BBC Blog Network

User Profile

ex1312

Listed below are comments made by ex1312 between Sunday, 16th November 2008 and Monday, 17th November 2008.

«Newer
Older»

An end to "victimhood"? 10:29am on 17 Nov 2008 To: 822. At 9:48pm on 16 Nov 2008, allmymarbles

Right on!
American exceptionalism 09:45am on 17 Nov 2008 Further to 429:

In Business or (according to me following Sun Tzu in Art of War) in life, Ignore Sunk Costs!

Simply put. The U.S. has expended many 100's of billions in Iraq. It's gone. It's a sunk cost.

Today, Obama has to choose whether to spend more 100s of Billions USD in Iraq. Or whether the probability/possibility of regional warfare is less costly to the world in terms of those 100s of Billions of U.S. dollars. I hope Obama, Japan, the EU, China, and the Middle East region can come to an accommodation on who foots the lion's share of the bill.
American exceptionalism 09:32am on 17 Nov 2008 Further to ex1312 at No. 426:

For Iraq, the Discounted Cash Flow argument as stated relates to decision-making prior to invasion. Now, after the past five? years, the costs of pulling out exceed the benefits of pulling out.

The costs of withdrawal include:
a) partitioning;
b) Iranian involvement;
c) Turkey involvement;
d) instability in Kuwait;
e) Syrian involvement;
f) the wild-card: Israeli Tactical Nukes.

I outlined the basic cost hierarchy already in the original post.

Now, the U.S. is screwed. Now the U.S. decision hinges on lower cost vs. higher costs. There is no benefit anymore.

Dubya and Cheney started this mess. They, in my view, did not complete a well thought-out probability Cost-Benefit analysis of the initial invasion. Like I said above, Dubya earned "Cs" at Yale. Maybe he missed class when they covered Cost/Benefit scenarios.
American exceptionalism 09:15am on 17 Nov 2008 To: 423. At 04:53am on 17 Nov 2008, allmymarbles

I said I'd take a bullet for POTUS. I happen to intensely dislike the policies of Dubya. But I'm an American. Even though, in my eyes, Corporate America denied many opportunities to me solely on the basis of my brown skin, America gave me my culture, my education, and access to lifelong friends and acquaintances. And, lest I forget, the freedom to express myself in various ways - and the freedom to say that I disprove of Dubya's policies - and the freedom to leave the country (or return, if I ever have that desire). So I reiterate, I would take a bullet for POTUS. That's the contract I signed when I became a citizen of the United States!
American exceptionalism 08:51am on 17 Nov 2008 To: 424. At 06:01am on 17 Nov 2008, Xie_Ming

Like I stated above in the original, I explain the "dictionary definition" to my students. I do this for a twofold purpose. Primarily, I need to make sure that the word "terrorist" does not intend to label "only persons of Middle Eastern ancestry." And believe me, in today's world, many youngsters have come to believe that the definition of "terrorist" is exclusive to persons of Middle Eastern or Islamic ancestry (mostly because of the media hype). (And I go to great pains to also label the American participants of the Boston Tea Party to also be "terrorists" in the eyes of King George III of 18th Century Great Britain.)

Secondly I was trained to view International Relations through writings beginning with Thucydides [Peloponesian Wars], through St. Augustine, Locke, Rousseau, Marx, Hegel, Clausewitz, Bismark, and even Lenin [Imperialism-the Final Stage of Monopoly Capitalism]. Hence, I must make a break concerning "illegal and unlawful" regarding the actions of states who aim to improve their positioning amongst competing governments. It's purely a semantic difference.

Bottom line is that I always provoke my students to question whether state actions are immoral. But I always aim to use the economic argument as the basis for reason. For instance, in Iraq the question would be: Does the current benefit exceed the Discounted Value of the Future Costs? In the case of Iraq, the costs include the loss of earnings power of dead or maimed survivors, the loss of U.S. prestige and goodwill amongst the so-called "family" of civilized nations, drain on U.S. economic power, the weakening of the U.S. military to respond to other international threats, medical costs, psychological costs, and so on. Clearly, in the case of Iraq, the costs far outweigh the benefits - no matter how you cut the pie.

I prefer to use the economic argument as a method to provoke my students to think in "rational" and not "emotional" terms regarding state actions - mostly because states have a vested interest in representing the will of their citizens for perpetuity. Following the definition of "terrorist" outlined above, "terrorist organizations" do not have the same interest, until that is, they themselves achieve status amongst the so-called "family of nations." (The implication herein is clearly toward Palestinian (and other) so-called "terrorists."

In my view, the difference between whether detainees at GTMO are terrorists or soldiers rests on how we defined "the Taliban." America, and later the world, agreed that "the Taliban" was not the rightful representative government of the will of the Afghan people. Again, it's a semantic call. But that is how our world is currently defined.
American exceptionalism 02:55am on 17 Nov 2008 To 402. At 00:08am on 17 Nov 2008, allmymarbles

In my view George Dubya Bush has acted as a poor statesman. I am sure that he had the best policies of the American people at heart (as he views the American people, that is).

