A reader writes in to ask Tom about about John Robb's latest post: JOURNAL: Primary Loyalties in Basra, where he critiques Tom. Tom replies:

Robb straw-mans opposing views too often, reducing them to absurdity. I write disconnectedness defines danger. I don't pretend there's some grossly simplistic causality traceable through all human interaction. Robb's being silly and mechanistic to argue like this, like I should see a 10 percent drop in conflict with a 10 percent rise in connectedness.

Iraq was a disconnected country suffering dictatorship before we invaded. Then we screwed the postwar and now there is a load of civil strife that keeps any meaningful economic connectedness from emerging. What does this prove on some grand scale? It proves we screwed up the postwar.

Robb is being rhetorically obtuse, a common sin among bloggers, because it's just so damn convenient in this sloppy, free-for-all environment (sorry, but I bow not to the blogosphere in all its self-delusional glory). Today Robb prefers to fight straw-men. It's a free net--but a serious competition of ideas. Everyone approaches that promise and peril differently, and does better on some days than others.

This is very weak Robb today. He usually performs better.

I find a lot of it has to do with your daily confidence level.