IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Ashton-inspired thought experiment
Elsewhere Ashton muses:

Nothing would surprise me, next. Well maybe one thing: if for some bizarre reason -?- the rest of the world did Not boycott US Bizness/Corp Interests [!?] for the next ten years, as we rapidly sink into the state of Universal Pariah to the Planet.

Interesting concept. Let's suppose that Dubya loses big time at the UN and then invades anyway, in defiance of the Security Council. Suppose the rest of the world decides, for various reasons, that something's got to be done about this rogue state, and imposes sanctions: global trade embargo, withdrawal of landing rights, expulsion of troops...I realize that we're working in the realm of high fantasy here, but what do you suppose would be the responses, both among the pee-pul and on the part of the junta, to some kind of concerted global effort to bring down the Empire?

cordially,
"Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist."
New Re: Ashton-inspired thought experiment
Here's what one can *hope* for:

The United Democracies of Europe raise a BIG honkin' army - put their techno-attack capabilities on a par with us - all doable. Crack German infantry and armor, French air power, English logistics and planning - Italian MREs and Russian girls to entertain the troops. Scandanavians with blue faces in the foremost ranks giving us the fanny-salute.

Then let the war come - US and United Europe toe to toe.

We'd get our fat, Eminem-Nelly listening, cholesterol sucking, 200-dollar tennis-shoe wearing SUV-driving asses kicked. The kids of America are about as ready for real war as Marlowe is.

We only pick on little dudes. If only there were a big dude to teach us a fucking lesson about war, Western style.
-drl
New In reply

Let me quote from an article in today's [link|http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20030311.wbush0311_x/BNStory/International|Globe and Mail].

\r\n\r\n

With each passing day, the U.S.-led coalition of the willing, as Mr. Bush has called it, looks more like the coalition of the bribed and the kicking and screaming. Even staunch allies such as Canada are about as reluctant as they can be without actually thwarting the United States.

\r\n\r\n

The feeling here is that many are acting out of fear. I'd like to note that despite a lot of ranting in the right wing media in the US to the contrary, if you were to ask anywhere outside the US you'd be told that we (Canada) are your best friend on the planet.

\r\n\r\n

The arrogant manner in which the administration has been going about this issue is exemplified by the following; it's common public knowledge in Canada that we've been advocating a compromise solution for quite some time, only part of which is contained in the British-authored resolution:

\r\n\r\n

Canada was among the first countries to predict a diplomatic train wreck at the UN if the United States tried for a second resolution, but Ottawa's efforts to broker a compromise were met with disdain and even anger at the White House.

\r\n\r\n

If they're treating friends like that, just imagine how they're treating others.

\r\n\r\n

Oops, forgot something. The question you need to ask... what happens to empires when the subjects stop being afraid of the imperial power? What happens to joe citizen of that empire when that happens? If you want an answer, history is replete with examples to draw from. This means that if the US takes the path of empire, they're going to have to put the fear out for as long as they can. What do you think that's going to do to your culture? What do you think it's doing to it already?

\r\n\r\n

The more I read about what's happening in the US, between sanctimonious mall rent-a-cops hiding behind their authority all the way on up to Patriot and Patriot II, the more I figure that OBL is laughing his ass off. His little project has paid off far more than he could have hoped and dreamed for... he's turning you into them.

--\r\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\r\n* Jack Troughton                            jake at consultron.ca *\r\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca]                   [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\r\n* Kingston Ontario Canada               [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\r\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
Expand Edited by jake123 March 11, 2003, 12:47:01 PM EST
New #2: Won't happen like that - result more likely to be ....
smoldering envy at US power & birth of a new but more hidden jihadist movement

IMHO: The real reasons Repubs are going into Iraq is in support of world trade & globalisation (under a pax Americana) but the depth of the story & its issues are just too hard to sell to the world at large & also to the US public & troops.

We have produced here in IWETHEY, compelling evidence that Iraq is the lynch-pin to solving the Palestinian issue which despite what everyone believes, is really about Israel's paranoia that Arabs (& a Palestinaian state) will eventually wipe out Israel by cutting off its desperately needed water.

*Water* is Israel's long term achille's heel. Iraq by way of its two great rivers, has the water that could be used to solve that problem & thus allow potential peace between Israel and Palestinains. Hussien has *no* intention of letting that occur so the alternative is on-going conflict there & subsequent Arab anger at US for appearing to condone apparent Israeli suppresion of Palestinian Arabs (sure looks bad in news).

