After-shocks still coming at 10-15 minute intervals, more than 12 hours after the Big One hit. The 12 storey building I'm in swaying gently as I write. We hope this doesn't presage worse things to come.
Day light will bring the truly horrific picture up north nearer the epi-center into focus. Its a sad, sad day.
Meanwhile, Iranian protesters have distanced themselves from the strong support that came from US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton barely minutes after they had hit the streets. Noting that the US government sided with protesters in Tunisia and Egypt only after they had succeeded in forcing out dictators, one protester wondered whether US endorsement wasn’t bad karma. Mrs. Clinton has a long history of backing the wrong horse.
"In fact, Mubarak’s slap in the face of President Obama will not be punished and it is nothing new. It shows again American toothlessness and weakness in the Middle East, and will encourage the enemies of the US to treat it with similar disdain."
There seems to be an assumption that Mubarak has gone rogue; but beyond the usual platitudes, the Obama administration has so far given us no cause to think so. As has been well laid out, unlike Iran (during whose Green Movement, there was no end to swift, severe words and actions from all quarters and factions of DC), Egypt is practically a client state with multiple pressure points. The reluctance of Mubarak's masters to exploit -- if at all, these vulnerabilities speaks volumes.
The most sympathetic face one can put on the Obama administrations apparent impotence is that US Middle East policy is not crafted the White House, but rather, has been outsourced to Israel.
Therefore, it looks futile to even hope on this but, should Mubarak be sanctioned, punished and squeezed hard (as other allegedly rogue leaders routinely and relentlessly are), only then can the idea of a toothless America gain some plausibility.
Otherwise, a toothy dog that refuses (for whatever reason) to bite can be described as toothless -- but only in a manner of speaking. Perhaps pet and master are "playing".
"I believe that the phrase was taken over by Palin’s speech writers from right wing Israeli discourse."
Or, with the well documented -- "rogue" (or shall we say, "unlettered") -- nature of the principle subject's public discourse in mind, a simpler explanation (Occam's razor) might be closer to the truth. Familiarity with the etymology of that phrase might be an "unfair" accusation to make.
one of the most disheartening comments I've read. I'm left tongue tied...where does one start? Will it do any good to point out that killing a bunch of people who are fighting us because um...we are killing them -- just we surely would be fighting back like crazy if they were the stronger party rooting around the Texas-Mex border for "terrorists" who had wiped out entire villages with their robot planes -- will that make any sense? I doubt, because the logic of raw power is incompatible with ethics and antithetical to even basic humanity.
It is to quote, "wrong for all kinds of reasons", for anybody - US included -- to justify the slaughter of innocent people for any reason, let alone the ever evolving roster of explanations from Western capitals, as to why thousands are engaged in a deadly face off in the barren mountains of Asia, with neither side barely comprehending the other, nor why.
Right on the money Prof. Cole. For instance, Lebanese PM Saad Hariri is in Tehran waltzing with the Ayatollah as we speak.
"In line with its stable principles, Lebanon would never join any international grouping which pursues pressures on the Islamic Republic of Iran and has always condemned such moves," Hariri told reporters in a joint press conference with Iran's First Vice-President Mohammad Reza Rahimi here in Tehran on Monday. link to english.farsnews.com
Perhaps airplanes are preferred now, because of the bigger psychological Oomph and drama, but hardening targets can only go so far before normal life becomes virtually impossible. After all as has been noted, the bad guys also think and evolve with circumstances.
What is most remarkable to me is, in discussing possible solutions to the serious problem of terrorism, how rarely the option of, "how about we stop invading, bombing and generally causing havoc in their homelands?" is tabled and examined.
The problem and its major cause(s) are only discussed separately, as though they belong in mutually exclusive contexts. This could partly explain why many Westerners see only the narrow, fearful conclusion that "the only defense against irrational, homicidal maniacs is to build ever higher walls". (Or stay indoors - stop flying - altogether).
I disagree with most of Anjem Choudarys views but his rhetoric to Spitzer quoted from CNN below, makes me wonder whether some on the other side of the world, could be asking the same question - why do they hate us?
"When you send bombs over there, what do you expect them to send back to you? What did you expect to find in a package? You know, chocolates? Of course you're going to find bombs. They're going to give you a taste of your own medicine." link to parkerspitzer.blogs.cnn.com
Afghans [Yemenis, Iraqis] have few options when it comes to keeping themselves safe from dangers local and foreign; but as for our mutual ignorance, Westerners have only one excuse: the logic of raw power.
This Cantor guy must be something, he has the supposedly most powerful politician in the USA, running scared without so much as a toothless yelp?
Not that Obama needs much encouragement to allegedly turn colour. If the jpost report below is factual, a less timid (i.e. sans Cantors unnerving influence) Obama is giving up all plus the kitchen sink, just to tide Netanyahu over an excruciating three-month "freeze"* on land grabbing.
*(probably meaning a pause on pouring new foundations, as construction already in progress continues. The $64K question is, what happens after the 90th day when (not if) the peace joke falls flat?).
