My Eye on the Eye post led me to think about how foreign policy reflects our leaders more than we perceive. Let me set it up.
Imagine that you are so bright that you are constantly bored. But nevertheless, you can get what you want whenever you apply yourself. You spent parts of your childhood in countries outside the U.S. Your natural father was not in the picture. You went to an Ivy League school, but you never really engaged when it came to the study of history or foreign policy. Your interests were the labor movement and American Radicalism. Maybe foreign relations was symbolic of a failed relationship with your father. Who knows.
As you matured, you became interested in fundamentally transforming the status quo. You learned that success in achieving your goals came when you destroyed your opponent. Fundamental change, after all, emerges from destruction.
Russia has something that stands in the way of achieving your goal. They have not bent to your will. Suppose Mr. Putin has said that American leaders "don’t see that the struggle with radical Islam is a war, pure and simple. It’s a war that should unite all the civilized countries of the world. I didn’t say “democratic,” I said “civilized.”. What course will you take with them?
Simple. Permit a virulently Islamic Republic waiting for the arrival of the 21st Imam to develop nuclear weapons and lift economic sanctions against them, of course. Make them the 7th World Power on your southern border. And then tell the Israelis tone down your trash talk, and offer them a bunch of shiny new stuff.
The Russian riposte - leak information that the US maintained black interrogation facilities throughout Europe.
The strategic thinking that we once agonized over has given way to a food fight.
%%%%%%%%%%%%% Update %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
NSA is tracks the location of 5 Billion cellphones