[mikeh]

 helene_t, on 2013-September-12, 09:29, said:

Maybe but he has always said that he became Christian by choice. http://articles.lati...ligion-20100929

I don't think that he has 'always' said that. As best as my admittedly limited skills can determine, he only made this statement after he was being attacked by the wingnut fringe alleging that he was muslim.

Being muslim would be fatal to his presidency or re-election. Not as bad as being atheist, but to many Americans either terms is an insult.

I note that he said that he was raised by people who were not regular church-goers, and that suggests that he wasn't as thoroughly indoctrinated in religiosity as are many. Combine that with his apparent intelligence and obvious ambition, and it seems to me at least plausible that he 'became' Christian as a calculated move. And of course, if so then he has to continue to profess this no matter what. He has to stay on the horse he chose to ride in on.

[y66]

 mikeh, on 2013-September-12, 09:17, said:

Putin was pointing out, in a fashion apparently too subtle for most Americans, that it is hypocritical or at least inconsistent to claim both that god created all people equal AND that America is exceptional and entitled to particular blessing from this god of theirs.

I did not find Putin's sarcasm so subtle. Reminded me of some of Han's old posts before he mellowed which I also enjoyed.

[kenberg]

 mikeh, on 2013-September-12, 09:17, said:

I would be very surprised if Putin were religious.

Surprised doesn't begin to cover it. The only unresolved question I have about Putin's piece is whether he is just having his fun mocking us, or whether he actually thinks that talking of God and peace and law etc will actually gain him support. I suppose it is both.

As to exceptional ism, I have been griping about that for years. The way I see it, I might well think that I am the smartest guy in the room It is useful to realize that many of the others probably have similar thoughts about themselves, and the evening will go a lot better if we all shut up about it.

[y66]

 kenberg, on 2013-September-12, 10:47, said:

Surprised doesn't begin to cover it. The only unresolved question I have about Putin's piece is whether he is just having his fun mocking us, or whether he actually thinks that talking of God and peace and law etc will actually gain him support. I suppose it is both.

As to exceptional ism, I have been griping about that for years. The way I see it, I might well think that I am the smartest guy in the room It is useful to realize that many of the others probably have similar thoughts about themselves, and the evening will go a lot better if we all shut up about it.

I think it's both too. Probably not something they recommend in World Diplomacy 101 but also hard to imagine that leaders around the world and many others are not chuckling at this and thinking we Americans have this coming which we do. But yeah, even Woody Allen and Dali might think this situation is too surreal.

[hrothgar]

Quote

We must stop using the language of force and return to the path of civilized diplomatic and political settlement

<Cough> Grozny /<Cough>

[PassedOut]

 kenberg, on 2013-September-12, 10:47, said:

Surprised doesn't begin to cover it. The only unresolved question I have about Putin's piece is whether he is just having his fun mocking us, or whether he actually thinks that talking of God and peace and law etc will actually gain him support. I suppose it is both.

Whatever his personal beliefs, it does not surprise me that Putin, who has the strong support of the dominant and powerful Christian church in Russia, expresses himself in religious terms. We certainly see the same in politicians in the US, who sometimes suppress personal beliefs for political purposes. You might remember that Khrushchev placed a cross on his mother's grave and made the sign of the cross over himself.

[Aberlour10]

 hrothgar, on 2013-September-12, 11:27, said:

<Cough> Grozny /<Cough>

The first take shows Grozny to the time of Jelzins presidency. What this great democrat and USA friend did with this town, you see it.



This take shows Grozny nowdays, after this bad bad Putin ( the reincarnation of J . Stalin) pumped there x billions of dollars in

[kenberg]

This thread is obviously devoted to an important topic and I would not want to see it die, so I will comment a little on the pictures.

At the time of the collapse of the Soviet Union it was a mess. Of course it was, it collapsed. If progress has been made since then, I am happy for them. But who cares if I am happy or unhappy about what is happening internally in Russia?

