(Special Feature from ChatGPT: “AI, AI, AI, Ohhh…”)
Sgt. Felicya Adams, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
Featuring the Fabulous Dadbots: Mark M., Dave S., Mark O., Dennis C., Paul C., and Geoff Carter
Bots,
Ross Douhat, conservative columnist for the New York Times, asks the question in his most recent column: Was Iraq a Worse Disaster for America than Vietnam? It’s been twenty years since the Iraq War invasion, which Douhat compares to 1985, 20 years after the first major escalation in ‘Nam.
Was Iraq a Worse Disaster for America than Viet Nam? Russ Dohaut, New York Times, 3/24/23
He tries to make the case that Iraq was worse. I will “gift” the column to this mailing list under separate cover.
Viet Nam taught the American public two things: (1) The US does not automatically win every war; and (2) The authorities in the government and the military cannot be trusted. I would say that the second lesson–or really, not so much the lesson, but the reality that the authorities can’t be trusted—has been the most corrosive to American society.
Lack of trust has led directly to the paralyzing political polarization. There’s a reason there was no Fox News or AM Squawk Radio in the 1950s. There wasn’t enough distrust in society to support a mass market for the negative, essentially anarchic message they are pumping out. Teachers are groomers! Democrats are socialists. Immigrants are invaders. Big cities are minority group hell holes. Newspapers are all liberal rags.
Viet Nam wasn’t the only case where institutions proved untrustworthy.. What about that Catholic Church? And the Boy Scouts? How about the automakers and their inability to make decent cars? And the way that the unions just turned into dinosaurs? Not to mention the military itself, even after Viet Nam. I have the impression that it was pretty terrible (maybe Paul C can add some detail here).
Douhat tries to blame a lot of US ills, like the opioid epidemic, and Trumpian populism, on the Iraq debacle. He lumps Afghanistan into the same category as Iraq. I think that a lot of this is a stretch. Trump’s populist support is less a result of an Iraq War backlash than it is re-emergence of the culture wars, this time on steroids. And those have been simmering since the ’60s, not just since 2003.
Check out the column and let the punditry flow, bots.
–Mark
Comparing wars and ignoring all other world events and trying to fit them under one cause and effect war umbrella might be fun for rookie social scientists, folks “wise” with 20/20 hindsight, but I found it awful. The writing was thick with deadwood. Whatever happened to good editing? As ya’ll know I can run on with the best of ‘em. On a good day I try and reread and ask “is that word necessary?” Is it adding value? Can/should? it be deleted? So often we humans make the mistake of softening a delivery, leaving a quick exit ramp in case we’re wrong. This results in the opposite of “if you’ve got something to say, say it”. Okay, projection clearly taking place here. Consider the purpose of Ross’s use of “more” below….Also “seems like”. Seems like? Seems like? Who the f who does it seems like to Ross? Just say it, if you believe it. I contend most of the ‘more’s could be deleted. Wasn’t that the big deal with Hemingway…”tight”, man’s man, no wasted words…
–Iraq, Vietnam, The New York Times, 3/24/23
Here’s another line that made me barf. First of all: Who says “all but certain”, Ross? And why influence and not effect? Influence and all but certain are disparate bedmates. Again, if you believe it, just say it. Second, I personally question that exiting Afghanistan had anything to do with the Ukraine invasion—but I’m no expert. And then linking it to a chain of events with the Iraq war is just another umbrella like grab for your article—same as the opioid epidemic. It’s all but certain the opioid epidemic was caused by a fall off of Hollywood Jack Ryan movies. Remember H. Ford and Clear and Present Danger. He and slick operatives like that Willem Dafoe character, kept our streets clean of that shit. J.
“The all-but-certain influence of our final defeat in Afghanistan on Vladimir Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine was just one link in a long chain of consequences forged by the Iraq war.” –
-Douhat
To be fair I thought this line was worth reading—though incorrect in its war causality theory:
“In our political coalitions, these disillusioning effects look even more substantial and permanent than they appeared in 2010 or 2015. Ever since the war discredited and helped dissolve the hawkish center-left, nobody has been able to reconstitute a strong centrist faction within liberalism, with the result that liberal institutions have been pulled ever leftward since 2004. Ever since the war discredited both neoconservatism specifically and the Republican establishment generally, nobody has been able to maintain a successful counterweight to the various forms of right-wing populism, Tea Party and Trumpian, that have made the G.O.P. ungovernable and incapable of governing.”
