Are We At War?

Uh, Question Time's on, this being discussed much more sensibly...

Ashdown’s point was that the use of the word ‘war’ metaphorically was understandable, a reasonable expression of distressed and confused sentiments under extraordinary circumstances. Used with the implication of what he kept referring to as ‘legal’ war was inflammatory and misleading. I’m not sure I could agree with his point about the latter. It implies that there still is some recognisable legal state of war that we could all agree on. I suppose what I’m trying to say here is that that ain’t the case.

Like lots of people have done, I’d like to say thanks for all the thoughtful (and often moving) talk that’s gone on here in the last couple of days. I’ve been at home ill for a lot of the time, and you lot have helped provide a context for coming to terms with this. Also made me think, rethink and think again about the political situation. And given me lots of links and reading that I might otherwise have missed.

Oddly enough, I suspect senior seasoned politicians — whatever their faults — are LESS susceptible to this kind of amour propre, even when they choose to play to the peanut gallery for votes (after all, no one in an American or a UK election expects to get 100%).

Bear in mind — it may not be of significance, thopugh it ought to be — that phonelines between EVERY MUSLIM or LARGELY MUSLIM COUNTRY and the US are red hot at the moment (except maybe Iraq), horsetrading furiously over likely outcomes to difft paths of action. Pakistani leader (say) saying: "look, Dubya, I cannot take responsibility for the response of my people if you do [x]; but [y] I think we can live with, tho we will make angry noises." Nuking ObL at cost of the pitiless eternal enmity of all Islam forever ain't a good trade, and there will be ppl very firmly pointing this out. Senator Butthead of Buttfuck may declare (in public) that we already have that enimity and so what, we can win: Bush has (some) advisors who know different and will tell him so — that if he plays this well (= allows them to), he can actually split the Islamic world into grudgingly friendly sorta, and tiny but estranged hostile rump.

Way too soon to say if he'll listen to such advisors obviously.

Call me a cynic regarding our Good President's mental abilities, but I think he can't do anything *but* listen to them. Like you say, probably a very good thing.

(Also he has his dad, I assume, though I can't work out what I think of that.)

What do you say to people who talk like that? -- maria (silyl_aria@yahoo.com), September 13, 2001.

You say:

War on Drugs vs Vietnam — which war did the US lose more damagingly?

No, I think I was paraphrasing. But she was basically saying that it wasn't going to be 'war' as traditionally defined, and preferred the word 'campaign'.

I have heard the 'body bag' quotes too, and they do worry me. I'm not saying they'll be no military action (snatch squads? setting up bases in Afghan desert?) but it's just sounding to me like it's not going to be full-on 'kick the shit out of anyone' stuff.

Headline of the Day: "The Coverage: Some Flawed Information Occasionally Creeps In"

Both from the New York Times. Speaking of flawed information, Wolfowitz is Deputy Defense Secretary, not Deputy Secretary of State. And I'm sure that he did not misspeak, given that last Thursday Defense Department people were telling R.W. Apple of the Times that by "ending" states they meant going in with troops and taking out the governments of Afghanistan, Sudan, Iraq, and maybe Pakistan. My guess is that the reality is settling in for the Administration in regard to what the Congress will and won't allow and what potential U.S. allies would and would not support. Plus, I'd expect different people within the Administration to have different opinions about what actions would be in the U.S.'s best interests, would be morally justified, etc.

2. Am I right in thinking that US has never declared War despite attacking All & Sundry (!= Everyone)?

3. Thus Bush 'This Means War' = hypocrisy (I think).

4. War Talk = Vengeance Talk. [Desire for] Vengeance is understandable: but Justice is meant to be larger than Vengeance, which is (let's say) one of the animals that drives it, but is also restrained by it. Justice = victory of the Enlightenment (or much longer Xan tradition, or whatever) over Eye For An Eye model. Reversion to the latter = reversion to 'barbarism', in a sense.