What we have is a brutal Syrian dictator, supported by Russia, with a large stockpile of chemical weapons. There will, of course, always be arguments such as Putin's that of course the rebels shelled themselves. As near as I can recall, arguments of that sort are always made in almost any atrocity. Perhaps it is sometimes so, but really not often. The CIA did not fly planes into the Twin Towers, Roosevelt did not let the Japanese bomb Pearl Harbor to bring us into the war, and really the rebels did not shell the area that they controlled with nerve gas. Prove it? How would I? In mathematics, someone once self-published a treatise explaining that where mathematics went wrong was in the formula (a+b)^2=a^2+2ab+b^2. If you just drop the b^2 term as he proposed, you can square the circle. or something., No sale. . Evolution is a fact, although I can not prove it to doubters. And Assad gassed his people. The question is what to do about it.

[Trinidad]

 kenberg, on 2013-September-13, 18:13, said:

The question is what to do about it.

And the answer is: Let the appropriate authorities handle it.

Rik

[Aberlour10]

 kenberg, on 2013-September-13, 18:13, said:

The question is what to do about it.

This case should be handled in Hague as well as massacre of Srebrnica.

[kenberg]

I see ny the morning paper that the US and Russia have reached agreement. I will believe it when I see it actually carried out, but I guess perhaps maybe something good is happening. I remain deeply skeptical. I suppose that the essence of the agreement will be that Assad gets to slaughter his people as long as he doesn't use gas. The world is not a very nice place and there are times that I think that my safe, easy, comfortable life simply leaves me unprepared to deal with this harshness in an effective manner. Somehow, saying "Go on, keep killing each other, but no more gassing, good luck to you" seems inadequate. Better than the gassing though.

I have this uneasy feeling that, dealing with Putin, Obama is in over his head. We shall see.

[Aberlour10]

 kenberg, on 2013-September-14, 05:02, said:

. I suppose that the essence of the agreement will be that Assad gets to slaughter his people as long as he doesn't use gas.

There is no "black and white" in this conflict. Assad slaughters not alone. All parties follow these no-mercy-policy.
The lastest UN report says the rebel groups commit massive war crimes too. Not only the strong islamists supported
by Saudi Arabia, but also moderate groups among the rebels. Uncounted civilians,alawits, kurds, christs have been murdered,
during last two years, these are documented facts, not the Assads propaganda.

[kenberg]

 Aberlour10, on 2013-September-14, 06:24, said:

There is no "black and white" in this conflict. Assad slaughters not alone. All parties follow these no-mercy-policy.
The lastest UN report says the rebel groups commit massive war crimes too. Not only the strong islamists supported
by Saudi Arabia, but also moderate groups among the rebels. Uncounted civilians,alawits, kurds, christs have been murdered,
during last two years, these are documented facts, not the Assad's propaganda.

Yes, I understand this to be true. As I get it, the Assad family represents a minority religious faction that would be at least abused and perhaps eliminated if others had the power to do it. So they kill off the others, as long as they remain in power. Many in the Christina community support, or at least supported, Assad because he was not killing them, but others would. Now everyone is killing everyone else, and people by the millions are fleeing, no doubt intending to kill people elsewhere. Do I have to about right?

In my opinion, the Obama administration has been thoroughly incompetent in this. Announcing that Assad must go without any plans to achieve this was idiotic. I am at a loss to know what sort of plans there might have been, so maybe he could shut up. The comment about the red line was later described as off the cuff, and not to be taken seriously. Ditto with Kerry's comment about international control of chemical weapons. Maybe I get to run off at the mouth and there are no consequences for the nation or the world, but the President can't do that. They seem to have been caught flatfooted by the use of chemical weapons and they are making up their strategy on the fly for dealing with it. As for this latest US-Russian agreement, I think we are being played. I can hope otherwise, but Russia agreeing to destroy a stockpile that they have been instrumental in helping to assemble strikes me as highly unlikely unless there are side conditions we have not heard about and that will definitely not like when we do hear about them.

The US is often said to be too big a player in the Middle East. I think it is about to become a much lesser player. Perhaps that will be good, perhaps not.

[PassedOut]

Let's see how this agreement, once it is formalized by the UN, works out.