The other aspect is one we have done to death here & that is US ensuring it has 'police' in place to ensure *all* key oil supplies (Stans, M.E., Americas) never get threatened by being in the lands/hands of any country governmnent that might try to change balance of world power in their favour or to blackmail US or use the control to ferment other kinds of trouble. This issue is coming to a head because of the massive development in China. Oil *is* the lifeblood of the US economy & for China to keep growing, oil will also become lifeblood of its economy, but Europe wants to grow as does Russia.

So sooner or later the superpowers of today & tomorrow (Russia, Europe, China & US) will be wanting to manipulate access/control of oil to their own advantage. There is usually ever only one top dog & top dog has a habit of taking the biggest bone (learned that from National Geographic Channel :-)

US position re Iraq is that if the UN won't 'deal with' Iraq (as a constant and ongoing source of M.E. instability), then US will and is willing to take the consequences. 9/11 has 'hardened' US defences & internal security against the expect backlash should US have to go unilateral. Countries like UK & Australia & Japan are on-board with the US because it is very much in their strategic long term interests to allay with the power that is most able to support them while they support it, also all those countries are somewhat isolated in their respective world geographies (both ethnically & physically). By US partnering with those particular nations, US gets springboards to leap into any major part of the world to protect its strategic interests should relationships btween superpowers go sour (just look at what US commentators are saying about Germany & France today !!! and this is really just a minor spat !!!).

Their are two views as to what is happening re Iraq.

1) Europe doesn't want US to become excessively dominant (not unreasonable) so is arguing that inspections & UN approach to Iraq is working just fine (for them) but US considers that a lack of US military 'police' presence there leaves control of the oil in others hands & US won't tolerate that. Sure, Europe would rather it be under their control (quite undersatndably). US also possibly believes that Europe doesn't really care about Israel's long term survival & the water problem, so doesn't have any serious interest in exploiting Iraq's water potential to solve the Palestinian problem.

2) US is going into Iraq to prevent Iraq feeding or backing terrorism against US. This view is pure propaganda as any desire by Iraq to harm US would be a desire for revenge for what US has done & is doing to Iraq. This POV is a bit like shooting a dog after claiming the dog intended biting you but all the while you keep badly mistreating the dog.

Re the importance of Israel & Palestine:
US, *is* the most heavily Jewish influenced nation in the world. Europe & Russia in particular (*not* ME countries) have a 1000+ year history of pogroms against Jews & Jewishness brought about by the early desire of the 'Paulian' Christian church to appease the powerful romans & shift blame of death of 'son of GOD' from Romans to someone else (Jews became that scapegoat & have suffered ever since). Later Mohammad also turned on them spawning the current ME hatred that much later became endemic to Jew/Moslem relations. Israel is a country with a lot of bitter (emotional) enemies.

In terms of strategic goals US will lose heaviliy if outmanouvred by Europe over what to do with Iraq. Repubs may well have badly mishandled the lead up to Gulf-2 & put themselves in a corner internationally, but I am convinced they will still go in.

Issue then becomes what other countries do about it and this is where I am convinced that while some may use the deed as an anti-US whipping post, the majority will accept the outcome as to not do so will limit world growth & the grand globalisation plan that nearly all the superpowers want to pursue. This grand plan will more than likely stall or falter. Globalisation & growth will *not* happen if the major powers start isolating & blockading each other over what US does in Iraq.

Just my accumulated 2c worth.

Cheers

Doug
Expand Edited by dmarker March 12, 2003, 12:02:47 AM EST
Expand Edited by dmarker March 12, 2003, 04:51:52 PM EST
New Re: Ashton-inspired thought experiment
The US might be a pariah of Europe, but it will have a few allies throughout the world who aren't from the Western school of thought that invasions require UN approval, especially in the Third World. A black market of goods will flow through these countries to the US, and from the US to countries which aren't officially doing business with the US but aren't stopping illicit imports either. These black market center countries get rich. The big question mark is China, which largely relies on trade with the United States and vice versa.

The embargo would be on Britian as well, and possibly other countries joining the invasion. Djibouti, Israel, Taiwan, Australia are not likely to give up US support even with a UN resolution. Ports of call there will keep US sea supremacy, leaving the US's ability to fight a war halfway around the world only marginally effected.