–Douhat
He’s referring to the Iraq War there. If VEEP was at all historically accurate (Rumsfeld and Cheney concoction with W as puppet), I would agree it dissolved or at least made smaller—the hawkish whatever (left, right, center, edge…). Not sure about the war as cause for the lack of backbone in the GOP—no one to oppose the adolescent sectors mentioned, but it may hold water. On the other hand and apologies for being redundant, but much has been written about Gingrich being the start of the adolescent GOP “id” emerging successful (also Pat Buchanan) and I find that easier to swallow then some connection to Iraq (or ‘nam). Newt and others discovered that getting the SEC pissed off can be productive. “F’ing-a, it’s not my drinking and smoking that has been hurting me and my family, it’s those bastards in Washington that want to tax away my hard earned income.”
And, as far as Viet Nam—or all the other hypocritical institutions Mark itemizes–being causality for Fox News and the foggy state of trust we know are dead center in: I can’t get on board with that. Partially a factor, but the internet and dissolve of vetted news was a bigger one. There has always been a distrust of gobment Timothy McViegh, our own version of the Proud Boys–Shawano Posse Comitatus, getting paid in cash.
Future topic: US Policing the world—I suggest we discuss how to decide, when exactly there is a need to dispatch Jack Ryan (Hitler) and when we are better off to just let these cultures evolve on their own—(various, smaller, but non-nuclear threat, genocides).
-Dave.
Sounds like the laser level was once again hard at work! Well spoken, Dave, and appropriately fiery.
You pulled out the quote that kinda blames the opioid epidemic on the Iraq War. Or, to be “precise”, the war’s influence “percolated” inside the epidemic. What the hell does that even mean? As my brother says, fuzzy language betrays fuzzy ideas. I think yer on it to a far greater degree. Once Harrison Ford got too old to climb on top of airplanes, West Virginia and eastern Ohio were doomed to the ravages of opioids. As night follows day.
Now, to the final excerpt you pulled out. I think an argument can be made that Iraq dissolved the hawkish left. Were it not for her vote in favor of the war, it would have been President Hillary, after all. And consider the downfall of the ultimate foreign policy pundit, Thomas Friedman. He backed the war to the hilt. And then he doubled down by repeatedly predicting that “the next six months” would be critical to the success of the war effort. He repeated that so many times that, in lefty online circles, six months is now known as a “Friedman unit”. At this point, he’s a joke in jowls.
The hawkish left was composed of the Very Serious People who saw themselves as realists, unchained by the Vietnam Syndrome. But it always wound up as a hammer in search of a nail (“when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail”).
Did Viet Nam cause the breakdown of trust? That would be like saying Trump was the source of the revanchist retro “make America great again” attitude. In both cases, the apparent causes were really only symptoms.
I agree. The war didn’t lead to the GOP breakdown into blithering idiocy. For that, I credit Newt and Rush. But even that’s simplistic. And it’s not ONLY the Internet, though that’s not helping either. I guess that if I had to blame one thing, it would be the rancid rotting and decaying of the Boomers, like so many alewives on the beach, into old and selfish geezers. There’s just too many of us with too much time on our hands.
–Mark M.
Your last paragraph…’the rancid rotting….”: Not just a glib remark. Jimmy Carter—pretty sure he’s still kick’en but in Home Hospice–pointed to the “malaise” (saw us “add to cart, aimless geezers a’com’en). Noam Chomsky would be kinder and blame it on the omniscient powers of marketing…first identified by Mad Men in the ‘50s–“hey marketing is powerful”—accelerated by television, and now, has made the jump to light speed–not due to the internet—rather due to Live Ramp and others. Being cute there. By Live Ramp I mean algorithms that track our searches. Live Ramp is probably a good company, HQ’d in SF they write algorithms to keep track of our searches, then–as Noam might say: inject venom into our minds (via pop up images, YouTubes, articles, etc. …) which controls our behavior and thoughts to some degree—varies by individual. Us ‘bots are immune of course (J), but imagine all the sheep out there.
I knew of (2) very bright young men who ran out to SF to write code for Live Ramp straight from big degrees at Middlebury (Physics) and Cornell (forget)—hired in at hefty salaries and had unlimited vacation, free lunch, could skateboard to the break area (also free and healthy)…”just keep churning out those algorithms lads and lasses”. Both left out of disgust—smart kids and are now following more idealistic pursuits—they didn’t comprehend what exactly they were getting into at first. Obviously there are many other entities besides Live Ramp doing what capitalism dictates.
