PDA

View Full Version : The Rise of the Neocons


Bloggingheads
02-28-2008, 05:47 PM

alwsdad
02-28-2008, 06:49 PM
Eli Lake criticizes others for being nasty, sarcastic and dismissive.
Come back tomorrow to hear Yao Ming criticize the tall.

thprop
02-28-2008, 07:02 PM
I was really interested in hearing what Jacob Heilbrunn had to say - and I was even willing to listen to Eli Lake just to get Heilbrunn's take. Unfortunately, Lake just keeps babbling, telling his lies and delusions. Why was Heilbrunn subjected to this jerk.

Jacob did tell Lake how delusional he is (http://brainwaveweb.com/diavlogs/9077?in=00:28:27&out=00:28:35)- even though Lake did not notice and kept on lying. It is easy to tell when Lake is lying - anytime his lips move.

gwlaw99
02-28-2008, 07:18 PM
So far the comments are proving Eli correct regarding the "snarkiness" of the Yglesias left.

alwsdad
02-28-2008, 07:24 PM
Considering the damage that Lake and the people who think like him have done to the world, he should be glad his political opponents are merely snarky.

bjkeefe
02-28-2008, 07:44 PM
Neocon dreams (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/9077?in=11:31&out=11:44)? Every country in the world. Except, of course, the United States.

Bzzzt! (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/9077?in=35:05&out=35:17) Sorry Eli. Most recently (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/02/13/whos-your-maverick-john-mccain-votes-in-favor-of-torture/), he voted precisely against this.

Moment of sanity (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/9077?in=48:03&out=48:07)? So do we all, Eli. So do we all.

Andrya6
02-28-2008, 08:03 PM
Eli missed the point about Al Quaeda being unlikely to cooperate with Saddam Hussein. Cooperation wasn’t unlikely for theological reasons, but because Al Quaeda and Hussein were specifically rivals in the project of building an international Muslim/Arab empire (which each intended to organize and head). After Saddam was deposed and executed, his followers were struggling to regain control of Iraq, and an Iraqi empire was no longer a project. Under those circumstances the objection to cooperation disappears.

bramble
02-28-2008, 08:40 PM
So Lake is a neocon running dog...but he smokes cigarettes on camera, and that's cool.

Incompetence Dodger
02-28-2008, 10:11 PM
Eli on why resentment of America has skyrocketed during the George W. Bush years:

Heads I win (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/9077?in=31:30&out=31:46)

Eli, less than three minutes later, on why resentment of America has skyrocketed during the George W. Bush years:

Tails you lose (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/9077?in=34:16&out=34:30)

Eli contains multitudes!

bjkeefe
02-28-2008, 10:55 PM
ID:

Well done!

Bloggin' Noggin
02-28-2008, 11:02 PM
Bzzzt! (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/9077?in=35:05&out=35:17) Sorry Eli. Most recently (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/02/13/whos-your-maverick-john-mccain-votes-in-favor-of-torture/), he voted precisely against this.


Brendan, it's NOT precisely against this. McCain voted against forbidding the CIA to use torture. Eli carefully restricts the application ofthe army field manual to the military

Castaa
02-28-2008, 11:08 PM
I would like to hear more from Jacob Heilbrunn on bh.tv. He seems to know a lot about this whole history and topic. Very impressive. Granted I know very little so maybe it's a false impression.

Jeff Morgan
02-28-2008, 11:52 PM
See, free flow of ideas (http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/9077?in=00:49:41&out=00:49:58) promotes Islamic extremism.

I apologize if I misunderstood, but that's what I heard.

Personally, I would go so far as to say that the 'free flow of ideas', quasi the first of the bill of rights, is a generative condition from which other rights and democratic ideals can arise.

I see the absence of 'the free flow of ideas' as providing the environment where extremism flourishes. Kinda like how 99.9% sterilized environments give rise to super-dangerous bacteria heh.

osmium
02-29-2008, 12:27 AM
good shot of the records.

bjkeefe
02-29-2008, 03:41 AM
Strictly speaking, you're right, BN. But I heard it as misspeaking on his part, and understood him to mean the CIA should be required to abide by the Army field manual, which is the outstanding issue. After all, it doesn't really make any sense to say that the Army should abide by the Army manual. Well, it makes sense, but it's kind of a tautology.

T. More
02-29-2008, 10:25 AM
I must say that people must have simply stopped up their ears when Eli Lake was speaking. I thought he made a lot of concessions but simply provided good context to JH's tendency to overemphasize the impact of neocons on our policy and of the last eight years on the overall struggle with terror.

JH didn't seem to have a good account of why 9/11 happened--it certainly couldn't be blamed on Bush's arrogant, neocon foreign policy--since "they hate us" so much more now, we are told. He did not have a good account of why the entire Clinton foreign policy team viewed Iraq in much the same terms as the neocon cabal.

Let me be clear, I think the war was a mistake, and it may prove as disastrous a mistake as its worst critics now say (I hope not, but their critiques are reasonable and only time will tell). Eli is not yet ready to joint that view; nonetheless, I think he brought some good context to the discussion. America has struggled with its image in the Muslim world since long before Bush, and it may do so for some time thereafter.

I was also intrigued by his concession at the end that the Bush Administration has effectively ended the possibility (by its many missteps) of promoting democracy by the use of military force or other government power. Perhaps Eli's many critics here did not listen long enough to hear him make these concessions. I don't understand the hostility.

