<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel>
	<title>MetaFilter posts tagged with bacevich</title>
	<link>http://www.metafilter.com/tags/bacevich</link>
	<description>Posts tagged with 'bacevich' at MetaFilter.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 18:45:52 -0800</pubDate> <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 18:45:52 -0800</lastBuildDate>

	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>
	<item>
		<title>Is it worth it?</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/84091/Is%2Dit%2Dworth%2Dit</link>
		<description> Should the United States and Nato stay in Afghanistan?  &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Bacevich&quot;&gt;Andrew Bacevich&lt;/a&gt; wrote an &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/article.php3?id_article=2609&quot;&gt;article&lt;/a&gt; in commonweal saying that it is not and that the question has been insufficiently debated.  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cnas.org/node/737&quot;&gt;Andrew Exum&lt;/a&gt; (A former US Army Captain, now researcher who blogs as Abu Muqawama out of the &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_a_New_American_Security&quot;&gt;Center for a New American Security&lt;/a&gt;) quickly &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawama/2009/08/nope.html&quot;&gt;responded&lt;/a&gt; to Bacevich saying that the issue has been carefully debated, pointing to a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cfr.org/bios/2603/stephen_biddle.html&quot;&gt;Stephen Biddle&lt;/a&gt; article entitled &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.the-american-interest.com/article.cfm?piece=617&quot;&gt;Is It Worth It?&lt;/a&gt; as an example.

