And I would say an objective view.
I'm not sure the author will live much longer if he remains in Moscow, although he is certainly not an agitator.
Link to Column
Friday, March 27, 2015
This is a Bipartisan Mess With Global Responsibility
For years, Presidents of both parties, and leaders of the other countries in the Global Economy have sucked up to the Leaders of Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states. We supported the Shah and didn't promote Democracy or encourage economic development or fair treatment of women.
Somehow, all this led to a proxy war between the Sunnis and Shia that turned into the War on Terror, which in turn created conditions that have brought the Middle East to its current condition.
The U.S. is in an impossible condition and I am sure we would be in the same place (or even a worse place) if John McCain or Romney had won their elections. Because Iraq is a Shia dominant country in an Iraqi National Election and some Iraqi Sunnis resent that to the point of becoming anarchists. Syria was poised to disintegrate into it's Sunni and Shia areas with Iraq so out of control.
At this point, some Neo-conservatives would say, no I am wrong because if we had left the U.S. Army in Iraq, this wouldn't have happened. But do you really believe the U.S. Army can fight a war in Iraq against the Sunni's and the Shia for decades. The Sunni and Shia have been going at it for over a thousand years. The U.S. Army would have been a magnet for the jihadists to come from all over to join ISIS with the U.S. Army right there for the fight they all want to have.
I have written before about the tangled web of the Middle East. It is becoming ever more obvious that Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran need to develop some diplomacy with each other if Jihadism is to be stopped. The money needs to be cut off from the Jihadists and the militias that fight the proxy war.
That is what is going on in Yemen, a god forsaken country that has no economic reason to exist, except that it does for some reason. Don't forget, almost every Muslim country in the Gulf has a mix of Sunni and Shia. The opposing sect is discriminated against in many countries feeding the resentment.
So why does Saudi Arabia send its military forces against the Shia in Yemen but not ISIS? Why do the Shia militias stand down vs ISIS when the U.S. military starts bombing in support of their efforts? Why can't the Iraqi Army fight? These are not questions with answers from the U.S. Department of Defense.
The world needs to cut off its use of oil from the Middle East and Russia as fast as possible. Only by cratering the funds that feed this mess, will we be able to put these autocracies back into a less harmful place.
And while we are doing that, we need to get Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran talking to each other about what their vision of a peaceful coexistence looks like, because right now, that vision does not appear to exist. And there is no reason for the U.S. military to be in the middle of that.
Somehow, all this led to a proxy war between the Sunnis and Shia that turned into the War on Terror, which in turn created conditions that have brought the Middle East to its current condition.
The U.S. is in an impossible condition and I am sure we would be in the same place (or even a worse place) if John McCain or Romney had won their elections. Because Iraq is a Shia dominant country in an Iraqi National Election and some Iraqi Sunnis resent that to the point of becoming anarchists. Syria was poised to disintegrate into it's Sunni and Shia areas with Iraq so out of control.
At this point, some Neo-conservatives would say, no I am wrong because if we had left the U.S. Army in Iraq, this wouldn't have happened. But do you really believe the U.S. Army can fight a war in Iraq against the Sunni's and the Shia for decades. The Sunni and Shia have been going at it for over a thousand years. The U.S. Army would have been a magnet for the jihadists to come from all over to join ISIS with the U.S. Army right there for the fight they all want to have.
I have written before about the tangled web of the Middle East. It is becoming ever more obvious that Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran need to develop some diplomacy with each other if Jihadism is to be stopped. The money needs to be cut off from the Jihadists and the militias that fight the proxy war.
That is what is going on in Yemen, a god forsaken country that has no economic reason to exist, except that it does for some reason. Don't forget, almost every Muslim country in the Gulf has a mix of Sunni and Shia. The opposing sect is discriminated against in many countries feeding the resentment.
So why does Saudi Arabia send its military forces against the Shia in Yemen but not ISIS? Why do the Shia militias stand down vs ISIS when the U.S. military starts bombing in support of their efforts? Why can't the Iraqi Army fight? These are not questions with answers from the U.S. Department of Defense.
The world needs to cut off its use of oil from the Middle East and Russia as fast as possible. Only by cratering the funds that feed this mess, will we be able to put these autocracies back into a less harmful place.
And while we are doing that, we need to get Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran talking to each other about what their vision of a peaceful coexistence looks like, because right now, that vision does not appear to exist. And there is no reason for the U.S. military to be in the middle of that.
Tuesday, March 24, 2015
Why the United States is not a Christian Nation
I know this will be a shock to some on the Religious Right, but there is a reason that Christianity is not enshrined in The Constitution, but rather Freedom of Religion is enshrined.
Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington and James Madison, as well as Ethan Allen, were Deists. Deism is the belief in a deity based on natural religion only, or belief in religious truths discovered by people through a process of reasoning, independent of any revelation through scripture or prophets.
I am really not sure how Deism differs from being Agnostic or an Atheist, as a life led by reasoning and basic goodwill toward others, would seem common to all three.
And certainly, respect for the right of others to believe in scripture and prophets is part of that as well.
If only, those on the Religious Right, would return the respect for the rights of others to live as they wish without interference from the beliefs of those who follow scriptures and prophets.
I thank Paul Unger for pointing this out to me in a blog on Forbes.com
Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington and James Madison, as well as Ethan Allen, were Deists. Deism is the belief in a deity based on natural religion only, or belief in religious truths discovered by people through a process of reasoning, independent of any revelation through scripture or prophets.
I am really not sure how Deism differs from being Agnostic or an Atheist, as a life led by reasoning and basic goodwill toward others, would seem common to all three.
And certainly, respect for the right of others to believe in scripture and prophets is part of that as well.
If only, those on the Religious Right, would return the respect for the rights of others to live as they wish without interference from the beliefs of those who follow scriptures and prophets.
I thank Paul Unger for pointing this out to me in a blog on Forbes.com
Even Elite Colleges Fail to Produce Intelligent Graduates, Ted Cruz
As a graduate of the University of Chicago Business School, I have long felt slighted at the aura Harvard graduates have around them in the eyes of recruiters. I have also noticed that when companies failed they are frequently led by Harvard Business School graduates who were head strong, didn't listen well, and didn't respect their underlings. This does not mean all Harvard Graduates have those fatal traits, just some of them who have the tendency to master the bureaucratic political process to rise to the top of big corporations.
Now we have example number one that even Princeton and Harvard Law can graduate a dud. Everything Ted Cruz stands for policy wise is an assault upon my senses. However, his policies are in the main stream of the Republican Party today. Watch the 2016 GOP platform and I guarantee it will be indistinguishable from what Ted Cruz represents.
However, the speed with which the GOP venomous wags have come out against Ted Cruz with personal assaults is stunning. When Donald Trump and Peter King are out for you, you know you have a problem in the base.
Why is that? Well, you can fault Ted Cruz for a lot of his policy beliefs, but they are GOP mainstream. I think the issue is the same problem I noticed in some Harvard Business School graduates. He is headstrong, doesn't respect the opposition or even some of his teammates, and clearly doesn't know how to listen.
That unfortunately, is a problem some smart people have and why they are failures as leaders. I am always amazed, have had the importance of teamwork drilled into me growing up, being educated and seeing it at work in successful organization, that some people who go to great schools fail to see that and insist on their way or no way.
I am sorry the 2016 campaign has begun, but hopefully I will be able to stay distracted and maintain my low blood pressure. I just wish a Democrat other than Hillary would get some momentum, but many of the other candidates either have serious flaws or are little known.
That is really depressing.
Now we have example number one that even Princeton and Harvard Law can graduate a dud. Everything Ted Cruz stands for policy wise is an assault upon my senses. However, his policies are in the main stream of the Republican Party today. Watch the 2016 GOP platform and I guarantee it will be indistinguishable from what Ted Cruz represents.
However, the speed with which the GOP venomous wags have come out against Ted Cruz with personal assaults is stunning. When Donald Trump and Peter King are out for you, you know you have a problem in the base.
Why is that? Well, you can fault Ted Cruz for a lot of his policy beliefs, but they are GOP mainstream. I think the issue is the same problem I noticed in some Harvard Business School graduates. He is headstrong, doesn't respect the opposition or even some of his teammates, and clearly doesn't know how to listen.
That unfortunately, is a problem some smart people have and why they are failures as leaders. I am always amazed, have had the importance of teamwork drilled into me growing up, being educated and seeing it at work in successful organization, that some people who go to great schools fail to see that and insist on their way or no way.
I am sorry the 2016 campaign has begun, but hopefully I will be able to stay distracted and maintain my low blood pressure. I just wish a Democrat other than Hillary would get some momentum, but many of the other candidates either have serious flaws or are little known.
That is really depressing.
Friday, March 20, 2015
Is it Time to use the Neutron Bomb?
I will admit I am out of my league with this question and know that I don't know all the questions that need to be asked before something like this should be done.
But what better way to kill the jihadists in ISIS and ISIL. Kill them and leave the buildings standing.
Of course, I am assuming you could inhabit the land they are on again. And I am assuming there are relatively few innocent people in the target area. And I am assuming that the rest of Islam would not turn on us for being so brutal against their fellow Muslims.
Of course, it is the brutality of those targets toward their fellow Muslims that prompt me to ask this question. And it is the failure of those fellow Muslims to develop the means of isolating ISIS from money and recruits that prompts me to ask this question.
