VDH on the Brain

Every time he says something like this, the reputation of Fresno State drops a little bit lower...

Very.

That war the Vietnamese fought with China in 1979--that wasn't real was it?

The truth of the matter is that today's loose alliance of convenience among radical Shiites, al Qaeda, and Baathists is completely an artifact of US foreign policy over the last 5 years. Those guys only get along at gunpoint--and we've happily obliged.

Not stupid at all. Evil. There is a great deal of it out in the open nowadays.

I can't believe I actually bought, and tried to read, one of his books. The thesis of the book was that the major historical reason for the West's dominance was its style of fighting, emphasising frontal confrontation, heavy infantry, and battles of annihilation. It sounded like an intriging, if dubious, hypothesis. Unfortunately, his writing is really turgid, confusing, and full of logical flaws. And then there's the portentousness.

I remember, shortly before the Iraq war, that John Derbyshire was gushing that he thought it would be a "VDH war". Meaning, I guess, that the way it would be fought to a successful conclusion would symbolize the dominance of the "Western way of war". How pathetic.

Anybody playing Sparta who attacks before building his Wonders cannot be taken seriously on foreign policy.

How convenient of Hanson to be so selective. As a matter of fact Franco's Spain and Salazar's Portugual were both facist states. But they were not formal allies of Hitler and the US and Great Britain did not declare war on them. The British managed to woo Portugal into basically pro-British neutrality and keep Spain on the fence. So in WWII the distinction drawers were also right.

Does Hanson really deny this? How stupid is he?

I doubt if he actually believes this, but - through experience - has learned that, if you assert something boldly enough and repeat it often enough, then people will believe you and - futhermore - you will succeed in shouting down others and force them to waste time and energy rebutting you. Consider the high ratings that Fox News enjoys.

So, whatever else he may be, he's not stupid.

What a total lunatic.

Hanson's WWII argument is ludicrous not only because there was a formal alliance between the Axis Powers, but because each of them declared war on us first and so even if there hadn't been an alliance between them we would have just fought a separate war against each one simultaneously. We didn't fight Japan based on its alliance with Germany, or vice versa.

America's worst Thucydides scholar takes on twentieth century history

BTW: if we are going to drag Thucydides into this, then consider Cleon, an Athenian politician whom Thudydides discusses at length.

We like to think of the ancient Athenians as these enlightened, democratic sorts of chaps. And there was that aspect to ancient Athens. But, remember, not only "democracy" but also "demogogary" and "tyrrany" also are Greek words. And that was present also.

Cleon was an Athenian politician who succeeded with precisely this sort of bluster.

So maybe he isn't such a bad Thucydides scholar after all.

So what is this obsession with talk, talk, talk?

This sounds literally fascist to me. "We must have action, not talking or thinking!" Isn't that like Fascism 101? Also there's the ecstatic anticipation of purifying violence.

Here is an amazing fact. Victor Davis Hanson is a wonderful Thucydides scholar. That includes his recent "A War Like No Other," which my friends in the profession -- all of them far to VDH's left -- unite in praising. Hanson breaks the Peloponnesian War down, discussing the various forces at work: land, ships (the trireme as a "floating spear"), horses, plague, and so on. "The Western Way of War," on ancient infantry warfare, "The Other Greeks," on Greek farmers, and other works all the way back to his dissertation on warfare and agriculture, are rich in ideas, original -- far more so than the standard "chronicles" of the fifth century -- and responsibly done. They are engagingly written, and worth reading.

What does this tell us about VDH's columns in National Review, his general celebrations of wholesale slaughter, and his bad analyses of international relations? Folks will have their own answers, and I don't need to add to them. I would say that the works I've mentioned above do _not_ deal with ancient inter-state relations very much, and that's one thing he concentrates on in the modern world.

When Jim Sleeper coined the useful term "Thucydiots," I don't believe he was thinking of Hanson. There are other dangerous abusers of the historian I love, and a survey could be rewarding.

I am one of those who feels very grateful to have the collected works of this innovative, energetic, and spirited historian. Even when he's wrong, he is very worthwhile. I admit that reading him is a major challenge to one's ability to compartmentalize.

Best,

Dan Tompkins, Temple University

VDH is definitely a terrible writer. Turgid, confusing, portentous - Jim W above is right.

