View the h-diplo Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in h-diplo's August 2006 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
View the Next Message in h-diplo's August 2006 logs by: [date] [author] [thread]
Visit the h-diplo home page.
I appreciate the moderator starting a new thread to parallel the "Fallacies of Pre-emption" thread. I enjoyed Prof. Lovelace's comments and his approach to applying diplomatic history to the current situation in Iraq. I'm not sure I follow Prof. Lovelace's on his following comment: "...is that the global context -unlike the nation's dominant strategic culture strand - has qualitatively changed. That appears to be a very serious difference with respect not just the wars with Britain or Mexico or Spain or Japan and Germany, but even in relation to the Vietnam war. The world is far smaller and vulnerable and aware of its own vulnerabilities through the ever growing levers of interdependence." I just finished 3 days of reading Wisconsin newspapers from 1898 - 1903 at the Wisconsin State Historical Society. (My previous comments were written before I left for the archives.) What struck me regarding my research on the Philippine-American War is how global issues dominated headlines and often removed the Philippine issue away from the headlines. During this same time there is the Boer War, the Boxer Rebellion, the Venezuelan crisis, the Canal issue and Panamanian revolution, unrest in Cuba, revolution in Haiti and the Russo-Japanese War to name the top global crisis. Too often, I get caught up studying these as individual events and it wasn't until I was browsing through the papers did I realize how these overlapped each other. While the speed of reporting events has shortened, I don't think the world has ever been a "large" place and given all the regional conflicts in place today, unfortunately, I believe the culture of war is here to stay. Enjoying everyone's contributions. Jon Krohn Graduate Student UW-Eau Claire