Thursday, July 31, 2014
The importance of our next presidential election
Wednesday, July 30, 2014
Recommended: 7 Things to Consider Before Choosing Sides in the Middle East Conflict
I would only add this to his excellent piece - there are constant complaints that while Israel certainly has the right to respond to Hamas rocket attacks, kidnappings and murders, and suicide bombers, its response has been disproportionate. So think about this. An exactly proportional response would be for Israel to go into Gaza every time an Israeli was killed, and pick at random a man or woman or child off the street and shoot them on the spot. That would be exactly proportional. Would the world think that was fair, or civilized? I don't think so. It's hard to think of what the world would consider a "proportional" Jewish response, but whatever it is it almost certainly wouldn't be enough to deter vicious thugs like Hamas.
So do we want Jews to just acquiesce to brutality, like they did in the Holocaust? I think what Jews learned from the Holocaust was that Europe (and America for that matter) are not dependable allies, and they had better look out for themselves. And I think they are right. Now their political choices for handling the enemies around them haven't always been the wisest, but what nation can you point to that has always picked the wisest course - certainly not ours! (As Churchill said -"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else".)
Tuesday, July 29, 2014
There is something inexorable….
Here is a proposition
Our last two presidents, Bush and Clinton, had both been governors, and, whether you like their policies or not, they were generally effective at working with Congress. President Obama was an academic, a community organizer, and a junior Senator before becoming president, but never a governor, and he has proven to be woefully inept at working with Congress, even with members of his own party.
As an independent, I am not bound by party loyalties (in fact my current attitude is “a pox on both your houses”). On the basis of my proposition above, in the upcoming 2016 presidential election I am not going to vote for any candidate in either party who does not have a record as a reasonably successful governor.
That eliminates Hillary Clinton, nice as it would be to have our first woman president. On the Republican side it also eliminates Paul Rand and Ted Cruz (though Cruz would have been eliminated anyway for other reasons). Governor Chris Christie is a possibility, as is ex-Governor Jeb Bush, who seems to have done a pretty good job in Florida (but are we ready for a third Bush?)
On the Democratic side, with Clinton already eliminated, the requirement to be an ex-governor would leave New York’s Andrew Cuomo and Maryland’s Martin O’Malley , but eliminate Senator Elizabeth Warren and vice-President Joe Biden.
It will be interesting to see who, in the end, each party puts up as their candidate, But if the candidate isn’t a governor or ex-governor, they won’t get my vote. Of course, both parties might fail to nominate someone with governor experience, in which case I’ll be back to square one, and so, probably, will the nation.
Recommended: John Kerry’s Big Blunder
There is no question that the Palestinian problem will remain intractable as long as Hamas controls the Gaza strip. Israel is right – only a demilitarized Gaza strip, with international peacekeepers to really keep it demilitarized, is ever going to stop the deadly Hamas attacks, and Hamas will never voluntarily accept those conditions because it would lose power that way.
The world (including apparently many Palestinians in Gaza) seems to have forgotten that when Hamas took over the Gaza strip in 2007 they promptly murdered hundreds of members of the Palestinian Authority. However good they are at portraying themselves in the media as “freedom fighters”, they are really just thugs more interested in maintaining their power than in representing the people of Gaza, a point that ought to be obvious as they continue to use those people as human shields.
Whether Israel’s current military approach to achieving a Hamas-free Gaza strip will be effective is a debatable point, but no one has yet offered a viable alternative. The UN, as usual, just wants a short-term fix; an end to the current war. But without an effective process that removes Hamas as a threat to Israel, any cease fire will just be another interlude to allow both sides to regroup and rearm before beginning yet again.
Hamas is holding out for a lifting of the embargo on Gaza, but all sides know perfectly well that if the embargo is lifted the first thing Hamas will do is rearm with new and probably more deadly weapons from its sponsors in places like Turkey, Iran and Qatar. Moreover, it is equally clear that any international aid that is sent to Gaza while Hamas rules will simply be diverted to building more rockets and tunnels, just as previous aid has been diverted. Clearly this problem will not go away until Hamas is eliminated from Gaza and the more moderate Palestinian Authority again rules the area. But how to do this without more bloodshed is not clear to anyone.