The US would probably leave the United Nations if such a resolution passes; I'd give a 40% chance of Congress doing this immediately after the embargo and if not, a >90% chance after GIs find Iraqi WMDs in a bunker in the desert. Israel might follow, as the UN actively works against its existence. Don't know if Bush is stupid enough to completely sever ties with the UN, but I expect someone with a brain to have diplomats or spies at the UN's new headquarters in Europe.

After victoly in Iraq, I expect a bombing of Iran's nuke reactors. Iran, Syria, SA, Kuwait, and Jordan then gear up to liberate Iraq. Kurds stay on the sidelines. Lebanon may stay on the sidelines, under Syrian pressure, just so the US doesn't have an excuse to invade Syria on two fronts. The armies get creamed in <2 months by superior US firepower, but Hezbollah keeps the US busy for the forseeable future. US wouldn't have the forces available to return the favour to all of these countries, so would just stay in Iraq. This might happen regardless of a UN denunciation/embargo of the US's actions.

Herat, which identifies strongly with Persia, may break off Afghanistan after the US attacks Iran. The US, which will still be in an Afghanistan that's not strong enough to kick them out, will probably let this happen and concentrate on the Pakistani border where al Qaeda is. Speaking of which, Musharraf will kick the US out to save his neck from his people while accepting bundles of US money under the table to keep up the fight against al Qaeda. India will solicit under the table help against Pakistan but won't get it.

With Taiwan supporting the US against the wishes of the UN, it's likely that the UN will declare Taiwan to belong to the PRC. This especially considering the UN does not recognize Taiwan as a sovereign entity and that the US has historically been the only supporter for Taiwan's continued existence in the UN.

After six months: Gas is up to $4.00/gal in the US. Inflation hits 15%/annum. Drilling in ANWR, other parkland passes as an emergency measure after Bush refuses to open the strategic oil reserve he's had filled for exactly this situation. A few labor strikes break out, all fail. Few changes militarily.

Europe would need three years to build a military to match the United States. Even then, they would only be able to compete for supremacy of the Atlantic and would not be capable of invading the US mainland or pushing a presence into the Indian or Pacific oceans.

After these 3 years: North Korea would have nukes, the United States would not care. The US would not care if NK overran SK if SK joined the embargo and kicked out US forces. After NK tests a nuke, Japan tests one within 2 weeks. Miniature cold war ensues, which ends when Kim's heir is assassinated in a military coup and the unified Korean generals make peace with Japan. Meanwhile, China and Russia supply both sides, with Russia leaning towards supporting Korea for historical reasons and China supporting Japan to spite Russia. Chinese propaganda begins to mention that Japan has changed a bit since the '40s.

The US would get used to a weakened economy, large segments of population made to rely on government support and church support funded by government, and so populace has good opinion of government and government-run churches. Bush reelected in landslide victory after blaming all hardships on Americans' lack of faith in God and on the Godless Europeans and Godless Muslims. Blair kicked out in landslidier victory, and Britain joins the embargo. Canada, probably a black market center, would be pressured by Britain to enforce the embargo. This may lead to threats of an invasion by the US, if not an actual invasion.

If Canada is invaded, Europe will begin to arm to match the United States (having not used any of the prior three years, with the possible exception of Russia). Unlike Canadian Bacon, the invasion is highly unpopular in the US, but dissent only leads to one or two Oklahoma Cities for which the perps are quickly caught. Russia gears up to liberate Canada and maybe keep Alaska as payment.

Israel stays out of the Iraq situation because all of North Africa is ready to invade it on the way to Iraq. Egypt stays out of the Iraq situation because it's a logistical problem getting troops over there, Israel is staying out, and the US is still giving it $4bil/annum.

Intifada casualties up to 5000 Arab and 2000 Jewish dead. Israel finishes building the Great Wall of Caanan, which the PA immediately launches Qassam-3s over. Arafat croaks of natural causes, UN Secretary General Mary Robinson condemns Israel for assassinating Arafat. New PA leadership suggests peace, announces that it will not negotiate with a terrorist like Sharon. Sharon steps down, new elections are held. Shinui proposes joining Europe in the embargo of the United States, watches half its membership disappear. Right-wing parties become openly Kahanist, an Arab right-wing party emerges that is openly Palestinian. New coalition is Likud-Labor-Shas-Shinui, in that order of power. Israel sends a peace delegation to Ramallah, Hamas blows it up, PA refuses to arrest perps, here we go again.