In an effort to convince the Netanyahu government to impose a three-month moratorium on settlement construction in the West Bank, the Obama administration offered Israel last week a long list of security and diplomatic benefits, including 20 F-35s for free. link to jpost.com
It is disturbing that a man who advocates and speaks loving of sanctions that are 'biting more deeply', innocent Iranians, (just like hundreds of thousands of Iraqis in the 90's), is described in terms like "adult" and "sane".
If at the end of that period, Obama is said to have pledged, there had been no progress in the peace talks, then the US would not object to the freeze lapsing.
So, all Netanyahu had to do was continue saying "no!" for a couple of months and he'd win the Obama's blessing to continue plundering with impunity? Please, someone tell me this is not true!
Moreover, he was willing to given written assurances of American commitment to Israeli security.
For the nth time but fine. What about the aggrieved party?
"voters, put some steel in the spines of the Democrats."
Double, or even triple-entendre?
Anyway, thanks to a public that can not only read and understand, but feel and live the data in those eloquent charts, Democrats have had Congress and the WH for four and two years respectively. Any more steel flying around could mean cries of "¡viva la revolución" in the streets.
As I understand it, one was a gross distortion. Words were twisted to mean what Ahmadinejad did not say.
In contrast, you imply the Rabbi was misunderstood in terms of scope, not substance. He wished the destruction of "only a few"*, not "all". Or to use the language of the Obama administration,
"Targeted assassination" (drones?): GOOD!
Mass extermination (nukes?): BAD!
*It might transpire that the Rabbi's defenders, rather than Mr. Cole, may find it useful to make amends should it be determined that, "all the evil people who hate Israel" is a surprisingly large constituency, approximating "all" (Palestinians).
(Though I'd suggest the "evil" be dropped, unless the argument then becomes that the Torah mandates non-believers to "love thy oppressor").
Sure. But I presume Mr. Cole is addressing an audience where the his views are likely to carry better.
Furthermore, as with say the US and Canada, the two neighbours have legitimate mutual interests and concerns that far outweigh those of a would-be coloniser on the other side of the world.
Third, the US was/is the aggressor, the problem, not Iran. At least not to the same degree (yet).
"but, given an appreciation for the motivation of those in question (ie. Awlaki) ..."
What is Alwaki's motivation? How do you know?
At any rate, if criticising, even urging violent overthrow of the US government by its citizens has become a crime (wasn't last time I looked) necessitating 'outcome based justice', the backwoods of Montana etc could be crawling with outcomes waiting to happen, if you know what I mean.
After-shocks still coming at 10-15 minute intervals, more than 12 hours after the Big One hit. The 12 storey building I'm in swaying gently as I write. We hope this doesn't presage worse things to come.
Day light will bring the truly horrific picture up north nearer the epi-center into focus. Its a sad, sad day.
FAKE NEWS
"In fact, Mubarak’s slap in the face of President Obama will not be punished and it is nothing new. It shows again American toothlessness and weakness in the Middle East, and will encourage the enemies of the US to treat it with similar disdain."
There seems to be an assumption that Mubarak has gone rogue; but beyond the usual platitudes, the Obama administration has so far given us no cause to think so. As has been well laid out, unlike Iran (during whose Green Movement, there was no end to swift, severe words and actions from all quarters and factions of DC), Egypt is practically a client state with multiple pressure points. The reluctance of Mubarak's masters to exploit -- if at all, these vulnerabilities speaks volumes.
The most sympathetic face one can put on the Obama administrations apparent impotence is that US Middle East policy is not crafted the White House, but rather, has been outsourced to Israel.
Therefore, it looks futile to even hope on this but, should Mubarak be sanctioned, punished and squeezed hard (as other allegedly rogue leaders routinely and relentlessly are), only then can the idea of a toothless America gain some plausibility.
Otherwise, a toothy dog that refuses (for whatever reason) to bite can be described as toothless -- but only in a manner of speaking. Perhaps pet and master are "playing".
"I believe that the phrase was taken over by Palin’s speech writers from right wing Israeli discourse."
Or, with the well documented -- "rogue" (or shall we say, "unlettered") -- nature of the principle subject's public discourse in mind, a simpler explanation (Occam's razor) might be closer to the truth. Familiarity with the etymology of that phrase might be an "unfair" accusation to make.
typo: "Iran, two, condemned the act..."
Iran, too ?
RE:Vince Cannistraro
one of the most disheartening comments I've read. I'm left tongue tied...where does one start? Will it do any good to point out that killing a bunch of people who are fighting us because um...we are killing them -- just we surely would be fighting back like crazy if they were the stronger party rooting around the Texas-Mex border for "terrorists" who had wiped out entire villages with their robot planes -- will that make any sense? I doubt, because the logic of raw power is incompatible with ethics and antithetical to even basic humanity.
It is to quote, "wrong for all kinds of reasons", for anybody - US included -- to justify the slaughter of innocent people for any reason, let alone the ever evolving roster of explanations from Western capitals, as to why thousands are engaged in a deadly face off in the barren mountains of Asia, with neither side barely comprehending the other, nor why.
