SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Obama's Foreign Policy Needs A Reset

THE SPINE NOVEMBER 23, 2010

Obama's Foreign Policy Needs A Reset

BY MARTIN PERETZ

What the Washington Post's Jackson Diehl actually wrote was that "Obama's foreign policy needs an update." Diehl is correct.

He is correct in characterizing the president's concern with the New START treaty as much out of date, although I am in a lackadaisical way for it. I suppose much like Deihl himself. But it is an obsession of the president's perhaps because, as the columnist points out, this is the issue with which Obama grew up and made his public debut. After all, he published an article in a Columbia University student publication calling for a "nuclear free world," which sensible liberals knew even then was a chimerical vision, aside from the fact that the "nuclear freeze" played into the hands of the Soviets. But that's another matter. I do not believe that this animated young Obama. But it probably motivated many in the National Committee for a SANE Nuclear Policy and Women's Strike for Peace. After all, the nuclear debate was the stage onto which fellow-travelers first stepped after their perfectly understandable but metaphorical "underground" experience during and after the "red scare" McCarthy era.

Now, the Obama administration has America and some of its allies fighting terrorist organizations here, there and elsewhere. Correctly so, and in a just cause. But it has concluded that these wars--I believe it is more probably this war--are quite winnable and in a short time. I do not. This is because our enemies are non-states. They are terrorists who are bounded by quite literally no rules at all. We have not yet absorbed this fact, although I believe that Israel is beginning to do so...and maybe also some of our military intellectuals at West Point and other service academies and institutions.

Diehl also argues that the Obama foreign policy rumpus room is peopled with folk who do not grasp that "Greater Israel" from the river to the sea is dead matter in the Jewish state. Yes, some extremists and some cynical profiteers are clinging to the idea. But the idea has no substance. All it has is blackmail value. And it is being milked for cash, especially among sections of the pious. But not only.

The dream of a "greater Israel" died more than 15 years ago. Even the Israeli right now accepts that a Palestinian state will be created in the West Bank. The settlements have become a sideshow; the real issues concern how to create a Palestinian state in a Middle East where the greatest threat is not Israeli but Iranian expansionism. What to do about Hamas and Hezbollah and their Iranian-supplied weapons? How to ensure that the post-occupation West Bank does not become another Iranian base? Those issues did not exist in 1983 - and the Obama administration seems to have no strategy for them.

The Palestinians focus on the settlements because they do not want to pay attention to the real price they will have to pay for statehood. That is, if they can focus on the non-symbolic issues of security for themselves and for Israel. What they want is for the pre-negotiation stage to be the setting for the signing.

Diehl makes the point that there are no heavy thinkers in the foreign policy offices of this administration.

Still, this administration is notable for its lack of grand strategy - or strategists. Its top foreign-policy makers are a former senator, a Washington lawyer and a former Senate staffer. There is no Henry Kissinger, no Zbigniew Brzezinski, no Condoleezza Rice; no foreign policy scholar.

Instead there is Obama, who likes to believe that he knows as much or more about policy than any of his aides - and who has been conspicuous in driving the strategies on nuclear disarmament and Israeli settlements.

OK, there is Richard Holbrooke...but he is neither seen nor heard. And, of course, Dennis Ross who is the most seasoned and most mistrusted in the apparatus. Otherwise, the international affairs segments of the government are being run by amateurs. Of whom Hillary Clinton, with her own ambitious agenda, is the prime instance.

Maybe you've noticed that George Mitchell has disappeared from the line-up. Perhaps it's because even the amateurs have grasped that he is really an amateur. For my prognostications on light-weight doings see here and here and here.

Diehl quotes Obama in The Audacity of Hope as writing, "I personally came of age during the Reagan presidency." A long time ago when the world was different. Diehl concludes that the time lag "shows."

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 67 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

67 comments

I was following Diehl's argument with interest until I came to "Condoleeza Rice."