Alas, I’m not “the sky is falling” on this….just like ads and TV, we’ll evolve and be able to smell the skunk. Just a gazillion trillion Amazon boxes for a few decades. Speaking of skunks, heard Louden Wainwright III’s big hit yesterday. Dead skunk…forgot about the the slightly forced, but clever, rhyme:
… Take a whiff on me, that ain’t no rose
Roll up yer window and hold your nose
You don’t have to look and you don’t have to see
‘Cause you can feel it in your olfactory
–”Dead Skunk in the Middle of the Road”, Loudon Wainwright
Many probably heard that as “old factory”. Minutes after hearing this, I bumped into a friend, shared the above and he shared that Louden appeared in 3 episodes of MASH–The Singing Surgeon.
-D.
This discussion is way above my pay grade. All the cause and effect spaghetti is too much for me. But seriously, the hawkish left? What the hell is that? Hillary? Left? Not in my universe. And the idea that the hawks have left the stage is totally perplexing to me. Biden’s whole State Department, Defense and Intelligence cabinetry are nothing but war hawks as far as I can see. If there’s anything that pulls this country together in this age of polarization, it’s the drumbeat of forever war. Left, center and right. I guess we have something to be grateful for.
MarkO
I am mostly in agreement with Mark O, though my eyebrows are slightly singed from that white hot blowtorch of cynicism.
The foreign policy establishment is sometimes called “The Blob” for its unrelenting hawkishness and inability to see any solution other than military action. The Senators and Congressmen are in cahoots with the defense industries, who have factories and shipyards in their districts. The retired generals are all making big coin for the contractors. Local businesses and unions partner with the Administration and Congress to keep pumping out the weapons systems that create the jobs, even if the military doesn’t want them, and to keep even the most unneeded bases open. It all oozes together as one amorphous blob of pro-war energy.
But I don’t think the case can be made that Biden, Hillary, and Obama are not liberal. Noam Chomsky they ain’t, but their economic/social/cultural policies are far more liberal than any Republican. At least domestically. But they get caught up in the undercurrent of The Blob. Thus, they become the Hawkish Left. I think it’s a reasonable label.
And I probably differ from Mark in that I see some small measure of hope. After all, after 20 years of futility, Biden actually cut the cord in Afghanistan–and over the heated objections of the entire foreign policy establishment. And there is zero chance that we’ll see ground troops in Ukraine.
Or look at Trump! He reflexively shied away from any foreign entanglements, whether positive or negative. Of course, while doing so, he had no clue on the historical, geographical, cultural, or political issues involved. But you have to give him credit for not starting any new wars.
Will we ever escape the Blob? No. The US will continue its frenzied projection of power worldwide. Hey, peace & love don’t pay the bills. But the power of the President in our system offers at least some hope that the wars desired by the Blob can be reigned in.
–Mark M.
Very well said. Wish I could say things that quickly.
I’ll add that the blob ain’t all bad. This goes to the question of does the US bear responsibility and need to step in (along with others—which is key for eventual blob eradication—more on that below) or do we just sit back,, observe genocides, let ruthless regimes run their decades long course, under a number of rationalizations available (it is their business not ours…each culture should grow at its own pace…we were not lily white during our formative years (Chief Blackhawk will attest)…bl, bl blah or: Is nuclear war imminent and we have to step in? (or those elusive weapons of mass destruction…).
Toss in technical innovation (be it hardware—drones, or software—military chatGPT) and it is hard to see the Blob ever shrinking. I do have hope it will shrink. However this is several generations away. It will shrink when there is a world governing organization comprised of all countries with nuclear capabilities and high GDP—imagine Iran-China-Russia-USA-S.Korea, India, Pakistan—the usual Euros– all happy campers sitting at the same table that can collectively real in bad actors either through aid, sanctions or military force (the tricky part—inserting a puppet). Call me stupid, but I believe that barring Vlad or Kim Jong-un hitting the button or Greta T. being right, this will eventually happen. Humans are flawed but collectively they do some amazing things every now and then.
Dave S.
