The Ambrosini Critique

…and they say that those that can’t, teach.

Us students called her Jane, but I don’t think her name was Hammons when she taught me.

Wouldn’t it be funny if the critical Suskind book actually helped the administration articulate it’s long-held claim that Iraq war was necessary post-9/11, that sanctions were too risky. By putting into focus the pre-9/11 policy towards Iraq, the book will make the reader consider the situation as it was and ask the question: how can we live with a world that has in it an avowed enemy of the U.S. with the risk he has or is developing weapons that can destroy us?

Europeans see the direction of world history to be parallel to the history of Europe itself. The world is destined for reconciliation and a transnational rule of law, a la the EU. I’m not sure why this outcome seems inevitable to Europeans, but after a 3 hour discussion the other night with some folks from the UK, it seems obvious that this bias is built-in. To them, the world is edging towards lasting peace and diplomacy is all that is needed to smooth the rough edges (e.g. Iraq, Iran and North Korea).

For all the optimism American’s are purported to have, they are pessimistic about the fate of the world. They are distrustful of the UN and other forces that claim to bring order to the world. This article surmises that the Book of Revelations and the stories of the second coming have ingrained themselves in the American culture much more than in other countries. According to those stories, the world is going to end with the coming of the Anti-Christ. He will be calling himself Christ and while bringing destruction on the world, he’ll promise salvation. With this point of view, promises of world peace are thought to be tenuous and are to be regarded with deep suspicion.

The article does a good job explaining why America has not shied away from the use of force in the past. The articles analysis could be used to explain why we ventured into Iraq, even against world opinion.

To me, the prospect of engaging in diplomacy with Saddam Hussein is laughable. I think most American’s would agree with me. That said, there is a wide gap between me and my British friends on this point. This article goes a long way in trying to explain that gap.