I think I've understood the principle here. Right?

really interesting thread, and it's amazing to see that so many people were asking exactly the right questions about the war on terrorism, only 2 days after 9/11.

i found this thread while searching for any discussion of this morning's news that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS, was apparently wounded in an airstrike on Saturday. we don't even have a thread for ISIS (at least one that's not about the band). there was a good Radiolab episode from a few months back called Sixty Words which focused on the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) that was drafted in response to 9/11. part of the episode focuses on the wave of patriotic vengeance that swept the country in the following weeks. there's a great bit where they play the sounds of the memorial service, which begins with a terrifying rendition of Battle Hymn of the Republic - "He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword" - sung fullthroated by all of the politicians in attendance. just after that was the vote for the AUMF, which all members of congress, save for Melissa Lee, voted for. the text:

That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

of course, that same language has been used to justify many of the conflicts that have happened since. there really is no end, there can't be an end. we don't even know who we're at war with, and that's not an exaggeration. the US Senate Armed Services Committee held a hearing in 2013 called "The Law of Armed Conflict, the Use of Military Force, and the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force" where there was a jawdropping moment when everyone in the room realized that there wasn't an authoritative list of entities which the US is currently at war with. absolutely insane.

anyway, my feeling is that we've all just accepted that we're at permanent war. the blasé feeling extends beyond friends and family and ILX - it's difficult to find a news organization that's reliably covers what's going on with ISIS right now. part of that is the permanent war fatigue, but part of it's also just the nature of the conflicts - drone strikes, top level security clearances, remote control death sentences. anyone who's involved with fighting ISIS probably can't talk about it. it might be your neighbor driving out of town to the drone command center on the edge of a desert. or the guy with the tacky 6-year-old boy fantasy sports car and bluetooth headset at the intersection. it's all so fucked up.

tl;dr do we have a rolling ISIS thread? or rolling We're At War the Rest of our Lives thread?

I was just listening to a report this morning on NPR about how our strikes on ISIS have almost unquestionably strengthened Assad, and that he's been able to strike at rebel positions (I'm sure killing plenty of civilians in the process) with impunity. I feel like I literally have no fucking idea what the right foreign policy response is when the choices are either help ISIS build a totalitarian caliphate across the region, help Assad murder his people, or do nothing and just let em fight it out (or I guess arm the "moderate rebels" but that seems so murky and impossible and likely to just produce some other bad result).

I guess you have to ask what the larger *goal* is in order to figure out an answer, and I don't know that either.

there's gotta be a thread for ISIS/ISIL, right? i'm not criticizing, either. i mean, i didn't start one. i'm just curious why collectively, we all decided that it wasn't even worth discussing. rolling middle east 2013 thread has 1495 posts, while Rolling 2014 Middle East Thread has 7.

That's because the main middle east thread is annoyingly titled
Rolling MENA 2014

Can a mod change it perhaps and lock the other one?

i have been worried about this since i was about 11 or 12 -- i was really into nuclear disarmament and not just stopping the arms race, but eliminating the possibility of world annihilation. i was a really serious kid.

and a smart kid, too! :) carl sagan's idea of the meaning of life was this:

We are rare and precious because we are alive, because we can think. We are privileged to influence and perhaps control our future. We have an obligation to fight for life on Earth — not just for ourselves but for all those, humans and others, who came before us and to whom we are beholden, and for all those who, if we are wise enough, will come after. There is no cause more urgent than to survive to eliminate on a global basis the growing threats of nuclear war, environmental catastrophe, economic collapse and mass starvation. These problems were created by humans and can only be solved by humans. No social convention, no political system, no economic hypothesis, no religious dogma is more important.

The hard truth seems to be this: We live in a vast and awesome universe in which, daily, suns are made and worlds destroyed, where humanity clings to an obscure clod of rock. The significance of our lives and our fragile realm derives from our own wisdom and courage. We are the custodians of life’s meaning. We would prefer it to be otherwise, of course, but there is no compelling evidence for a cosmic Parent who will care for us and save us from ourselves. It is up to us.

xpost ah THERE it is. thanks!

RIP CCND (Children's Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament)

Carl Sagan sadly otm

I wonder if people in earlier empires could ask the question "Are We At War?" Like is the US unprecedented as an empire that tries pretty hard to pretend it isn't one? In past empires were ordinary citizens more likely to openly revel in conquest?

you were repping for a strong ISIS piece in harper's, right, hurting?

yeah it's good

That's because the main middle east thread is annoyingly titled
Rolling MENA 2014

― my jaw left (Hurting 2), Monday, November 10, 2014 12:34 PM (18 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Can a mod change it perhaps and lock the other one?

― my jaw left (Hurting 2), Monday, November 10, 2014 12:34 PM (18 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I locked the other one. I'm not going to change the "MENA" thread because it's been used that way all year. Next year, someone set a reminder for Jan 1 to try to beat Mordy to the punch.

You know what? I'll edit it so it's searchable though.

maybe keep the title but add a parenthetical "(Middle East)" after MENA? I know that's not the prettiest title, but I can never even remember what MENA stands for.

er rather "(Middle East and North Africa)"

ROLLING C/D MENA DUNHAM 2014 THREAD

or do nothing and just let em fight it out

this is the best course of action imo

The problem lately has been that ISIS was not fighting Assad, but opportunistically rolling up territory in Iraq instead, where the Iraqi army presented quite a bit less resistance than Assad's army did. Consequently, the price for giving ISIS a free rein was to risk letting them conquer a shockingly weak Iraq and control its massive oil reserves. Which could stimulate Iran to come in and make a grab for Iraq, too.

Take the oil out of the equation and we could let them play grabass all they want, without a second thought. But the world economy still runs on oil, so we can't play "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" there.

nah oil should be $1 million/barrel, that'll wean us off of it

I didn't realize you were a prepper, Οὖτις

wouldn't you like to be a prepper too

the number of times i have wondered if maybe the preppers are onto something is at an all time high of 2 in 2014, with most of 2 months still to go.

like, for the first time ransacking abandoned houses for canned goods feels like it has an integer % chance of happening in my lifetime. i guess this must be a part of getting old.

I feel like I literally have no fucking idea what the right foreign policy response is when the choices are either help ISIS build a totalitarian caliphate across the region, help Assad

― my jaw left (Hurting 2), Monday, 10 November 2014 17:31 (49 minutes ago)

the problem is that assad wasn't helped sooner

Today's low low oil price suggests the oil market is not yet worried about ISIS taking control of significant reserves, but I think there is reason for concern in the longer term.

I always remember the Friday after 9/11. Not sure how it was around the rest of the country but in L.A. there were all kinds of "America fuck yeah!" rallies on all the major streets, lots of "kill bin laden!" signs and giant american flags and stuff. it must have been something someone said "we" should do that night. it felt like America taking a deep breath right before a loud scream or something.

― LIKE If you are against racism (omar little), Monday, November 10, 2014 5:30 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I'll grant myself this cue for a grand, way too general statement, but this is how I felt it was like for the whole 'west' that day, not just America. That Friday was the day of the three minutes of silence. I was at some unimportant local political event as a journalist planned weeks before, nothing to do with America, and everyone there was still flummoxed, sad and had visibly gone without sleep for the third day since that Tuesday. Including myself. That Friday for me, too is the day I remember best since it happened. Two days of dust settling, and then that deep breath right before the retaliation...

good War Nerd article on ISIS today:

http://pando.com/2014/11/10/the-war-nerd-farewell-islamic-state-we-hardly-knew-ye/

maybe premature? I am not an expert.

If a Sunni-Arab jihad group can’t please the Abu Nimr, something is very wrong.

