![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Iraniana
Why It Bothers So... One can make all sorts of clever arguments-indeed the Brits have, from blaming us to blaming their own-about why this crisis was someone else's fault, due to a misunderstanding, due to media exaggeration, due to an accident. But what is missing is the simple fact that THIS IS THE BRITISH NAVY. Who would care if the Iranians had embarrassed the Italian Navy, the Russian Navy, or the Chinese Navy? But the Brits? We forget that the entire history of Western navies is predicated on the British experience at sea. The Brits had the greatest admirals, the Brits invented the Man-of-War, dreadnought, battleship, heavy cruiser, and aircraft carrier. The Brits created the very notion of modern seamanship and discipline, and its pantheon of naval heroes like Drake, Cook, Anson, Vernon, Nelson, and Fisher still resonates. So like the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon and World Trade Center this was an iconic act that sent a message that the descendents of Xerxes finally upped Lord Nelson. Pictures Worth a Thousand Words Nancy Pelosi in a Scarf at the nexus of terrorism in Damascus British sailors in cuffs being escorted by proud Iranian seamen Sophocles 1974 One could make the argument that by early 1974 it was finally known that the prior Tet Offensive really had been a terrible defeat for the North Vietnamese, that the efforts to rid the South of the Viet Cong were mostly successful, that radically different bombing strategies and ordinance had redirected the damage from rice paddies to communist hierarchies in Hanoi-and that the public absolutely did not care, and could not be convinced that there was a chance to save South Vietnam, and so backed serial Congressional cut-offs of aid. We may be nearing that same crisis point; that is, at last we have made necessary adjustments in Iraq, are defeating the enemy-and no one cares any more for any news other than that of our departure. It's almost like a Sophoclean tragedy, since we know the script from 1974-2007 and can't seem to stop it: we give up, the government collapses, hundreds of thousands are killed and exiled, our military and diplomatic reputation is shredded, and so we squabble for the next 30 years over the defeat and how we had almost won when we threw in the towel. The British Vocabulary of the Iranian crisis Rules of engagement: a diplomatic embarrassment waiting to happen GPS coordinates: an outdated and inexact pseudo-science, of no value in adjudicating territorial or geographical disputes Admiral Nelson: dead, irrelevant white male imperialist colonialist- fill in the blanks ... First Lord of the Admiralty: nothing first, lordish, or admirable about it Naval vessel: a floating liability Royal Marines: diplomatic personnel Hostages: can instruct the enemy on power-point The United States: your only ally, but you'd prefer it a neutral Europe: neutral, but you'd prefer it an ally. European Union: unified by profit, divided by principle NATO: The Neutral anti-American Truce Organization Captives of the Past The success of a country is almost inextricably connected to the degree of its strangulation by the past: confident societies like Japan, Germany, Italy, Israel, China, etc. don't dwell on the past in the context of victimhood. But a stereotypical rule of thumb: when I talk to a Mexican national, he whines about the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo; when speaking to a Greek, the 1967 coup or the 1973 invasion of Cyprus starts the discussion, for an Iranian of any persuasion, it is always 1953 and Mosaddeq. A Palestinian talks only about 1947, and shows some strange rusted key to a house in Jerusalem. The point is not that there are not legitimate grievances that have had repercussions, but that they are in the past and one must get on with one's life. Americans don't talk about the burning of the White House in the War of 1812, and are not obsessed with hating the Vietnamese for that lost war. The only exception might be Southerners' obsession with Longstreet at Gettysburg or Albert Sidney Johnston dying at the high water mark at Shiloh. But rarely now are any in the South captives to the Lost Cause, which is always a symptom of an insecure and angry mind, that faults others for the past rather than looks confidently toward the future. And nowhere is this more common than the eastern Mediterranean and Middle East. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Bruce T. wrote:
Iraniana Why It Bothers So... snip I think you posted to the wrong ng, or are you proposing an "Escape from New York" style rescue? ;-) Finally saw that movie yesterday, BTW. Glider or no glider, what a dog! Shawn |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ya' just gotta luv them sailors! | T3 | Naval Aviation | 0 | February 6th 07 04:01 PM |
Sailors of the Sky | [email protected] | Soaring | 19 | December 15th 06 02:02 PM |
Sailors of the Sky | Alistair Wright | Simulators | 1 | March 27th 06 07:24 PM |
Sailors o the Sky | Alistair Wright | Soaring | 8 | August 22nd 04 10:26 AM |
Sailors of the Sky | Alistair Wright | Simulators | 0 | August 12th 04 08:22 PM |