What Year Is It? 1938? 1972? Or 1914?

WSJ, Atlantic Monthly ^ | August 15, 2006 | ROSS DOUTHAT

[schu]

Foreign-policy debates are usually easy to follow: Liberals battle conservatives, realists feud with idealists, doves vie with hawks. But well into the second Bush term, traditional categories are in a state of collapse.

***** Snip

There are five major schools of thought on this question, beginning with the "1942ists," who believe that we stand in Iraq today where the U.S. stood shortly after Pearl Harbor: bogged down against a fascist enemy and duty-bound to carry on the fight to victory.

***** Snip

Over the last year, though, many conservatives have been peeling away from '42ism, joining the "1938ists" instead, for whom Iran's march toward nuclear power is the equivalent of Hitler's 1930s brinkmanship.

***** Snip

'72ism has few mainstream politicians behind it, but a great many Americans, and it holds that George Bush is Nixon, Iraq is Vietnam, and that any attack on Iran or Syria would be equivalent to bombing Cambodia.

***** Snip

"1948ists," who share the '42ist and '38ist view of the war on terror as a major generational challenge, but insist that we should think about it in terms of Cold War-style containment and multilateralism, not Iraq-style pre-emption

***** Snip

But as our crisis deepens, it's worth considering 1914ism, and with it the possibility that all of us, whatever year we think it is, are poised on the edge of an abyss that nobody saw coming.

[joe fonebone]

Amen, brotha, amen...........

[Anne of DC]

I'm a 1776ist

LIBERTY! :o)

[ZULU]

I think its 476 A.D.

[jonascord]

I tend toward the "1938ist" simply because we have not yet had an incident so massive, so horrifying, that it will convince the donks and other people on the short bus that Islam is out to kill us all or die trying.

Call 911 as equivalent to the "Panay" sinking. It was bad, but compare it to a when a city dies, in a moment. After all, there are 1000 million Muslims who cannot play well with others...

[dirtboy]

When it comes to Iran, I'm more of a 331 BC kind of guy.

[Eastbound]

But then we would have nobody to fight on Thursday. ;>

I don't think we should kill them. Just isolate and contain them in some zoo-like region somewhere, far removed from the civilized world. Let them work out their problems without the means to blame anyone else for their sorry existence. Perhaps their blood-thirsty 'god' would require them to bleed each other, at least as long as the supply lasts.

But realistically, that won't happen and I think we'll have to go to 'Plan B' before this is over.

[RobRoy]

>>Attempts to draw create false historical analogies are the behavior of sophomoric intellects.<<

I strongly disagree. Think of this a working the problem within the context of the saying "Those that do not learn from history are destined to repeat it".

Although history never repeats, it is all men do: Times change. People don't.

We can indeed learn from mistakes and successes from history. A strong understanding of history is more valuable than a strong understanding of science. The former tells you who you are and who your enemy is. The latter is "fun", but also helps you keep ahead of your enemy. And life has been a fight for survival since we were banished from the garden.

[schu]

I would tend to agree with the 1938 analogy, we are trying to appease dictators and fascists, that has never really worked.

Not sure that the idea of history never repeating is true. While individual circumstances may vary, man's folly is quite predictable, we always want to play God. Napoleon and Hitler in Russia come to mind.

schu

[brownsfan]

"I'm for killing all the Islamofascists, all their supporters, financers, media fifth columnists, enablers, all their families, friends and relatives tomorrow morning and feeding them to the fish and pigs. "

Hey... you stole my post! ;)

[<1/1,000,000th%]

1803.

[brownsfan]

"Our current enemies, all rolled into one "Axis" do not have the power to destroy the USA. We have the power available right now to crush any Conventional Military challenge in days if not hours."

And the key is conventional military challenge. Our enemies won't line up for us. They'll hide among us and kill us from within. And our left wing will welcome them. This is not dissimilar from our ancestors hiding behind trees shooting a superior British army that had lined up in ranks.

Also, oil is our Achilles' heel. It's no coincidence that Iran is warming up to Venezeula. If we don't act to become energy independent, the combination of internal terrorism and oil embargo could cripple if not bring down the US.

[Wolfstar]

The modern world is in 2006. The Islamofascist world is in 1006 (or thereabouts). The clash between these two different worlds is due to the fact that the Islamofacists are awash in oil money while nursing thousand-year-old grudges and religious ideas.

This era may have some similarities to earlier times, but it is quite unique largely for one reason: The modern "westernized" world fights with ridiculous self-imposed restraints, while the Islamofacist world fights a world-wide guerrila war without restraint of any kind other than their failure to conjure and implement an overarching strategy.

[brownsfan]

"This era may have some similarities to earlier times, but it is quite unique largely for one reason: The modern "westernized" world fights with ridiculous self-imposed restraints, while the Islamofacist world fights a world-wide guerrila war without restraint of any kind other than their failure to conjure and implement an overarching strategy."

And it is the self restraint of the West that scares me as much as anything. We are of a mindset to contribute to our own demise right now. I hope that changes before it's too late.

Good post.

[schu]

Agree. We think in terms of military might, clearly it will be a long time before we are threatened in that manner. But if one is unwillingly to use this power, for whatever reason, it becomes false security.

However, our way of life is absolutely threatened, externally and internally. But before you can defend your way of life, one needs to define what that means. There are such dramatic differences in the left and mainstream views on this issue and the country is pretty divided, hence our enemies see a chance to hurt us bad.

It's 1938 or 1914, not sure what is coming, but it is not good.

schu

[Porterville]

I'm more of a 1858-1860ist..... George being a hybrid proto-Lincoln type before the Lincoln type actually takes charge.

[headsonpikes]

An argument could be made for say, 68 AD - modernizing, civilizing Romans and Hellenists versus crazed zealots, and in the Middle East.

[headsonpikes]

An argument could be made for say, 68 AD - modernizing, civilizing Romans and Hellenists versus crazed zealots, and in the Middle East.

[Porterville]

Instead of slavery being the taboo that no one wishes to touch... now it is religion.

[Eastbound]

"They'll hide among us and kill us from within."

They already are hiding among us and killing us. But when the water starts to boil, it will be too late for the gummint to do anything about it. Not difficult to foresee a 'one on one' here.

[filbert]

All of the above.

None of the above.

We're seeing the feeling of inevitability driven by human frailty, misunderstanding, and stupidity of 1914, the head-in-the-sand appeasement of 1938, and the religious element of, well, most crisis periods throughout human history.

But this time, it is different from any other crisis. Combine the destructive potential of nuclear weapons and the extremist Islamist disregard for all human life.

This will not end soon, easily, or well.