It can't be easy being Marie Harf. She has so many things to explain:
U.S. State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf explained Monday that the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, which has marauded through much of the Middle East, leaving thousands dead, won’t be defeated through military force but through responsible governance and better job opportunities.Of course, when that argument gets hooted down by meanies like Michael Ramirez, Harf has to go back out and explain it all again:
Harf’s explanation of the Obama administration’s plan for dealing with the deadly ISIS threat came in response to a question from MSNBC’s Chris Matthews.
"Longer term, we cannot kill every terrorist around the world, nor should we try," Harf said on CNN. "How do you get at the root causes of this? Look, it might be too nuanced an argument for some, like I've seen over the past 24 hours some of the commentary out there, but it's really the smart way that Democrats, Republicans, military commanders, our partners in the Arab world think we need to combat this."Well, that satisifies me. I've known for years about my own personal lack of nuance and it's about damned time that everyone else comes to grips with their own shortcomings in the nuance department. I appreciate this dedicated public servant's efforts to set us straight. Let's all try to do better, m'kay?
9 comments:
In one sense she isn't wrong, though it's certainly by accident. A culturally and militarily assertive America is not ultimately a solution, it is the cause of a problem. We tend not to think of ourselves as aggressive bullies who go around destroying other cultures and meddling in everybody's business. But we are that.
If you're out there and you love Coke, Democracy, and Western values, then we're awesome. But what if your traditions have gotten upended and your world is in chaos, either embracing or rejecting the Western presence that insists on coming near?
If we can think of ourselves honestly as aggressive imperialists and if we're okay with that, then we should get down to business and win the war. But we don't think of ourselves that way. We don't even believe in ourselves at home! We just introduce chaos and pat ourselves on the back.
I guess what I'm thinking is that we've got extremists like ISIS piping up because of what we've done in the past (We were strong and assertive) and because of who we've become (weak and divided.) It's only going to get worse abroad because the rot is getting deeper at home.
Words of nuance, words of skill
and words of romance are a thrill...
http://youtu.be/6Vl1m5FYlAo
I would stipulate that we are an imperial power and have been for over 100 years. I'd also agree that we're at best ambivalent about that role and that the ambivalence has plays a role in where we are today. Having said that, I'm less than convinced that what we're seeing throughout the Muslim world is a reaction to our imperial overreach. The conflict has been going on for nearly 1500 years now. The issue isn't a lack of jobs — the jihadis have a job. The problem is their job requires killing people, potentially many people. And we aren't sure how to react.
Crankbait, that's spot on.
Assuredly the Muslim world is not innocent. When they were able, they took people over by force. But some of the particular brands of "modern" Islam are very much a reaction to us. The whole "jobs" thing is a non sequitur. They could have jobs, puppies, and a new set of golf clubs and it wouldn't change things one iota.
If only Osama bin Ladin coould have been part of a rich family with a great education and plenty of opportunities, instead of a lean and hungry street urchin.
Swap the puppy for a kitten, and ill remain peaceful.
I think our presence simply determines us as the target. People in India, Pakistan, Thailand, Malaysia, and a host of other countries know very well that radical Islam does not exist as a response to the U.S., but rather in and of itself.
Approaches, tactics, yes, those are influenced by us and how we respond to them. But 1500 years of war indicate that the problem is not at its core "us".
The "I don't care who started it, I'm going to finish it," approach isn't good for parenting or for foreign policy.
Post a Comment