Posted by DipNote Bloggers on Feb 06, 2009 - 04:53 PM
![Women raise their hands during a procession in Kabul, Jan. 15, 2008. [AP]](http://blogs.state.gov/images/Dipnote/behind_the_scenes/2009_0206_open_hands_bh_m.jpg)
How ought the international community engage national regimes to transform from pariahs to partners?
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
Follow Entry's Comments Via RSS
Do you want to know when a comment is added to this entry? Stay up-to-date:
Comments
Follow Entry's Comments Via RSS
Do you want to know when a comment is added to this entry? Stay up-to-date:
Comments
Mahes in Maryland writes:
Dear Sec. Clinton: Shouldn't we for starters stop calling them 'pariahs' and refer to them with something a little more respectful, like for instance, 'alienated nations'?
Maybe you coud open up a discussion for finding suitable terminology. This would be more in accordance with Pres. Obama's assurance of "civilized" and "respectful" discussion/debate. It would help to move the U.S. to that position of respect that we aspire to take it back to in the world.
Posted on Fri Feb 13, 2009
Dear Sec. Clinton: Shouldn't we for starters stop calling them 'pariahs' and refer to them with something a little more respectful, like for instance, 'alienated nations'?
Maybe you coud open up a discussion for finding suitable terminology. This would be more in accordance with Pres. Obama's assurance of "civilized" and "respectful" discussion/debate. It would help to move the U.S. to that position of respect that we aspire to take it back to in the world.
Posted on Fri Feb 13, 2009
Al in New Jersey writes:
Dear Madame Secretary, I searched your website to see if you had made any comments about the abduction and kidnapping of Sean Goldman in Brazil. As you are aware, his father, David Goldman, has been trying for almost 5 years to get his son back. U.S. State Courts have sided with Mr. Goldman. There is an international treaty which the U.S. and Brazil signed. Are we (U.S.A.) just going to be pushed around by another country. Why have you not gone made a public statement about this? You would think that all it would take is one call from the white house. I understand President Lula is coming to the U.S. in March. Maybe you should have his visa revoked and not allowed to enter this country until this resolved amicably. We can not allow governments to sign treaties and the decide to renegotiate the terms because they want to. It does not set a good precedent. Thank you for your efforts in this matter!
Posted on Fri Feb 13, 2009
Dear Madame Secretary, I searched your website to see if you had made any comments about the abduction and kidnapping of Sean Goldman in Brazil. As you are aware, his father, David Goldman, has been trying for almost 5 years to get his son back. U.S. State Courts have sided with Mr. Goldman. There is an international treaty which the U.S. and Brazil signed. Are we (U.S.A.) just going to be pushed around by another country. Why have you not gone made a public statement about this? You would think that all it would take is one call from the white house. I understand President Lula is coming to the U.S. in March. Maybe you should have his visa revoked and not allowed to enter this country until this resolved amicably. We can not allow governments to sign treaties and the decide to renegotiate the terms because they want to. It does not set a good precedent. Thank you for your efforts in this matter!
Posted on Fri Feb 13, 2009
Morton in Virginia writes:
How do I send my thoughts about the U.S. role in the Israel/Palestine peace process?
Posted on Fri Feb 13, 2009
How do I send my thoughts about the U.S. role in the Israel/Palestine peace process?
Posted on Fri Feb 13, 2009
Joe in Tennessee writes:
1. P5+1. or ten LOL..: Perhaps this is one part of the problem when internal political agenda differences within the Security Council exist. When the U.S. pushed the mandates, Russia openly backed Iran on more than one occasion. THERE NEEDS TO BE SETTLEMENT WITHIN THE COUNSIL PURSUENT TO ENFORCEMENT or there is no realistic authority represented.
2. The perspective of the five Perminate members, China, France, Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States have no real authority legally by International law; especially in limiting the Nuclear agendas of other countries. By what rights do the few control the many is the real question being asked by smaller nations and realistically so. Why can you have the ability to defend yourself from aggression in this manner and we cannot? How do you justify that legally? It leaves an open ended argument, especially when the U.S. gave WMD to Pakistan. We need to provide a justifialbe answer.