Two days of dust settling

well in Brooklyn this was literally the case. Also you could scarcely find an ATM that wasn't outta cash.

putting any article that remotely backs up my claim that china is heading to war here

http://www.popsci.com/china-microwave-weapon-electronic-warfare

http://www.businessinsider.com/chinese-military-official-war-2017-1

also theyre buddies with north korea and kim jong un said hed nuke los angeles (but apparently their nuclear weapon can only reach san francisco)

and as nk's govt grows more unstable

i dunno

shit meet fan yo

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mikhail-gorbachev-ussr-last-soviet-premier-russia-world-prepare-war-syria-donald-trump-middle-east-a7548646.html

and as nk's govt grows more unstable

And as the usa's govt grows more unstable

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/jack-ma-if-trade-stops-war-starts-2017-2

not a lot of content but more of a statement from jack ma

As time goes on I'm feeling increasingly optimistic that reason will prevail and the US won't launch some appallingly indiscriminate attack on the MIddle East. I hope I'm not wrong.
― Nick, Sunday, September 16, 2001 8:00 PM (fifteen years ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

oof

it'd be nice to live in that timeline

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphjennings/2017/02/14/japan-and-trump-are-teaming-up-to-contain-china

The long-time American ally has the military might -- world No. 7 per rankings by the database GlobalFirePower.com -- to be a persuasive player in Asia. China ranks third and has militarized disputed islets off its coats.

Japan has the economic clout, too. It gives development aid and investment to poor countries in Asia in part to maintain a pro-American, anti-China alliance. Other allies include Vietnam and the Philippines. The United States, however, has other things to do -- back to that America-first element of Trump’s nearly month-old presidency. It might lean on Japan to do some of its China checks.

“For what’s going on in Asia, the U.S. is not going to be as large of a presence,” says Christian de Guzman, vice president and senior credit officer with Moody’s in Singapore. “There may be a desire for Japan to fill that void.” Otherwise China might fill it, he adds. “China has promised a large pool of investment for the Philippines. Then the Chinese government turned around and promised a similar package for Malaysia. They are trying to gain influence through investment.”

After Chinese ally North Korea test fired a ballistic missile into the sea on Sunday, both Japan and the United States protested. Trump gave Tokyo another boost by reassuring Japan that the uninhabited but strategic Japanese-held Senkaku Islands disputed by Beijing fall under a U.S.-Japan security treaty. Defense collaboration will “intensify,” says John Vail, chief global strategist with Japan-based Nikko Asset Management. The two sides “share several geopolitical concerns,” he adds.

japan having the military might is debatable at the very least

everything else seems par for the war course imo

Japanese militarism, yes, let's encourage that.

abe/ldp is working on amending the constitution so japan can beef up its military and attack instead of only 'defend' itself

Abe also seems more forthcoming on why he thinks Article 9 needs to be amended. The LDP draft says the “Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation” and will not resort to the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes — but adds that this will not prevent the nation from exercising its right to defend itself. The LDP has explained that this right to self-defense includes collective self-defense, which allows a country to take military action to defend an ally under attack even when the nation itself is not being attacked.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2016/03/15/editorials/abes-drive-amend-constitution/#.WKSrxtIrLs0

apologies for the japantimes link

caveat is that he needs the support of the people, and there are still mixed feelings about it

but my interpretation is that a lot of japanese people believe some type of re-arming is needed and if abe tweaks his rhetoric (he was already re-elected, but this may be a case of other presidential candidates being worse), he can make it happen

related is the pacific pivot -- US helping to militarize the asia pacific region

http://fpif.org/u-s-militarizing-pacific-not-taking-questions/

oh china responded

"No matter what anyone says or does, it cannot change the fact that the Diaoyu Islands belong to China, and cannot shake China's resolve and determination to protect national sovereignty and territory," Geng told a daily news briefing in Beijing.

The United States and Japan should watch what they say and do and stop making the wrong comments to avoid complicating the issue and affecting regional peace and stability, he added.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-japan-china-idUSKBN15S0UA

some reading between the lines needed but i tried to quote the decent parts

http://japan-forward.com/the-hate-farm-china-is-planting-a-bitter-harvest/

China is leading a deadly information war. The first target is Japan. The ultimate target is the United States. For more than two years, our research team and I have been warning that a Chinese radicalization program will lead to terrorism against Japanese. These predictions are proving true, so far with minor attacks. In November 2015, a Korean extremist detonated an explosive device inside the grounds of Yasukuni Shrine. He fled to South Korea but was arrested when he returned to Japan the following month.