Bloggin' Noggin
02-29-2008, 10:40 AM
Actually, it's not a tautology. That was precisely the issue of the last big debate in the Senate about torture -- bringing the military back into line with its own traditions -- Cheney and Bush fought for a CIA exception. I believe the bill reasserted the provisions of the field manual over the uncertainties that the Administration had created with their advocacy of "enhanced interrogation". What you hear as a tautology is not at all a tautology in the context of the actual debate that took place.
At another point in this diavlog, Eli is quite explicit that he (Eli) wants the CIA to be able to continue using torture, and I don't believe he qualifies this by noting any kind of disagreement with McCain.
I don't think Eli was misspeaking at all, and I see no reason to think he would be surprised by the vote you point to in your link.
Not that I want to get too deep into Eli Lake exegesis -- on the other hand, maybe it's important when we hear a candidate promising to make the military abide by the field manual, that we don't take him to be promising more than he actually is.

Bloggin' Noggin
02-29-2008, 11:05 AM
This was a good discussion, though a very poor book interview.

It would have been nice if Eli had tried to bend himself a bit toward the Will Wilkinson model -- help the writer set out the argument of the book and then raise criticisms in that context. Eli assumes we've all read the book (or that the audience doesn't matter or the book doesn't matter except as a springboard for his argument). Fortunately, this didn't get in the way of my understanding the current argument, but I would have liked to know a bit more about the book than I actually can get out of this diavlog.

Eli just can't seem to help himself - he can't make just one argument at a time. He's got a shotgun approach to argument: spew every talking point out there and you're sure to hit something (or at least give the appearance of hitting something). He talks way more than Jacob does, and I'd have liked to hear a bit more from Jacob.

Still Jacob guages is opponent intelligently and he deftly (and calmly) manages to fight the barrage to at least a draw.
Eli isn't all bad by any means. He does seem intellectually honest (if often rather deluded in my view), and he certainly knows a great deal. He's no mere legacy-intellectual, like Jonah Goldberg. He also manages, even though he talks too much, to be reasonably fair and certainly quite civil.
He could learn a thing or two from Wilkinson, though.

bjkeefe
02-29-2008, 01:31 PM
BN:

You might be right, and I may have read too much into Eli's remark in this case.

The "tautology" I was speaking of, just to be clear, was the idea of the military following the Army field manual for interrogations.

bjkeefe
02-29-2008, 01:41 PM
T.More:

I must say that people must have simply stopped up their ears when Eli Lake was speaking.

A fair criticism, based on the comments. I might have acknowledged that I did not find Eli's contributions wholly without worth. In fact, this is always the case. I disagree with him about some things, but I respect his point of view on almost all of those. Further, I think he offers good analysis, some of which I find instructive, and also, I am happy to see that he has admitted some realism into his world view.

America has struggled with its image in the Muslim world since long before Bush, and it may do so for some time thereafter.

Heartily agreed, though I'd change "may" for "will." The real question is, how do we now go about addressing the problem? I do not think a continued policy of throwing our weight around is the right approach, both from considering the point of view of the rest of the world, and even being selfish, and worrying only about our own national interests.

I was also intrigued by his concession at the end that the Bush Administration has effectively ended the possibility (by its many missteps) of promoting democracy by the use of military force or other government power. Perhaps Eli's many critics here did not listen long enough to hear him make these concessions.

I definitely heard that, and it reminded me that he has said similar things before, here on BH.tv. Good for him, I say.

I don't understand the hostility.

Part of it is due to history. Part of it is due to the fact that, despite some of Eli's recent moments of clarity, he still comes off as someone who is overly paranoid about many other countries, and overly inclined to think in military and other punitive terms as the first choice for dealing with these countries.

bjkeefe
02-29-2008, 01:48 PM
Jeff:

I think you got it right. I'll grant that Eli may not have meant it to sound the way he did, but it is inarguable that it did sound like he equated free speech with increased radicalism.

I agree with your rebuttal more than 99%, especially when considering the long-term point of view, but I think there is a small case to be made that cheaper and better communications technologies can abet the growth of splinter groups. There's no question that Internet forums, for example, can have an echo chamber effect, and all the people sitting around agreeing with each other has been shown to promote a drift towards more extreme points of view, or at least, tones of voice.

Not this forum, of course. All those other forums.

bjkeefe
02-29-2008, 01:51 PM
Castaa:

Yes. In all the discussion over Eli, we have neglected to mention Jacob. I found him quite a good guest, too.

As BN points out below, it might be better to pair him with another diavlogger next time. Not that he didn't hold his own, but his (book's) ideas were somewhat obscured by Eli's preference for mixing it up.

Bloggin' Noggin
02-29-2008, 02:48 PM
BN:
The "tautology" I was speaking of, just to be clear, was the idea of the military following the Army field manual for interrogations.

Yes, I understood that. My point is that it was not a tautology in context: the debate in which McCain stood up to Bush (somewhat and for a while) was precisely about whether the military should be explicitly told to go back to the field manual's original rules on interrogations. Military intelligence (and even ordinary soldiers) had, shall we say, "evolved beyond" what had been in the field manual, and I believe that the contents of the field manual were themselves under debate (whether they should be made more explicitly restrictive or permissive). I guess Eli should have said he agreed with McCain that the entire military should be governed by The guidelines that ARE CURRENTLY in the ARMY field manual concerning interrogations.

bjkeefe
02-29-2008, 03:25 PM
BN:

That's a good and clear way of stating things. Now, if only Eli would weigh in with his own clarifications ....

At the risk of belaboring what might be obvious to some, I do want to reiterate that, most recently, McCain has had the opportunity to make his views on torture clear, and he voted in line with the Bush Administration. Call it soldifying his base or whatever else you want, the fact remains that he is inconsistent with his earlier talking on this matter. The important thing to remember is that when it came time to vote, he voted for torture.