Separated at Birth?
Has Krauthammer been reading VodkaPundit? Says Charles:
…We should begin laying the foundation for a new alliance to replace the now obsolete Cold War alliances. Its nucleus should be the “coalition of the willing” now forming around us. No need to abolish NATO. The grotesque performance of France, Germany and Belgium in blocking aid to Turkey marks the end of NATO’s useful life. Like the United Nations, it will simply wither of its own irrelevance.
We should be thinking now about building the new alliance structure around the United States, Britain, Australia, Turkey, such willing and supportive Old Europe countries as Spain and Italy, and the New Europe of deeply pro-American ex-communist states. Add perhaps India and Japan and you have the makings of a new post-9/11 structure.
From this site, on February 10:
It seems somehow unfair to our better NATO allies to leave the alliance, but there is an alternative: A new alliance that would officially sit alongside NATO, but in practice would render NATO as useful as a buggy whip for a hydrogen car.
Sign up Italy and Spain and Lithuania and the rest of the Gangs of Eight and Ten. Hell, get Israel, Australia, and India on board, too. The new threat is global — not the simple, parochial interest of protecting Germany from. . . um, from whom are we protecting Germany?
Exactly. Don’t withdraw from NATO, don’t give Germany and France the satisfaction of having forced us to bolt “their” alliance. Just let it — and them –wither on the vine.
That’s about all I can manage right now — Benadryl not only shrinks the sinuses, it also shrinks the brain.
I don’t even know why I bother to read Big Media any more. Their “breaking news” is hours behind the blogosphere and their “insightful analysis” is weeks behind.
Advantage: (a heavily sedated) VodkaPundit!
Maybe he read your site, or maybe the idea is so imminently sensible that he came up with it independently.
I saw this email on an Austin list I am still a member of. I don’t live in TX anymore but would love to hear about this event – if anyone reading this lives in TX and attends, report on it, send me the URL and I’ll post it on Kesher Talk.
Let’s stop and consider the countries Mr Krauthammer and Vodkapundit would have as our new allies. Lithuania. Bulgaria. India. Britain, Israel, Australia, Turkey. Lithuania and Bulgaria are small and relatively poor. They have little incentive or inclination to devote precious resources to military spending. With all due respect to those countries and their fine inhabitants, Bulgaria and Lithuania are not allies, they’re friendly parasites. They’re parasites we can happily afford to carry, but counting on them to help us maintain Mr Bush’s New American Empire is rather like counting on Pee Wee Herman to back you up in a bar fight with the Hell’s Angels. You picked the wrong team for that tangle, partner.
I favor a much closer relationship with India for various reasons, but with a nuclear-armed and hostile Pakistan on one side and a nuclear-armed and hostile China on the other, India is understandably preoccupied with the security in its own backyard. It’s pretty difficult to see New Delhi spending its time and money guaranteeing the security of Israel or the Persian Gulf. Or even the Korean peninsula, for that matter. If we need help keeping the Maldives in line, though, I’m pretty sure we’ll be able to count on India.
We’re already allied with Britain and Australia, so what possible use would a new alliance with them serve? The Aussies are such loyal allies, they followed us into Vietnam for a time. Even the Brits were not stupid enough to fall for that one. Then there is Turkey. We’re also allied with them. In fact, the alliance with Turkey pre-dates even NATO so why do we need a new alliance with them? And even if we did, I’m not sure we could afford it. As we’ve seen recently, the Turks drive a pretty hard bargain for their favors. Ankara may be an old whore when it comes to war, but at least she is not a cheap one. Le’ts not forget Japan. Despite its decade-long recession, Japan–unlike many other countries listed–does have the money to defend itself and even project power. However, that’s about all they’ve got. Japan is simply disinclined to be part of the aggressive military alliance Mr Krauthammer and Vodkapundit envision. Even with North Korea flinging missiles over the Sea of Japan, Tokyo cannot get its act together to establish some order in northeast Asia. In fact, Japan does not want to get its act together for such things and even if it did, the Chinese and South Koreans would look more than a little askance at such development. Besides, Japan’s population is aging so rapidly that in a few years they’ll be able to do little more than send wave upon wave of crutch-wielding geriatrics at the enemy.
That leaves…Israel. We’re also already allied with them already. The Israelis enjoy a close relationship with Turkey, but that’s about as far as it goes. None of our allies in Old or New Europe or anywhere else understand or sympathize with our relationship to Israel. The Brits don’t see it our way with Israel. Neither does India. It is unclear if the Japanese would fight for anything or anyone, but if they did, I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t be Israel. The fact is, the only country on Earth that approves of our Israeli policy is Israel. That makes for a pretty close bilateral relationship, but it isn’t much of a foundation to build a world-wide Alliance of the Willing and the Purchased.
I think this agonizingly long pregnant pause before war is getting to these neocons. The increasing eccentricities of their empire fantasies are exceeded only by the hysteria of their attacks on our true allies in ‘Old’ Europe.