- ironyroad

November 23, 2010 at 12:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Quoting Diehl: "if only to ensure the continued monitoring of Russian missiles". Well, yeah, THAT minor detail. Diehl seems to be obtuse for whatever reason. The START treaty doesn't matter, because it only benefits the fight against terror indirectly, by making it harder for terrorists to get their hands on Russian nukes. And because this is an indirect benefit, it's somehow less important, but still important. Okay.....

- miceelf

November 23, 2010 at 12:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think what needs a reset is Mr Peretz's reflexive contempt for almost anything this administration does. While there is certainly plenty of grounds for reasoned criticism, his overheated screeds in The Spine are becoming an embarrassment. Maybe he'd consider turning over TNR to folks without quite as overwhelming an obsession, and heading off for more congenial surroundings; Fox News, perhaps?

- K_Wilson

November 23, 2010 at 1:08pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

With all due respect, Diehl's article was a pile of shite. In case anyone needs to be reminded of it, the main foreign policy issues in 1983 that were on the mind of the US public and its liberals in particular were (i) the revived Cold War and the arms race beween the US and the Soviet Union (and the nuclear freeze movement) and (ii) America's revived anti-Communism in Latin America, especially Nicaragua and El Salvador. Afghanistan was also big on the agenda, as was the Korean Peninsula in that year at least (remember KAL 007) and the anti-Apartheid movement against South Africa. The Arab-Israeli conflict was somewhere in that third category, primarily because of the US's participation in the multi-national intervention in Lebanon in 1982 and the Beirut bombings in 1983. But, as I recall (as an avid reader of Time and US News & World Report in that period), that issue wasn't nearly as big a deal for the average American voter as events in Nicaragua and El Salvador except when the Beirut bombings made the news. In that case, Barack Obama should be most obsessed (after nuclear freezes) with American policy toward Latin America, especially the resurgent state socialism in Venezuela, Bolivia and other like-minded countries. In case anyone has noticed, he probaby pays less attention that part of the world than did his predecessor, which is quite a feat. And another thing about Diehl -- the invasion of Lebanon was hardly the apotheosis of Greater Israel as promulgated by Likud. Israel was interested in creating a friendly entity along its northern border and eliminating the PLO, but there was no interest in annexing Lebanese territory or creating more room for settlements. There was plenty of settlement going on in the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan from 1978 onwards, which long predated the Lebanon War and continued even after the Israelis withdrew back to their southern security zone in 1983.

- wildboy

November 23, 2010 at 1:18pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It needs more than a "reset" they need to hire people who know what they are doing. How about figuring out who the heck they negotiating with? "Afghanistan shifts from reconciliation after Taliban impostor revealed The revelation that NATO and members of the Afghanistan government may have been negotiating with a Taliban impostor has dealt a blow to peace talks." http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-South-Central/2010/1123/Afghanistan-shifts-from-reconciliation-after-Taliban-impostor-revealed Nice going Barack!

- jdyer

November 23, 2010 at 2:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Afghanistan was also big on the agenda, as was the Korean Peninsula in that year at least (remember KAL 007) and the anti-Apartheid movement against South Africa." Predictable crap from wildass.

- jdyer

November 23, 2010 at 2:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Any suggestion that I went missing from work during exactly the same periods of time when the ostensible "Taliban leader" was negotiating in Kabul and picking up parcels of free cash will be treated as the offensive slur it so clearly is.

- ironyroad

November 23, 2010 at 3:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Predictable crap because it's true, Jackalope. Americans were not obsessed with the Arab-Israeli conflict in 1983 by a long shot, at least not compared to other issues such as -- look at headlines in major newspapers and magazines of the period if you have the time or inclination. Of course, you were still playing with toy trucks in 1983.

