Ye Kun grabbed his five fingers and scratched his hair a few times.

The painstaking meditation lasted for a long time, and the long single ponytail hair that was tied for coolness was all scratched.

"If there is a new model of excuses, it must be the recent case that has taught Americans a bloody lesson and made them realize the huge price to be paid for 'indecision......

Americans are always like this: after suffering from 'too arbitrary' once, Congress will tighten up a little bit from the left to the left; and after suffering from 'indecision' the next time, it will play a game with the right and the right and relax a little...... The defeat in the Vietnam War was obviously a lesson of 'starting the war lightly', so what are the negative lessons of the later wars......

Ye Kun unconsciously made up for more than ten minutes.

Then she finally had a flash of inspiration.

Ye Su subconsciously grabbed Gu Wei's hands excitedly, shook them up and down twice, lowered his voice and asked urgently and firmly: "Evacuate overseas Chinese! Armed evacuation of overseas Chinese! Do you think this excuse is enough? I think it is very promising! It is enough to bypass the US Congress and launch a rapid response military operation." ”

In 1898, during the Messi War, there was a resolution to protect overseas Chinese, but it took a long time for diplomatic negotiations in the Spanish-American War to officially start. GU BIAO THOUGHT INERTLY, OBVIOUSLY NOT IMMEDIATELY GETTING TO THE KEY POINT THAT YE SU SAID.

Ye Kun was very proud: "You are stupid, of course it is not the ordinary protection and evacuation of overseas Chinese in history, what I am saying is that the Americans now have one more excuse than in previous years, and they can use a more 'offensive and defensive' posture to maliciously speculate on other countries whose ideologies have just been Sovietized."

That is, 'the other side may be an extremely evil country that completely ignores the norms of human diplomacy, and it is possible to detain American civilians and diplomatic envoys to blackmail the United States, so it should be resolutely dispatched to eliminate it immediately' - you should have reacted, and the negative material I am talking about is what the Iranians provided to the United States three years ago.

Iran is the only country in the 20th century that has directly detained the embassy of the other side and ignored the norms of civilized diplomacy in the 20th century. However, after Iran set this evil example of blackmailing the United States, it also gave the United States an excuse to imagine other enemy countries as more evil.

They can say, 'How do I know if you're going to be like Iran, detain all my embassies and blackmail me,' so in order to prevent the United States from being blackmailed, they send troops on offensive defense, immediately nip this possibility in the bud, and eliminate the enemy regime directly. ”

Before Gu Biao finished listening, he clenched his fists and stood up, then clenched his left hand into a fist and his right hand clenched his palm, and kept beating his right palm with his left fist, pacing back and forth excitedly.

The question of "why the Grenada War in history went directly to the stage of force through diplomatic mediation so quickly, and what caused the US Congress to weaken its suppressive power against the president's use of force" has suddenly become clear and clear.

It's a shame that he went to Iraq to talk to President Hussein about the aftermath of the incident, and he took care of it himself, which is really a mystery for the authorities.

In fact, it is easy for later generations to understand:

Historically, when the Scodon incident broke out in 13 years, many post-00s who had never experienced the nine-year-old were wondering "how could the American people pass bills and be willingly monitored by the president". But those who have experienced the Nine Generations will feel that "it is not a big deal to sacrifice a little privacy in exchange for security protection".

Each time, it was an evil force that challenged the existing order in a way that broke through the lower limits of human moral imagination, and then the people's tolerance for "more aggressive offensive defense, even hypothetical defense", was further increased. If it weren't for the death of President Ben Moudin and President Hussein, the American people would have continued to endure surveillance.

Similarly, back in the early 1980s, the American people's tolerance for the president's unauthorized use of force had reversed from the anti-war campaign at the end of the Vietnam War.

The opportunity for this reversal is the Iranian hostage crisis.

Don't underestimate the extent to which the Iranians have damaged the credibility of international law, because they have actually done an epoch-making thing - before, even during World War I and World War II, everyone was a civilized country, and there was no case of a belligerent government directly and openly hijacking and killing diplomatic missions.

Especially in World War I, everyone is actually more decent. Although the overall level of warfare in World War II was higher, the Soviet Union and Germany did not do it, and other countries that were more advertised as civilized countries could not do it.

The last time a government connived at the killing of a diplomatic corps was when Cixi killed the German minister Klinder under the guise of a boxer. However, everyone also knew that Cixi had "declared war on the whole world", and then was fatly beaten by the Eight-Nation Alliance.

In fact, some of the eight countries that sent troops did not have their direct interests harmed by Cixi, but they could also send troops, because Cixi violated the basic principles of international law and challenged the rules of the game in the civilized world, so Cixi was not treated as a civilized country at all, and when people beat her, it was like beating an uncivilized non-chieftain.

