Interesting piece on the Persia conflict in the Times from an Oxon. prof. It's all of a piece with the ongoing agenda in the Levant, of course, but I have some misgivings. In conflicts between nations, intelligence and tact are usually only in play because of institutional factors, and those are precisely the forces that have been sidelined in the present politics. While right and wrong becomes a difficult question when dealing with vastly different national cultures, it is still very possible to make a mistake, as was observed of Napoleon's avenging acts on campaign.
Further upstream, I wonder if there are two realities -- the day to day reality of national existence, and then the more abstract or general view that strategy creates around this quotidian existence. The sort of politics we have now, based on narrative and theme, emphasizes the second type of thinking. And it's important to note that this second type of thinking is entirely contingent - it's something we made up for its explanatory and predictive value. It makes no claim to say what these things are. What's needed, and what America was created to achieve, is a political reality that is based ion the first type of existence, the quotidian life of the countries. Warriors for the working day.
But then came the televisions.