- wildboy

November 23, 2010 at 3:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

wildboy "Predictable crap because it's true,.... Americans were not obsessed with the Arab-Israeli conflict in 1983 by a long shot,..." Still crap, you were not obsessed about it (in a negative way) till after 1983 but that wasn't true for the rest of the country. Americans were always obsessed by the Arb-Israeli conflict, some more than others, but many people and not just Jews cared about, from Truman on. Even Kennedy had visited the area and wrote approvingly about the Jewish pioneers who "were different from other Jews he had met before, in his diary. In 1973 the Soviets threatened nuclear war over the the war between Egypt, Syria and Israel and the US government responded in kind. Culturally, the film Exodus cam out in the early 60's and made lots of money, so did the movie about Lawrence of Arabia (not directly about the conflict though it's mentioned there. That's just for starters.

- jdyer

November 23, 2010 at 8:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

actually, Obama seems to also be ignoring most of Africa almost as much as South America. If anything, he is stuck on the wars on terror and drugs. Nuclear non-proliferation is his one real passion. Too bad there is no magic wand, just an unending list of conflicts and problems and plagues. Bet he wishes he could trade places with the President of Uruguay - a nice manageable country that no one expects to lead the free world. People who want to be President need to accept that it is mostly 'stuff happens' and try to at best keep from making things worse - a general proposition not meant to be critical. Jackson Diehl really dove into a puddle of over-simplification with this 'stuck in 1983' theme. Did Obama pardon the wrong turkey yet? :)

- K2K

November 24, 2010 at 12:04am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Even Pau; Krugman is pessimistic about Obama’s ability to engage in the real world: “The World as He Finds It” By PAUL KRUGMAN “On Wednesday David Axelrod, President Obama’s top political adviser, appeared to signal that the White House was ready to cave on tax cuts — to give in to Republican demands that tax cuts be extended for the wealthy as well as the middle class. “We have to deal with the world as we find it,” he declared. The White House then tried to walk back what Mr. Axelrod had said. But it was a telling remark, in more ways than one. The obvious point is the contrast between the administration’s current whipped-dog demeanor and Mr. Obama’s soaring rhetoric as a candidate. How did we get from “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for” to here? But the bitter irony goes deeper than that: the main reason Mr. Obama finds himself in this situation is that two years ago he was not, in fact, prepared to deal with the world as he was going to find it. And it seems as if he still isn’t…..” http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/15/opinion/15krugman.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

- jdyer

November 24, 2010 at 9:48am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's twilight for the American pProject: "American foreign-policy analysts are divided these days into two camps: those who believe the United States is a twilight power, and those who think that the only threat to America’s superpower status comes from a self-induced crisis of confidence, brought about by wimps in high places who are steering us toward decline. President Barack Obama appears to be in the first camp, and there’s an argument to be made that he’s right. One way to understand Obama’s presidency is as the stewardship of a leader who must subtly make his countrymen confront a fact they would prefer to avoid—namely, that the age of American prosperity is over. " http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/51332/twilight/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=twilight

- noga1

November 24, 2010 at 9:56am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/51332/twilight/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=twilight

- noga1

November 24, 2010 at 9:57am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What Obama was most unprepared for is the reality that the enemies of America are not just the Iranians, Moslem terrorists, the Chinese, and such, but the entire American right.

- roidubouloi

November 24, 2010 at 11:08am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"...the reality that the enemies of America are ... the entire American right." Aren't you getting a little overexcited, roi? If "the entire American right" are the enemies of America, surely something must be done to expose this treason and punish them accordingly. Any ideas? Now if only there were a real patriotic congressman with some guts and initiative were to organize a House Committee Un-American Activities to investigate suspected threats of subversion or distribution of enemy propaganda and focus on real or suspected internal enemies. Before you can say McCarthy, you'll have Stalinist courts churning out indictments. "Mr. Chairman, may I say that I can think of no greater way to parade one's seditious political beliefs than to appear under the auspices of The Spine, a neo-con publication published by a traitor of dual loyalties who objects to our deal leader's policies …?" I know who I would recommend to serve as the Grand Inquisitor.

