Interesting duel in
the Sunday NYT book section. On the one side is that indefatigable fluffer of all
things Petraeus, Dexter Filkins, who gets to tell his favorite surge fairy tale
all over again in his review of John A, Nagl's book. I think of Filkins as an
exemplary figure, failing ever upwards in an establishment that has been
astonishingly unmarked by 13 years of American foreign policy failure, which
has mired the US in unwinnable and even incomprehensible wars all over the Middle East and
Central Asia. The Filkins style of indirectly acknowledging this - which is the
establishment style of tiptoing the graveyards that its criminality has filled
- comes in the fourth graf: "The last Americans didn’t leave Iraq until
2011, after about 4,500 of them had been killed and more than 30,000 wounded.
At least a hundred thousand Iraqis died, too." Notice the Iraqi casualty
addendum, which is as true as saying, about the Holocaust, that "at least
a million Jews died too." The establishment, especially the NYT,loves big
data and columns that make statistical points using a well established science
of sampling. But it appears that in the world of sampling, Iraq forms a strange
exception. The lancet's sampling, which long ago showed six hundred thousand
deaths, has been supplanted by the latest survey, showing nearly a million. The
Filkins half truth maneuver is the answer to this persnickety question of the
extent of the establishment's catastrophic policy of "humanitarian intervention."
On the other corner, you have the review of Daniel Bolger's Why We Lost, which
dares to deride st. Petraeus. This is reviewed by Andrew Bacevich, who is on
his best behavior. One feels that he actually agrees with Bolger that Petraeus
was a jerk, a showboat, and a man whose surge was designed to disguise the
inevitable: the retreat of the US from Iraq. But he doesn't outright say that
Bolger has an excellent argument here - he shifts the focus to the politics of
the war. Here, of course, Bacevich is right. The Generals didn't lose the war -
the war was pre-lost in 2001, when the Americans rallied around the dangerously
negligent government that had allowed 9.11 to happen as though the incompetence
had never happened, and allowed them to expand the terrain of their
incompetence, which of course they happily did.
Eventually, Bolger concludes that America's enemies
in the two wars are "everybody" - of which there is no more absolute condemnation. It is Kurz at the end of his tether. But the establishment doesn't want to swallow that. Hence, our current swollen
Pentagon, our Patriot act, our eliminationist rhetoric against ISIS. It is all
a very bloody farce, and will go on until we don't have that extra trillion
dollars to pay for all the fun.“I’m so bored. I hate my life.” - Britney Spears
Das Langweilige ist interessant geworden, weil das Interessante angefangen hat langweilig zu werden. – Thomas Mann
"Never for money/always for love" - The Talking Heads
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Reviewing, a retrospective
I’ve done my time as a book reviewer. I’ve lived in the foxhole, or the book-reviewer’s equivalent: an efficiency apartment overflowing wi...
-
You can skip this boring part ... LI has not been able to keep up with Chabert in her multi-entry assault on Derrida. As in a proper duel, t...
-
Being the sort of guy who plunges, headfirst, into the latest fashion, LI pondered two options, this week. We could start an exploratory com...
-
The most dangerous man the world has ever known was not Attila the Hun or Mao Zedong. He was not Adolf Hitler. In fact, the most dangerous m...
No comments:
Post a Comment