POTUS (in the words of Truman and of Nixon) is the Lobbyist for the people. I think every President at some point comes to view his position in a similar vein. Some persons rise to the challenge and provide brilliant service. Other persons perform not so brilliantly. And others, like Dubya, I'd give him a C- (kinda like his Yale grades).

But he is serving an office in proxy for the American people. Now we can argue whether the American people consists solely of large business concerns or whether the American people consists of the 300 or so million citizens/residents who reside within the lower 48, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico and the other territories.

Dubya, in my view, was a below average POTUS. But I'd still take a bullet for him - simply because he is my POTUS.
American exceptionalism 10:59pm on 16 Nov 2008 To 393:

American Heritage Definition of Terrorism:
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

I always teach my students that terrorism, by this definition, means that the threat or use of force by the "terrorist" originates with an illegal entity - that is, a group or political element that lacks recognition (in the general consensus) as a legal entity. Hence, "States" cannot commit terrorist acts because a "State" is a recognized legal entity.

For example, before the American Revolution succeeded, all American forces were "terrorists" in the eyes of King George III of Great Britain. King George likely had standing orders to try for treason, then hang any American soldier or political leader.
After the American Revolution succeeded, and after the U.S. Constitution afforded U.S. "Statehood" under the political scheme of Europe and the world, the U.S. "terrorists" became soldiers.

In the same vein, soldiers kill innocent women and children as part of war. They are not terrorists because they are carrying out the will of the state. "Terrorists" are, however, not carrying out the will of the state, and "civilization" views their actions as vile and contemptible, because their actions go against the popular consensus.
American exceptionalism 10:19pm on 16 Nov 2008 To 359 nessie1945:
Quote[The offspring of these [put in words which would guarantee moderation] types are being carefully taught hateful and hate-filled ideas, ensuring this kind of [bleep] goes on into the future.
They have bets going over a possible date for the death of the United State's President-elect.
Terrorists must be thrilled with these good ol' boys who, working from within, are saving them from having to raise a finger.
The whole world is watching.]

To say that the whole world is watching is an understatement. My personal view of the stock market is that it will be extraordinarily volatile until after January 20, 2009. And if anything were to happen to Obama, wife, or kids, between now and then, it would be a disaster for Republican democracy in the U.S. and throughout the world (and for the world economy, too).

Obama is a brave man. He is seeking progress by testing the American system - and quite honestly, the U.S. needs this test to progress to a higher level. He is a brave man indeed.

Directly after the election, I posted this on my blog at Facebook:
Lyndon is honestly surprised that America elected a black man to the Presidency. Just 2.5 months to inaugural. Obama is now the most safely guarded man in the world.

I sincerely hope that he makes it to January 20 and serves as POTUS for at least the first four years.
American exceptionalism 1:44pm on 16 Nov 2008 341. At 1:37pm on 16 Nov 2008, Xie_Ming

About what the NAZIS (not Germans) did in Russia...

I think BBC production: The Nazis, a Warning From History - actually captured the number of dead (soldiers and civilians) Russians due to Nazi Germany.
American exceptionalism 12:51pm on 16 Nov 2008 To: 334. At 12:18pm on 16 Nov 2008, Xie_Ming

About the math, I was taught that the number murdered in the Holocaust was approximately 6 million. In Catholic High School, we read Night and Fog (Elie Wiesel) and The Diary of Anne Frank. My father had a book in the bookcase: While 6 Million died (about FDR and the American hierarchy having evidence of the episode well before December 1941).

I don't know the actual number. I hadn't been around to count. And I honestly have never done the research to actually come up with the numbers.

But whether it was 30,000 100,000 530,000 or 6,000,000. Bottom line: it was an atrocity.

I just finished viewing Racism-A History (Produced by BBC 4). It was interesting and blood-curdling, though the program did not teach me anything new (except that perhaps as many as 10 million blacks died as a result of Belgium in Congo). I hadn't known about that particular genocide.

With regard to the modern Israel and Palestinian relations... I know little. My knowledge of current Israeli affairs stops at approximately Netanyahu's height of power (early-mid 1990's). Terrorism on both sides. I trivialize it by comparison to blood feud between Ishmael's and Isaac's descendants. And that's too trivial.

I think the past three generations of recent blood-letting have created a toxic situation. Mutual distrust, "terrorist" acts, and an ingrained desire to act intolerably toward the other are the current symptoms of the plight in "Palestine." To use the Christian euphemism, it is a tough cross to bear for all concerned. The solution requires fundamental changes in conscious thought. And that is a generational shift. But as I said, they've had three generations of shift in the opposite direction.

Maybe global warming might offer a solution in 60 to 100 years. Perhaps rain patterns will change and Sahara might actually become viable (who knows). Then whole other groups of humans might find themselves embroiled in conflict to create a state there.

I'm not a peacenik. But the futility of war really does turn my stomach.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

ex1312