Just who is buying ISIS's oil and paying them in dollars? And where does ISIS have a bank account? And where does ISIS get it's cash to pay its fighter's? I don't understand why this cannot be shut down.
Do I see duplicity on the part of Sunni Muslim leaders in bordering countries? Yes, I do, Mr. Erdogwan and I wouldn't be at all surprised if Mr Putin was somehow involved because he is one evil individual.
This is probably one of my most nonsensical posts, but I share the frustration of the GOP, I just don't share their desire to send in the Marines or the 10th Mountain Division.
Post Blog Wikipedia Update: It turns out the U.S. dismantled all its neutron weapons some time ago as they were difficult to maintain, had limited effectiveness in combat situations and did not leave buildings standing.
But what better way to kill the jihadists in ISIS and ISIL. Kill them and leave the buildings standing.
Of course, I am assuming you could inhabit the land they are on again. And I am assuming there are relatively few innocent people in the target area. And I am assuming that the rest of Islam would not turn on us for being so brutal against their fellow Muslims.
Of course, it is the brutality of those targets toward their fellow Muslims that prompt me to ask this question. And it is the failure of those fellow Muslims to develop the means of isolating ISIS from money and recruits that prompts me to ask this question.
Just who is buying ISIS's oil and paying them in dollars? And where does ISIS have a bank account? And where does ISIS get it's cash to pay its fighter's? I don't understand why this cannot be shut down.
Do I see duplicity on the part of Sunni Muslim leaders in bordering countries? Yes, I do, Mr. Erdogwan and I wouldn't be at all surprised if Mr Putin was somehow involved because he is one evil individual.
This is probably one of my most nonsensical posts, but I share the frustration of the GOP, I just don't share their desire to send in the Marines or the 10th Mountain Division.
Post Blog Wikipedia Update: It turns out the U.S. dismantled all its neutron weapons some time ago as they were difficult to maintain, had limited effectiveness in combat situations and did not leave buildings standing.
Tuesday, March 17, 2015
Why isn't there a greater focus on family?
I know one area that I have common cause with some conservatives is in the area of family responsibility for child rearing outcomes. And the debate in D.C. on both sides skirts around this, but gets mired down in base cheering politics.
Michael Gerson's column today outlines a book that focuses on the consequences of inequality on kids that has risen from 3 interrelated trends: family instability, community disfunction, and the collapse of the blue collar economy.
It is hard to believe in my life time, the chances for a kid today to follow my path, have gone from likely to improbable. My grandparents didn't go to college, my mother is the only one who preceded me through college and I was raised in a blue collar household in a blue collar town. But I got a good education, went to a good college, and got into a great business school.
The important thing is my parents stayed married and gave me good examples. They also had two steady jobs. That is much harder today and the political debate is not really focused on how to make that simpler. One of the reasons that ObamaCare is in such trouble is people see it as being focused on the poor only, while those who are just above that level, cannot see the benefits from ObamaCare which will come when they lose their job or suffer a serious illness (or the real safety net, those two coincide).
But I see ObamaCare as helping keep families together and focused on raising productive children. It also helps control the cost of health care which is one reason in my mind that we have had a collapse of the blue collar economy. If I were a business manager with a global operation, I have no doubt that I would be motivated to establish the marginal business in a country where there is a single payer health plan or no health plan. You multiply that decision by 1000 companies and you have sent hundreds of thousands of jobs to other countries.
Anyway, Gerson's column doesn't go there, he simply highlights the issue and I wonder why D.C. politicians can't frame their policy discussions around this critical issue.
But then I know all D.C. politicians care about is their next campaign dollar.
Link to Gerson column
Michael Gerson's column today outlines a book that focuses on the consequences of inequality on kids that has risen from 3 interrelated trends: family instability, community disfunction, and the collapse of the blue collar economy.
It is hard to believe in my life time, the chances for a kid today to follow my path, have gone from likely to improbable. My grandparents didn't go to college, my mother is the only one who preceded me through college and I was raised in a blue collar household in a blue collar town. But I got a good education, went to a good college, and got into a great business school.
The important thing is my parents stayed married and gave me good examples. They also had two steady jobs. That is much harder today and the political debate is not really focused on how to make that simpler. One of the reasons that ObamaCare is in such trouble is people see it as being focused on the poor only, while those who are just above that level, cannot see the benefits from ObamaCare which will come when they lose their job or suffer a serious illness (or the real safety net, those two coincide).
But I see ObamaCare as helping keep families together and focused on raising productive children. It also helps control the cost of health care which is one reason in my mind that we have had a collapse of the blue collar economy. If I were a business manager with a global operation, I have no doubt that I would be motivated to establish the marginal business in a country where there is a single payer health plan or no health plan. You multiply that decision by 1000 companies and you have sent hundreds of thousands of jobs to other countries.