On the other hand, Matt, it is not a complete answer to VDH here just to point out that, indeed, there were distinctions and disagreements among U.S. enemies in past wars. VDH's basic point (poorly articulated - no surprise) is that insisting on the differences among one's enemies can blind you to their more immediate and crucial common interest in defeating you. That's what he says is going on now. Is he right or wrong about that, regardless of what he says about the Axis or the commies?

I think Stevie Smith said it best:

"It was not curious so much
As it was wicked of them."

BTW: if we are going to drag Thucydides into this, then consider Cleon, an Athenian politician whom Thudydides discusses at length.

Actually, Thucydides somewhat underemphasizes Cleon, as I understand it - most of what we know about Cleon comes from Plutarch's biography of him, and from Aristophanes' bitter satires of him. I believe he also comes into play more in Diodorus's much more condensed history than he does in Thucydides. Possibly because Thucydides detested the guy.

I seem to recall reading an article that showed how Hanson would often throw out statements as quotes from the ancient wise man Thucydides, that were actually instances where Thucydides was quoting Cleon, the Athenians at the Melian Debate, or the Corinthians urging the Spartans to war - i.e., things Thucydides himself disapproved of.

Whatever the quality of his direct ancient scholarship may be, Hanson uses it in a completely irresponsible and ridiculous way in his columns and so forth.

In response to Dan Tompkins, I know that John Keegan is an admirer of VDH's scholarship, and Keegan is someone that I definitely respect. I will also agree that "The Western Way of War" seems good to me (a nonexpert) insofar as it deals with methods of warfare in the ancient world.

However, when VDH uses that data to support his larger thesis, I found the arguments to be so circular, illogical, and badly written, that I eventually just had to put the book down without even finishing it.

"Cleon was an Athenian politician who succeeded with precisely this sort of bluster"

One thing about Cleon--in complete contrast to VDH and his contemporary allies: he went to war himself, beat the Spartans at the battle of Sphacteria, and was later killed fighting in the front lines at Amphipolis--Cleon was no chickenhawk.

Thucydides may not have been very objective about Cleon, who had the historian prosecuted and exiled for incompetent generalship.

Matt, there was indeed a formal treaty creating the alliance between Italy, Germany and Japan - the Axis Pact of 1940 (also known as the Tri-Partite Pact). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripartite_Pact
Hitler cited it as the reason for declaring war on the US:

"Germany and Italy have been finally compelled, in view of this, and in loyalty to the Tri-Partite Pact, to carry on the struggle against the U.S.A. and England jointly and side by side with Japan for the defense and thus for the maintenance of the liberty and independence of their nations and empires..."

In terms of the transitivity of respect, I'm skeptical. I've formed the belied that too many members of (genuinely) elite groups offer respect to other members, even if they later prove to be undeserving. People who know how hard it is to write a long non-fiction work respect others who've done that. In Hanson's case, (a) it's been pointed out that he's got a little problem with quotes[1], and (b) the guy seems to feel that we are Athens in the modern-day Peloponnesian War, and that we should therefor play out Athens' part. Since that involves the conquest of the US by foreign powers, his sanity or intelligence is open to question.

[1] Which, I understand, would be deadly to the career of somebody trying to become a historian, so anybody who still respects Hanson is overlooking malpractice or deliberate fraud.

Richard: "VDH's basic point (poorly articulated - no surprise) is that insisting on the differences among one's enemies can blind you to their more immediate and crucial common interest in defeating you. That's what he says is going on now. Is he right or wrong about that, regardless of what he says about the Axis or the commies?"

And insisting on the supposed common interests of a set of enemies/potential enemies can blind you to their differences, resulting in potential enemies becoming actual, immediate enemies. For example, putting Iran on the "we kill you next list" made sure that Iran had no interest in a successful US conquest of Iraq, and every interest in a quagmire.

Ol' Tertiary Syphilis Hanson doesn't seem to recognize that possibility, or to give good reasons why that's not so. This, of course, is in line with the non-recognition of reality that he's demonstrated for the past three years.

With respect to John Keegan, the guy also testified on behalf of David Irving. Whatever the quality of his own work, the guy's judgment of others is rather suspect.

With respect to Cleon's non-chickenhawk status, iirc, at Sphacteria, at least, the situation is not that simple.

