What Year Is It? 1938? 1972? Or 1914?

WSJ, Atlantic Monthly ^ | August 15, 2006 | ROSS DOUTHAT

[schu]

Foreign-policy debates are usually easy to follow: Liberals battle conservatives, realists feud with idealists, doves vie with hawks. But well into the second Bush term, traditional categories are in a state of collapse.

***** Snip

There are five major schools of thought on this question, beginning with the "1942ists," who believe that we stand in Iraq today where the U.S. stood shortly after Pearl Harbor: bogged down against a fascist enemy and duty-bound to carry on the fight to victory.

***** Snip

Over the last year, though, many conservatives have been peeling away from '42ism, joining the "1938ists" instead, for whom Iran's march toward nuclear power is the equivalent of Hitler's 1930s brinkmanship.

***** Snip

'72ism has few mainstream politicians behind it, but a great many Americans, and it holds that George Bush is Nixon, Iraq is Vietnam, and that any attack on Iran or Syria would be equivalent to bombing Cambodia.

***** Snip

"1948ists," who share the '42ist and '38ist view of the war on terror as a major generational challenge, but insist that we should think about it in terms of Cold War-style containment and multilateralism, not Iraq-style pre-emption

***** Snip

But as our crisis deepens, it's worth considering 1914ism, and with it the possibility that all of us, whatever year we think it is, are poised on the edge of an abyss that nobody saw coming.

[schu]

Summary

1914ist - edge of the abyss 1938ist - appeasers 1942ist - carry on to victory 1948ist - long term cold war approach, minimal preemption 1972ist - peacenik

Which one are you?

[schu]

Redo:
1914ist - edge of the abyss
1938ist - appeasers
1942ist - carry on to victory
1948ist - long term cold war approach, minimal preemption 1972ist - peacenik

schu

[Comico Atómico]

1967ist - last chance to fight a war to unconditional victory

[AntiGuv]

I'm a 1956ist.

[garyhope]

"Which one are you?"

I'm for killing all the Islamofascists, all their supporters, financers, media fifth columnists, enablers, all their families, friends and relatives tomorrow morning and feeding them to the fish and pigs.

Just in case you were wondering.

[knews_hound]

2006, the year of missed opporunities.

I truly believe we will look back on this month as the last chance to prevent disaster.

Sadly, I also believe we will fail in that attempt.

Cheers,

knewshound

Latest article; Flooding the Zone; The coming war against Israel

[kevkrom]

I'm more of a 1096ist.

[SpaceBar]

I believe that the current geopolitical situation most closely resembles that of pre WW I. Extreme political alignment into two camps of hegemony, a whole new generation of devastating weapons that need real world testing, and alliances that put virtually all countries in an us-or-them category. The only resemblance to WWII is the anti-semitic rhetoric. Hitler was a far more formidable foe than that unkempt schoolteacher in Tehran.

[oldleft]

I'm a 1095ist.

[schu]

Should I assume that this means a new Crusade?

schu

[oldleft]

Yes, but I'm afraid that's just wishful thinking on my part.

[kinghorse]

Definitely 1914. The homegrown opposition is for isolationism and the impending war will be fought dirty using WMD's just like WWI. I bet the isolationist sentiment before WWI grew from fatigue over years of adventure under Theodore Roosevelt. Just as in that time, we can't stop because the job is too hard.

Could be an exact replay right down the act that opens it.

[RobRoy]

>>But as our crisis deepens, it's worth considering 1914ism, and with it the possibility that all of us, whatever year we think it is, are poised on the edge of an abyss that nobody saw coming.<<

Nobody saw it coming?! Baloney. A transcript of Bush's speech after 911 lets us know Bush saw it coming. That is why we are in Iraq. Imagine the same Rina/syria/lebanon mess with a strong Saddam in Iraq.

Also, if you read the koran or went here you saw it coming: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/696408/posts

I'm a 1938ist, but in the context of my tagline. Except I now think it is 1939. It's gonna get worse before it gets better. A lot worse. It is literally unconscionable to most people in the west just how bad it can be - and probably will be.

[MNJohnnie]

None of the above. Attempts to draw create false historical analogies are the behavior of sophomoric intellects.

Here is the crucial fact that shatters all the hysteric handwringings and breast beating of the Junk Media Always Whining types.

Our current enemies, all rolled into one "Axis" do not have the power to destroy the USA. We have the power available right now to crush any Conventional Military challenge in days if not hours.

Our enemies know this and will NOT face us across the battlefield. All this bluster and hand wringing in the Junk Media about "What year is it" is merely the prattle of drama queen hysterics with no clue what they are talking about.

History never repeats. The situation is always different if for no other reason then the previous events having all ready happened. This is a problem like no other. Trying to draw false analogies to previous wars is the behavior of room temperature intellects with NO clue about current factual military and political realities.

[DuncanWaring]

I'm for...

You left out "barbeque their goats".

Other than that, it's a good list.

[Skooz]

I'm a 1796ist and think we should call on Horatio Nelson.

[RobRoy]

>>Should I assume that this means a new Crusade<<

In a sense, I think you are correct.

[Always Right]

You left out the Armageddonists. We are headed towards teh final battle.

[Skooz]

Attempts to draw create false historical analogies are the behavior of sophomoric intellects.

Well said.

[schu]

Agree, many saw the disaster of 1914 with the interlocking treaties as a clear formula for disaster, which it was.

There is another date:

"For '19ists, Mr. Bush is Woodrow Wilson, a feckless idealist bent on sacrificing U.S. interests and global stability on the altar of messianic liberalism."

The 1919ists believe Bush is the equivalent of Wilson, seriously misguided and and idealist. In other words democracy will never succeed in the Middle East, we are just wasting our time, treasure and lives.

schu