Comments on: The lessons of Richard Holbrooke Sun, 28 Jul 2013 14:34:09 +0000 hourly 1 By: CommonSensLogic Mon, 03 Jan 2011 22:27:22 +0000 Chrytia:
You really disappoint me.
When a comment agrees with you, you publish it.
When a comment points out the fatal flaw of your comments, namely, how the image of America being a bully is detrimental to our foreign policy in places like Pakistan/Afghanistan, you censor them.
I thought you were different!

I am all for honoring the achievement of one of our own.
However, between the lines, your article promote “bullying” as part of our foreign policy, whether you are aware it or not. And THAT is dangerous for foreign policy in Afghanistan/Pakistan. Part of the definition of bullies, is that these are people who are so full of themselves, that brute force will work. Their over-sized ego made them gullible when enemies pretend to be admiring them and offering intelligence. That’s the exact attitude and leadership that contributed to the dismantling of most of the intelligence structure in Afghanistan( the infamous bombing that killed many precious lives). Yes, in my humble opinion, the egotistic attitude is bullies, IS the number one, number two, number three reasons for America being in a the longest war in Afghanistan, only to alienate the country, and create a worse image of America there than before. Petreaus, on the other hand, is more capable of understanding the cultural reasons what bullying would backfire.

Yes, honor our serviceman, our politicians, our patriots. However, that is NOT an excuse to promote a dangerous foreign policy for our country. YES, you are insinuating something dangerous between the lines, that bullying is the way to go in Afghanistan.

My suggestion: stick with commentaries on economics. You are usually decent there.
With foreign policy, you sometimes steer many in the wrong direction with your intelligent yet misguided arguments. The fact that your underpinnings, myopia in foreign policies are hidden between the lines, makes your statements potentially even more dangerous.

Please, leave foreign policy, particularly military foreign policy, and stick strictly economics, where you tend to have decent ideas.

By: widollar Fri, 24 Dec 2010 18:32:53 +0000 Chrystia Freeland has written an excellent column on Richard Holbrooke and his fantastic abilities to match his skills to the occasion. When talking with world leaders who were hot heads, he could be volcanic. When dealing with high level Chinese Leaders, he could be calm and soft spoken. His unique skills will be missed! Sadly, he left the planet far too soon.

By: hsvkitty Mon, 20 Dec 2010 19:22:13 +0000 You are quite right that he kicked the dog when away and yet cared deeply about those closer to him, and that is what you wish to and will remember. History may not be as kind.

Forgive those whose loved ones were lost and whose countries remain impacted by his bulldog interference and bullying, for not seeing him in that same light.

By: Avispa43 Mon, 20 Dec 2010 14:44:12 +0000 Yes, much like Teddy in many ways! If there had been a PNAC in those days TR would have been the poster child.
Perhaps another view of the man… nes/richard-holbrooke-represe_b_796447.h tml

By: dzoo35 Sun, 19 Dec 2010 00:36:36 +0000 Bully!

In the late 19th century vernacular of course, I concur.

By: pHenry Fri, 17 Dec 2010 19:50:07 +0000 Bully!