« USIP Future of US Forces in Iraq | Main | USIP Iraqi Interior Minister »

July 29, 2008


Crude Analysis

If Thomas Hegghammer wasn't there, well... then he should've been!


Ill write the paper for you if you don't have time. I love this stuff. I wish it wasn't under Chatham rules, but if thats what it takes to make it easier to flow, so be it. Is there any plan to release the comments/papers in full later on? I see that Hegghammer has a new piece out as of today on AQ in KSA via jihadica.com, which I found fascinating. Can't wait to see what you have in store for readers

Josh SN

Read Grousset's "The Empires of the Steppes" and I think you'll appreciate how alienating certain styles of writing can be (i.e. you have a _lot_ of names in this post!)

Which reminds me. Weren't the Turkic and Mongol barbarians like the Chinggis-Khanites about the most feared people in history, so, in a sense, being much more feared than loved, they are a Machiavellian extreme? Both Chinggis and Tamerlane's story in Grousset is also filled with a certain amount of duplicity and intrigue, fake loyalty and back-stabbing.

And, continuing crablike, I really love this talk on Machiavelli, which shows that the man himself was a powerless, sarcastic romantic, quite the opposite of what he wrote about.


"By Chatham House Rule I can't talk about the specifics of who was there or what was said, but I can say that it was one of the more interesting events of its kind I've been to lately."

Why not? It's going to be written up in next month's "Sentinel" anyway.

Helena Cobban

Actually, Marc, you've described the Chatham House rules erroneously. Under CHR you can convey the full flavor of what was discussed without writing anything that hints at attribution of any statement or any particular argument to any individual.

Helena Cobban


The comments to this entry are closed.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Blog powered by Typepad