As I understand it, the Athenians had trapped a large number of Spartan soldiers at Pylos. The Spartans sued for peace, offering generous terms to the Athenians. Cleon persuaded the Athenian assembly to refuse, expecting that the Spartans would soon be captured. Unfortunately the siege dragged on and on, and the Athenians realized that Cleon had gotten them to make a bad decision. Cleon, trying to save his position, started saying that all the messengers coming back from Pylos were lying about the awful conditions the Athenians troops were facing as winter approached (sound familiar?). Basically, the Athenian assembly called his bluff by appointing him to go to Pylos personally to report on conditions.

His bluff called, Cleon decides to call for reinforcements. He makes a casual comment that, had he been in command, he'd have finished the thing ages ago. The Assembly takes him at his word, and appoints him to command the reinforcements. He says he'll be back victorious in 20 days. He arrives in the midst of a plan by Demosthenes, the previous commander, to win the battle, which is carried into effect. Cleon returns a hero.

Cleon's role in this seems extremely chicken-hawkish. It's just that in the US we don't have a mechanism to force braggarty chicken hawks to put their money where their mouth is and actually go out and fight. The lovely completely non-liberal Athenian democracy did have such a mechanism. Cleon got lucky at Sphacteria, and what should have been a humiliation turned out to be a triumph, but not particularly thanks to his own actions. His later campaigning in Thrace proved disastrous (and was also the occasion for his scapegoating of Thucydides).

If VD isn't writing about hoplites or Greek farming then one can assume he is over his head. While he is some what prolific, he is not turning out scholarly works from university presses.
VD is now a polemicist who has taken to attacking others for their 'pseudo-history' of Iraq because they use anonymous sources.

John,

That's a good point about Keegan. He was also a supporter of our misadventure in Iraq. So, he does have questionable judgement.

At least his books are good. The are well reasoned and a pleasure to read.

Thanks for the comments. I think figuring out VDH's particular ideology would take some work, though it could be interesting work. I stopped reading his National Review stuff in March '03 or so, when I think he was saying that US marines would find the WMD the lazy UN guys missed within two weeks, or something like that. We seem to be caught in a temporal causality loop, and "two weeks" have -- despite appearances -- not yet elapsed.

John Keegan was an important early influence on Hanson's scholarship, and has praised it. He is a military historian. But other historians too, not just military specialists, have found his work valuable. He knows a lot, organizes his thinking in interesting ways, and provides a basis for further work by people whose approach is not at all ideologically congruent with his.

Cleon remains a bit of a mystery. Thucydides and Aristophanes clearly did not like the dude, and this certainly affected their portrayals. I've not yet decided where I stand on him, though I don't like him either.

I am not disagreeing with the comments by other posters.

Dan Tompkins, Temple University

I would even say that Western mischaracterization of Vietnamese Communism- i.e., thinking that Ho Chi Minh was more a Soviet lackey than a nationalist hero, was the single biggest factor in the whole Vietnam debacle. Witness Ho's impassioned pleas to President Truman for US assistance in resisting the French during the Vietnamese War for Indepdence.

Hanson's no idiot but he is clearly skating on this ice when discussing East Asian history.

I think the basic problem here is the constant resort to dubious historical analogies to justify current policy. It's like some parlor game for this guy. Explain how the U.S. forces in Iraq are just like:

1. The Union Army in the U.S. Civil War
2. The Allied forces in the WWII
3. The American militias in the Revolutionary War

etc., always making clear to pick an example where the U.S. gets to be the sympathetic winner.

These analogies are completely worthless, except for the meager propoganda value they might still have for certain readers. Moreover, his analogies really are getting sillier and sillier.

I completely agree both on the analysis of the various "communist" groups and on the dangers posed by analogies. We got into Vietnam partly because of Cabot Lodge's use of the Munich analogy at a critical cabinet meeting, and Munich is sprouting up like daisies in right-wing discourse on Iraq.

Dan Tompkins

Everything Hanson said. But not just that: at least 13/10 of the country is being overtaken by taco-eating illiterates who only vote for Democrats and other fags.

Linus, thanks for the warning. I didn't realize they loved tacos in Utah and Alabama.

"at least 13/10 of the country is being overtaken by taco-eating illiterates who only vote for Democrats and other fags."

I'm no big fan of illiteracy, despite how well it seems to work for our buddies over there on the right, but the rest of this list sounds pretty cool to me . . . yum, tacos!