- noga1

November 24, 2010 at 2:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga, stop already! You're giving me ideas . . .

- ironyroad

November 24, 2010 at 2:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Don't give yourself too much credit, ironyroad. From my more recent observations your toe is already on the slippery slope.

- noga1

November 24, 2010 at 3:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The slope to where?

- ironyroad

November 24, 2010 at 4:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

To the point where statements like roi's lead to. And which you seem to take in stride without so much as batting an eye.

- noga1

November 24, 2010 at 4:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well, I have agreed with some of his comments, I'll give you that. But then, I've agreed with some of yours too. And for longer. So in general, I find the truth to be rarely held by one individual alone.

- ironyroad

November 24, 2010 at 4:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Slippery slope.

- noga1

November 24, 2010 at 5:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Believing one individual to be the fount of wisdom is, what, your idea of solid ground?

- ironyroad

November 24, 2010 at 5:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Believing one individual to be the fount of wisdom is, what, your idea of solid ground?" What do you think? You have known me for a few years now. Do you think I believe that? Do you think that was the point I've been making? Do you agree with roi's statement or do you just go along with it, because (to paraphrase something you said once) it feels so good to hold this kind of bludgeoning hammer in your hand? Do you think it is decent to make this kind of accusation? Do you think there is any measure of wisdom or liberality of sentiment or proper decorum, in this assertion?

- noga1

November 24, 2010 at 6:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don't understand why I'm somehow evil for sharing some of roid's positions, while it's no problem that I share many of yours, many of ick's, some of JD's, some of malahat's and even now and then -- because he's so unpredictable -- some of K2K's. Apologies to anyone who feels left out. I don't understand why it's so difficult to grasp that I am not responsible for other people's opinions or rhetoric. I don't hold you responsible for JD's occasional wild swinging of the machete with danger to all around. I've never actually suggested -- and would not suggest -- that you were on board with amidut's paranoia about muslims per se. I believe I am just a participant on this board like you, Noga, with no extra authority other than whether people read what I write or skip over it with a roll of the eyes.

- ironyroad

November 24, 2010 at 8:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I would have liked to know whether you agree with roi's statement which I find outrageous, as you may have gathered by now. If you'd rather not answer then it's fine with me. What I don't get is why you imagine that you share many of my views. You must be confusing me with someone else.

- noga1

November 24, 2010 at 9:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm always confusing people with people, Noga -- you should see me sometime going, "and you're . . . ah . . . " hoping for a rescue. But as you didn't do me the minimal courtesy of telling me which statement I was supposed to tell you I agreed or disagreed with, I felt that I was somewhat at a disadvantage in the exchange. If you tell me what exactly it is, I'll respond to the best of my ability. I'd like to point out, as a kind of footnote, that I'm not psychic. I don't always know what you mean when you refer to something that is clear to you but not always to someone else. There's no need to turn nasty and jab the stiletto in just because I don't get it at first pass.

- ironyroad

November 24, 2010 at 10:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"There's no need to turn nasty and jab the stiletto in just because I don't get it at first pass." Given all the years you have known and agreed with each other, what else would you expect? _______________________ Every last one of them is an enemy of the United States of America, happy intentionally to damage the nation for the purpose of unseating Obama, happy to side with our enemies and make our problems, such as unemployment, worse for the purpose of unseating Obama, even willing to declare that the purpose of power in the hands of the Republican party is not to address the problems of the nation but to unseat Obama. And what they will do for personal greed is unspeakable. They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all. I suspect this is the sentiment that noga finds so odious. But, it is true none-the-less. And we know perfectly well where noga would find her political company if she were an American. Time to ratchet up the rhetoric and go hand to hand with these insane sons of bitches in the same hyperbolic terms in which they attack the left. We need open political warfare in America, with two sides engaged, not just one. Then the matter can reach some resolution -- either they are marginalized, finally, or they get a free hand to wreck the place. Appeasement is not an option any longer. PS There are no doubt some reasonable people on the right, somewhere, but they have more or less of the same mythical character as "moderate Moslems" who are supposed to engage and overcome Islamist radicals. If they exist at all, they certainly aren't doing anything much to combat extremism. So too with right-wing moderates. If they exist at all, which is doubtful, they are doing nothing to contest with their dominant extremists. Hence, we can ignore them as either to few and/or too craven to make a difference. The one righteous person in Sodom.

