1 posted on
04/07/2004 1:09:41 PM PDT by
ZGuy
To: ZGuy
Interesting, but not too constructive.
2 posted on
04/07/2004 1:18:20 PM PDT by
expatpat
To: All
Rank |
Location |
Receipts |
Donors/Avg |
Freepers/Avg |
Monthlies |
7 |
Montana |
815.00
|
4
|
203.75
|
43
|
18.95
|
|
|
Thanks for donating to Free Republic!
Move your locale up the leaderboard!
To: ZGuy
I am working on it. Some things to be considered include identifying the best practices from several previous periods (including earlier ones in Europe, prior to the 1500s). This is, on the face of it, and, using some terminology currently in vogue, a DMAIC Six Sigma Project. But that vastly underplays what is involved, and what is at stake. The author sort of hinted at parts of the likely new design, in his alternative number 2. War may be a necessity to get through the knot hole, hundred of millions may die. One analysis I've done suggests that such a war is inevitable. Therefore, in that case, our grand strategy really would need to be how best to anticipate and manage through it, such that we emerge in a desireable position and able to implement our next grand strategy.
4 posted on
04/07/2004 1:39:03 PM PDT by
GOP_1900AD
(Un-PC even to "Conservatives!" - Right makes right)
To: ZGuy
Interesting read. He calls for Kuhn-like paradigm shift.
10 posted on
04/07/2004 1:52:13 PM PDT by
DoctorMichael
(The Fourth Estate is a Fifth Column!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)
To: ZGuy
"the amazing thing is that none of them, and nothing else to date, proposes a new grand strategy for the United States"Methinks that the author of this article doesn't get out much (and apparently doesn't read too much, either)...
President Bush's Grand Strategy
11 posted on
04/07/2004 1:54:44 PM PDT by
Southack
(Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
To: ZGuy
In short, statesmen are needed in the next two decades to formulate and implement a grand strategy which requires virtue, wisdom, diplomacy and courage at Churchillesque, Ghandi-like and Jeffersonian proportions.
And herin lies the problem. 95% of our Representatives and Senators are incompetent, have no vision, have no courage, and are too busy finding ways around that pesky United States Constitution getting in the way of their power grabs for personal gain. Sadly, the majority are not up to the task of any "grand strategy".
13 posted on
04/07/2004 1:58:21 PM PDT by
Wolfhound777
(It's not our job to forgive them. Only God can do that. Our job is to arrange the meeting--N.S)
To: ZGuy
A second proposal is outlined by Ambassador Mark Palmer in his book Breaking the Real Axis of Evil. Ambassador Palmer goes well beyond the Bush Administration and suggests that America adopt as its national purpose the ousting of all dictators in the world by 2025. He argues that dictatorship is the true evil in the world, and that democratic nations led by the United States and its President should strategize and implement a plan to get rid of all the dictators everywhere. Interesting goal. A bit ambitious. How do we achieve it without losing the benefits by being engaged in continuous wars for the next generation? Possibly by (1) identifying them, possibly with a grander version of the "axis of evil" speech; (2) depriving them of their WMD; (3) isolating them from others of their ilk; (4) bombarding them in various ways with our ideas, our products, etc.; and (5) assisting (or covertly creating) their internal democracy movements -- as we are presumably doing in Iran.
There could be exceptions. For example, most of Africa is dictatorships, over 50 of them. But although they condemn themselves to perpetual wretchedness, they are no threat to us. Such places could be put on the back-burner of this new grand strategy.
20 posted on
04/07/2004 2:21:25 PM PDT by
PatrickHenry
(Hic amor, haec patria est.)
To: ZGuy
Every Grand Strategy of America has been based on one idea: GROWTH.
Without growth as it's basis any Grand Strategy is radically unamerican. Impossible.
So the first step in making a new Grand Strategy is deciding where and how we are going to grow. The possibilities seem limited, but they must be there.
22 posted on
04/07/2004 2:47:57 PM PDT by
mrsmith
("Oyez, oyez! All rise for the Honorable Chief Justice... Hillary Rodham Clinton ")
To: ZGuy
To: ZGuy
I don't think many of these large policy changes are obvious except in retrospect. You don't just set policy, you also have to respond to events.
It seems to me that the three biggest challenges at the moment are Muslim fanaticism, the threat of China, and the possible collapse and disappearance of Europe.
But the situation could change. For instance, it seems logical that we will come closer and closer to Russia as an ally, since we both face the common threats of Islam and China, but Russia will have something to say about that too. Kosovo didn't help.
25 posted on
04/07/2004 3:09:14 PM PDT by
Cicero
(Marcus Tullius)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson