One Phil to Another: In all fairness I think you should add “almost certainly” between “war” and “was”. Beyond that, this is a typical Phil Harper post in that it is well conceived, meticulously researched (AFAIK - I am no expert and am not about to invest the time and energy to make an independent assessment) and crisply written.
But, uh … so what? This is the Trump Administration 2.0. Did you expect something else? Are you new around here? This is the Trumpy way.
What I did not see in this particular chunk of Phil Harper good journalism is attention to an important question. Did Team Trump copy the right stuff? Were the assertions true? Is this a well premised war? Are the objectives positive for the US, the Middle East or the world? Is this bloody, greedy imperialism running unfettered?
I’m thinking that with your obvious talent and willingness to work, you could engage the more important question. You could grab it by the horns and, unlike lesser journalists, make a positive contribution to a very consequential matter, namely war and peace.
So this post gets a B-. You did a first class job of proving an uninteresting and ultimately unimportant theorem. Try again.
Thanks for the sub and input. You're right broadly. I've been a little frustrated by this particular investigation because...there's a lot I want to say but I feel I need to get this out of the way first.
I think once I have the pieces put together, I'll be able to put a much more coherent argument forward about my view (hopefully backed by data) that we are very far off the map right now.
I live in the data. I have had a Substack account for a while, maybe years. I’ve already made a post. That was after approximately 1,000 hours of research. It isn’t looking good for my career as a “hot takes” guy.
One Phil to Another: In all fairness I think you should add “almost certainly” between “war” and “was”. Beyond that, this is a typical Phil Harper post in that it is well conceived, meticulously researched (AFAIK - I am no expert and am not about to invest the time and energy to make an independent assessment) and crisply written.
But, uh … so what? This is the Trump Administration 2.0. Did you expect something else? Are you new around here? This is the Trumpy way.
What I did not see in this particular chunk of Phil Harper good journalism is attention to an important question. Did Team Trump copy the right stuff? Were the assertions true? Is this a well premised war? Are the objectives positive for the US, the Middle East or the world? Is this bloody, greedy imperialism running unfettered?
I’m thinking that with your obvious talent and willingness to work, you could engage the more important question. You could grab it by the horns and, unlike lesser journalists, make a positive contribution to a very consequential matter, namely war and peace.
So this post gets a B-. You did a first class job of proving an uninteresting and ultimately unimportant theorem. Try again.
Thanks for the sub and input. You're right broadly. I've been a little frustrated by this particular investigation because...there's a lot I want to say but I feel I need to get this out of the way first.
I think once I have the pieces put together, I'll be able to put a much more coherent argument forward about my view (hopefully backed by data) that we are very far off the map right now.
Oh, by the way, getting all the data can be a huge amount of work. I happen to know this from experience.
I live in the data. I have had a Substack account for a while, maybe years. I’ve already made a post. That was after approximately 1,000 hours of research. It isn’t looking good for my career as a “hot takes” guy.
The Zionist Team Goebbels have been busy indeed