Berlusconi of Italy jailed for Mafia connections. Leftists elected, declare support of UN embargo and neutrality beyond that.

After six years: After initially seizing the entire territory, Russian forces have evacuated southern Alaska if not all of it, and are being beaten back in Siberia. One or two US aircraft carriers sunk in Pacific by Russian subs and air force, Russian navy largely ceased to exist. China-Japan axis on sideline. N^HK on sideline at Russian request so as not to involve China-Japan. China takes opportunity to make a grab at Taiwan, gets clobbered by Taiwanese forces. Shipyards and fleets of European countries pledged to liberate Canada are bombarded by US carrier-based aircraft, Euro fleet set back two years. Rumsfeld elected President of United States.

All quiet on al Qaeda front, GIs moved from Afghanistan to Iraq to put down growing revolutionary trend.

US-friendly governments in Georgia and Uzbekistan have been conquered by Russian forces or Russian-friendly coups. Chechnya blown to bits as enemy-of-evil-US Russia can do no wrong; not a threat any more.

At eight years: US left friendly Spain and Italy alone, surprised when their friendly fleets sink two US carriers in Atlantic and Mediterranean. Retaliation takes six months to arrive, sunk by combined European wolfpack built in that time. US down to four carriers: two in north Pacific, one in Persian Gulf, and one in San Diego.

US begins to learn meaning of "never fight a land war in Asia", bogged down against numerically superior Russian lines in Siberia, 6 figures dead both sides. Reinforcements arrive from mainland without a hitch, Russia sues for peace as they head towards the front line. US accepts on condition Russia accept US sovereignty over Canada and Alaska. Russia accepts, help promised from Europe five years ago never showed up and soldiers haven't been paid in months except by the CIA.

Following year, US deploys three new carriers, goes to attack European shipyards again. Meets Russian carrier built on the west side and French long-range bombers with long-range, accurate missiles. US cries fowl at Russia's breach of ceasefire, Russia points to defensive alliance with one of the countries the US bombed.

Eventually, Europe makes landfall on Canada and Russia invades Alaska again. As US moves forces north, Mexico invades followed by every single country to the south, eager for vengeance for the past century, shipping a long line of troops and supplies north. Revolts break out in hispanic and black communities. Retaliatory lynchings occur, the Ku Klux Klan becomes an honorable American institution again. Cuba conquers a few nearby islands.

Mexico installs a friendly government in California, which declares independence. Mexican forces are then beaten back by US forces, who enter California towns to find lead confetti for their victory parade; it turns out that many Californios wanted to secede. The coastal and Tehachapi ranges become the effective border between rebel-Mexican California and the United States, with the US controlling the central valley with its armour and air power. Forces from one of the Central American countries massacre hundreds of US loyalists in Fresno before being forced to withdraw, giving loyalists throughout the US a cause to rally around.

Canadian loyalists sabotage the US's efforts in the North. The US massacres thousands of innocent Canadians to get to them. Not long after, no USian is safe in a Canadian bar, and soldiers are ordered to remain on base.

Rumsfeld is reelected with 62% of the vote. A Republican activist in New York finds out that the voting machines in their district are registering every other Democratic vote as a Republican vote, and leaks the information to the Post, Journal, and to right-wing Times columnist Cal Thomas. The Post and Journal ignore the activist, who is soon killed in a nighttime mugging in Central Park. Thomas's report is largely uninflammatory. Rumsfeld condemns Cal Thomas as a Communist traitor and orders the Times shut down. The Washington Post sends agents to other parts of the country, where they find out the machines there are also rigged. After the Post's front-page story on this, which points out that the difference would have elected the Democratic candidate, Rumsfeld orders the Post shut down and the article's authors Robert Woodward and Carl Bernstein arrested. Several divisions of the military immediately surrender to United Nations forces.

