MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
By Dexter Filkins, The New Yorker, September 19, 2011 (available free online now.)
Syed Saleem Shahzad wrote aggressively about Pakistan’s military. But is that why he was killed?
My comment: Highly recommended. Despite what their blurb suggests, in investigating Shahzad's story, and trying to get across what he learned, Filkins ended up doing a very good job of suggesting where the US is at with Pakistan right now and how the administration (as well as some Pakistani leaders) is sort of stuck between a rock and hard place.
It's #2 on the New Yorker's "most popular" list right now, so it's not just me who thinks it's really worth the time.
Comments
Interesting. I was hoping for more on the idea that bin Laden was still alive, but there's a lot to digest. I've noted before that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has forgiven billions of dollars of Pakistani oil debt, so the idea that they would be beholden to Islamists is not that surprising.
by Donal on Tue, 09/13/2011 - 9:40am
Oh, my takeaway on that is the article among other things is very much a confirmation he's dead. In the beginning of the article, page 2:
And then the rest of the article is a parade of how everything like that is screwing up for the ISI, which they are not used to, and there is panic. I.E., he wasn't dead then; the U.S. no longer believes a thing they say. indeed they might start with the theory that one should suspect the truth is the opposite of what they say; and the raid was one of many things that screwed things up for them. Same with Haqqani network, Ilyas Kashmiri, etc. And worse, everyone in their own country no longer believes what they say.
Some similarities came to my mind of the most complex games of Soviet vs. U.S. spies during the Cold War, almost as if it might help for them to have the advice of some involved from that time. Another similarity is no party involved can just say fuck you, I'm sick of this crap, not going to play anymore, because there's control of nukes involved.
And for me, that also explains some of Obama's reasoning for wanting to stay in that theatre, because nuke control was clearly one of his passions from the getgo.
by artappraiser on Tue, 09/13/2011 - 7:40pm
The comment made by Rashid regarding the "red line" is chilling. He has not thrust himself into the middle of events the way Shahzad did and he fears sharing the same fate.
Thanks for pointing to the article. Much of the structure of the ISI described in the story matches closely to what a number of Indian journals have been reporting for over a decade. I wonder who those Indian reporters talked to.
In regards to your comment about Cold War tactics, the idea presented that one part of the Pakistani apparatus didn't know they were helping the U. S. look for someone a different part of the apparatus was trying to conceal is a perfect example.
by moat on Tue, 09/13/2011 - 6:54pm
In regards to your comment about Cold War tactics, the idea presented that one part of the Pakistani apparatus didn't know they were helping the U. S. look for someone a different part of the apparatus was trying to conceal is a perfect example.
Yes! Tuly amazing that you understood what I was trying to say from that mess of a comment.
On one of your other points, about Indian journalists--> me too; I am beginning to think that in the past I doubted the integrity and objectivity of many of them too much.
by artappraiser on Tue, 09/13/2011 - 7:47pm
Shit hits fan:
by artappraiser on Wed, 09/14/2011 - 10:36pm
by artappraiser on Tue, 09/20/2011 - 12:20am
by artappraiser on Fri, 09/23/2011 - 3:14am
I am glad to see the move in the pipeline market. Money spent there beats pumping cash into combat operations. Unless, of course, it leads to new combat operations.....
by moat on Sun, 09/25/2011 - 6:50pm
Myself I seize on any hopey of changey in the status quo. No matter how bleak alternatives sound, it's a positive to me to know the simple fact that some peeps in charge are thinking of and planning alternatives, rather than proceeding on the basis that they will never need any.
by artappraiser on Mon, 09/26/2011 - 7:09pm
I agree.
One can have as many paradigm shifts in thinking as one likes but if they don't lead to change of the actual structure of dependencies that limit degrees of freedom, then the shift doesn't amount to much.
My suggestion that solutions might to lead to new problems wasn't given in a spirit of futility; Getting unstuck involves risk.
by moat on Mon, 09/26/2011 - 7:50pm
by artappraiser on Mon, 09/26/2011 - 10:55pm
by artappraiser on Tue, 09/27/2011 - 12:03am