3. http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/annual08_pt2.pdf The scope of the Security Council is much more diverse than perhaps it should be. They have limited resources and we presume too much.
4. Propaganda Methodology is offensive. This is just one example: The UN has a Radio Broadcasting network which throughout 2008 verbally chastised Iran for non recognition of woman rights. This is without the US radio broadcast, which went well beyond that. When you reach out a hand in peace or to negotiate, you should not have a nail in it. It is not the way to do business. Why offend an entire culture to force alteration abruptly? If you insult an existing mass, be it right or wrong, you unify them. As of late, Russian diplomats always commend a culture, regardless of personal feelings; but, keep an eye on the overall picture which is why they have done so well. Change will come, but not by offensive propaganda to the authority that is established and when the fiscal doors open with the International community.
5. There is no Cultural War in reality. There are only differences established in perspective from culture and the histology. The change has begun: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ixeFBxfLzaSjs8Mb8cuFmtPOT6-wD96A27HO2
QUOTE: There is mention that he may have been attacked for his views. The Times says Khatami was hustled to safety by bodyguards after stick-waving attackers approached the cleric, shouting: "Death to Khatami. We do not want American government." You note here: the Methodology of our Propaganda efforts lead the people to think that we want to Establish American Government, values, etc to them. Not establish independence of themselves as Iranian citizens. ESTABLISH BETTER COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE PEOPLE.
6. While we are centered on one issue, Iran is moving to establish itself in Iraq and has opened two consulates this week.
If you have interest in following the significance of this placement please go to:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&q=Irbil and Sulaymaniyah.&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl
Posted on Thu Feb 12, 2009
1. P5+1. or ten LOL..: Perhaps this is one part of the problem when internal political agenda differences within the Security Council exist. When the U.S. pushed the mandates, Russia openly backed Iran on more than one occasion. THERE NEEDS TO BE SETTLEMENT WITHIN THE COUNSIL PURSUENT TO ENFORCEMENT or there is no realistic authority represented.
2. The perspective of the five Perminate members, China, France, Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States have no real authority legally by International law; especially in limiting the Nuclear agendas of other countries. By what rights do the few control the many is the real question being asked by smaller nations and realistically so. Why can you have the ability to defend yourself from aggression in this manner and we cannot? How do you justify that legally? It leaves an open ended argument, especially when the U.S. gave WMD to Pakistan. We need to provide a justifialbe answer.
3. http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/annual08_pt2.pdf The scope of the Security Council is much more diverse than perhaps it should be. They have limited resources and we presume too much.
4. Propaganda Methodology is offensive. This is just one example: The UN has a Radio Broadcasting network which throughout 2008 verbally chastised Iran for non recognition of woman rights. This is without the US radio broadcast, which went well beyond that. When you reach out a hand in peace or to negotiate, you should not have a nail in it. It is not the way to do business. Why offend an entire culture to force alteration abruptly? If you insult an existing mass, be it right or wrong, you unify them. As of late, Russian diplomats always commend a culture, regardless of personal feelings; but, keep an eye on the overall picture which is why they have done so well. Change will come, but not by offensive propaganda to the authority that is established and when the fiscal doors open with the International community.
5. There is no Cultural War in reality. There are only differences established in perspective from culture and the histology. The change has begun: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ixeFBxfLzaSjs8Mb8cuFmtPOT6-wD96A27HO2
QUOTE: There is mention that he may have been attacked for his views. The Times says Khatami was hustled to safety by bodyguards after stick-waving attackers approached the cleric, shouting: "Death to Khatami. We do not want American government." You note here: the Methodology of our Propaganda efforts lead the people to think that we want to Establish American Government, values, etc to them. Not establish independence of themselves as Iranian citizens. ESTABLISH BETTER COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE PEOPLE.
6. While we are centered on one issue, Iran is moving to establish itself in Iraq and has opened two consulates this week.