- roidubouloi

November 24, 2010 at 11:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Someone mentioned Sodom? Oh sorry - have been sick at home for the last week ... the mind wanders. Interesting, yawn, discussion and all ... I suggest irony and noga share a lentil recipe.

- icarusr

November 24, 2010 at 11:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Ps to Noga: irony agrees with you on my scatological excesses. Now, there you have at least one area of agreement. You're both welcome.

- icarusr

November 24, 2010 at 11:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"And we know perfectly well where noga would find her political company if she were an American." There, I disagree. I'm not sure of that at all.

- ironyroad

November 25, 2010 at 1:07am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"And we know perfectly well where noga would find her political company if she were an American." There, I disagree. I'm not sure of that at all.

- ironyroad

November 25, 2010 at 1:07am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Actually, ironyroad, I'm not sure of that at all either. So we agree on that. What you mean, you are not psychic? You responded to a comment of mine which was only about that statement. But never mind. Maybe you really do confuse people with people as you claim. Icarus: you are wrong about the scatology. ironyroad made of point once of emphasizing that it was OK with him, scatology being a kind of American humor or something. I believe he thinks there is something very poetic about the way you employ scatology to smear people you don't like. I mentioned Sodom in a conversation I had with willjames on some other thread, about Abraham. You don't find it interesting? Such insult calls for a rice pilaf. Mere lentils wouldn't do the job of reconciliation.

- noga1

November 25, 2010 at 6:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

My anti-virus program is blocking a Trojan Horse every time I open a TNR.com page (realmedia adstream) today, so try not to choke on Turkey:) (rumor has it that Turkey's President Gul is next in line for UN Sec-General) roid's call to deport 40% of the American population to the 'Gulag for Contagious Conservatives' - which would include almost everyone licensed for gun ownership, the military, National Guard, so, good luck with his incitement to political genocide as it is sadly too late for anyone who writes this to get a grip on reality :) 11/24/2010 - 11:12pm EDT | roidubouloi [on America's 'rightwing', from the keystrokes of a Stalinist]: "...They are enemies. We are in a life and death struggle with them for the future of our nation, or whether it even has much of a future. Traitors, scoundrels, liars and thieves one and all. ...We need open political warfare in America, with two sides engaged, not just one. Then the matter can reach some resolution -- either they are marginalized, finally, or they get a free hand to wreck the place. Appeasement is not an option any longer. ..." [if only that malevolence were channelled against North Korea instead of 40%+ of America]

- K2K

November 25, 2010 at 9:23am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I have some suspicion that roi's Savonarolaish rhetoric is affectionately perceived by the more sedate Democrats as some sort of meaningless hyperbole, to be excused because of the great provocation roi and ilk are subject to on these boards.. Of course I don't think roi is planning gulags for Palin's supporters. He is just like those fulminating Arab mullahs that MEMRI helps us get acquainted with. Just words. We know they mean nothing. Fortunately, I also have a feeling that no one in his real life takes him seriously. With such shocking fantasies, God forbid that roi should ever gain any real political power.