There is a reason the United States chose the allies it now has. These are the countries that are most like us and that share most of our values. I didn’t write that Germany and Italy and France necessarily share the values of the Bush admin, but they do share the values of most Americans. These countries were our most likely allies 50 years ago and the passage of time has done nothing to change that.
Thomas
dailyreview.blogspot.com
–These countries were our most likely allies 50 years ago and the passage of time has done nothing to change that. –
No, they don’t share the values of Americans, unless you want socialist/marxist values.
France/Germany/Italy were not allies, they were defeated. We did not choose them, we chose to keep them from causing more mischief. When France & Germany collaborate, Europe bleeds. It’s been bleeding for centuries and it hasn’t changed.
And empiric fantasies??? What??? Our history and isolationist tendencies prove otherwise. We want to be left alone to navel-gaze. Too much money to build a military empire. Think of the children, the (rich) seniors who need prescription meds.
The Arabs are also talking about new strategic alliances, especially with Western Europe.
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/opinion/27_02_03e.htm
You wrote: No, they don’t share the values of Americans, unless you want socialist/marxist values.
REPLY: Have you ever actually been to any of these countries? Spent time there? Gotten to know them? I have. The people of France, Germany, and Italy are overwhelmingly pro-American. They like the U.S. very much. They just loathe Bush. Pretty much like us American liberals. I love America and hate the halfwit usurper. Bush is not America. If he was, he’d have gotten the most votes in the last election.
You wrote: And empiric fantasies??? What??? Our history and isolationist tendencies prove otherwise. We want to be left alone to navel-gaze.
REPLY: Isolationists do not invade other countries unless they’ve been attacked first. ‘Nuff said.
Thomas,
I looked at your site. Nice design, easy to read text and consistent viewpoint, IMO wrong, but consistent.
Trotting out the tired lies about “Half-wit usurper” (GWB = MBA Harvard), evading the challenge on Marxist/Socialist values (you did not respond, you evaded) and suggesting that we were not attacked (Uh… WTC?.. you heard about that, right?) I can only think that you inhabit an alternate universe or it is you that is the Half-wit.
I also noted that you have not included comments on your site and that says more about you than anything you could write. There is no excuse for eliminating comments except to limit dissent to your ideas and as bankrupt as your leftest ideology is, you need the edge.
Have the courage of your convictions and change your template. Include comments. Read them. You might (I emphasize might) learn something. Open your mind.
There is a whole world out there that, though we may not love GWB, we know he isn’t an idiot. When I hear you tell that lie, I discard everything else you say.
If you tell me the sun is blue and the sky is chartreuse, I check out my window then start to wonder what kind of drugs you take.
That’s OK… I’m certain that you are certain that you are the only one who knows the truth.
“Everyone has a right to an opinion, no one has a right lie.”
Thomas: “Bush is not America. If he was, he’d have gotten the most votes in the last election.”
Um, Thomas? In the last election (Nov 2002) Bush’s candidates *did* get the most votes.
At great risk and against advice, Bush stuck his neck out to personally aid GOP candidates. The result: major gains for the GOP, a rarity in midterm elections.
But don’t take it from me: ‘Democrats say Bush popularity turned tide’
Benadryl may shrink the brain but it makes watching paint dry ever so much fun!
Thomas,
>>Have you ever actually been to any of these countries? Spent time there? Gotten to know them?
Hasn’t pretty much everyone, these days? My personal experience suggests that the French are not, in fact, very pro-American these days. I was living in Paris in September 2001, and the pro-American euphoria lasted about as long as Stephen’s cough syrup high. (I think I’ve got a bottle of that stuff at home myself…)
While I don’t think France and Germany will be totally frozen out of any post-Iraq settlement, there is clearly no way that those nations can or will exert the same influence with Washington that they have done in the past.
Ultimately, these two, fairly wealthy and at times remarkable countries have under the moral pygmies that are their political class, squandereda great deal, and for what?
Thomas – you repeat the old mantras about Bush and his alleged lack of intellectual finesse. I wish, just for once, that I could read a liberal opinion about the President without encountering the usual sneering, rude boilerplate.
Imagine what things would be like under Al Gore. Need I say more?
I’m wondering why no one has asked the question–could the French and Germans be, albeit indirectly, supporting Saddam? The French and Germans clearly have a stake in Iraq, and have a m.o. that goes far beyond pacifistic aims, perhaps even that they’re attempting to cover something up. France has sold nuclear weapons to rogue states, including Iraq, in the past, and is obviously benefitting from Saddam remaining in power in terms of oil, if the embargo ever gets lifted. Is this possible, and if so, how come no one has asked this question before?
Aziza,
I first saw it here, and the idea’s been circulating around the blogosphere, and to a lesser degree the mainstream American press, ever since. The French press are more than interested; they’re desperately trying to dig up evidence of some kind of collusion, but they haven’t found anything. Yet.