69 million page views

And Yet Words Sometimes Fail to Explain the Insanity of the World Peace Process

Reader comment on item: Kenneth N. Waltz – The Stupidest Strategist?
in response to reader comment: That's a whole lotta words when only a single sentence is needed

Submitted by M. Tovey (United States), Jul 2, 2012 at 12:13

Obviously, your perspective is as faulty as former presidents Bushes and you have not really understood where I have come from or know where I am going with all of this. But it is not hard to understand why this might be so.

In reality, I do have my issues, a culmination of nearly six decades of having to watch as a world that potentially could find a way to peace instead resorts to varying kind of humanistic rationale to find ways for one sector of society to divide and dominate (now there's a conundrum if ever there was one) for whatever goal that might be achieved for humanistic satisfaction. I have long ago given up on human reasoning as a basis for how mankind should continue; for every time it tries, it fails.

Being human, I do have a warrior mentality; but then there's not a man alive or once was that did not have to face the reality of survival and develop whatever abilities as humanly possible to accomplish that task, not merely physically, but emotionally. Some do well; some not so well; some never achieve it.

When Viet Nam was all the world's rage, my time to face up to the dilemma of surviving the American draft was put to the challenge as it was laid at my doorstep. I did not dodge it and contemplated entering the navy; yet circumstances played themselves out and I was not chosen to go. I could have played the pacifist after that, for the times certainly played that to the hilt. But having been born to the generations that endured the two prior worldwide conflagrations and being self taught the 'reasoning' of why, pacifism did not address the underlying causes well enough to make a real human plan to avert the next confrontation.

You make insinuation of less than honorable intentions for the recent wars in the Middle East (going back to Lebanon for me) and you have definitively laid the blame on American imperialism (maybe not overtly or intentionally, but sublimely it has that resonance of logic) and there are some inferences of truth to that; but the bulk of the reasoning lays deeper, to the roots of ideological controversies to which there will be no rational resolution on any humanistic level. Therein lays the inevitability: going to guns; and there are plenty ready to go to guns, now aren't there.

Now I do agree that the term 'war on terror' does have its play on words; for it should be war IS terror. But it has been used as a tool to legitimize imposing one's will on another, whether in these little acts of war on small targets (civilian and military) for ideological reasons and larger targets (still civilian and military) for less than ideological rationale. Those labeled terrorists are given that special little designation because those that are charged with keeping the peace are afraid to call it what it is: war on humanity. In their little human minds they have developed some twisted rationale that is for the most part demonically inspired- and for good reason-demons hate humanity. Yet these 'terrorists' think they can impose their will at will and will obtain whatever tools necessary to do so.

This is what Mr. Waltz (and evidently quite a few others) seems to want to ignore-the intentions of war-not remembering that the process of peace is not natural to the typical arrogant mindset of 'my will is better than yours;' and they'll prove it when they have the means to prove it. Last century it was Hitler and Stalin that proved it; who will it be this century?

While it may be argued that there is not enough evidence that Saddam Hussein did not have a sufficient capacity to wage a WMD style war during the United States invasion of Iraq, the Iranians and Kurds already have enough war dead due to chemical attacks that gives credence that if he had been able to keep his chemical ordnance intact for use, his mind had already demonstrated it was unstable enough that he could have employed them again is such circumstances arose. His intentions were plain enough-he just did not get to the place where he could have done it again.

Now as for the Bush's' intentions, senior Bush had a different agenda than junior-though both converged on the Iraqi situation I suspect for a circumstance of convenience. That the senior Bush did not have Schwarzkopf finish what was intended in the first Gulf War was a failure that we should have avoided; but since it was incomplete, Bush junior was compelled to finish it and the mere 'threat' of WMD was evidently enough for some to provide a false sense of legitimization. The real threat all along was the instability of the mindset of Saddam Hussein - and junior President Bush needed no imagination to perfect a human reason to act against that.

But, that poses a 20-20 hindsight question: was that reason enough? Further, if the same 'reasoning' that imputes instability to Saddam Hussein (and later Muammar Ghaddafi, Hosni Mubarak-maybe Bashar al-Assad), is there enough justification to begin an elimination process against them all? After all, they all started demonstrating their insecurities of power against their own populations before exporting the 'terror' that made them easy targets of labeling as dictator or tyrant-or whatever label that would make it easy to argue for their removal. What is the intention necessary there?

But of intentions, we'll come now to the central issue of the Middle East-survival of the peace process; and what will it cost? Does Israel deserve being targeted by the likes of Iranian leadership; or how about Hamas and Hizbollah? Both have specifically and pointedly declared that for them, Israel does not deserve to exist, either as a nation or as a people. While Iran can conveniently say what they want without apparent disagreement from likeminded thinking from the region, how is it then that the world is beginning to take sides in preparation for war to either make that point stick or fall into the regions of hell arguing it in futility at the point of a gun?