The pro-Mexico puppet legislature of California is massacred by loyalist forces from Southern California, who pledge California to Rumsfeld. They are massacred by Communist forces from Oakland, who order the arrest of several prominent Jewish businessmen for causing all the problems of the past 70 years. They are massacred by a group of Civil War reenactment enthusiasts who actually conduct the countercoup in old blue and grey uniforms, clashing with their modern weaponry. They abandon the capitol as a rebelling mobile infantry unit advances. The APCs roll into Sacramento to see packed streets, with one man standing on the capitol steps addressing the crowd. He says his name is William Norton, and that the people need decisive leadership in these trying times, and he would be their Emperor for so long as they would accept him...


Hmm, this strayed from a thought experiment to a fun experiment a long time ago.
New Sha-yit, a budding novel <g>
New Slight changeup
Alaska secedes from the US. The 13I corps immediately declare war on the secesh state. They close down the pipelines and cut the road system to isolate the interior. The state government calls out the national guard but finds out that only the commanders and the anchorage unit is white and all the arms are gone. Without oil money the Alaskan treasury is broke in 3 weeks the whites in Anchorage call for an evacuation to Seattle and turn the lights off when they leave. Once they leave the 13I corps disolve the state, ask washington to declare all former state land 13I lands and senator Ted Stevens pushes the Bill thru the senate saying Alaska Natives are the only true patriots up there. I finally get to go home.
thanx,
bill
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]

questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]</br>

"If you want to meet a group of people who have a profound distrust of, and hostility toward, our legal system, don't waste your time on political radicals; interview a random selection of crime victims, and you will probably find that they make the former group look like utopian idealists by comparison." Dave Robicheaux
New a little closer to earth
I did say "high fantasy," didn't I? tangaroa's entertaining epic certainly takes the notion of a serious estrangement between the US and the rest of the world into orbit, and boxley takes the opportunity fancifully to indulge one of his secondary preoccupations, but I wonder what shorter-range scenarios are out there for a concerted effort by the civilized world (a notional community with which the US of A has never been entirely comfortable and from which it now appears determined to secede) to impede, by vigorous but nonviolent collective action, the imposition of a barbaric American hegemony over the planet. What measures might be taken, so calibrated as to make the empire say ouch without causing it to draw its guns? What might the prevailing domestic response (in toto a continuum, of course) be to the enforced awareness that the rest of the world, including the western industrial democracies, regard us as a rogue state? Might people make the connection or, like Norman, would the pee-pul conclude that we are the target of a wicked conspiracy: "they hate us because we're free."

I think that a recall of ambassadors, an embargo on air and sea transport to and from (no blockade needed--just no landing or docking rights abroad), an embargo on trade (including oil, natch), an abrogation of military basing rights abroad (auf wiedersehn!) might be a good beginning--sure, it would make for a dreadful short-term disruption of the world economy, but might that not be preferable to the long-term consequences of allowing Cheney, Rumsfeld and confederates to raise up their empire unimpeded? Would it be enough? Would the junta (which will steal next year's election if it has to) give up its dreams of world domination short of war?

My own rather incompletely-imagined scenario of European-led collective action would be helped along should Labor rise up and turn out Tony Blair (recall that another British PM once appeared invulnerable on the eve of a middle east conflict)--a scenario made just a tiny bit more plausible by Rummy's recent insult.

So what do you say, comrades? Should our march to empire be stopped from abroad? Can it be stopped? If so, how?

cordially,
"Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist."
New Don't know if it's doable
Too many holes. Strategically, the US has staunch European allies in Spain, the Netherlands, and Italy, and many of the Eastern European countries seem to support the US. The US can also spread around more lucre to get its way than France, Germany, and Belgium.

Economically, Canada relies on trade with the US and would hurt itself more by joining in an embargo than it would hurt the US. China might be in this position too, and there are probably others given the US's trade deficit. For at least a few nations, the benefits of joining the US in a rogue commercial union would exceed the costs. Several of those who believe the US is right would outright refuse to enforce the embargo. The embargo weakens over time as the free-trade nations reap benefits.

It is very difficult for a disunited world to interfere with another country's trade without blocking its ports. Since chances are the embargo would be doomed to failure in the long term, a symbolic limited embargo of 1 to 3 months would salvage the boycotters' reputation without allowing time for a rouge union to visibly defeat the embargo. Countries on the sidelines would see the end of the embargo weeks away and would be less inclined to break it.