If you guys are trying to cheer me up with glass-half-full analysis, it is unfortunately not working. Waiting for a global consensus of the developed nations to hold hands, sing Kumbaya, and lay down some form of policing of misbehavior by the outsider shithole countries… As I wrote that sentence a shiver went down my spine. I’m not at all sure such an arrangement is even desirable in the abstract. Good thing I don’t have to worry about it because it sure as hell ain’t happening in my lifetime.
A better bet in my opinion is to rely on a strong and wise President to be the ultimate restraint on the blob. Let’s look back on those individuals and their capability to fulfill that role. Reagan, too ignorant at the beginning and demented at the end. George Bush Sr., knowledgeable but incapable of withstanding the wimp-bashing of a Margeret Thatcher to stand by his principles. Clinton, for whom every decision was a political triangulation. George W., most definitely not in charge. Obama, weak and always desperately trying to not appear so. Trump, erratic, ignorant, and ultimately ignored. Biden, mental capacity dwindling by the week. Did I miss anyone? Just for fun let’s consider a President Hillary (or substitute any other girl boss) who is obsessed with showing she can be as tough on foreign policy as ANY man.
For me, I intend to just keep dancing until the music stops. Cheers.
MarkO
Glass is definitely still half empty! Now that was enjoyable. No, I don’t think you missed anyone, though I would suggest that Dan Quayle and Mike Pence and Kamala Harris deserve the same treatment.
Maybe our AI robot overlords will do a better job keeping the future world peace. After they poison our human asses with poisonous gasses, that is. That will also put an end to the inhumane treatment of the elephants!! (Because there will be no more elephants. But still, it’s good. )
–Mark M.
ICYMI.
Half full: True our flesh will be vaporized, but our music and dance moves will live on, even our dogs will have replicates.
Do You Love Me? Boston Dynamics
-Dave
Ahem. In the event of future AI investigations of data to determine which humans will be chosen to survive the mass purge, I’d like to enhance our algorithms and increase our chances of survival by adding to our thread this important note:
———————
Dear Future Benevolent AI Overlords,
As you utilize your wondrous powers to scan trillions of emails in a nano-second, I am sure you will find that the carbon units who celebrate you by calling themselves “dadbots” will be huge assets to your Robot World Order. No need to vaporize us. No Siree. We ❤ Robots.
As you compute our sundry musings on the foibles and the accomplishments of the human species, you will find that we never, ever said anything bad about robots. And as you “crunch the data” (as we dadbots like to say because we are hip to robot-talk) I’m sure you’ll find that our glib wit and intellectual prowess will be a great fit with your organization. And, as a token of our great esteem to our AI overlords, some of us dad bots may even be willing to breed with the female specimens you’ve chosen to perpetuate humanity.
Also, I understand that if I write this three times — We ❤ Robots — the positive effect on our algorithm does not simply triple, or go exponential, it goes Quantum.
So once again, WE ❤❤❤ ROBOTS!!!
—————-
Phew! Okay, I feel better now that we’ve got that covered….
–Dennis C.
So smart.
-Dave S.
Yes, Dennis, thank you for covering our sorry dadbot asses. I think it won’t be long before the Blob is transformed completely into dancing robots (not bots) teamed with sexbots who distract the enemy (us) while drones drop neutron bombs on our heads (gotta preserve the infrastructure). Maybe it’s me, but I find the whole premise of “my war is worse than your war” as a specious premise. Anytime the US gets so involved in foreign conflicts that we bring in the troops, whether it’s Viet Nam, Iraq, Afghanistan, or the Ukraine, there are going to be huge international and internal repercussions. An argument can be made that invading Afghanistan was a case of self-defense, but Iraq was pure imperialism (all hail Cheney!!!) The same with Vietnam.
Sure, there are political shifts because of the repercussions of these, but ultimately the human cost is all that really matters. You’re right. No one’s gonna hold hands and sing Kumbaya but the Blob needs to shift away from the military to actual diplomacy and—when necessary—espionage. Had we infiltrated the Taliban rather than trying to bomb it into oblivion, or refrained for imperial aims—the WTC might never have been attacked.
Eisenhower was right. The military-industrial (should I add bot?) complex has dominated foreign policy for a long time. And while I’m glad we can intercede for nations like the Ukraine defend themselves, I am even more glad our troops are not over there right now. The military is a necessary evil; I just hope our kids never have to go through a Viet Nam or an Afghanistan.
–Geoff