He worked at the RAND Corporation, inside the Pentagon directly under the Secretary of Defense, on-site in Vietnam, and then based on what he saw, decided to commit an incredibly major federal crime by going public about what was going on in the United States’s decision-making process so the American people could be aware. He was charged with espionage, with the government aiming to put him in prison for 115 years, and beat the case. Much later, he wrote a book with his experiences and insights.
That’s an extremely broad overview. I would highly recommend looking into more of the details, or maybe reading his book.
I’ll email the amazon link for the book to Blinken and Miller.
Edit: if anyone didn’t figure it out, I’m rejecting the baseless idea put forth that they know better than the professionals. Next we’ll see mozz giving state department briefings instead of Miller, because they clearly know better than those fools.
A good example would be Ellsberg’s writings on “the stalemate machine” in Vietnam - that should be, in my opinion, required reading for anyone who’s involved on any level in our Ukraine policy. I feel like, observing the result, it probably is not.
I mean you’re not wrong. As I said I am sure I would fuck up horribly in these roles, as applied to either Israel or Ukraine. It’s at least 10 times easier to lob criticism and identify problems than it is to actually execute, and solve the problems. But if you’re suggesting that just because someone’s at a high level, they’re obviously wise to the real situation and making good comprehensive decisions, that suggests strongly to me that you probably haven’t worked either in a big company or on military / foreign policy things.
Is that what I was suggesting? Or were you just suggesting that based on your anecdotal experience in the military you can confirm that Blinken and Miller don’t know what they’re doing? Or, even better, are you basing this on a book about Vietnam? That you can succinctly reduce down the reason against everything cited in the article as “Bibi hates brown people” tells me your analysis is one dimensional (perfect for your intended audience). For one second, do you think that private discussions between interlocuters might not show from the outside? That foreign affairs, which is part of the council on foreign relations, might have some insight into how a “moonshot” like this might work out? And discussing the potential motivations of the involved countries for how these interwoven goals could be achieved?
No, Bibi hates brown people, and shit like this is for suckers. Talk about lobbing easy criticism…
leans back in chair, twirling moustache, sipping cognac
Why sweet lemming, they’re the author of the book that’s going to open Blinken’s and Miller’s eyes to the truth!
He worked at the RAND Corporation, inside the Pentagon directly under the Secretary of Defense, on-site in Vietnam, and then based on what he saw, decided to commit an incredibly major federal crime by going public about what was going on in the United States’s decision-making process so the American people could be aware. He was charged with espionage, with the government aiming to put him in prison for 115 years, and beat the case. Much later, he wrote a book with his experiences and insights.
That’s an extremely broad overview. I would highly recommend looking into more of the details, or maybe reading his book.
I’ll email the amazon link for the book to Blinken and Miller.
Edit: if anyone didn’t figure it out, I’m rejecting the baseless idea put forth that they know better than the professionals. Next we’ll see mozz giving state department briefings instead of Miller, because they clearly know better than those fools.
A good example would be Ellsberg’s writings on “the stalemate machine” in Vietnam - that should be, in my opinion, required reading for anyone who’s involved on any level in our Ukraine policy. I feel like, observing the result, it probably is not.
I mean you’re not wrong. As I said I am sure I would fuck up horribly in these roles, as applied to either Israel or Ukraine. It’s at least 10 times easier to lob criticism and identify problems than it is to actually execute, and solve the problems. But if you’re suggesting that just because someone’s at a high level, they’re obviously wise to the real situation and making good comprehensive decisions, that suggests strongly to me that you probably haven’t worked either in a big company or on military / foreign policy things.
Is that what I was suggesting? Or were you just suggesting that based on your anecdotal experience in the military you can confirm that Blinken and Miller don’t know what they’re doing? Or, even better, are you basing this on a book about Vietnam? That you can succinctly reduce down the reason against everything cited in the article as “Bibi hates brown people” tells me your analysis is one dimensional (perfect for your intended audience). For one second, do you think that private discussions between interlocuters might not show from the outside? That foreign affairs, which is part of the council on foreign relations, might have some insight into how a “moonshot” like this might work out? And discussing the potential motivations of the involved countries for how these interwoven goals could be achieved?
No, Bibi hates brown people, and shit like this is for suckers. Talk about lobbing easy criticism…
Go away.