Among the US's biggest weaknesses is oil, which means the embargo must include Venezuela (which makes most of its national income selling oil to the US), Nigeria, Indonesia, Russia, and the Gulf States. The US produces about half its own, and the reserve is enough to survive a shortened embargo such as I suggested. Still, limiting the availablity of oil is a good way of disrupting the US economy.

It's possible that the Internet might be included in the embargo, as it enables business communication, et cetera. I think this is a bad idea, as it cuts off the flow of information. Perhaps rig the gateways to ban all but port 80 and to filter out cookies.


The effects to the US's geopolitial position may be more significant than the economic harm. The US wants to reduce its presence in northern Europe anyways, so all the better if Germany gets the blame for a massive strategic disruption than the US. There will be some countries which may not join in the diplomatic/military boycott:

Iraq and Afghanistan: US won't be leaving these countries
Georgia: Too afraid of a Russian invasion to kick out the US
Israel: No other friends, will keep diplomatic lines open
Spain, Italy: Staunch US allies afaict. Italy will probably keep the US's bases there, maintaining the US sphere of influence over Europe and the Mediterranean
South Korea: Fear of North invasion may cause hesitation
Uzbekistan: US's buddy in middle Asia
Australia: Will keep diplomatic lines open, possibly ports as well
New Zealand: May ignore boycott if Oz does, especially of listening posts
Djibouti: The US has made this country its hub of operations for the Horn region, may be willing to pay the whole country's expenditures for a few years to keep the base. Then again, maybe it's not that important.

After an economic embargo ends, the US is permanently stuck with the effects of the military embargo. Its no longer has bases in nearly all but the above countries and will not be invited back to most of them. China may make bids for leases on a few empty bases.

Many countries may permit only smaller diplomatic teams to return. It's possible the economic embargo was also against US corporations, some of which are used by the CIA to insert spies around the globe. The US's intelligence operations are now hampered compared to beforehand.

Some countries may misinterpret the embargo against the US as a reason to weaken their antiterrorism investigations.


If well planned and executed, an embargo might knock the US down a notch or two, but I doubt that it would stop the US. After a (inUS?worst:best)-case scenario, the US still has force of arms and ability to move them wherever it wants.


I wonder what would happen if Canadian aircraft started dropping European newspapers (translated to 'murrakin) on US cities. Propaganda will play a big role in how this would play out in the long term. People tend to rally around their leader when they're being victimized, and a lot of folks in the US are already believing that Europe doesn't care about Sep11. The non-Bush point of view isn't getting across to any USian who isn't going out of their way to get it.
New Holy crap
Doug is right. That needs the full-length treatment. I'm thinking Clancey, someone who could add enough historical reality and current research to make it all seem plausible. Not that it's that far away now.
===

Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
New making it plausible?
Tom Clancy???? The same guy who published a novel a few years back in which a group of environmentalists (with an influential lesbian contingent in the top ranks) attempts to kill off 99% of the world's human population with a genetically-engineered hemorrhagic fever virus so as to protect the rest of God's creation from our depradations? That Tom Clancy? Or is there a social realist out there doing business under the same or a similar name I'm not aware of?

(Don't get me wrong--TC used to be a guilty pleasure for me, the male equivalent of a bodice-ripper, but where it used to be amusing to watch his fantasy avatar Jack Ryan, it gradually became a queasy sort of spectacle, sort of like being compelled to watch Clancy practicing self-abuse on the public stage.)

cordially,
"Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist."
New "bodice ripper" - rofl - you're on today!
"With one sweeping motion, she tore off her bodice and placed her cellphone on 'mute'."
-drl
New I haven't had time lately to read him
I'm thinking particularly about the one comparing the then-current state of the Japanese economy, and their dependence on U.S. trade, to the situation before WWII. Laid out how a combination of pragmatic thinking and good old revenge fantasies among the power players could lead to an economic attack on the stock market. It seemed all too plausible.
===

Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
New Ah, that would be "Debt of Honor"
...a work of somewhat less than negligible literary merit, but it did elicit from Christopher Buckley a hilariously negative review, and from aggrieved author Clancy a testy fax to the critic:

"Dear Chris,
Thanks for the review. You seem to have inherited your father's hauteur but, alas, not his talent or noblesse. Revealing a surprise ending for a novel is bad form, lad.
For the body of your review, Dr. Johnson said it best:
'A fly, sir, may sting a stately horse and make him wince, but one is but an insect, and the other a horse still.'
Regards,
Tom Clancy."