Clint died in June 1900, and 1900 belongs to the 19th century (in the same way 2000 belongs to the 20th century, and 01 is the 21st century), so Cixi's bestiality should be blamed for the 19th century.

In the first 78 years of the twentieth century, all of humanity was innocent, and it could have established the international credibility that "such a thing would not have happened again in a civilized century like the twentieth century." Until the Iranians carried the baton of "the shame of civilized society in the 20th century" and broke the whole of humanity.

(Before the Iranians, there were some chiefs in Africa who did the same, but they were only chiefs, or tribal armed leaders, not leaders of civilized nations, and at best occasionally gained power, and were also characterized as "warlords.") There are warlords who kill diplomats, but warlords do not represent the country, just like the warlords in the country in the 1920s. ）

From now on, the Americans can naturally lower the lower limit of the threshold for "rapid response and protection of overseas Chinese." Because the United States is the direct victim of the Iranian hostage crisis, it is difficult for the international community to condemn it if they want to do so.

It is equivalent to that after the Iranians have refreshed the lower limit of civilized society, they will ask all other countries that do not deal with the international order established by the United States to bear the blame and bear the fate of malicious speculation and hypothetical defense that have been broken through the lower limit.

The Americans only need to say, "How do I know if this country will have no lower limit like Iran," and then use force.

……

After clarifying the outline of the theoretical deduction mentioned by Ye Kun, it is a matter of how to form a solid internal thesis or diplomatic pretext.

There is still a big gap between the idea and the implementation to the rigorous diplomatic rhetoric that can withstand scrutiny by the international community.

Don't underestimate the value of this part of the work.

Suffice it to say, in 1983, if anyone could translate the above illusion into a time-tested diplomatic document and submit it to the President of the United States, it would definitely be an academic achievement worth at least tens of millions of dollars.

This is not to brag, because the president of the United States needs such a document to make him "spend a few days less arguing with Congress and make the US military respond faster when he wants to send troops and use force."

From an economic point of view, how valuable is the intellectual results that can accelerate the suddenness of US military operations in a few days?

If the first person who can come up with it and share the worries of the president, if he is an American citizen, then he will definitely not run away from being an assistant to the secretary of state for ten or eight years and becoming a member of a think tank.

It's a pity that Gu Biao is not a U.S. citizen and doesn't want to be an U.S. citizen, so he can only use it in exchange for some other benefits - for example, the original idea, to increase the credibility of the follow-up results.

At the same time, let Kissinger believe in Gu Biao's other predictions, "the risk of being infiltrated by the Soviet Union in other Latin American countries that are going to transition to the pig population this year", and expand the scope of use of this "active false defense", and use it in Grenada and then in Argentina.

Then Gu Biao can carry private goods unknowingly, and President Li Gen will not ask how to pull it.

This is also an American tradition.

Just like Nixon, he would not have known about the various actions of the executive in the Watergate scandal. Moreover, when the CIA and the FBI are doing things, they often use the technique of "first proposing a few more unreliable plans, letting the superiors veto them, and then proposing a less reliable plan in exchange for implementation".

Because the CIA and FBI were originally doing shocking things, they have become accustomed to being vetoed, and after decades of development, the CIA and the FBI's cutting-edge executive layers are used to it, and deliberately take a few unreliable ones to be rejected first, so as to meet the psychological problem of "Party A is uncomfortable if Party A does not reject Party B's design plan first".

Party A is often embarrassed to continue to refuse after rejecting several proposals, which is a common human nature in psychology.

After many Party A asked Party B to change the N draft design plan, the rebuttal was fully satisfied, and maybe the first draft of the design was finally passed in a circle.

When the "Watergate Scandal" was executed, it was actually a "foreshadowing plan that was not very reliable and wanted to be rejected", which was accidentally passed, resulting in a subsequent disaster.

And this time, what if the CIA people were not careful when they carried out the overseas infiltration and support mission?

The United States has a long habit of letting the CIA help the secretary of state carry out secret overseas infiltration. For example, in the Dulles era, Dulles himself was the secretary of state, and his younger brother was the director of the CIA. The Dulles brothers are the majority shareholders of the "United Fruits" company, so once a Latin American country nationalizes land and infringes on the commercial interests of the "United Fruits" company, the Dulles brothers will exert diplomatic pressure and secretly infiltrate the other party to replace the other party's president.

For example, if you accidentally put a plan that was "originally sent to Party A as a draft and was ready to be rejected by Party A", but Party A suddenly implemented it?

Of course, the first party here is President Ronaldo Bennetto on the surface, but in fact the person who decided and was inspired may be the former President Galtieri, who has already left the field.

It is even more unlikely that anyone will know who those brain-dead pre-filings that are "ready to satisfy Party A's desire to refuse" come from.

Because when the CIA was doing things, it didn't care about these "making up PPT".