Now, like too many do today, you cannot necessarily blame it on the Bush's. All of the Bush doctrines went out the window when the current occupant of the White House went to Egypt to begin the process of 'normalizing' relations between the current American Administration and the entirety of the Muslim world. It is no secret and the evidence supports the situation that the Arab Upheavals are proximal to that 'fundamental change' of the American political scene and how it relates to the resurgence of fundamentalist Islamists in their declared intentions and efforts to make shari'a the defining social norm, to be imposed on a world that has otherwise lost the sense of the rationale to keep a world peace.

That is the faulty intention that is being demonstrated-and that is what I am demonstrating as a situation of inevitability. It is not what I want, as you have so incorrectly asserted by trying to argue Mr. Waltz's position; but look at the world and tell me that you think peace is in the offing. To the contrary, peace is never more so the offering on the altar of warring intentions as it is now-Iran may have set it up-but they are as much as anybody going to pay for their intentions as anybody else.

Now, if you took the time to read this wordy explanation, you will finally come down to the bottom line: I have been watching all of this come to pass, doing so for more than fifty years; and there is only one way to explain this in one sentence: but I'll leave that to you.

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Submit a comment on this item

Reader comments (89) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
3ad hominem [129 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
ChristopherMar 1, 2013 07:27203944
3Waltz was and remains ahead of his time [116 words]Waltz fanAug 7, 2012 09:48197724
1What Mr. Waltz Misses - Whose Finger Would He Put at the Button [542 words]M. ToveyAug 8, 2012 11:21197724
TIME [22 words]PROPHET AAASep 9, 2012 14:21197724
You can't be serious! [70 words]VincentJul 26, 2012 14:40197457
2Stupidity, Iran, And Nukes [178 words]CliffordJul 16, 2012 02:59197257
Iran [32 words]helenJul 12, 2012 20:12197201
8Waltz is a blithering Idiot!! [92 words]BamagujeJun 30, 2012 17:19196854
Deterring a non-state actor [100 words]apvMar 23, 2014 07:34196854
3Idiot [26 words]KerryJun 28, 2012 09:32196787
4I agree with Mr. Waltz [67 words]KarimJun 27, 2012 02:50196741
Hazards of Empathizing with Mr. Waltz's Assertions of a 'Peaceful Nuclear Iran.' [505 words]M. ToveyJun 28, 2012 15:36196741
1Dear Mr. Tovey [75 words]Debanjan BanerjeeJul 5, 2012 11:22196741
Saddam and The Bomb [79 words]DavodJul 7, 2012 07:16196741
Nuclear Weapons are NOT Tools of Peace - Nuclear Iran Does NOT Offer Peace [540 words]M. ToveyJul 9, 2012 11:52196741
Dear Mr. Tovey [221 words]Debanjan BanerjeeJul 12, 2012 10:25196741
Choice of Destiny Requires Knowledge of Whom One will Serve [262 words]M. ToveyJul 12, 2012 19:07196741
Dear Mr. Tovey [167 words]Debanjan BanerjeeJul 18, 2012 23:22196741
Personal Choices - Choosing the Love of Jesus Christ over the Control of the Caliphate [877 words]M. ToveyJul 19, 2012 19:06196741
3Our dear Deb and the Stockholm syndrome [537 words]dhimmi no moreJul 20, 2012 06:42196741
Dear Mr. Tovey [341 words]Debanjan BanerjeeJul 23, 2012 23:18196741
2Islamic hypocrisy [606 words]dhimmi no moreJul 25, 2012 06:42196741
1I have a few questions for our dear Deb al-tablighee [395 words]dhimmi no moreJul 25, 2012 10:18196741
Personal Choices Continued- Choosing the Love of Jesus Christ over the Control of the Caliphate [731 words]M. ToveyJul 25, 2012 18:02196741
2Muslims and reality [186 words]dhimmi no moreJul 27, 2012 06:48196741
peaceful muslims [172 words]trippsSep 30, 2012 20:02196741
peaceful muslims continued [172 words]trippsSep 30, 2012 20:18196741
The Time for Being 'Peaceful' Without the Prince of Peace is Closing [409 words]M. ToveyOct 1, 2012 19:25196741
mr tovey [172 words]trippsOct 21, 2012 08:03196741
Waiting Upon the LORD for His Will [1238 words]M. ToveyOct 23, 2012 16:59196741
confirmatiom [377 words]MRTrippsOct 25, 2012 15:10196741
Confirmation and Validation of the WORD of the LORD [1435 words]M. ToveyOct 30, 2012 19:35196741
2Kenneth N. Waltz - The Stupidist Strategist? [66 words]JudithJun 26, 2012 20:57196733
Academia??? [34 words]Jon C.Jul 15, 2012 16:55196733
3so much for intellectual observations of Islamic concepts [77 words]rodney allsworthJun 25, 2012 20:20196684
1Saudis desire tanks [63 words]mythJun 25, 2012 12:36196670
1The Inevitability of an Iranian Nuclear Situation [338 words]M. ToveyJun 25, 2012 11:07196669
