The Pentagon's New Map

From: Ramez Naam (mez@apexnano.com)
Date: Sun Feb 23 2003 - 11:43:52 MST

  • Next message: nanowave: "RE: IRAQ sort of: Re: Tim May calls for nuking of D.C."

    A friend posted this article to another list. I can't recommend it
    enough. Whether you are for or against the war on Iraq, this article
    presents a very cogent analysis of where the greatest risks to world
    peace are and why. While the author (an analyst at the pentagon)
    frames this in the context of preparing the US military for future
    threats, you can just as easily use the same analysis to motivate
    greater economic engagement to uplift and stabilize these areas of
    greatest danger to the world.

    cheers,
    mez

    > From: Llew Roberts [mailto:llew@llew.net]
    >
    >
    > Thomas P. M. Barnett wrote an excellent article for Esquire
    > this month (Benicio del Toro on the cover) called "The
    > Pentagon's New Map". He talks about "connected" areas and
    > "disconnected" areas. The US always deploys troops to
    > disconnected areas. Disconnectedness is Bad.
    >
    > The article summary from the Esquire website (unfortunately
    > the article is not available on Equire's website):
    >
    > The author, a top Pentagon strategist, lays out a new theory
    > of the world--and the aggressive departure in U. S.
    > war-fighting strategy that goes with it. His map,
    > illustrating a redefinition of the international order, is
    > gaining influence in Washington and explains not only why
    > we're going to war in Iraq but also where we'll be fighting next.
    >
    > You can read more about Barnett's theories here:
    >
    http://www.nwc.navy.mil/newrulesets/thomas_barnett.htm

    And he has the entire Esquire article here (be sure to check out the
    hemisphere maps for hot spots):

    http://www.nwc.navy.mil/newrulesets/ThePentagonsNewMap.htm



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Feb 23 2003 - 11:46:18 MST