Anyway, Gerson's column doesn't go there, he simply highlights the issue and I wonder why D.C. politicians can't frame their policy discussions around this critical issue.
But then I know all D.C. politicians care about is their next campaign dollar.
Link to Gerson column
Thursday, March 12, 2015
Boris Nemtsov, We Barely Knew You, Cop Killer Bullets, and Congress
I have given up my Economist subscription, but they have yet to stop sending me a copy. Each week I expect that to happen, but so far it has come. I know it will not last.
But, it came last week and I got to read the obituary for Boris Nemtsov. He was a great man for what he did not do. He did not become an oligarch even though he was a very smart guy. He was humble and aspired to have good government and a clean market economy. He was the anti-Putin who worried that Russia is becoming a fascist state where if you don't agree with the government, you are killed. And he liked to windsurf.
Boris Nemstov died too young, and I have no doubt that Putin is behind it somehow and that it will never be proven. That is how dictators work.
Meanwhile, the NRA has fought and defeated a proposal to ban cop killer bullets. You would think people who want the police to be safe (which is almost everyone) would be for this. But not the NRA and not the GOP politicians that are scared of them. They will bemoan the death of a policeman from a cop killer bullet (and it could have been the shootings in Ferguson, MO last night), but they will not act. The way the NRA and the Heritage Foundation act today, it almost seems like they are trying to emulate Putin.
The Senate cannot pass a bill showing support for our efforts against ISIS because the Democrats think the authorization allows too much and the Republicans think it does not go far enough (and they don't want to be seen as supporting a policy that might fail because we are showing restraint). I have two thoughts about this: (i) Is it any wonder that Presidents don't want to go to Congress for authorization on International stuff? Congress cannot do it's basic job and hold votes and they don't do anything quickly. And they don't seem to care that they don't do anything. Congress is disgusting; (ii) What do you think Iran thinks about this? Chaos in policy making, threats of policy retreat and disavowal, who would want to cut a deal with the U.S.
All I know is Iran is next door to Iraq. Syria is next door to Iraq. We took out Saddam Hussein who stood up to both of them and now the GOP is complaining that Iran is getting involved with the Shia led Iraqi anti-ISIS forces. Only Muslims can defeat ISIS. Widespread involvement of the U.S. will lead to jihadists pouring into Syria to kill Americans. Civil Wars need to be settled by the locals and their neighbors. There is only so much people with stretched supply lines can do.
Why can't the Senate agree on a bill that supports a prudent middle ground approach to fighting ISIS? Are they responsible leaders or just leaders when it fulfills a need? I suspect it is the latter.
But, it came last week and I got to read the obituary for Boris Nemtsov. He was a great man for what he did not do. He did not become an oligarch even though he was a very smart guy. He was humble and aspired to have good government and a clean market economy. He was the anti-Putin who worried that Russia is becoming a fascist state where if you don't agree with the government, you are killed. And he liked to windsurf.
Boris Nemstov died too young, and I have no doubt that Putin is behind it somehow and that it will never be proven. That is how dictators work.
Meanwhile, the NRA has fought and defeated a proposal to ban cop killer bullets. You would think people who want the police to be safe (which is almost everyone) would be for this. But not the NRA and not the GOP politicians that are scared of them. They will bemoan the death of a policeman from a cop killer bullet (and it could have been the shootings in Ferguson, MO last night), but they will not act. The way the NRA and the Heritage Foundation act today, it almost seems like they are trying to emulate Putin.
The Senate cannot pass a bill showing support for our efforts against ISIS because the Democrats think the authorization allows too much and the Republicans think it does not go far enough (and they don't want to be seen as supporting a policy that might fail because we are showing restraint). I have two thoughts about this: (i) Is it any wonder that Presidents don't want to go to Congress for authorization on International stuff? Congress cannot do it's basic job and hold votes and they don't do anything quickly. And they don't seem to care that they don't do anything. Congress is disgusting; (ii) What do you think Iran thinks about this? Chaos in policy making, threats of policy retreat and disavowal, who would want to cut a deal with the U.S.
All I know is Iran is next door to Iraq. Syria is next door to Iraq. We took out Saddam Hussein who stood up to both of them and now the GOP is complaining that Iran is getting involved with the Shia led Iraqi anti-ISIS forces. Only Muslims can defeat ISIS. Widespread involvement of the U.S. will lead to jihadists pouring into Syria to kill Americans. Civil Wars need to be settled by the locals and their neighbors. There is only so much people with stretched supply lines can do.
Why can't the Senate agree on a bill that supports a prudent middle ground approach to fighting ISIS? Are they responsible leaders or just leaders when it fulfills a need? I suspect it is the latter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)