Juan, your first paragraph has struck me as shock and awe for which you should wear a hair shirt as punishment. But I did read, and agree with the remainder of your post, except that your final paragraph is wishful thinking.
By the way, Paul Krugman made light of Broder's column at his Blog, which is the proper weight to be given to Broder these days. (Juan, don't forget Broder's adulation with everything Bush/Cheney for 8 years.)
"Among the findings are that modern insurgencies go on for about a decade, and the longer they continue the more likely it is that the government will find a way to defeat them."
Juan, your first paragraph has struck me as shock and awe for which you should wear a hair shirt as punishment. But I did read, and agree with the remainder of your post, except that your final paragraph is wishful thinking.
By the way, Paul Krugman made light of Broder's column at his Blog, which is the proper weight to be given to Broder these days. (Juan, don't forget Broder's adulation with everything Bush/Cheney for 8 years.)
Brazil still Reaching out to Obama on Nuclear Deal
I thought this was an interesting post but the final paragraph:
"By the way, Arizona, just a note. Now might not have been an opportune time to anger the Mexicans, if you wanted their support on Iran."
escaped me. Is there a leap of logic in this?
"Among the findings are that modern insurgencies go on for about a decade, and the longer they continue the more likely it is that the government will find a way to defeat them."
Should "likely" be "unlikely"?