Right on the money Prof. Cole. For instance, Lebanese PM Saad Hariri is in Tehran waltzing with the Ayatollah as we speak.
"In line with its stable principles, Lebanon would never join any international grouping which pursues pressures on the Islamic Republic of Iran and has always condemned such moves," Hariri told reporters in a joint press conference with Iran's First Vice-President Mohammad Reza Rahimi here in Tehran on Monday.
link to english.farsnews.com
Perhaps airplanes are preferred now, because of the bigger psychological Oomph and drama, but hardening targets can only go so far before normal life becomes virtually impossible. After all as has been noted, the bad guys also think and evolve with circumstances.
What is most remarkable to me is, in discussing possible solutions to the serious problem of terrorism, how rarely the option of, "how about we stop invading, bombing and generally causing havoc in their homelands?" is tabled and examined.
The problem and its major cause(s) are only discussed separately, as though they belong in mutually exclusive contexts. This could partly explain why many Westerners see only the narrow, fearful conclusion that "the only defense against irrational, homicidal maniacs is to build ever higher walls". (Or stay indoors - stop flying - altogether).
Failing - 0r refusing - to ponder the issue puts us in a situation not dissimilar to many Afghans, who reportedly have no idea why foreign troops are in their country, making things and many innocent lives, go "BOOM".
I disagree with most of Anjem Choudarys views but his rhetoric to Spitzer quoted from CNN below, makes me wonder whether some on the other side of the world, could be asking the same question - why do they hate us?
Afghans [Yemenis, Iraqis] have few options when it comes to keeping themselves safe from dangers local and foreign; but as for our mutual ignorance, Westerners have only one excuse: the logic of raw power.
This Cantor guy must be something, he has the supposedly most powerful politician in the USA, running scared without so much as a toothless yelp?
Not that Obama needs much encouragement to allegedly turn colour. If the jpost report below is factual, a less timid (i.e. sans Cantors unnerving influence) Obama is giving up all plus the kitchen sink, just to tide Netanyahu over an excruciating three-month "freeze"* on land grabbing.
*(probably meaning a pause on pouring new foundations, as construction already in progress continues. The $64K question is, what happens after the 90th day when (not if) the peace joke falls flat?).
In an effort to convince the Netanyahu government to impose a three-month moratorium on settlement construction in the West Bank, the Obama administration offered Israel last week a long list of security and diplomatic benefits, including 20 F-35s for free.
link to jpost.com
It is disturbing that a man who advocates and speaks loving of sanctions that are 'biting more deeply', innocent Iranians, (just like hundreds of thousands of Iraqis in the 90's), is described in terms like "adult" and "sane".
If at the end of that period, Obama is said to have pledged, there had been no progress in the peace talks, then the US would not object to the freeze lapsing.
So, all Netanyahu had to do was continue saying "no!" for a couple of months and he'd win the Obama's blessing to continue plundering with impunity? Please, someone tell me this is not true!
Moreover, he was willing to given written assurances of American commitment to Israeli security.
For the nth time but fine. What about the aggrieved party?
"voters, put some steel in the spines of the Democrats."
Double, or even triple-entendre?
Anyway, thanks to a public that can not only read and understand, but feel and live the data in those eloquent charts, Democrats have had Congress and the WH for four and two years respectively. Any more steel flying around could mean cries of "¡viva la revolución" in the streets.
al-Maliki Declares Independence
"the president acknowledged the human cost of the war, for both the Iraqis and the Americans"
Iraqis are not mentioned in the passage quoted. Honest mistake, or is Prof (vicariously) compensating for the president?
Dear Elder,
As I understand it, one was a gross distortion. Words were twisted to mean what Ahmadinejad did not say.
In contrast, you imply the Rabbi was misunderstood in terms of scope, not substance. He wished the destruction of "only a few"*, not "all". Or to use the language of the Obama administration,
*It might transpire that the Rabbi's defenders, rather than Mr. Cole, may find it useful to make amends should it be determined that, "all the evil people who hate Israel" is a surprisingly large constituency, approximating "all" (Palestinians).
(Though I'd suggest the "evil" be dropped, unless the argument then becomes that the Torah mandates non-believers to "love thy oppressor").
the same argument can be made about Iran, no?
Sure. But I presume Mr. Cole is addressing an audience where the his views are likely to carry better.
Furthermore, as with say the US and Canada, the two neighbours have legitimate mutual interests and concerns that far outweigh those of a would-be coloniser on the other side of the world.
Third, the US was/is the aggressor, the problem, not Iran. At least not to the same degree (yet).
@ Jude
"but, given an appreciation for the motivation of those in question (ie. Awlaki) ..."
What is Alwaki's motivation? How do you know?
At any rate, if criticising, even urging violent overthrow of the US government by its citizens has become a crime (wasn't last time I looked) necessitating 'outcome based justice', the backwoods of Montana etc could be crawling with outcomes waiting to happen, if you know what I mean.