As MeFi&apos;s may appreciate, the comments section of that post vigorously debated the point and an Exum has started an ongoing dialog at the abu Muqawama site.  &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawama/2009/08/maybe-bacevich-has-point-introducing-afghanistan-strategy-dialogue.html&quot;&gt;Resolved&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawama/2009/08/afghan-strategy-project-day-one.html&quot;&gt;day 1&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawama/2009/08/afghanistan-strategy-dialogue-day-two.html&quot;&gt;day 2&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawama/2009/08/afghanistan-strategy-dialogue-day-three.html&quot;&gt;day 3&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawama/2009/08/afghanistan-strategy-dialogue-day-four.html&quot;&gt;day 4&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawama/2009/08/afghanistan-strategy-dialogue-day-five.html&quot;&gt;day 5&lt;/a&gt;.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2009:site.84091</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 18:45:52 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>abumuqwama</category>
		<category>afghanistan</category>
		<category>afghanwar</category>
		<category>alqeada</category>
		<category>andrewexum</category>
		<category>bacevich</category>
		<category>exum</category>
		<category>taliban</category>
		<dc:creator>shothotbot</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>Bacevich speaks to Moyer about the American Empire</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/74213/Bacevich%2Dspeaks%2Dto%2DMoyer%2Dabout%2Dthe%2DAmerican%2DEmpire</link>
		<description> Ret. Col. Andrew Bacevich &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/watch.html&quot;&gt;speaks to Bill Moyers&lt;/a&gt; (&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/transcript1.html&quot;&gt;transcript&lt;/a&gt;) about the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.americanempireproject.com&quot;&gt;American empire&lt;/a&gt; and his new book &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/profile2.html&quot;&gt;&quot;The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism.&quot;&lt;/a&gt;  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2008:site.74213</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 07:00:56 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>america</category>
		<category>americanempire</category>
		<category>bacevich</category>
		<category>catastrophetheory</category>
		<category>empire</category>
		<category>foreignpolicy</category>
		<category>gwot</category>
		<category>imperialism</category>
		<category>iraq</category>
		<category>moyers</category>
		<category>war</category>
		<dc:creator>geos</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>I Lost My Son to a War I Oppose.</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/61571/I%2DLost%2DMy%2DSon%2Dto%2Da%2DWar%2DI%2DOppose</link>
		<description> &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/25/AR2007052502032.html?hpid=opinionsbox1&quot;&gt;Memorial Day orators&lt;/a&gt; will say that a G.I.&apos;s life is priceless. Don&apos;t believe it. I know what value the U.S. government assigns to a soldier&apos;s life: I&apos;ve been handed the check. It&apos;s roughly what the Yankees will pay Roger Clemens per inning once he starts pitching next month.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2007:site.61571</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 May 2007 07:14:39 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>bacevich</category>
		<category>duty</category>
		<category>grief</category>
		<category>iraq</category>
		<category>memorialday</category>
		<category>peace</category>
		<category>war</category>
		<dc:creator>geos</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>Coup D&apos;Etat</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/54271/Coup%2DDEtat</link>
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.harpers.org/AmericanCoupDEtat.html"&gt;American Coup D&apos;Etat.&lt;/a&gt; Will the most powerful and &lt;a href=&quot;http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=31&amp;Itemid=61&quot;&gt;well-funded&lt;/a&gt; institution on the planet remain under civilian command indefinitely? As the domestic spying saga &lt;a href=&quot;http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&amp;ned=us&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;q=warrantless+domestic+wiretapping&quot;&gt;unfolds&lt;/a&gt; and militarism rises, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.harpers.org&quot;&gt;Harper&apos;s&lt;/a&gt; brought four experts - both academics and brass - to discuss the possibilities. 
&lt;blockquote&gt;&quot;To subdue America entirely, the only route remaining would be to seize the machinery of state itself, to steer it toward malign ends&#8212;to carry out, that is, a coup d&apos;&amp;#0233;tat.&quot;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
(See also &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.claremont.org/writings/02apsa_owens.html?FORMAT=print&quot;&gt;The Origins of the Military Coup of 2012&lt;/a&gt; [&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/30061&quot;&gt;previous&lt;/a&gt;])  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2006:site.54271</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Aug 2006 19:37:41 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>BACEVICH</category>
		<category>Coup</category>
		<category>D&apos;Etat</category>
		<category>DUNLAP</category>
		<category>Harpers</category>
		<category>KOHN</category>
		<category>LUTTWAK</category>
		<category>Military</category>
		<category>Takeover</category>
		<dc:creator>trinarian</dc:creator>
	</item>
      <item>
		<title>On The New American Militarism - How Americans Are Seduced By War</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/39801/On%2DThe%2DNew%2DAmerican%2DMilitarism%2DHow%2DAmericans%2DAre%2DSeduced%2DBy%2DWar</link>
		<description> &lt;small&gt;The argument I make in my book is that what I describe as the new American militarism arises as an unintended consequence of the reaction to the Vietnam War and more broadly, to the sixties... If some people think that the sixties constituted a revolution, that revolution produced a counterrevolution, launched by a variety of groups that had one thing in common: they saw revival of American military power, institutions, and values as the antidote to everything that in their minds had gone wrong. None of these groups &#8212; the neoconservatives, large numbers of Protestant evangelicals, politicians like Ronald Reagan, the so-called defense intellectuals, and the officer corps &#8212; set out saying, &#8220;Militarism is a good idea.&#8221; But I argue that this is what we&#8217;ve ended up with: a sense of what military power can do, a sort of deference to the military, and an attribution of virtue to the men and women who serve in uniform. Together this constitutes such a pernicious and distorted attitude toward military affairs that it qualifies as militarism. &lt;/small&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.bu.edu/alumni/bostonia/2004/winter/war/&quot; title=&quot;How do you see us getting out of this World War IV mess? &apos;I think the beginning of wisdom is to rethink our attitudes and expectations with regard to military power and to come to something that&#8217;s more realistic and balanced &#8212; and I&#8217;d emphasize, more in harmony with our democracy. This outsourcing to a professional elite of our responsibility as citizens to defend the country, this penchant for interventionism in our world, this expectation that somehow the building up of ever-greater military power offers some sort of antidote to the problems that we face &#8212; these are wrong. We can&#8217;t come to the right answer until we first recognize that the accepted answer is defective &#8212; fundamentally defective.&apos;&quot;&gt;An interview with Andrew Bacevich&lt;/a&gt;, international relations professor and former Army colonel, and author of &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/HistoryOther/MilitaryHistory/~~/cHI9MTAmcGY9MCZzcz1wdWJkYXRlLmFzYyZzZj1jb21pbmdzb29uJnNkPWFzYyZ2aWV3PXVzYSZjaT0wMTk1MTczMzg0&quot; title=&quot;In this provocative new book, Andrew Bacevich warns of a dangerous dual obsession that has taken hold of Americans, conservatives and liberals alike. It is a marriage of militarism and utopian ideology--of unprecedented military might wed to a blind faith in the universality of American values. This perilous union, Bacevich argues, commits Americans to a futile enterprise, turning the US into a crusader state with a self-proclaimed mission of driving history to its final destination: the world-wide embrace of the American way of life. This mindset invites endless war and the ever-deepening militarization of US policy. It promises not to perfect but to pervert American ideals and to accelerate the hollowing out of American democracy. As it alienates others, it will leave the United States increasingly isolated. It will end in bankruptcy, moral as well as economic, and in abject failure.&quot;&gt;The New American Militarism: How Americans Are Seduced by War&lt;/a&gt;--and here is a &lt;a href=&quot;http://antiwar.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&amp;title=The+New+American+Militarism+-+by+Paul+Craig+Roberts&amp;expire=&amp;urlID=12911826&amp;fb=Y&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fantiwar.com%2Froberts%2F%3Farticleid%3D4445&amp;partnerID=16&quot; title=&quot;The new American militarism has abandoned the Founding Fathers, deserted the Constitution, and unrestrained the executive. War is a first resort. Militarism is inconsistent with globalism and with American ideals. It will end in abject failure. The world is a vast place. The U.S. has demonstrated that it cannot impose its will on a tiny part known as Iraq. American realism may yet reassert itself, dispel the fog of delusion, cleanse the body politic of the Jacobin spirit, and lead the world by good example. But this happy outcome will require regime change in the U.S.&quot;&gt;review&lt;/a&gt;. Recently by Bacevich: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/iraq/commentary/la-oe-bacevich20feb20,1,6632062,print.story?coll=la-iraq-commentary&amp;ctrack=1&amp;cset=true&quot; title=&quot;In the early days of the insurgency, Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez vowed to use &apos;whatever combat power is necessary to win,&apos; displaying all the pugnacity of a George Patton or Stormin&apos; Norman Schwarzkopf... Senior commanders no longer make such bold promises. Nor do senior civilian officials in Washington. Indeed, today the Bush administration&apos;s aim is not to win but to relieve itself of responsibility for waging a war that it began but cannot finish. Debate in national security circles focuses not on deploying war-winning technologies or fielding innovative tactics that might turn the tide, but on how we can extricate ourselves before our overstretched forces suffer irreparable damage... The decisive victory promised by the war&apos;s advocates back in March 2003 &#8212; remember all the talk of &apos;shock and awe&apos;? &#8212; has now slipped beyond our grasp.&quot;&gt;We Aren&apos;t Fighting to Win Anymore - U.S. troops in Iraq are only trying to buy time&lt;/a&gt;.  </description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">tag:metafilter.com,2005:site.39801</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2005 15:05:00 -0800</pubDate>
		<category>america</category>
		<category>american</category>
		<category>andrewbacevich</category>
		<category>army</category>
		<category>bacevich</category>
		<category>militarism</category>
		<category>military</category>
		<category>unitedstates</category>
		<category>us</category>
		<category>vietnam</category>
		<category>war</category>
		<dc:creator>y2karl</dc:creator>
	</item>
      
	</channel>
</rss>