If you have interest in following the significance of this placement please go to:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&q=Irbil and Sulaymaniyah.&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl
Posted on Thu Feb 12, 2009
Zharkov in U.S.A. writes:
Dear T.J. in the U.K. -- When people call Hitler an idiot, I have to agree with them and would never insist anyone show respect for that former Austrian citizen.
Respect is earned by good deeds, but not by American and UK agents overthrowing Iran's government, or Iran holding Americans hostage, or Israel killing children in Palestine, or Arabs killing Israeli children.
The governments involved on all sides of the Iran dispute deserve little respect, perhaps none, for their wasted posturing, threats, and stupid moves. There is absolutely nothing the U.K. government does today in spying and punishing its citizens, cancelling the Magna Charta, etc., that is worthy of even a scintilla of "respect". At this point, citizen respect for governments is in short supply.
If you dislike my post on Israel, perhaps you might drop Tel Aviv a note telling them to obey their masters at the U.N. and stop violating U.N. resolutions. They won't but it's good for a laugh.
As for me, respect on internet blogs is secondary because getting answers to questions far outweights any need for ego stroking by others. There are others willing to sugar-coat their posts, but I think too much sugar is unhealthy.
Posted on Thu Feb 12, 2009
Dear T.J. in the U.K. -- When people call Hitler an idiot, I have to agree with them and would never insist anyone show respect for that former Austrian citizen.
Respect is earned by good deeds, but not by American and UK agents overthrowing Iran's government, or Iran holding Americans hostage, or Israel killing children in Palestine, or Arabs killing Israeli children.
The governments involved on all sides of the Iran dispute deserve little respect, perhaps none, for their wasted posturing, threats, and stupid moves. There is absolutely nothing the U.K. government does today in spying and punishing its citizens, cancelling the Magna Charta, etc., that is worthy of even a scintilla of "respect". At this point, citizen respect for governments is in short supply.
If you dislike my post on Israel, perhaps you might drop Tel Aviv a note telling them to obey their masters at the U.N. and stop violating U.N. resolutions. They won't but it's good for a laugh.
As for me, respect on internet blogs is secondary because getting answers to questions far outweights any need for ego stroking by others. There are others willing to sugar-coat their posts, but I think too much sugar is unhealthy.
Posted on Thu Feb 12, 2009
Chris in New York writes:
I think the key to engaging "pariah" regimes is to look for areas where cooperation is already possible, and to proceed with that cooperation without demanding concessions in other areas. The areas of cooperation should be driven by U.S. policy, but the offer to cooperate should be sincere and repeated. Limited cooperation in this manner should build up trust and an understanding that the pariah nation could benefit from integration into the current global regime. For example, in the case of Iran, security in the Persian Gulf might be one area where limited cooperation is possible.
Posted on Thu Feb 12, 2009
I think the key to engaging "pariah" regimes is to look for areas where cooperation is already possible, and to proceed with that cooperation without demanding concessions in other areas. The areas of cooperation should be driven by U.S. policy, but the offer to cooperate should be sincere and repeated. Limited cooperation in this manner should build up trust and an understanding that the pariah nation could benefit from integration into the current global regime. For example, in the case of Iran, security in the Persian Gulf might be one area where limited cooperation is possible.
Posted on Thu Feb 12, 2009
Eric in New Mexico writes:
@ T.J. in the U.K. -- You really never know who reads these things...(chuckle).
So how (beyond the moral support involved), would you propose breaking the Irainian people out of their prison?
After 30 years, and last time I checked some 200,000 political prisoners executed to date, piecemeal protests regularly crushed in brutal fashion, ethnic cleansing of Azari, Ba'hai, Kurds, and other ethnic and religious minorities, is there anyone left to stand up en mass to the regime?
Posted on Thu Feb 12, 2009
@ T.J. in the U.K. -- You really never know who reads these things...(chuckle).
So how (beyond the moral support involved), would you propose breaking the Irainian people out of their prison?
