Andrew Bacevich Sees Reason for Hope!

I sure hope so.

I wish I could believe that, but I tend more toward the Michael Parenti view.

Gimme a cite?

http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474979517993

It isn't that I don't hope that Bacevich is correct, it is that I am afraid he isn't. I am afraid that all of the "anti-war" stuff out of the Republicans is really only anti-Obama stuff. I don't think that they have "taken the pledge and are on the wagon."

George, I will try to read that article in more detail today and return to comment on how the two guys are similar and different, ok?

OK, I had a chance to read it.

As I see it, the two men are describing pretty much the same facts. The main difference is, Bacevich comes at it from a pragmatic point of view and Parenti from a more ideological mindset.

I tend to be a pragmatist myself, since I think every ideology can blind you to facts on the ground. (As it happens, I have sympathy with Parenti's ideology, btw. But I prefer fact reporting to be done from a stance of pragmatism.)

Here's the situation as I see it. The US has devoted (or maybe the word is wasted) a lot of money to the kind of expansionism described by both Parenti and Bacevich. But Bacevich's main concern is the fact that this expansionism has become unsustainable, partly because the US has run out of surplus capacity and partly because the blowback from our actions has added to the costs of any new expansion.

The question isn't whether we will cut back our role on the world stage. The question is, when will that happen, and will we wait for our economy to collapse and force us to retrench.

What Bacevich is saying in this article is, that the chances of a non-catastrophic change seem better than they did when he wrote the book.

I hope he's right.

But my point is, I am afraid Bacevich is too optimistic. I don't believe that the Republicans have changed; I think that they are just trying to find anything to attack President Obama. I also think that President Obama is too sold on the U.S. trying to maintain and expand its empire.

Well, the Republicans haven't changed, but the Tea Party element has focused attention on the deficit -- and some of them are willing to look at the military budget as part of the problem. It's still not a controlling faction of the Grand, Really Old Party, but it is growing, and that is actually a good thing, in this limited arena. (I hope.)

As for Obama, I don't think he has the same kind of intellectual clarity about our role in the world as he has about justice in society. I see some signs that he realizes we are over-extended, and he even seems to be making some (limited) progress in pulling back. For one thing, I'm encouraged by his insistence on forming coalitions instead of going it alone.

But I don't think he has made the connection between our excessive military entanglements and our problems at home. It's not just a matter of money -- although there's no doubt that the military budget is a huge part of what is bleeding our economy. But the fact is that one reason other countries are becoming more economically productive than we are is that they are not paying for all the military protection they are getting.

I don't mean to imply (and I don't think Bacevich is implying) that everything is definitely gonna be ok. But I feel better about our prospects for getting out of this hole than I felt a few months ago.

I'll have to check out both links. In the immortal words of Ahhnold: "Ahh'll be back!.....

Thank you for sharing :-)

I am a believer that we are seeing a transition from America as the World Police to -- other nations have to have some skin in the game, too! Obama, Gates and Clinton have been moving us toward their new doctrine. Will it be easy? Will it be without mis-steps? No. But we are seeing it being played out in Libya as GOP-ERS whine that we are not IN CHARGE!

I have some hope that Obama and Panetta do actually want to make real cuts to our military role in the world. Time will tell if that hope is justified.

Well, here's hoping!

Hope springs eternal in the human breast;
Man never Is, but always To be blest:
The soul, uneasy and confin'd from home,
Rests and expatiates in a life to come.

-Alexander Pope,
An Essay on Man, Epistle I, 1733

Well, Vincente, I don't actually agree with Pope about the idea that it's all misery now and all bliss later.

As I see it, at every moment the world is full to the brim with suffering and full to the brim with blessing. The next moment will be more of the same. We need hope to keep our balance as we step into the future!