- noga1

November 25, 2010 at 10:04am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I just read roi's comment and realized the Sodom allusion belongs to him. Sorry about that, icarusr. I take back the perceived insult. No need for the pilaf. (Aside, in a whisper: BTW, the only time I prepared it according to your strict orders my son said something he had never said before: this is the best rice I have ever eaten in my whole life! I swear those were his exact words. But he was hungry that evening so I don't know for sure how representative his assessment was about the real quality of the dish)

- noga1

November 25, 2010 at 10:23am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga: I don't know how old your son is, but I have it on good authority that no depth of hunger would, in itself, elicit a comment like that out of a boy in the 8-16 year range without there being a huge culinary impetus behind it. The young'uns are remarkably discriminating in matters related to their tummies and, unless you have a magic touch with your children, stingy with praise for food. So I would take the compliment seriously. Did I mention, by the way, that you should add to the top of the rice, once you have reset it for the steam-cooking, about 30 grams of butter per cup of rice? If I did not - and no one in your household suffers from cholesterol - I suggest you try it. I'd be curious about report your son's reaction.

- icarusr

November 25, 2010 at 11:17am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Malaht: the amount of the additional butter is optional (but you do need some, for both the aroma and the taste). An ounce per cup is my reduced amount; in Ze Olde Countrie, the individual kernels of rice glisten from the butter ;) ...

- icarusr

November 25, 2010 at 1:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

While everyone's attention is engaged, I think I'll just sneak out of here . . .

- ironyroad

November 25, 2010 at 1:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

My husband who is a thin man has cholesterol problem, believe it or not. But that would be nothing except that adding butter to rice would render that rice inedible for him. He is one of those men, you know. A vegetarian who won't have any cheese in cooked food, no eggs, very little oil (he doesn't know how much oil goes into the tahdig), butter is haram, no cheese at all except feta in a sandwich. Someone it's a pleasure to cook for, in short. The problem is he suspects me all the time of being subversive so anything he doesn't know that for sure can't contain cheese or butter he won't even try. (Remind me sometime to tell you what my theory for an ideal marriage is. It involves gay men marrying straight women.)

- noga1

November 25, 2010 at 1:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

How typical. I talk about "political warfare" and "hyperbolic rhetoric" to match that of the right and the usual suspects -- those who are quick to rationalize and justify any bad behavior in the service of their own cause -- immediately impute to me a call for Stalinism, gulags, and murder. Then they proceed to discuss same as if it were I, rather than they, who said such things. This merely indicates the filthy ideas with which they routinely pollute their own minds, to the point where they assume thoughtlessly that everyone has the same taste, or perhaps it is lust, for violence and repression that they do. Not so. Unfortunately, in their case, these are not merely empty words as they are part of a movement that advocates for ethnic cleansing and apartheid in the name of peace and security. Orwell's children.

- roidubouloi

November 25, 2010 at 1:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Remind me sometime to tell you what my theory for an ideal marriage is. It involves gay men marrying straight women." I couldn't be less surprised.

- roidubouloi

November 25, 2010 at 1:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The grinch has returned. End of fun. Grinch's Answering Machine: [computer voice] You have no messages. The Grinch: Odd. Better check the outgoing. Grinch's Answering Machine: [Grinch's voice] If you utter so much as one syllable, I'LL HUNT YOU DOWN AND GUT YOU LIKE A FISH! If you'd like to fax me, press the star key. .

- noga1

November 25, 2010 at 2:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga: (Remind me sometime to tell you what my theory for an ideal marriage is. It involves gay men marrying straight women.) There was a movie about that - with Paul Rudd and Jennifer Aniston. And, one of my close friends acted on this theory. Let me tell ya ... Not a Good Thing. She wanted fidelity - really - and he wanted sex, and not, ahem, with her ... Ended badly. Good theory, though, in theory. Well, I gave up being a vegetarian after eight years because my partner was a great cook and loved meat. Well, the dead kind too. Sometimes, you gotta compromise to keep a good thing :) ...

- icarusr

November 25, 2010 at 4:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I have seen the lesbian+gay guy version. But that's more a marriage of convenience, really. Everyone knows what they are doing it for: social respectability. Also, I know a couple who got married entirely in order to raise their chances of both getting jobs at a university that had two vacancies, one in each of their specialized fields.