Foreign Affairs Magazine [13 words]samsonJun 25, 2012 02:14196657
4This is the troubling trend [141 words]saraJun 25, 2012 18:08196657
1Incredibly theoretical [74 words]StasJun 25, 2012 01:01196656
1It's actually a reasonable article, once you understand the underlying logic [179 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
JohnboyJun 24, 2012 21:15196652
1Ignoring Iran's Real Intentions are Proximal to the Apoplexy Shown in the Middle East [439 words]M. ToveyJun 26, 2012 14:55196652
No doubt it does [90 words]JohnboyJun 28, 2012 01:19196652
That's a whole lotta words when only a single sentence is needed [132 words]JohnboyJun 29, 2012 19:55196652
And Yet Words Sometimes Fail to Explain the Insanity of the World Peace Process [1304 words]M. ToveyJul 2, 2012 12:13196652
4Kenneth N. Waltz's motives [180 words]PrashantJun 24, 2012 14:05196641
3Stupidity at its absolute best! [46 words]Nelson D'SilvaJun 24, 2012 08:08196628
1Regarding Mr. Waltz [24 words]Prof. Paul EidelbergJun 24, 2012 07:33196626
1Stylish Chapeau [39 words]J. MeschJun 28, 2012 11:06196626
2this might surprise you, too [168 words]Nora A.Jun 24, 2012 01:26196620
1This is what happens when we ignore [85 words]steveNJun 23, 2012 21:46196618
2Ridiculously naive [58 words]stanley bJun 23, 2012 21:35196613
8Waltz-ing Matil-Dupe ( Mearsheimer & Walt's endorsement is like a "Seal of Approval" from Hitler and Muhammed) [476 words]RonJun 23, 2012 17:20196601
2K Waltz! [13 words]Steven LJun 23, 2012 16:59196599
4The reason for publishing is clear [46 words]JP GolbertJun 23, 2012 16:20196595
2Brilliantly Stupid [125 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Richard B.Jun 23, 2012 15:10196590
Waltz article [170 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Gil BindelglasJun 23, 2012 14:51196587
3If you don't know what you are talking about, keep your mouth shut [96 words]alanJun 23, 2012 14:46196585
2Truth is a very difficult commodity to protect [260 words]PrashantJun 23, 2012 14:37196583
1Prashant, you are optimistic [61 words]steveNJun 23, 2012 21:39196583
In support of insanity [76 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
EthanPJun 23, 2012 14:01196578
kenneth Waltz in Foriegn Affairs [17 words]ronnie PleetJun 23, 2012 13:36196577
1Kenneth N. Waltz - The stupidest Strategist! [169 words]Nenette GrunbergJun 23, 2012 12:45196576
Why not? [58 words]stanley bJun 23, 2012 21:42196576
Bad Calls [60 words]jay1Jun 23, 2012 12:21196575
I can agree with the author on only one point [145 words]Abu NudnikJun 23, 2012 11:52196573
Islam is a political philosophy as well. [96 words]PrashantJun 24, 2012 14:15196573
2Threats to wipe Israel off the map. [162 words]David GoshenJun 23, 2012 11:22196572
Iran gets the bomb the world become a bum [as bad – poor] [214 words]NuritGJun 23, 2012 11:18196571
Earth to Waltz, please come in! [24 words]Arnold ServaisJun 23, 2012 10:44196570
1Foreign Affairs Magazine is the problem here [183 words]Richard H. ShulmanJun 23, 2012 10:12196568
2Waltz Doesn't Dance Alone! [30 words]Barry BlackJun 23, 2012 09:52196566
there a many dopes in the US [11 words]alanJun 23, 2012 20:24196566
Stupid [131 words]Dean WestridgeJun 23, 2012 08:13196565
1Stupid, perhaps , but [212 words]JudithJun 24, 2012 13:13196565
Kenneth Waltz [17 words]Lou VanDelmanJun 23, 2012 07:39196564
Kenneth N Waltz- The Stupidest Strategist? [80 words]AnneJun 23, 2012 07:37196563
2The article [46 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
NickJun 23, 2012 06:31196560
If Israel has nukes, they maintained peace in the middle east for as long as they may have had them [51 words]alanJun 23, 2012 20:22196560
1many factors are lacking-by choice? [107 words]Michael Hanni MorcosJun 23, 2012 05:08196558
1When Iran gets the bomb (nevermind Alabama, Tom Lehrer.) [64 words]JohnBJun 23, 2012 04:15196557
1Altering the balance of power in the Middle East [208 words]Ralph DavisJun 23, 2012 03:47196556
The key problem here [102 words]Dvar DeaJun 23, 2012 03:27196555
1Ill thought out and assinine comment [93 words]ChaimJun 23, 2012 02:24196553
1it is true then.Humanity is unable to learn anything from History [18 words]Constantinos KalotarisJun 23, 2012 01:26196549
1Mr. Waltz must be joking [135 words]JosephJun 23, 2012 01:17196548
1Iranian Nuclear Lobby Shows Its Face [223 words]CanaanJun 23, 2012 01:09196547
I expect more mainstream articles like this. [213 words]Pinchas BaramJun 23, 2012 00:47196545
2Kennedy was wrong to object Cuba's Nuclear aspirations. [72 words]IamJosephJun 23, 2012 00:18196543

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)