[…]

War crimes occurred at Nanjing from various sides. Japanese are partly responsible but not to the extent of customary Chinese exaggerations. Japan has demonstrated remorse while China never admits wrongdoing. China now claims that 300,000 were murdered and many raped. American anti-Japanese reports at the time put the number at 20,000 to 30,000. Many deaths were caused by the Chinese Civil War—which the Chinese never mention.
 
Bottom line: Japanese committed war crimes at Nanjing, the number was far fewer than advertised, Chinese forces committed many of the atrocities, and China uses it today as hate fertilizer.

[…]

Comparing Yasukuni with Arlington invites protest from some Americans, who gerrymander definitions to fit favorable visions, or say that war criminals are enshrined at Yasukuni. An argument can be made that war criminals are buried at Arlington. Confederates from the U.S. Civil War are buried there. They fought in part to continue slavery. American soldiers who committed war crimes in the Philippine insurrection, against Native Americans, and in almost every war, are certainly buried there.

One example is General Samuel W. Koster, who was compared to General Tomoyuki Yamashita during the My Lai war crimes trials in the Vietnam War. He is buried with honors in West Point Cemetery Sec. 18, Row G, Grave 084B. Would Americans take seriously any complaint from Vietnam of a president or other government official paying respects at Arlington or West Point Cemetery?

One of our revered leaders, Curtis LeMay, famously said, “If we’d lost the war, we’d all have been prosecuted as war criminals.”

Japanese view death differently than do many others. In the Shinto way, when people die, all are equal. Suddenly there are no generals, no privates, no criminals, no saints. Everyone is neutral. There is a memorial in Los Angeles for the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, which was formed during World War II and consisted mostly of Japanese-Americans. The 442nd became the most decorated unit for its size in U.S. history. The 442nd has a legitimate memorial. A place of authentic honor. At the 442nd memorial is a large wall of names of fallen heroes, with no ranks. Their souls are equal, in keeping with the Japanese way.

[…]

China kills two birds by diverting attention from their own crimes while creating friction in U.S. relations with Japan by playing up that Japanese pray at Yasukuni to conjure evil spirits. This is like a movie plot.

[...]

The Chinese are radicalizing people for conflict. This is more than a mind game. People are being weaponized. It is only a matter of time before Japanese are being killed from the products of Chinese hate farming, and the myth of Japanese militarization will become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Gullible reporters will need to account for their role in this outcome.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/07/world/asia/thaad-missile-defense-us-south-korea-china.html

The New York Times reported Sunday that President Trump’s national security deputies have discussed both the possibility of pre-emptive strikes that would almost certainly provoke an attack on South Korea and a reintroduction of nuclear weapons to the South. Intelligence officials say North Korea is already able to hit much of South Korea and Japan with a nuclear-tipped missile.

[...]

For days, the official Chinese news media has warned that deployment of Thaad could lead to a “de facto” break in relations with South Korea and urged consumers to boycott South Korean products. The Chinese authorities recently forced the closing of 23 stores owned by Lotte, a South Korean conglomerate that agreed to turn over land that it owned for use in the Thaad deployment, and hundreds of Chinese protested at Lotte stores over the weekend, some holding banners that read, “Get out of China.”

Xinhua, the official Chinese news agency, warned that Thaad “will bring an arms race in the region,” likening the defensive system to a shield that would prompt the development of new spears. “More missile shields of one side inevitably bring more nuclear missiles of the opposing side that can break through the missile shield,” it said.

[...]

Takashi Kawakami, a professor of international politics and security at Takushoku University in Tokyo, said the deployment of Thaad could put the United States in a stronger position to consider a pre-emptive strike on North Korea. If the United States took such action, he said, “North Korea is going to make a counterattack on the U.S. or Japan or another place, so in this case they will use Thaad” to defend against the North’s missiles.

The Japanese prime minister, Shinzo Abe, said he spoke for 25 minutes on Tuesday with Mr. Trump, who reiterated his pledge to stand by Japan “100 percent,” according to the public broadcaster NHK. “I appreciate that the United States is showing that all the options are on the table,” Mr. Abe said, adding that Japan was “ready to fulfill larger roles and responsibilities” to deter North Korea.

adding that Japan was “ready to fulfill larger roles and responsibilities” to deter North Korea

...and to wrest some portion of the fate of Japan out of the hands of an incompetent, erratic, and unstable president.

