also get from , uh, iTunes, yeah) but I can't sit through an audiobook. I hate being read to. I tried listening to a lecture on a topic I am familiar with (The Crusades) but I got bored and ended up listening to Korn.

    How do you folks get through those things?
    • How do you folks get through those things?

      I listen to a lot of talking heads ... I watch/listen to probably 10 hours of talking heads a week, with PBS News Hour + Sunday shows. And I listen to audiobooks while I am doing other things (driving, working in garage, etc.).
      • Way back when -- I had the ability to listen to audio books while studying -- or even when READING another book. I'm one of the lucky few who can truly multi-task.

        It's an ability I can no longer manage with the level retention I had back in college. Part of the problem is that now I'm partially deaf. Too many years of loud music -- and one car engine blowing up in my face (no "physical" damage, but it killed my hearing). It just requires too much of my attention now to UNDERSTAND what I hear.

        Now, I su
  • And why neocons scare the bejesus outta me.

    Good summary of neoconservatism [wikipedia.org].

    The works of Leo Strauss [wikipedia.org] (Straussian - a plato style elitist but without a requirement for morality or character[yes, I'm serious, and yes, it's true]) of which all neocons pretty much follow.

    Project for a New American Century.

    There was also a faith based neocon "commune", but I can quite remember the name of it. Either Reader's Digest or Christian Science Monitor(IIRC) did a piece on it a year or two back.
    • That entry is pretty weak (especially in calling neoconservatives new to conservatism, as Richard Perle isn't new ...). However, I think that they have a lot to offer that has, until recently, been missing from the national discussion: specifically, that in some cases, detente, negotiations, appeasement, etc. simply *do not work*. And now more than ever that's been made clear to us through the blight of terrorism.

      We know that appeasement with DPRK has been a mistake. We know that appeasement with Hitler
      • A. It's a wiki
        B. It's trying to summarize an entire political movement, hence it's chock full of generalizations. Can't be even close to 100% accurate for everyone involved in that movement, then again neither can the book... but eh, that's a standard assumed disclaimer(I hope...). The book is probably much more accurate but with a reversed and stronger bias.

        Apart from your second assertion, all of those can be argued about. DRPK I wouldn't quite call appeasement, but I can't think of a better word for
        • DRPK I wouldn't quite call appeasement, but I can't think of a better word for it, so appeasement is good enough.

          Whatever you wish to call it, it has failed. We've bribed them, we've allowed them to keep their existing technology (freezing instead of dismantling), we've done everything EXCEPT insist that they dismantle (until now).

          Suffice to say there were perfectly reasonable reasons(most of which have proven to be well founded), expressed by Bush Sr, to not go in,

          Yes, they were good reasons, that a
  • One way to reduce the big "evil" in the world is to stop funding it when it's a small evil. Like not giving bin Laden a ton of money, weapons, and training, sending his men off to fight and die in our proxy war, and then dropping him cold and grossly insulting his extremist religious beliefs once he's no longer useful. We might not want to do things like that again. Does the book mention that as a long-term evil-reduction tactic?
    • Does the book mention that as a long-term evil-reduction tactic?

      I don't remember specifically, but I think so. That's the big reason I want to get a hard copy, it's easier to remember if I read it, and easier to find it again if I forget. :-) Regardless, I cannot recall if this was mentioned as a broad policy or not, but it was clear that they found problems with past instances of such things. On the other hand, they also criticized our past tendencies to NOT affiliate ourselves with distasteful charac

      • Yeah, actually that is one of my favorite things about Bush. He does not leave the dirty work to shifty semi-terrorist allies. He has our troops there doing openly what needs to be done!
    • Hrm, how much money *did* we give to bin Laden?

      (I know he did some fund raising on his own from Muslim sources. I know the Saudi's supported him against the Soviets financially (with our encouragement.) And I presume he might have had or obtained family money. But I haven't seen any actual cash dollar amounts the US sent him discussed. Are there any on-the-record figures or even estimates? I have heard about giving him training, intel, and sending Stinger missles.)

      Also, what are you referring to in ter
      • I don't know how much money we gave him. We trained the mujahedeen, in Pakistani camps, so they could use the Stinger missiles we also gave them. I guess in 50 years we'll know the whole truth when everything gets declassified. Clarke's version (since his book is on my desk at the moment) is, p. 50: "The overall covert action program expanded greatly in Reagan's second term. Unclassified studies show that it grew from $35 million in 1982 to $600 million in 1987. With few exceptions, the funds bought materie

Slashdot Top Deals

Avoid strange women and temporary variables.

Close