After 30 years, and last time I checked some 200,000 political prisoners executed to date, piecemeal protests regularly crushed in brutal fashion, ethnic cleansing of Azari, Ba'hai, Kurds, and other ethnic and religious minorities, is there anyone left to stand up en mass to the regime?
Posted on Thu Feb 12, 2009
Alfredo in Florida writes:
I think that we must support the travel of americans to these countries each person for our country that visit their family or friends there take our ideology of freedom and democracy to them and show a better way of live, remember that for example Cuba has more than 50 year without a democratic chang a lot the people there do not know what mean to have the opportunity of have a different opinion and what is a political party. In their campaing to the presidency Mr. Obama made the promise of lift off the travel restrictions of cuban americans to their country and allow them to help with money and goods their familes, there is no law to write is just avoid Mr. Bush Presidential Order. For how long we have to wait to begin this travels of freedom and democracy to the Cuban People?
I want to thanks the opportunity to express my feelings and an ideas to this place.
Posted on Thu Feb 12, 2009
I think that we must support the travel of americans to these countries each person for our country that visit their family or friends there take our ideology of freedom and democracy to them and show a better way of live, remember that for example Cuba has more than 50 year without a democratic chang a lot the people there do not know what mean to have the opportunity of have a different opinion and what is a political party. In their campaing to the presidency Mr. Obama made the promise of lift off the travel restrictions of cuban americans to their country and allow them to help with money and goods their familes, there is no law to write is just avoid Mr. Bush Presidential Order. For how long we have to wait to begin this travels of freedom and democracy to the Cuban People?
I want to thanks the opportunity to express my feelings and an ideas to this place.
Posted on Thu Feb 12, 2009
T.J. in the United Kingdom writes:
Dear Zharkov, Thank you for your input. Please change your tone and remember that, "respect" will reward you with "respect".
In common terminology, I maybe regarded as a "Half Breed". I have no hang ups about this, as my Academic achievements would provide the proof that, I have inherited the best genes.
Next time, if you wish to address me, please remember that, it is NOT possible to win any War without conquering the Hearts and Minds first. I could well be an important player in dealing with the forthcoming challenges. You only know me as T.J
Posted on Thu Feb 12, 2009
Dear Zharkov, Thank you for your input. Please change your tone and remember that, "respect" will reward you with "respect".
In common terminology, I maybe regarded as a "Half Breed". I have no hang ups about this, as my Academic achievements would provide the proof that, I have inherited the best genes.
Next time, if you wish to address me, please remember that, it is NOT possible to win any War without conquering the Hearts and Minds first. I could well be an important player in dealing with the forthcoming challenges. You only know me as T.J
Posted on Thu Feb 12, 2009
Chul-hong in South Korea writes:
Basically, the International Community should focus on promoting human rights and democracy that are intrinsic U.S. values, also.
There are two ways in compelling Pariahs to move toward transformation: "Carrot-and-Stick"
In order to deter Pariahs such as Iran and North Korea from retaining nuclear weapons (or devices) threatening its neighboring states respectively, the International Community, first of all, should collaborate in building common sense: If the so-called rouges don't change, then the International Community will engage naturally.
As a means of "Stick," a sea blockade by military coalition or a sort of economic sanctions can be considered.
In case of giving up their unreasonable nuclear ambitions irrevocably, Iran and North Korea can procure what they need, energy or food, as a kind of "Carrot," by the assistance of the International Community.
In conclusion, "Carrot-and-Stick" policy will be preferable and effective in transforming the rouges from Pariahs to Partners.
Posted on Thu Feb 12, 2009
Basically, the International Community should focus on promoting human rights and democracy that are intrinsic U.S. values, also.
There are two ways in compelling Pariahs to move toward transformation: "Carrot-and-Stick"
In order to deter Pariahs such as Iran and North Korea from retaining nuclear weapons (or devices) threatening its neighboring states respectively, the International Community, first of all, should collaborate in building common sense: If the so-called rouges don't change, then the International Community will engage naturally.
As a means of "Stick," a sea blockade by military coalition or a sort of economic sanctions can be considered.