I can't believe I actually bought, and tried to read, one of his books. The thesis of the book was that the major historical reason for the West's dominance was its style of fighting, emphasising frontal confrontation, heavy infantry, and battles of annihilation. It sounded like an intriging, if dubious, hypothesis. Unfortunately, his writing is really turgid, confusing, and full of logical flaws. And then there's the portentousness.

The Book is "Carnage and Culture" and it's not bad - but not "Great".

VDH is a fine military historian. When it comes to politics, however, he thinks that everything can be deduced to an anology with the Peloponisian war.

insisting on the differences among one's enemies can blind you to their more immediate and crucial common interest in defeating you. That's what he says is going on now. Is he right or wrong about that, regardless of what he says about the Axis or the commies?

Exactly.

After watching "The Power of Nightmares" , I think a good point from which to move forward may be to recognise the difference between the Popular strains of Islamism, which believe that most muslims are good muslims and that the Islamic state should be built from the ground up with the support of the people, and Vanguardist strains, like "Al Queda", who believe that only they represent "true Islam", that most of the world's muslims are actually corrupted apostates, and that their Islamic state should be built from the top down by the idealogically pure who will then "re-Educate" the masses about "true" Islam.

When I look back, it looks to me that the most violent and reprehensible movements tended to be "vanguard" movements which tend to be filled by those who either believe, or want to believe, in their superiority over others. I'm not fan of the idea of "The Islamic State" but I'd still rather have one built on public participation than one ruled by idealogical purists who dismiss their own citizens as corrupted and in need of saving.

Jesus. Read VDH's whole column. Really, how can you have been alive for the past half century and actually argue this? To discredit those who argue, correctly, that the supposed global jihadist alliance is far more complex than those like VDH present it (for example that the cited actors are driven more by local concerns rather than any overarching hatred of the US or western civilization), he cites the supposed alliance of Russian, Vietnamese, and Chinese communists against the US in the Cold War. Of course those commies put aside their differences to unite against the US, right? Uh, no, duh. The most cursory glance at history reveals that those who pointed out these "intracacies" were correct. But VDH pretends it didn't happen...the Sino-Soviet border war!? followed by the Sino-Soviet split?! Nixon in China!? The Chinese INVASION of Vietnam!? throw in the Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia for good measure!? No, pointing this out is "nonsense" apparently, just like pointing out the divergent motives of Hizbollah and al-Qaeda is "nonsense". Seriously, what would the Russians, Chinese, and Vietnamese had to have done to convince VDH that their sinister alliance was hollow?Apparently shelling and shooting each other wasn't enough, if he actually noticed.

Of course all this begs the question, does VDH know the difference between Sunni and Shi'ite?

And finally, I just graduated from college, and if anyone wants to pay me to say stupid shit that makes no goddam sense on a full-time basis, well, i'm your man. i see its been a real growth industry the past several years.

Thanks
Best regards
mirc
mirç
mırc
mırç
mircturk
turkmirc
mirc indir
mirc yukle
mirch
mırch
mirc turk
turk mirc
mırcturk
turkmırc
mırc turk
turk mırc
turkiyemirc
türkiyemirc
turkiye mirc
türkiye mirc
mircturkiye
mirctürkiye
mirc turkiye
mircturk
turkmırc
muhabbet
mirc sohbet
mırc sohbet
mirc chat
mırc chat
mırc ındır
mirc ındır
Türkçe mirc
Türkce mirc
Turkçe mirc
Türkce mirc
Türkçe mırc
Türkce mırc
Turkçe mırc
Turkce mırc
mirc
mirc
forum
forum
turkforum
turkiyeforum
mirc
turkmirc
toplist
site ekle
pagerank
turkmirc
turkforum
sohbet
chat
sohbet odaları
bedava sohbet
bedava chat
türk
karar

