I truly enjoyed your post and endorse it. I did not intend to create a sideshow but that is not an excuse. The remedy is to take a time out. Apologies.

Hang in there. Anger management is hard. My problem is that I like to be angry. I kid.

for some reason they're not giving my daughter any merit based aid, despite her excellent GPA and test scores. They're the only ones, even CU is chipping in 10k and Wyoming 15k. AZ is giving 35k.

CSU is her first choice but they're forcing her to consider other options. Very strange, something we certainly didn't expect.

If you want to head over there and crack some skulls, I'd appreciate it.

And people thought we had such promise.

Snide; no connection to the original post; of no value to other participants in the thread. Better just to keep silent. Or, better still, offer insights, convey knowledge, instruct.

If I were Board Ops, I'd shut it down and give myself more time for fun or interesting stuff.

Your subject line and opening paragraph set the tone. Nappy Joe and the border are generally unrelated to the broader points you wanted to discuss.

So, where did you envision the thread going after that? Did you consider that there are generously ten people who regularly contribute to the board that have the requisite knowledge and/or experience to engage thoughtfully on the strategic questions that you noted? The expected participants that many of us would defer to on these subjects weighed in to varying degrees, and still the interesting thread you envisioned did not develop. But, rather than let it go, or make additional posts to try to guide the thread, you decided to express disappointment via your own snide post.

Most posters here aren't interested in getting in an argumentative thread with you on any topic. Let alone on a topic where your insight and experience are far superior. As Sorin69 pointed out, we're here to learn from others in areas where we are lacking sufficient knowledge to participate.

I don't think you really expect or believe that our politicians (especially these two nimrods) will have a meaningful discussion as it relates to "geostrategy and vital national security interests". Frankly, I don't want them to. Trump is a bona fide idiot. Has he had a thoughtful, meaningful discussion on any subject in his entire life? And, Biden can do the least amount of damage while napping so I encourage him to take more.


I don't know the answers to your questions. You mention the Indo-Pacific theatre? For the uninformed, what is going on there? Are you referring to China's ambitions, China's desperation, or something more concrete and active?

Circling back to your subject line, isn't all of this about how it makes us feel? Does any of it really matter? If Russia takes over Ukraine, does it matter? If Ukraine repels Russia, does it matter? If China invades Taiwan, does it matter? If Israel decimates Gaza, does it matter? My opinion is that it doesn't. Just like it didn't matter that we fought for twenty years in Afghanistan. I don't view these as existential problems as it relates to the Illinois or Iowa farmer or the accountant in Chicago, the banker in New York, or the programmer in San Francisco. Don't get me wrong, I recognize these are existential problems for the Ukrainian farmer and the others. I'm just not convinced that America's finger on the scale makes a whole lot of difference. It's just different people dying.

I should first say that I think you’re being disingenuous when you suggest that NDN is home to a clerisy of foreign affairs mavens, and only they can have discussions which are informed or relevant. That’s nonsense. The board is littered with educated, well-informed people. No one’s opinion or views are illegitimate, and part of the fun is when issues are debated.

Yes, there are posters whose life experience conveys a measure of credibility that others might not have. But I am leery of this. Say we’re talking about jurisprudence. Must we listen to lawyers only? God forbid. Foreign affairs? No one knows more about political/military affairs than WilfordBrimley, and any thread where he is a participant should garner attention. But who among us does not pay attention when sorin69 or Kbyrnes participate in a thread? Neither of them has experience in foreign affairs beyond a lively interest, however, sorin69 is a learned scholar whose subject is Church history. Kev is a polymath, for chrissakes.

OT: One of the great experiences in my life is accompanying Kev to a lunch at an Albanian restaurant in Chicago. On the way over there, he delivered a spirited talk entitled “The Cuisine of Illyria”. Had Mike been there, he could have lectured on Albania as an exemplar of the religious tolerance on the part of Ottoman imperial society, in which the Orthodox Church and its communities were protected inside an Islamic sultanate. I have traveled there, but I don’t know much about Albania except that Zog is my favorite royal name. The remains of King Zog, King of the Albanians, were returned to Albania in 2012. His grandson, Crown Prince Leka II lives in Tirana and is married to an Albanian movie actress. I feel sorry for the guy because it does not seem that he is invited to any of the royal weddings in Europe.

You might ask, what was on the menu that day? I think we were served a plate with small piles of lentils, each pile a different color—black, red, green. When lentils are featured prominently on a menu, you can be sure this signals poverty. I mean, what do you get when you visit an Ethiopian restaurant? In fact, I like lentils, especially lentil soup. Travel tip: If you plan to visit Albania or Ethiopia, put Beano tablets in your dop kit.