This is only a baby step, but is a step in the right direction. The best thing for the US to do is to support the UN fully and to work harder to make the UN a more effective organization. The cowboy stuff has got to stop.

[blackshoe]

I do not think the UN is the solution to all the world's ills. That said, I do think the ICC is the appropriate body to deal with Assad - and anyone else in that conflict who commits or has committed war crimes. OTGH, I remember what President … Jackson I think it was, said about a particular decision of the Supreme Court: "Mr. Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it."

[PassedOut]

 blackshoe, on 2013-September-14, 08:09, said:

I do not think the UN is the solution to all the world's ills.

Nor do I. I seriously doubt that there will ever be a "solution to all the world's ills." Should the worst of the ills be solved, there will always be another lower tier of ills to be solved next. Folks everywhere have a responsibility to work on solving their own particular ills, and we have plenty of ills to work on here in the US.

The issue at hand is the use of military force against a brutal dictator who violates international law. That's a matter for the international community, through the UN.

The focus now is on Russia's ally, the brutal dictator Assad, but the US would do well to stop propping up brutal dictators ourselves, after a long history of doing exactly that. Whatever short-term gains a country gets from doing so is dwarfed by the long-term losses in the future.

It's a sad fact that many wonderful places in the world are now dangerous for US citizens to visit. You can't enrage people over and over without consequence.

[blackshoe]

Generally speaking, when someone commits a crime, you arrest him, try him, and if he's convicted impose whatever sentence the court directs. The "arrest" part is a police function, not a military function, although I grant it may take military force to carry it out. As the UN does not have its own military (yet) it will have to rely on member countries' military to carry out the arrest.

While I agree that US foreign policy needs a makeover, that's irrelevant to the question of what to do about Assad.

[Aberlour10]

 PassedOut, on 2013-September-14, 10:27, said:

, but the US would do well to stop propping up brutal dictators ourselves,

Agree. Washington could start to do it, talking with the allied regime in Riad about brutality of these forces in Syria, which are controlled, paid and armed by Saudi Arabia. But, I doubt it will ever happen.

[y66]

 PassedOut, on 2013-September-14, 10:27, said:

I seriously doubt that there will ever be a "solution to all the world's ills."

You might enjoy Ralf Dahrendorf's ideas about taking "steps in the right direction" and renovating international systems of governance which he talks about in Reith Lectures 1974, The New Liberty, Lecture 6: Steps in the Right Direction (pdf). The published version of this lecture includes what Dahrendorf describes as a slightly melodramatic if apposite warning from Max Weber:

Quote

Ahead of us is not the bloom of summer, but first a polar night of icy darkness and hardship, whichever group may win the battle of the day. For where there is nothing, not only the emperor but the proletarian too has lost his chance. Once this night slowly begins to cede, who then is going to be alive of those whose lent has now apparently blossomed in such abundance. And what will have become of all of you within yourselves? Embitterment or barbarism, simple dumb acceptance of the world and one's place in it, or the third and by no means rarest: mystical escapism by those who have the gift for it, or who -- as happens so often and is so miserable to see -- strain themselves into the fashion?

I don't think I've ever seen anyone so clearly equate renovating international systems of governance with survival. It would be very cool if this chemical weapons gambit works and leads to more constructive actions of this type.

[PassedOut]

 Aberlour10, on 2013-September-14, 11:35, said:

Agree. Washington could start to do it, talking with the allied regime in Riad about brutality of these forces in Syria, which are controlled, paid and armed by Saudi Arabia. But, I doubt it will ever happen.

I do see these matters as inherently related to the situation in Syria, but not everyone shares my view:

 blackshoe, on 2013-September-14, 10:51, said:

While I agree that US foreign policy needs a makeover, that's irrelevant to the question of what to do about Assad.

And indeed I found this link from y66 interesting:

 y66, on 2013-September-14, 12:59, said:

You might enjoy Ralf Dahrendorf's ideas about taking "steps in the right direction" and renovating international systems of governance which he talks about in Reith Lectures 1974, The New Liberty, Lecture 6: Steps in the Right Direction (pdf).

Thanks for posting it!