Stephen M. Walt. ForeignPolicy.com, 30 November 2009.
http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/11/30/why_they_hate_us_ii_how_many_muslims_has_the_us_killed_in_the_past_30_years
Excerpt:
Yet if you really want to know “why they hate us,” … the fact remains that the United States has killed a very large number of Arab or Muslim individuals over the past three decades.
Editor’s Comment:
And no amount of “public diplomacy” or “American narrative” will win friends when the U.S. is responsible for killing sons and daughters of people in their home land. That is a basic piece of strategic wisdom!
Council on Foreign Relations, November 2009.
http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/PublicOpinionProject.pdf
Project website — http://www.cfr.org/thinktank/iigg/pop/
Excerpt:
Publics around the world—including in the United States—are strongly internationalist in orientation. They believe that global challenges are simply too complex and daunting to be addressed by unilateral or even regional means. In every country polled, most people support a global system based on the rule of law, international treaties, and robust multilateral institutions. They believe their own government is obliged to abide by international law, even when doing so is at odds with its perceived national interest. Large majorities, including among Americans, reject a hegemonic role for the United States, but do want the United States to participate in multilateral efforts to address international issues.
Colin S. Gray. Strategic Studies Institute, Army War College, 28 October 2009.
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/download.cfm?q=947
Galrahn. Information Dissemination, 03 October 2009.
http://www.informationdissemination.net/2009/10/misunderstanding-problem.html
Excerpt:
When I see the story saying “President Obama has reaffirmed a 4-decade-old secret understanding that has allowed Israel to keep a nuclear arsenal without opening it to international inspections,” I read it as not only protecting Israel’s right to have nuclear weapons, but Israel seeking assurances in writing that they have the right to use nuclear weapons if necessary… perhaps on a well protected nuclear facility.
After all, if Israel is willing to accept the risk of attacking Iran knowing full well a few conventional bombs could very easily cost the United States its strategic objectives in both Afghanistan and Iraq, efforts paid for with 8 years of American blood; Israel will make damn sure they destroy what they intend to in an attack on Iran. This whole issue is about whether Israel assesses that Iran will use nuclear weapons against Israel. If the defensive purpose of nuclear weapons is to defend a country from being attacked with nuclear weapons, and defending Israel from potential Iranian nuclear weapon use against Israel is the issue here, then I think Israel use of nuclear weapons must be considered as part of the calculus.
Disbelieve Israel would go nuclear all you want, but Israels short, modern history is one of Israel consistently taking enormous risks, both politically and militarily. It is the rule rather than the exception, something we should not forget; particularly considering that the new buried and concealed nuclear site everyone is discussing is in Qom – a Shi’a Islam holy city.
Michael A. Cohen. Dissent, Fall 2009.
http://spi.typepad.com/files/arms-for-the-world.pdf
Excerpt:
… the defining characteristic of U.S. foreign policy and national security policy in the post–cold-war era is the extent to which America’s foreign policy agenda is being crafted and implemented by the military. …Whether it’s waging the war on terror or the war on drugs; nation-building in post-conflict environments; development, democracy promotion, or diplomacy; fighting cyber-criminals or training foreign armies, the global face of the United States today is generally that of a soldier.
Lewis Carroll. (English Logician, Mathematician, Photographer and Novelist, especially remembered for Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland. 1832-1898)
Donald M. Snow. New Atlanticist Policy and Analysis Blog, 13 August 2009.
http://www.acus.org/new_atlanticist/outside-intervention-internal-wars
Elaine M. Grossman. Global Security Newswire, 28 July 2009.
Phillip C. Saunders. Strategic Forum, Institute for National Strategic Studies, July 2009.
http://www.ndu.edu/inss/docUploaded/SF244China_Saunders.pdf
Antulio J. Echevarria II. Strategic Studies Institute, Army War College, 25 June 2009. Posted on the Commonwealth Institute Website (printable .pdf file).
Robert D. Blackwill. RAND Occasional Paper, 2009.
Colin S. Gray. Air Force Doctrine Development and Education Center, December 2007.
http://www.au.af.mil/au/aul/aupress/ARI_Papers/GrayARI2.pdf
Andrew R. Hoehn, Adam Grissom, David Ochmanek, David A. Shlapak, Alan J. Vick. RAND, 2007.
Full report: http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2007/RAND_MG499.pdf
Summary: http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2007/RAND_MG499.sum.pdf
Steve Geary. Presentation to Supply Chain World conference, 26 March 2006. Hosted on the Commonwealth Institute website.
http://www.comw.org/qdr/fulltext/06Geary.pdf
Editor’s Comment:
Although this presentation focuses on logistics and maintenance of equipment, it includes useful information pertaining to the tradeoffs between operational ambitions / quality and costs of maintenance of forces that are inherent in “performance based” approaches.
Receive notice of new posts on this site through 