- ironyroad

November 25, 2010 at 4:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Noga wishes to be left alone, not to gut fish, but to mutilate them in peace, publicly to indulge her peculiar anti-social sensibilities without a response of any kind. Oh well. Not to be. Life is so unfair to poor noga. But noga, do you think that simple gutting like a fish would be condign punishment for you? Don't you think your behavior demands something rather more than that? One wonders whether your husband feels exactly the same way you do about marriage. Stands to reason he would.

- roidubouloi

November 25, 2010 at 10:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well, icarus, ironyroad, your conjectures about my theory are wrong. Mine is a new theory and based on what is real, possible and even desirable. I once expounded on it to some colleagues and they thought it was a neat idea. The only problem is that it involves a paradigm shift in an entire society.

- noga1

November 26, 2010 at 12:02am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"The only problem is that it involves a paradigm shift in an entire society." And if a pig had wings, it would fly. But if noga's friends (all how many of them?) consider it a neat idea, why then it must really be swell.

- roidubouloi

November 26, 2010 at 12:45am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oops. She didn't say "friends," did she? She said "colleagues." That makes much more sense.

- roidubouloi

November 26, 2010 at 12:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roi you have a singular ability for misinterpreting things. "Jerry and Elaine have cups of coffee, George is ordering his beans from the guy behind the counter. GEORGE: Uh, excuse me. Uh, pound of Arabian mocha java, please. The counterperson nods to George, and moves to fill the order. George leaves. The guy behind the counter brings a bag of coffee over. COUNTERPERSON: Arabian mocha java? ELAINE: (looks for George) Mmm. (can't see him) Oh, um, I got it. Elaine takes the bag and pays for it. JERRY: That Arabian is strong coffee. ELAINE: It's PLO blend. George rejoins the gang. ELAINE: Ohh, I got your coffee. Elaine proffers the bag to George. He takes it and reaches for his pocket. GEORGE: Oh Oh, here, lemme uh... ELAINE: (waving away) Nah, nah, it's on me. (looks at her watch) Aww, man. Okay, listen guys, I'm gonna be late. (taking her cup of coffee) I'll see you, okay? (begins to walk away) GEORGE: Yeah. ELAINE: Bye. GEORGE: Mmm. Elaine leaves. Jerry moves to wander out of the store also, when George stops him. GEORGE: You see what just happened here? JERRY: What? GEORGE: She treated me to the Arabian mocha java. JERRY: And you misinterpret this how? GEORGE: She's stickin' it to me that she makes more money than me. JERRY: I'm sure she was just being nice, buying you the coffee. GEORGE: No, not nice. She's stickin' it to me. JERRY: You're crazy. GEORGE: (worked up) Stickin' it to me, Jerry. JERRY: George. GEORGE: (angry) Stickin' it! George walks off, pulling an angry face."

- noga1

November 26, 2010 at 9:10am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Ah - I think I understand. Straight men don't want commitment; women like to have a man they could talk to. Gay men like the company of women, and they don't like commitment either. So Straight men kinda move around single, like free electrons in a graphite or copper crystal, hitch up with women who are in nuclear families with their gay partners, women and men have their sex, gay men have their sex, all outside the nuclear family, while women and gay men will have their nuclear cluster in the evenings and weekends, sort of thing?

- icarusr

November 26, 2010 at 10:25am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

And if it's Canada, everyone will be sending everyone else 'thank you' notes!

- ironyroad

November 26, 2010 at 12:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You read my mind, icarus. Venus and Mars will shift their relational locus to another territory, where they can actually enjoy each other's company. Venus will build her nest with ... with... Apollo(?) where they each bring out the selfless best in the other, creating an oasis of friendship and intellectual engagement that can only be beneficial for the kids. The greatest advantage in this system is that it removes such negative emotions like jealousy or vindictiveness from the sphere of the family. For sure there will be irritations and disagreements but with the removal of the stronger emotions, they will be much easier to resolve. Why not, I ask you? There are of course monogamous, interesting, men who can be good companions to their wives. They will be allowed to maintain the present order. I see, ironyroad, from your trenchant comment, that you don't like my theory. But of course. You will belong to the party that stands to be the most loser in the new arrangement.