Such a straight line is provided gratis maybe once or twice in a generation, and Buckley would have been churlish to spurn it. He didn't:

"Dear Tom,
I may be the insect, but you're still the horse's arse."
Regards,
Christopher Buckley"

cordially,
"Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist."
New Read that book due to my dad...
and good LORD, did it stink. It's probably the only "recommended reading" from my dad that did.

Especially the unnamed hero worship at the end for Mr. Ryan. God, don't get me started on the contortions he went through to "reward" his avatar in the end...
"Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music." -- Kristian Wilson, Nintendo, Inc, 1989
New Since you two both seemed to hate it ... why?
I wouldn't exactly call it a classic of American literature. But the scenerio for crashing the stock market seemd right, assuming a software monoculture. And the plane attack at the end was either prescient or someone actually got the idea form it.

So what did you hate so much about it?
===

Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
New It's the Jack Ryan thing. (Spoilers)
ObDisclaimer: I read this book YEARS ago. I don't remember much of it.

The manipulation of the stock market was plausible. I'll give him that.

I'm about 50/50 on the military planning - I have a hard time believing that the JSDF would actually commit acts of war against U.S. forces, even WITH orders, in the day 'n age the book was written in. I've known too many people from Japan, including a few who served, to think that even one of them would think of something like that. And after the initial strikes, the whole Japanese military force comes down with a collective case of the "we're so fucking stupids" that they basically stood around with their heads up their asses instead of actually doing anything useful, while getting blown to shit by the U.S. forces.

But I accepted it, and kept going, until I got to the final bit: How convenient, that Jack Ryan gets named to be VP just in time for the entire U.S. government to be wiped out, except for himself... Talk about fucking wish fulfillment - I could literally imagine Tom Clancy spooging all over himself when he wrote those pages, and I wish I couldn't. Jack "I can do no wrong" Ryan is such an obvious avatar for Tom Clancy's fantasies, that I just get ill even thinking about that book.
"Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music." -- Kristian Wilson, Nintendo, Inc, 1989
New the Jack Ryan thing indeed
I concur w/inthane-chan's second paragraph. For the rest, I don't hate Clancy--as I say, times past he's been a guilty pleasure (particularly in the 90s, when I did more business travel--indeed, I read most of Debt of Honor at a deserted Dulles Airport overnight, after outsmarting myself in an attempt to catch an earlier flight out). I'll even go so far as to say that in another airport I once purchased the work of an imitator whose prose made The Hunt for Red October read like Faulkner by comparison. However: at his very best, at the tippy-top of his form, Clancy's work is bloated, self-indulgent and utterly devoid of literary merit. Even as a storyteller he ranks countless fathoms beneath a man like the late Nevil Shute, a writer of limited literary gifts who could nevertheless take a yarn from beginning to middle to end like nobody's business. And as to the top of his form, Clancy hasn't been there for years: his last "President Ryan" epic, The Bear and the Dragon appears to have gone directly from Clancy's Macintosh to the typesetter without the intervention of an editor. Half a lifetime ago I resisted the notion that a writer's work necessarily told us anything about the man behind the curtain. I have since come to believe that style tells us a great deal indeed, and that Clancy's prose reveals a smug, parochial, deeply naive and breathtakingly vulgar man. Still, his works are fraught with rich, albeit entirely unintentional comedy (a recurring motif in The Bear and the Dragon: American sausage vs. Chinese stringbean--in other words, our dicks (tanks, bombers, missiles and, of course, our individual fighting MEN) are bigger than theirs. The prose conveys this with the subtlety of a Sousa march), and should be suffered to exist in our nominally free society even at the risk of a diet of his books warping the sensibilities of impressionable young people--as we have seen in Marlowe's case.

cordially,
"Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist."
New I have this strange ability
If there is one aspect of a book I find interesting, I can overlook the obvious flaws.[1] Yeah, Jack Ryan is the thinking man's Forrst Gump: always in the right place at the right time for no apparent reason. But the whole stock-market-on-a-monoculture angle really struck a chord with me. Also his description of the hopelessly-overpriced Japanese real estate market, and the fact that basically all of what we call "the economy" is a house of cards held up by collective self-deceit.


