Kissinger's Peanutsegy and Hitchens

























One of the very small number of scoops in Bob Woodward's new book has to do with Dr. K's influence Bush's Iraq policy. I was particularly intrigued by his use of metaphors:
In a meeting with presidential speechwriter Michael Gerson in early September 2005, Kissinger was more explicit: Bush needed to resist the pressure to withdraw American troops. He repeated his axiom that the only meaningful exit strategy was victory.

"The president can't be talking about troop reductions as a centerpiece," Kissinger said. "You may want to reduce troops," but troop reduction should not be the objective. "This is not where you put the emphasis."

To emphasize his point, he gave Gerson a copy of a memo he had written to President Richard M. Nixon, dated Sept. 10, 1969. "Withdrawal of U.S. troops will become like salted peanuts to the American public; the more U.S. troops come home, the more will be demanded,"he wrote.

The Salted Peanuts Model of Troop Withdrawal.
Someone should tell Kissinger that he needs to adapt to the age of diet freaks and come up with cool metaphors (Survivor, Paris Hilton, iPod,etc.) In any case, I'm not sure why Kissinger didn't use something more simple and classic involving addictions, say alcoholism. Like in "Withdrawal of U.S. troops will become like alcohol to Christopher Hitchens; the more U.S. troops come home, the more will be demanded." Christopher Hitchens being now Dr. K's close ideological pal.

Comments

aelkus said…
Kissinger is the exception that proves the rule. Cheney and Rumsfeld both got their start in the Nixon White House. Part of this administration's pathological obsession with secrecy and disregard for legality owes from Cheney's yearning for the golden days.

As for Hitchens, I think he'll eventually have a near-death experience after getting into a drinking contest with Mel Gibson. Then Hitchens will become a born-again Christian and renounce eveything.
9:56 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Pundits who screw-up: No big deal...

Image
Matt Barganier desconstructs Andrew Sullivan's mea sorta culpa on Iraq in Time magazine (Sullivan seen above in a thoughtful pose on Bill Maher's "Real Time"). There have been many of those in recent weeks (including by WFB and Fukuyama ). In an commentary published last year, Oops! I helped start a War which was about one of the earlier apologizing-war-aplogists, I pointed out to the contrast between the way the losers who operate in the market (including financial analysts) are punished and the reality in which the losers in the political game (including foreign policy analysts) rarely get punished: Imagine: for a few years you were investing the money you had saved for your daughter's college education in one of those moderately conservative plans that provided some increase in the value of the investment without exposing it to major risks. But then your financial planner – let's call him Ken P. – got in touch with you and came up with a really great ide
Read more

When will Israel attack Iran?

Image
I'm not an "Intelligence analyst" and I don't play one on television. But I urge you to study the following items: 1. Seymour Hersh new piece in The New Yorker, "The Next Act: Is a damaged Administration less likely to attack Iran, or more?" 2. Tony Karon's "Israel's Domestic Political Games Raises the Danger of a U.S.-Iran War." 3. Aluf Benn's "Olmert's Drums of War" in Haaretz . 4. Bush:I would understand if Israel chose to attack Iran. 5. Michael Oren's op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal on November 16 which is only accessible to subscribers. So here are a few interesting quotes: Much like 1967, Israel faces a Middle Eastern leader who has repeatedly sworn to wipe it off the map, and to that end is assiduously trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Like Nasser, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can cripple Israel economically by keeping it in a state of alert, driving away foreign investment and tourism. In the absence of interna
Read more