Sunday, July 27, 2014
Has our president just checked out?
Wednesday, July 23, 2014
Those who will not study history….
Apparently enough time has passed since the start of World War II that Europeans, and especially European politicians, have forgotten how a weak and timid reaction to Hitler’s 1938 invasion of Austria and the subsequent betrayal by the Europeans of Czechoslovakia at the 1939 Munich Conference led to the horrors of World War II.
Considering that the Ukraine is in Europe’s back yard, not America’s, it amazes me that we seem to be the ones who have to push for a stiffer reaction to Russian aggression.
More anti-Semitism
The UN's Human Rights Council is clearly anti-Semitic. It has little to say about war crimes anywhere else in the world, especially in the member's own countries, but is remarkably quick to jump on anything Israel does.
I also notice that the world press keeps making the point that Israel has killed more Palestinians that Hamas has managed to kill Israelis. Not surprising, since Israel has poured billions into shelters and missile defense systems to protect its population, while Hamas has poured its millions into tunnels and rockets, and spent next to nothing on protecting its own people. But Hamas' lack of success in killing Israelis isn't for want of trying. Apparently being better and more competent than your attacker counts against you in this game. On that basis we ought to castigate our police more, and give criminals better press.
Tuesday, July 22, 2014
Recommended: Can Vladimir Putin Survive?
Worth reading.
Saturday, July 12, 2014
Isn’t it strange?
Recommended: Mullah Dreams: Not Counting Sheep
To get just the barest taste of this, read Adam Garfinkle's current article in The American Interest: Mullah Dreams: Not Counting Sheep. The complexity will make your head swim!
Recommended: Is Hamas Trying to Get Gazans Killed?
Jeffery Goldberg from The Atlantic has an interesting article: Is Hamas Trying to Get Gazans Killed? A few other astute writers have made the same argument that he makes - that Hamas was driven to start this latest exchange because it has become markedly weaker as many of its normal sponsors and sources of funds (like Egypt and Syria) have dropped away.
It is clear (a) that sending rockets into Israel is not going to accomplish any of the stated goals of Palestinians - it won't get them a state, nor eliminate the blockade, nor make the State of Israel go away, nor even kill many Israelies, (b) on the contrary it will make all of these things less likely, but (c) it will increase the standing of Hamas among other terror groups in the short term. For these thugs apparently that is enough to justify getting a lot of Muslim civilians killed - as many as possible in fact.
I am continually amazed at the UN and world leaders who decry Israel's response, though if the same thing happened in their own country their own response would be at least as forceful, if not more so. Is this another example of the latent anti-Semitism still around in the world?
Thursday, July 10, 2014
Israel vs Hamas
Wednesday, July 9, 2014
Obama and Carter
Tuesday, July 8, 2014
Recommendation: Confronting Russian Chauvinism
How much of a threat is Russia, really?
Wednesday, July 2, 2014
It’s the economy, stupid!
A Florida law requires vending-machine labels to urge the public to file a report if the label is not there. The Federal Railroad Administration insists that all trains must be painted with an “F” at the front, so you can tell which end is which. Bureaucratic busybodies in Bethesda, Maryland, have shut down children's lemonade stands because the enterprising young moppets did not have trading licenses. The list goes hilariously on.
Dodd-Frank is part of a wider trend. Governments of both parties keep adding stacks of rules, few of which are ever rescinded. Republicans write rules to thwart terrorists, which make flying in America an ordeal and prompt legions of brainy migrants to move to Canada instead. Democrats write rules to expand the welfare state. Barack Obama's health-care reform of 2010 had many virtues, especially its attempt to make health insurance universal. But it does little to reduce the system's staggering and increasing complexity. Every hour spent treating a patient in America creates at least 30 minutes of paperwork, and often a whole hour. Next year the number of federally mandated categories of illness and injury for which hospitals may claim reimbursement will rise from 18,000 to 140,000. There are nine codes relating to injuries caused by parrots, and three relating to burns from flaming water-skis.