The author of the essay is a veteran journalist with decades of experience writing about foreign affairs. Reading his work requires a certain amount of background knowledge needed in order to fully understand his central thesis. Your task is to identify at least six concepts Cohen states in his piece that you do not understand. He uses terms such as , "liberal hawkisness" and "conservative American hubris." Or ideas such as his reference to being sickened by the carnage of Bosnia. As you read a passage you are unfamiliar with, please identify it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/30/opinion/30iht-edcohen30.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
Cohen states many concepts throughout this article on foreign policy. One such statement is, “Hypocrisy masquerading as prudence-can be as criminal as recklessness.” When talking about how Serbian forces invaded Bosnia and how much carnage there was. Another statement used is “dressed up as a millennial conflict beset by Balkan fog…” He uses this as a description for the Serbian forces. Cohen goes on to question “Was Sarajevo to be another Munich?” when talking about how damaged Munich was after being the center of a war. “Mea culpa.” Is another phrase used by Cohen. The Latin word means “an acknowledgement of one’s error” and Cohen uses it when talking about going into Iraq under false pretenses. Cohen also uses the idea of being “morally numbed by the cold war” when talking about reasons for the United States for intervening or not. Another concept Cohen explores is the “post-Cold-War interventionist cycle.” and how the cycle hurts American interest
ReplyDeleteReading Cohen's piece was quite overwhelming and confusing; many phrases and topics he covered were new to me. One such phrase that Cohen used that I didn't quite understand was "polemics." Another phrase was, "dressed up as a millennial conflict beset by Balkan fog and moral equivalency," which he uses when describing the Bosnian war. He also uses the phrases, "mutual assured destruction," and "the prism of Vietnam," both of which I don't quite understand the meaning of. In this statement, "a massacre foretold in Benghazi," I am confused as to what or where "Benghazi" is. I also do not understand the phrases, "Bosnian-induced hubris" and "had the disquieting latitude to act."
ReplyDeleteCohen talks about many concepts in his article that are hard to understand. One word Cohen uses is the word prevaricated, which means to have strayed or evaded the truth. He also mentions something about “A History of American Hubris.” The meaning of hubris is excessive pride or self-confidence; arrogance. So he is talking about the way America is acting prideful and arrogant. In Cohen’s article he talks about “false pretenses”, here he is talking about how the war was justified and fought under false representation. “The Icarus Syndrome: A History of American Hubris,” I found out that this is actually the name of a book written by Peter Beinart. There is much more in Cohan's article that is hard to understand, but i believe i can understand it better with what i now know.
ReplyDeleteCohen uses many terms that are a little difficult to understand at first. An example of this are the terms "hawkishness" and "hubris", which means a supporter of war or warlike policy and exaggerated pride or self confidence. Another term that puzzled me was the use of the word "polemics". Something else that puzzled me was the phrase "latitude to act".I am also not sure what Cohen is referring to when he used the term "the pendulum had swung". Lastly i also did not understand the term "prism of vietnam".
ReplyDeleteIt is very hard to grasp the concepts and the ideas on which Cohen is trying to get at. many of his terms that he uses such as "prism of vietnam" and “The Icarus Syndrome: A History of American Hubris,” are very hard to decipher. He goes on by saying "Bosnian-induced hubris" and if you know what he is saying there I give you eminence respect and understanding.
ReplyDeleteCohen begins his piece by speaking about "liberal hawkishness and conservative American hubris coalesced with disastrous consequences", he then talks about "polemics" which the meaning is not identified. He states the question, "Was Sarajevo to be another Munich?"which isn't necessarily common knowledge and then goes on to speak about the mutual destruction saying it had the "disquieting latitude to act". When he then talks about Liberal interventionists he says "proud badge of a generation discovering the good war", but what is a good war? Lastly he talks about "his adulation for Schlesinger" and goes on about this in a very confusing way.
ReplyDeleteIn his article Cohen uses several phrases that can become quite confusing if you do not know their meaning. One such phrase is “conservative American hubris.” Hubris means pride and arrogance so Cohen is exemplifying how conservatives are quite arrogant. He also uses the term “polemics.” This term’s definition is “the art or practice of disputation or controversy.” He uses the phrase “millennial conflict beset by Balkan fog and moral equivalency.” This is used to describe Serbian forces during the Bosnia war, and how they covered up crimes by using war. Another such sentence is “Was Sarajevo to be another Munich?.” This is to reference how the city of Sarajevo could come to the same ending Munich had in both World Wars. Cohen also uses the term “prevaricated” which means to deviate from the truth. Another term he uses is “Mea culpa” when describing the United States pushing Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait in the Gulf War. The words are from Latin, and mean my fault or my mistake.