perde

temizlik

stor perde

ip perde

jaluzi perde

dikey perde

ofis temizliği

ilaçlama

açılış organizasyon

perdeci

perde modelleri

organizasyon

chat
sohbet
komik video
aşk şiirleri
Tr Video
avrupa sohbet
89com
komik video
sohbet
muhabbet
chat
çet
bedava oyun
islami sohbet
Bol Sohbet
Sohbet
Bol Chat
Avrupa Sohbet
Kerizim Sohbet
chat
chatsohbet
çet
cet
komik video
kurtlar vadisi pusu
dizi izle
film izle
aşk şiirleri
bol sohbet
sohbet
chat
muhabbet
cinsel sohbet
sohbet
sohbet yerleri
oyunlar99
Bol Sohbet
chat
chat
sohbet
sohbet
seviyeli sohbet
göçmen sohbet
mynet sohbet
islam sohbet
yazılı sohbet
yazgülü sohbet
hollanda sohbet
bg sohbet
avrupa sohbet
alem sohbet
cinsel sohbet
liseli kizlar
kerizim
kameralı sohbet
sesli sohbet
canlı sohbet
bgsohbet
göçmen sohbet
cinsel sohbet
mynet sohbet
msn nickler
saç ekimi
sağlık bilgisi
mirc inndir
film inndir
bağ-kur sorgulama
bağ-kur ssk
bağkur
webcam oyunları
macera oyunları
3 boyutlu oyunlar
aksiyon oyunları
kız oyunları
spor oyunları
yarış oyunları
varmısın yokmusun
ssk sorgulama
ssk bagkur
ssk emeklilik

thanks ;)

adsl

http://www.ekmekmusafcarpsin.com/

Thank you very much for this information.
sohbet
sesli sohbet
chat
muhabbet
mirc
evden eve nakliyat
mirc
mirc
sohbet
kelebek
chat

Thanks Best Regards
mirc
mırc
mırç
mircturk
mirctürk
turkmirc
mirc indir
mırc indir
mirç indir
mirc yükle
mırc yükle
mirc yukle
mırc yukle
mirch
mırch
mirc turk
turk mirc
mırc turk
mircada
mircturkiye
muhabbet
mirc sohbet
mırc sohbet
mirc chat
mırc chat
mırc ındır
mirc ındır
türkçe mirc
turkce mirc
turkçe mırc
turkce mırc
oper mirc
sohbet
forum
chat
online sinema
catlak
türk forum
turk forum
kafkas
kafkasya
ders
siyaset
izmir
karşiyaka
karsiyaka
forum
karsıyaka
sohbet

harbiarkadas.com
harbiarkadas.net
harbiarkadas.org
itirafet.org
ebedava.net
elektronikmarket.net
ameribress.com
clitoriacream.net
superspenisbuyutucu.com
megabress.com
rednightperformans.com
performansartirici.com
penisplus.tv
penispluspenisbuyutucu.com
penispluspenisbuyutucu.net
cinselmerkez.com
aseks.net
erotikcamasirlar.com
vajinatr.com
bakirevajina.com
cinselkozmetik.com
kozmetikmedikel.com
eturknet.com
tecavuz.net
yutuvideo.com
ponotubesex.com
laraperuk.com
sackanagimerkezi.com
peruksa.com
perukmarket.com
aseks.com
aloveshop.com
erotikgiyim.com
geciktiricispreyler.com
geciktiricihap.com
geciktiriciler.com
azdirici.com
bayanuyarici.com
fntazialemi.com
fantaziservisi.om
cinselmazemeler.com
cinselfantaziurunleri.com
erotikdakikalar.com
erotikmarketiniz.com
seksmarketiniz.com
sekshatlari.com
erotikdergiler.com
erotikderginiz.com
penisbuyutucuviprx.com
penisbuyutucuvigrx.com
penisbuyutuculer.com
vigrxpenisbuyutucu.com
sismebebekler.com
sismebebekshop.com
yemekeviniz.com
sanalmarketiniz.com
elektronikmarket.net
ebedava.net
kontortr.com
elaydin23.com
turkcellkontorcu.com
aveakontoral.com
vodafonekontoral.com
toptankontorcu.com
cinselkozmetik.com
bayanpartnerler.com
erkekpartnerler.com
kizarkadaslar.com
yonjaarkadas.com
siberalem-siberalem.com
sexpartnerler.com
sekspartnerler.com
erotikpartnerler.com
gencyuz.com
erkekarkadaslar.com
bayanarkadaslar.com
yemekeviniz.com
sanalmarketiniz.com
baskahaber.com
medikalkozmetik.net
kozmetikmedikal.com
zayiflamavediyet.net
zayiflamahapii.com
zayiflamabandii.com
kilovertr.com
zayiflamatr.net
diyettr.com
toksinbandi.net
botoxtr.com
botokstr.com
selulittedavii.com
selulitgiderici.net
selulitkremii.com
catlaktedavisii.com
catlakgiderici.net
catlakkremii.com

penis büyütücü