Back to our subject: You well know that I am an old man. Old men have leeway when it comes to offering advice or counsel. Here’s some—when you are in high dudgeon, you make mistakes, get sloppy, etc. To wit, your last paragraph. It’s not just you, it’s all of us. Anger tends to ruin the fun, and I am as guilty on occasion as anyone.

You ask where I thought the thread might go? Like sorin69, I thought someone might take up the Bibi/Gaza issue, that is, the position that I hint at in the post. I am surprised no one took the bait.

Right off the bat, you suggest the border has nothing to do with vital national security interests (VNSIs). I’d challenge that and say that the border issues have everything to do with national security. For me, a list of VNSIs begins with the Western Hemisphere. Yes, ahead of Russia and China. We must maintain friendly relations with our near neighbors, particularly Canada, Mexico, and countries in the Caribbean Basin so that they are enlisted to ensure no military threat ever arises in the Western Hemisphere. We are never safe until we have this assurance. I call it the “Monroe Doctrine” because I think that’s a catchy name. For some, it’s sort of scary because, among other things, the doctrine demands that the next time Russian strategic bombers land at Símon Bolívar International Airport in Caracas, we crater the runways so they can’t take off and the air crews are required to return to Archangel in a banana boat.

Following below are the concluding paragraphs of an essay I wrote four years ago. I think I posted it (parts of it) here. Here goes:

Samuel Huntington observes that “No other immigrant group in American history has asserted or been able to assert a historical claim to American territory. Mexicans and Mexican-Americans can and do make that claim.” That is, the blurring of our southwestern frontier has become a geographical fact. Neither Trump’s wall nor American technology will prevail against this fact. Furthermore, to rely on American nationalism to preserve our Anglo-Protestant culture and values is a fool’s errand. Partial Latinoization of our society is inevitable. The organic connection between Mexico and the US—geographical, historical, and demographic—is simply too overwhelming. As Robert Kaplan points out, America is no longer an island protected by two oceans: “It is brought closer to the rest of the world not only by technology, but by the pressures of Mexican and Central American demography.” (The Revenge of Geography, New York: Random House, 2012).

For Kaplan, success for the US in the 21st century represents a multiracial civilization oriented from north to south (the axis turned 90 degrees), the globe’s preeminent hot-zone for business transactions, the favored residence for the global elites, and a place which uses its immigration laws to asset-strip the world of its best and brightest.

However, this vision requires a successful Mexico, a stable and prosperous Mexico working in organic concert with the US, a combination, Kaplan believes, that would be unbeatable in geopolitics: “A post-cartel Mexico, combined with a stabilized and pro-American Colombia [would] fuse together the Hemisphere’s largest, third largest, and fourth largest countries in terms of population”, thus preserving America’s sway over Latin America and the Caribbean Basin. In other words, fixing Mexico is far more important than fixing Afghanistan.

Again, I look to Robert Kaplan: “…if the United States and Mexico do not eventually come together to the degree that the U.S. and Canada already have—if we do not have Mexico as an intimate and dependable ally in world forums—it will adversely affect America’s other relationships, especially as Mexico’s (and Central America’s) population grows at a much higher rate than ours, and thus Mexico will assume more importance as time goes on…Mexico must play a central function in any grand strategy we decide upon.”

Instead we got the equivalent of a tsk, tsk.

I didn't post or imply that the border isn't a vital national security interest. I said it's "generally unrelated" to your broader post. I guess it's up to you to decide if you feel differently that discussing Middle East strategy and it's interplay with Eastern Europe/Russia or Southeast Asia should naturally segue to our southern border security.

As for the deep well of foreign affairs expertise here, I'll just point out that the three posters you noted all participated in the thread as did the handful of others that I would hope or expect to participate. Beyond those, I'm sure there are many others with expertise or insightful thoughts. They just don't regularly contribute to the board.


High dudgeon and feelings and advice and mistakes

My last paragraph was not an emotional throwaway or a response in "high dudgeon". Kevin and WilfordBrimley touched on it a bit in their subthread. I just took it to an extreme end. If we're talking "strategy" then I'd suggest it would behoove us to start with "does it matter?". I don't mean this in the nihilist "in the end we're all dead anyway" viewpoint, but rather to extrapolate out the "what if we don't do anything" scenarios. Where do our feelings diverge from reality?

Change is uncomfortable and painful, so we place excess value on stability and expend excessive energy on trying to maintain stability. This happens in everything. Often, we lament the change (since we're lamenting it, it's invariably a change for the worse) as a failure to act, but just as often, if not more so, the change is a result of action -- just the wrong action. I'll also note that we rarely celebrate changes for the better in the moment. We bemoan them and only after time and reflection and experiencing the benefits do we concede "that was a good change".