[1] In my whole life, I have probably only put down about a dozen books without finishing them. Either I'm really good at picking them, or I'm way too able to overlook flaws.
===

Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
New Re: I have this strange ability
Believe me, if you enjoy Clancy this is not sufficient cause for me to damn you (although--"Jack Ryan is the thinking man's Forrest Gump"? thinking?? I think not). Hell, I'll probably read his last turgid tome once it's remaindered--but I'll always know that I'm slumming, and will do some literary decontamination thereafter.

cordially,
"Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist."
New Well ...
although--"Jack Ryan is the thinking man's Forrest Gump"? thinking?? I think not
Consider: "Life is like a box of chocolates ... that's all I have to say about that." vs. "The Japanese power structure believes they're facing the same economic hardships that presaged their attack on Pearl Harbor." The average American (with a 4th-grade reading ability) couldn't follow the first chapter of the typical Clancey. Sure it's bodice-rippers for guys, but at least he doesn't write/sound like an 8-year-old.
===

Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
New It's war-gaming porn.
New If you stay out of Regional/World Conflict ...
You must go read [link|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=87523|this one]. It answers the question:
Let's suppose that Dubya loses big time at the UN and then invades anyway, in defiance of the Security Council. Suppose the rest of the world decides, for various reasons, that something's got to be done about this rogue state, and imposes sanctions: global trade embargo, withdrawal of landing rights, expulsion of troops...
And it answers it frighteningly well.
===

Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
New Did you mean to post that to another forum?
New Yes I did, lemme try again
===

Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
New If you stay out of Regional/World Conflict ... (new thread)
Created as new thread #87665 titled [link|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=87665|If you stay out of Regional/World Conflict ...]
===

Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
New So, When Are the Nukes Used?
And when does Jesus come again?

If you're going to tell Apocolyptic tales, you might as well do them well.
New Probably about the time that Pakistan, Israel and India do.
And.. several Avatars will get the credit:

Siva (Rama, Krishna)
Jesus (et al)
Mohammed (Allah)

Everyone's got a fav fantasy to plug-in, at such times -
(But only *our* Fundament-alists get bodily Raptured-Outta airplanes! and sell 18 M+ copies of a soap opera on that theme - and have acolytes in Guvmint '02, daily a-workin to Make It So\ufffd: help out God and all ;-)

Oh - and the Russians (who have numerically the most Bang-things of all)

Ivan (the Terrible One) can stand-in for the other fantasy figures.


Ashton Hysterio-theology LLC
Tell us your One Truth and we'll catalog it with The Others
Websites - optional extra fees.
     Ashton-inspired thought experiment - (rcareaga) - (27)
         Re: Ashton-inspired thought experiment - (deSitter)
         In reply - (jake123)
         #2: Won't happen like that - result more likely to be .... - (dmarker)
         Re: Ashton-inspired thought experiment - (tangaroa) - (23)
             Sha-yit, a budding novel <g> -NT - (dmarker)
             Slight changeup - (boxley)
             a little closer to earth - (rcareaga) - (1)
                 Don't know if it's doable - (tangaroa)
             Holy crap - (drewk) - (12)
                 making it plausible? - (rcareaga) - (11)
                     "bodice ripper" - rofl - you're on today! - (deSitter)
                     I haven't had time lately to read him - (drewk) - (9)
                         Ah, that would be "Debt of Honor" - (rcareaga) - (8)
                             Read that book due to my dad... - (inthane-chan) - (7)
                                 Since you two both seemed to hate it ... why? - (drewk) - (6)
                                     It's the Jack Ryan thing. (Spoilers) - (inthane-chan) - (5)
                                         the Jack Ryan thing indeed - (rcareaga) - (4)
                                             I have this strange ability - (drewk) - (3)
                                                 Re: I have this strange ability - (rcareaga) - (2)
                                                     Well ... - (drewk) - (1)
                                                         It's war-gaming porn. -NT - (inthane-chan)
             If you stay out of Regional/World Conflict ... - (drewk) - (2)
                 Did you mean to post that to another forum? -NT - (inthane-chan) - (1)
                     Yes I did, lemme try again -NT - (drewk)
             If you stay out of Regional/World Conflict ... (new thread) - (drewk)
             So, When Are the Nukes Used? - (gdaustin) - (1)
                 Probably about the time that Pakistan, Israel and India do. - (Ashton)

Got a question? Ask it here.
169 ms