- noga1

November 26, 2010 at 12:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Not at all, I think it has a lot of attractive elements. My comment was a cheerful endorsement, with a little "local color" leg-pulling thrown in for free. As in: Q: How do you get a Canandian motorcycle gang out of your jacuzzi? A: Just ask politely, Guys, I wonder could you all get out of the jacuzzi?

- ironyroad

November 26, 2010 at 1:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You have the oddest biases about Canadians, ironyroad.

- noga1

November 26, 2010 at 1:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Pity your marriage is so intellectually and emotionally impoverished, noga. But it explains a great deal, not least the tantrums you throw just to get attention, even if it is negative attention. But, noga, the purpose of these blogs is political and cultural discussion. Not therapy for you and your marital woes.

- roidubouloi

November 26, 2010 at 2:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If you want to join in the fun, roi, why don't you just say so?

- noga1

November 26, 2010 at 2:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Your idea of fun is for masochists only.

- roidubouloi

November 26, 2010 at 2:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Sometimes a very positive bias, though, with affection and all that: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gKwjxF7ilI&feature=fvw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BREYCGWOouw&NR=1 Ignore the "American Masters" flagwaving in the first link. That's just cultural imperialism or imperial culturism or something.

- ironyroad

November 26, 2010 at 3:18pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I prefer this Canadian singer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Mwc43Fd9DY&feature=related

- noga1

November 26, 2010 at 4:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

And anyway, Quebec is very different from the rest of Canada.

- noga1

November 26, 2010 at 4:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I used to like Cockburn for a while, but I haven't heard him in years. This is nice, however: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5B-tAnJXTK0&feature=related

- ironyroad

November 26, 2010 at 5:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I was only introduced to him relatively recently and I really like some of his songs very much. But not the kind of song you linked to. Too country-ish for my taste.

- noga1

November 26, 2010 at 5:38pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

wondering what trenchant insight spawned so many comments, I return to find the only riff missing is basman on music :) I am still struck by the concept of rice pilaf without butter. Anyway noga, your husband, and anyone else with a mildly high cholesterol issue, should try Fenugreek. oh crikey, the capsules are gelatin. But, perhaps you can find it as a powder. I started taking Fenugreek for something else, and discovered my cholesterol dropped 25% after three months of taking about 2400 milligrams per day of ground fenugreek seed in the form of two capsules twice a day.

- K2K

November 26, 2010 at 11:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

He takes something the doctor prescribed. I'm not a great fan of homeopathic miracles though my husband tends to prefer those. So I'll make that suggestion to him. Thanks.

- noga1

November 27, 2010 at 7:19am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Actually, noga, there is a Persian dish whose principal aromatic ingredient is fenugreek. It's a nastily bitter herb, so we don't use a lot of it, and I have always wondered why anyone would have thought of using it in the dish (the aroma is distinctive, so perhaps that was it), but if there are health benefits, that would explain it. I am not into homeopathic miracles either, but dish combos in the Great Cuisines are sometimes based on more than just taste benefits, and there is something to thousands of years of trial and error.

- icarusr

November 27, 2010 at 10:19am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

malahat: we don't have hummus. At least, I never had it in Iran. (And I lived there long enough, and travelled all over the place.) The closest thing we have is a paste derived from chick peas, beans, potatoes and meat - and sundried lime. And the trick to making THAT really smooth is an hour or two of pounding the whole concoction. Sorry could not be of more help.

- icarusr

November 27, 2010 at 4:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

For a smoother, creamier hummus I add a few tablespoons of some robust kind of yogurt to the usual mix.

- noga1

November 27, 2010 at 6:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close