So, I'll reword my ending paragraph...

If Russia takes over Ukraine, how does it affect our vital national security interests? Does it empower Iran? Does it empower China? In the inverse, does us stepping up more forcefully to help Ukraine also put Iran and China in check or does it make them think we're distracted? Flip flop Ukraine with Taiwan or Israel and Russia with China and Iran as desired.

If we do nothing, how does it affect our vital national security interests? Is it a sign of weakness or a sign of focus?


I don't think there are clear actions to take, so we do what we've been doing --- help Ukraine but keep our troops out officially, bomb the desert, try to calm Israel down. It may not feel like action, but no action is probably our best move.

I think it matters alot if Russia takes over Ukraine. Do you think Putin stops there? If you do then, yeah it probably doesn’t matter a lot to the common US citizen except for theoretical issues with us not helping out. But, if you don’t think Putin stops there, as I don’t, the next steps are the really scary ones. Does he go after Moldova next or does he feel the Baltic states, or Finland or Poland, deserve a lesson?

If China takes over Taiwan there is a very real path it could lead to a worldwide Great Depression , forget about the possible war that develops if we decide to defend Taiwan. But either way I think it does matter to the US citizen.

Again with Gaza it depends on the next steps. If Israel decimated Gaza does Iran finally get off the toilet and get personally involved. Do other Arab nations? Will it touch our shores by terrorists fighting for Islam? For better or worse we are always connected to Israel in the eyes of most of the Arab world. If Israel goes too far, and I don’t know what that line is, but if they do we will probably face the consequences of it as well.

I think the world is much more connected than you suggest and just because it hasn’t appeared like that for a few decades doesn’t mean it’s not ready to ignite in an instant. Depends on the catalyst I imagine.

I had various versions of that paragraph including one discussing the complex web of interests, and just like dealing with an actual spider web, the deft touch it requires to keep the whole thing intact. I ultimately decided to go with what I did because it likely represents a lot Americans' feelings, and I thought it was enough of a stance (hopefully without coming across a complete idiot) to provide plenty of room for good discussion in the counterpoint.


With regards to Putin/Russia and Ukraine, I'm supportive of our current approach. I'm not in favor of our escalation with American troops. Nor am I in favor of stopping the aid to Ukraine. To EC's point, I don't think there's much more for Putin to do beyond Ukraine. If he pushes into a NATO country then our response should be immediate and unforgiving.

For China/Taiwan and Israel/Gaza, I'm more on the side of "can American intervention attempts really change anything?". So, it's less about does the whole thing actually matter and more does our response actually matter. If China decides to invade Taiwan then there's nothing we can do about it. We're an ocean away, and our citizenry just doesn't care. Sure, they'll be affected, maybe terribly affected, but they certainly won't think it could have been stopped.

Outside of Moldova, he doesn't have very many options outside of NATO countries. (This map is old, and both Finland and Sweden are now in NATO.)

I guess that he could go south into Georgia, Armenia, or Azerbaijan. I'm not sure what he will gain by doing this. Taking back Ukraine makes sense from a historical perspective, the rest don't seem to have the same sentimental value as Ukraine does.

Likely the Baltics. He just has to get it in his head that we and europe would flinch.

The big wars have generally started with miscalculation by one or more parties. I'm sure a geriatric Putin has a major miscalculation left in him.

You could have shut down airborne’s off-topic thread instead of participating in it.

when posters drop the usual trigger lines. Like any number of people on this board, BI holds Biden in contempt (I don't). In this particular instance, the made for TV reception of the bodies of the dead soldiers, I imagine vets find it particularly galling to see dead soldiers as props, esp when the reason they were put in harm's way isn't transparent (sort of how I felt when Bush took a premature victory lap with the infamous Mission Accomplished landing -- on the deck of a carrier named for our greatest president, who had to take on the burden for one hell of a lot more dead soldiers). And the original post in the thread was meant to ask why the hell those soldiers are there. People should ignore the throw-away lines that irritate them. Though what the hell, this is also supposed to be fun and noisy, it's not a seminar room. No one needs a designated driver to get home.

questions, under the general heading of "What are we doing here?", as we sidle into another Middle Eastern war. I recognize these threads aren't seminars. But the genuine, though not extreme, diversity of opinions on the big question and the subsidiary ones, makes it a natural for a forum like this one -- and for the chance for mutual education, a big attraction for someone like me, who lacks life experience in a huge array of professions, locales, etc.