Great, add "wake up and find out Seoul is a crater" to the list of occasional sweat-provoking dread ideas

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-39301842

Military action "an option" against North Korea if it elevates weapons programme threat, US secretary of state says

a few steps closer

“The full range of the United States military capability is dedicated to the protection of Japan. Japan, you are our friend — you are our ally — and on that foundation, we will face the future together,” Pence told the thousands of American and Japanese sailors who packed the deck of the USS Ronald Reagan, which is based in the port city.

...

“Under President Trump, the U.S. commitment to Article 5 of our security treaty is unwavering, and the treaty covers all of the territories administered by Japan, including the Senkaku Islands,” Pence said.

Claiming sovereign power over the uninhabited islets, Beijing regularly dispatches government ships to the area — moves that have unnerved Tokyo.

Article 5 obliges the U.S. to jointly defend areas administered by Japan, and U.S. top officials have repeatedly affirmed this obligation to ease public concerns among Japanese over the potential for military clashes between Japan and China.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/04/19/asia-pacific/politics-diplomacy-asia-pacific/u-s-vice-president-pence-says-north-korea-sword-stands-ready/

full response trump made wrt dprk yesterday (floating around the web)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C94uuuPUQAAxjjV.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C94uuuPUQAAxjjV.jpg

yeah we're all gonna die

and i still haven't played the new zelda

if youre wondering about coal

china stopped importing coal from north korea at the end of feb

itll now import it from usa and russia

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-northkorea-coal-exclusive-idUSKBN17D0D8

china also threatening to cut oil supplies

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/China-Ready-To-Cut-Oil-Supplies-To-North-Korea.html

as part of a piece criticizing the NYT's coverage of our global no-name war:, here's a short list of selected ongoing conflicts that the US is involved in:

Over 6,000 days after it began, America’s war in Afghanistan continues, with Times correspondents providing regular and regularly repetitive updates;

In the seven-year-long civil war that has engulfed Syria, the ever-shifting cast of belligerents now includes at least 2,000 (some sources say 4,000) U.S. special operators, the rationale for their presence changing from week to week, even as plans to keep U.S. troops in Syria indefinitely take shape;

In Iraq, now liberated from ISIS, itself a byproduct of U.S. invasion and occupation, U.S. troops are now poised to stay on, more or less as they did in West Germany in 1945 and in South Korea after 1953;

On the Arabian Peninsula, U.S. forces have partnered with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman Al Saud in brutalizing Yemen, thereby creating a vast humanitarian disaster despite the absence of discernible U.S. interests at stake;

In the military equivalent of whacking self-sown weeds, American drones routinely attack Libyan militant groups that owe their existence to the chaos created in 2011 when the United States impulsively participated in the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi;

More than a quarter-century after American troops entered Somalia to feed the starving, the U.S. military mission continues, presently in the form of recurring airstrikes;

Elsewhere in Africa, the latest theater to offer opportunities for road-testing the most recent counterterrorism techniques, the U.S. military footprint is rapidly expanding, all but devoid of congressional (or possibly any other kind of) oversight;

From the Levant to South Asia, a flood of American-manufactured weaponry continues to flow unabated, to the delight of the military-industrial complex, but with little evidence that the arms we sell or give away are contributing to regional peace and stability;

Amid this endless spiral of undeclared American wars and conflicts, Congress stands by passively, only rousing itself as needed to appropriate money that ensures the unimpeded continuation of all of the above;

Meanwhile, President Trump, though assessing all of this military hyperactivity as misbegotten — “Seven trillion dollars. What a mistake.” — is effectively perpetuating and even ramping up the policies pioneered by his predecessors.

Are We At War? if we are, it's a war with no name, which might just be the point.

http://lobelog.com/six-questions-for-the-new-york-times-on-americas-wars/