Adam Garfinkle, who thinks harder and deeper than most, offers a long and thoughtful essay on the state of affairs in Iran, Iraq, Syria, et. al., and the role of the U.S. of A. Who knows what the right thing to do is? One thing for certain is that Obama is taking a vastly different approach than Bush. The history major in me can't wait to find out what happens. An excerpt from Garfinkle's latest:
The truth is that we have a classical Goldilocks problem: We don’t want to do too little, because that runs risks, and we don’t want to do too much, because that runs risks, too. Finding the level and specific focus that’s “just right” is hard, and even honest and well-informed people can disagree about it. Personally, I think the President underestimates the cumulative costs and risks of doing too little, which need not be limited to the Middle East. But I don’t think it moves the ball to ascribe very ambitious and controversial goals to those who do not have them. Way too many presidential “doctrines” have been created by outside observers trying to impose more coherence on an Administration’s views than really exists. Let’s please not invent an Obama Doctrine out of mostly thin air.
Andrew Sullivan weighs in with his observation - as of today. Who knows what tomorrow brings?