ReplyDeleteIn his article, Cohen uses several confusing phrases, such as” liberal hawkishness” and “conservative American hubris coalesced with disastrous consequences”. Hubris, as I learned, means pride and arrogance. He is talking about the way America itself is acting prideful and arrogant. Cohen also uses the term “polemics”, which means “the art or practice of disputation or controversy.” Another phrase was, "dressed up as a millennial conflict beset by Balkan fog and moral equivalency," which he used to describe the Bosnian war. Another phrase I do not understand is “Was Sarajevo to be another Munich?” which I assume has to deal with a world war. Finally, Cohen talks about "his adulation for Schlesinger", and at this point I was lost in his meaning.
ReplyDeleteIn this article the author Cohen uses many phrases that I don’t understand and a lot of event that I don’t know much about. In the second paragraph he uses the terms liberal hawkishness and conservative American hubris. I do not know what either of these terms mean. Another term he uses that I don’t understand is polemics. Another confusing term Cohen uses is Balkan fog. Throughout the piece he also references many foreign conflicts that I don’t know much about such as the Bosnian war and a war in Sierra Leone. My lack of knowledge concerning these events made it difficult at times to understand the message the author was trying to convey.
ReplyDeleteCohen uses some difficult words to understand in his article. One example of this is, "conservative American hubris coalesced with disastrous consequences". He goes on to talk about "polemics" which is simply, "the art or practice of disputation or controversy". Another difficult part is, "The Icarus Syndrome: A History of American Hubris". I did not understand: "Was Sarajevo to be another Munich?" Another one was, "Mea culpa". And lastly I did not know what he was saying when he stated, "his adulation for Schlesinger".
ReplyDeleteCohen refers to quite a few different world events and technical terms that I am unfamiliar with. I have no idea what the Bosnian war was, but knowing that it was a war helps to understand its context. I have no idea, however, what "liberal hawkishness" refers to, nor what "conservative American hubris" is, and I especially have no clue as to how their coalescence would lead to disastrous consequences. I didn't know anything about the massacre that was foretold in Benghazi, but I assumed that it was a good thing we stepped in before those sorts of acts continued in Libya. The phrase "Mea culpa" also jumped out at me, and since I don't recognize that as being English I didn't understand that at all.
ReplyDeleteCohen, being a veteran of news for quite some time, has covered and reviewed much more events than I will probably ever know. In his article, he jumps to several different conflicts through history.A phrase like,"moment when liberal hawkishness and conservative American hubris coalesced with disastrous consequences," does not mean too much to me because there are just words I do not comprehend. Later uses another unfamiliar word,"polemics." I do not understand what he is doing in Sarajevo, or where that is all together. I don't understand what he means by a "good war" with war nothing ever good comes out. It will just resolve a conflict between two entities. "Through the prism of Vietnam," I realize we were in the Vietnam war but this phrase is like Latin to me. Close to the end, Cohen states he is glad he resisted that temptation. I have no clue what was tempting him and what he was able to resist. Overall, Cohen speaks to me like a man who knows much about the world while I am only just learning about it.
ReplyDeleteRoger Cohen,a Veteran News reporter has covered a variety of different conflicts throughout history. He uses several phrases, such as "liberal hawkishness" and “conservative American hubris coalesced with disastrous consequences”. Hubris, means pride and arrogance. He is talking about the way America is acting to arrogant. Cohen also uses the term “polemics”, which means “the art or practice of disputation or controversy.” The way he phrases statements makes me feel illiterate, He is obviously a very worldly person. Seems to me that I know nothing about what is really beyond the US border.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading the article, it becomes very apparent that Cohen is a very verbose writer, and well learned man. He uses phrases like; "millennial conflict beset by Balkan fog and moral equivalency," "an ascendant West was faced with barbarism on European soil and had the disquieting latitude to act," and " interventionism is inextricable from the American idea." But, through all his verbose writing, he makes a strong point for interventionalism in the middle east.
ReplyDelete