FOREIGNID: 86327
FOREIGNPARENTID: 86323
FOREIGNCOMMENTERID: 10870
AUTHOR: sdanielles
DATE: 01/24/2006 07:16:04 PM

Posted at January 24, 2006 7:16 PM in response to Thoughts on Iran's nuclear program

FOREIGNID: 86487
FOREIGNPARENTID: 86468
FOREIGNCOMMENTERID: 10870
AUTHOR: sdanielles
DATE: 01/24/2006 07:09:49 PM

Posted at January 24, 2006 7:09 PM in response to Department of Semantics

FOREIGNID: 86486
FOREIGNPARENTID: 0
FOREIGNCOMMENTERID: 10870
AUTHOR: sdanielles
DATE: 01/24/2006 07:07:58 PM

Posted at January 24, 2006 7:07 PM in response to Department of Semantics

I have always been befuddled by the limitations of lingo of international relations, as the stakeholders seems have shown some flourish for combining or permutating about 50 or key terms. 
And for 30 (+ or -) years, I have waffled with the notion that really the key to some of these issues is to be able to think about them in multiple ways and dimensions, under conditions of constant self-examination & a little humility.  I suppose I found the approach necessitated by the epiphany that many too much ego & its  defenses were entailed in decision-making.   

Posted at January 24, 2006 11:56 AM in response to Thoughts on Iran's nuclear program

Accessing that website isn't going to to set off the NSA again  is it? 
lol!
Hey joking about it is better than going nuts over the potential. 
(I hope)
lol
sd

Posted at January 24, 2006 11:37 AM in response to Thoughts on Iran's nuclear program

I understand many of the points that you are making. Well I guess I don't think that men are the only ones capable of control oriented behaviours, some of which produce some of the wierdest situations that I've come across. Often enough, these sort of updated displays of alphahood are more apt to be scripted/scored/parodied in a tabloid, film, or live comedy show. 
I guess a better tact is to press for continuous self-examination, with an eye toward truly coming to terms with our own urges and contributions to any situation. 

Posted at January 24, 2006 10:11 AM in response to Practical Questions

Re: The absence of meaningful reality based assessments of the regional actors.----------
Well I don't know if I would characterize the situation as 'absence' because obviously the accuracy of your perception depends also on the extent to which you have arrived to it through direct evidence of the actors and researched the assessments that are currently out there now. 
I think we have to couch these issues in more open-ended ways. This strikes me as a basic axiom of good thinking.  
Then, as a response to a narrower but hornier point that you made about 'good faith actors'. I don't think it is going to be easy to claim that we are infinitely more capable of good faith, given our current understanding of the cognitive limitations of our minds and the impact of fear and trauma. In other words, I think the term 'good faith' is highly misleading and anachronistic now and obscures underlying states of mind.  

Posted at January 24, 2006 9:08 AM in response to A Sound Suggestion on Iran

Re: Are you sure the U.S. wants these things? I'm not. Divide and conquer? Divide and control? Absolutely.--------------
Obviously there is long history of competing strains of thought on whether the US has been adept at order-building, through the Cold War through to now, judging from George Kennan's own reflections on his own role in Cold War period foreign policy.  One of his key concerns, as I have interpreted it, was that we have continued to delude ourselves into the posture that we are the most civilizing force in the world. 
But if it is so, it sure engages in rhetorics which contribute to high levels of anxiety too, to the extent that it might be therapeutic to start a knitting circle or something: you know, with rocking chairs and all.  

Posted at January 24, 2006 8:24 AM in response to A Sound Suggestion on Iran

Re: as a result of the exhaustion of 'history' as Hegel's 'unfolding of Spirit in time.' Disspirited, fascism and communism collapsed after three quarters of a century.
And now we have islamofascism, so called. How long, oh Lord, how long?-------------
I have been suggesting that we need to rely less on essentialist characterizations to explain our current discontents. They beg the conclusion in too many cases and so function as straightjackets which are difficult to escape. 
And this perhaps why, from time to time, I return to the the subject of 'thinking dispositions'. Some combinations of attitudes/traits/domains may lend themselves to  

Posted at January 24, 2006 7:48 AM in response to Practical Questions

Re: Um I was about to write annalytical. My apologies.
I HOPE youse guys understand that I am kidding around . Actually I think Jim Woolsley can tell some great jokes, and I meant my original post to function as a compliment to him. I've heard him on C-Span. He does have great analytical capacities. 

Posted at January 24, 2006 6:36 AM in response to Practical Questions