Please use the form on the right, or send an email to letters@worldaffairsjournal.org to submit your comments. Letters will be edited for clarity and length, and should include a mailing address.
Testicular Fortitude
Dear Sir:
There needs to be a fundamental understanding that neoconservatives simply are not, and have never really been, conservatives (“Same Old Party,” Winter 2009). Their popularity and influence over the last decade have come largely from the fact that the critical topic of discussion for the nation has been national security and foreign policy—the singular niche of neoconservatives. What is often misunderstood—if even known in the first place—is that neoconservatism has its origin in liberalism. This becomes readily apparent when you look at the domestic agenda of neoconservatives—big government. At the end of the day, the only real difference between liberals and neocons is that neocons have far more testicular fortitude when it comes to national security threats. Otherwise, they’re simply the same side of the coin.
Ben Needles
Washington, D.C.
No Drama Obama
Dear Sir:
No Drama Obama
Dear Sir:
If Mr. Hitchens (“Dear Mr. President,” Winter 2009) had actual knowledge of or interest in economics he would no doubt be telling President Obama what actions he ought to take to address what is actually the most pressing issue facing the country and the world. But, that not being the case, he uses the inauguration as an occasion for puffery before railing about his pet subjects yet again. I suggest he give it a rest and stick to doing what he does best—pointing out the contradictions and idiocies of revered institutions and subjects.
Mike Hoy
Chattanooga, TN
Mr. Hitchens is exactly on target (“Dear Mr. President,” Winter 2009). He explains the world Obama will face. The president has cracked the door open and I suspect will soon enough realize that posing questions and making obervations come easier than actually facing down Iran or Russia. Problem identification is much easier than problem solving. Now even North Korea is asking for it’s pudding. One cannot run and hide from these situations. Isolationism is long dead, unless you live on Easter Island. Good Luck Mr. Obama. Thank You Mr. Hitchens.
Lars Svendsen
Kalamazoo, MI
McMaster of the Universe
Dear Sir:
Dear Sir:
H. R. McMaster’s treatment of technology and warfare is prescient (“The Human Element,” Winter 2009). In general, “system analysis,” “game theory,” and the like are imprecise science at best—and pseudoscience usually—when applied to human “systems,” no matter the goal. The people who typically engage in such excesses usually fool themselves into thinking these deductive tools are infallible hard sciences. We can see the results of that hubris in more places than war, the current financial debacle being a good example of where quantitative analysis of human nature on a wide scale by yet more “whiz kids” has failed in spectacular fashion.
Paul Jones
Pomona, CA
The anatomy of the causes of America’s failure in Vietnam has been profoundly traced by H. R. McMaster (“The Human Element,” Winter 2009). This is not merely an assessment of Vietnam, but an eye opening piece that comprehensively analyzes failed strategies of war in Iraq and Afghanistan. McMaster’s argument may provide a befitting roadmap for President Barack Obama to chart his government’s policies regarding the ongoing war on terror.
Syed Qamar Afzal Rizvi
Karachi, Pakistan
Paul Jones
Pomona, CA
The anatomy of the causes of America’s failure in Vietnam has been profoundly traced by H. R. McMaster (“The Human Element,” Winter 2009). This is not merely an assessment of Vietnam, but an eye opening piece that comprehensively analyzes failed strategies of war in Iraq and Afghanistan. McMaster’s argument may provide a befitting roadmap for President Barack Obama to chart his government’s policies regarding the ongoing war on terror.
Syed Qamar Afzal Rizvi
Karachi, Pakistan
