Hmmm. It's all foreign policy. I don't see anything objectionable here, but I've never been much interested in foreign policy, which is an expert's game and I'm not all into that diplomacy stuff.This is why editors never offer to pay me to write about foreign policy. They always want nuance and insight and crap like that: "Whither Azerbijan?"
So far as I’m concerned, the world can be divided into four categories:
The objective of policy should be for category 1 to whip the living dog$#it out of category 2, and thereby transfer them to category 3, so as to send a message to category 4: “Don’t even think about it, a$$holes."
- Countries that we’re at war with.
- Countries that we’re not at war with.
- Countries that are watching from the sidelines and thinking, "Hmmm. Maybe we should jump in on this war against America."
Peace Through Superior Firepower. Anybody got a better idea?
My attitude is more like, "Who cares? Canada, France, Azerbijan -- they're all just a bunch of foreigners. Unless you want to send me on an expense-paid trip to Azerbijan, let some geek at Brookings Institute write that stuff." Which sort of rules out foreign policy as an area of professional interest.
This is why four-eyed geeks like David Brooks get all the free trips to Azerbijan, so they can write nuance that bores people to sleep. Foreign policy magazines are the Darvon of journalism. They're boring on purpose. You wouldn't want some deputy undersecretary at the State Department to pick up his favorite foreign policy journal and read the kind of gonzo stuff I might write if the American Entetprise Institute sent me to Azerbijan:
The swimming pool at the Park Hyatt Baku is warm, the whiskey is cheap, the local prostitutes are friendly, and top officials from European NGOs were having themselves a swell old time of it. They had come to Azerbijan for a September conference convened by the United Nations, funded in part by U.S. foreign aid, to combat AIDS and international human trafficking. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had spoken that morning, but when I asked one British official, sitting poolside with a slender 17-year-old Azerbijani call-girl on his lap, what he thought of Mrs. Clinton's speech, he took a sip of his fourth gin-and-tonic and shouted: "Cow!" . . .No, AEI would never underwrite a "foreign policy" trip that produced such brutal stuff. Anyway, you should check out Da Tech Guy's "Statement of Common Principles."
Frankly, I've never been much of a joiner . . .