In case of giving up their unreasonable nuclear ambitions irrevocably, Iran and North Korea can procure what they need, energy or food, as a kind of "Carrot," by the assistance of the International Community.
In conclusion, "Carrot-and-Stick" policy will be preferable and effective in transforming the rouges from Pariahs to Partners.
Posted on Thu Feb 12, 2009
Jackie in California writes:
Hi Hillary -- I have a deep respect for Iran and his history. Now I agree to disagree but always respect. The Iran President come to the U.S. and was treated with disrespect and I was ashame so I emailed him to apologize and said our country does respect our guest. The Iran President answered me saying he understood and likes America. Now to get your foot in the door just use Universial way we were taught as kids. Respect and Manners while being a good listener and not doing the talking. No body ever agrees with everybody. Young people today are more open to accepting friends around the World. I couldn't believe how Foreign kids listen to rap music and love America. The computer has opened up the U.S. to the World and nothing will change that. It takes time to get someones trust.
I watched you Hillary for 17 years and I trust you but it was hard for me to just openly accept Barack Obama just because he won. He emailed all your supporters and asked us to ask questions and check him out. He accepted it would take time for us to earn his trust and it worked.
America worked with Saddam and there's pictures and weapons to prove it. Our Govenment hasn't always done the right thing in the pass and over the pass 8 years lies were coming out all over. We do owe Iran an apology for accusing them publicly as the Axis of Evil and spreading hate against them around the World. The first step is admitting your wrong and then move forward. No ody likes to admit they did something wrong but a real man/woman will. Trying to push the pass in the pass wont work. We have to deal with it up front before we can move forward. President Obama did so much with his speech as he said he would reach out his hand. I know the Iran Supreme Leader is the ruler of Iran and he watches everything.
My dream one day is to visit Iran and see it's beautiful history and maybe meet the President and the Supreme Leader. I read alot about both men and try to keep up with the Foreign News just to get their take on a topic.
I'll keep watching and following your travels and of course makeing my comments too.
Posted on Thu Feb 12, 2009
Hi Hillary -- I have a deep respect for Iran and his history. Now I agree to disagree but always respect. The Iran President come to the U.S. and was treated with disrespect and I was ashame so I emailed him to apologize and said our country does respect our guest. The Iran President answered me saying he understood and likes America. Now to get your foot in the door just use Universial way we were taught as kids. Respect and Manners while being a good listener and not doing the talking. No body ever agrees with everybody. Young people today are more open to accepting friends around the World. I couldn't believe how Foreign kids listen to rap music and love America. The computer has opened up the U.S. to the World and nothing will change that. It takes time to get someones trust.
I watched you Hillary for 17 years and I trust you but it was hard for me to just openly accept Barack Obama just because he won. He emailed all your supporters and asked us to ask questions and check him out. He accepted it would take time for us to earn his trust and it worked.
America worked with Saddam and there's pictures and weapons to prove it. Our Govenment hasn't always done the right thing in the pass and over the pass 8 years lies were coming out all over. We do owe Iran an apology for accusing them publicly as the Axis of Evil and spreading hate against them around the World. The first step is admitting your wrong and then move forward. No ody likes to admit they did something wrong but a real man/woman will. Trying to push the pass in the pass wont work. We have to deal with it up front before we can move forward. President Obama did so much with his speech as he said he would reach out his hand. I know the Iran Supreme Leader is the ruler of Iran and he watches everything.
My dream one day is to visit Iran and see it's beautiful history and maybe meet the President and the Supreme Leader. I read alot about both men and try to keep up with the Foreign News just to get their take on a topic.
I'll keep watching and following your travels and of course makeing my comments too.
Posted on Thu Feb 12, 2009
John in Greece writes:
@ Anne in Washington, DC -- Anne you have "some" eye! Great photo indeed!
I have also "travelled" with most of the photos in DipNote. I think that SD should organize a photo exhibition (with front page photos) in N.Y., Boston, or LA? wherever? everywhere...
Just an idea..
Posted on Wed Feb 11, 2009
@ Anne in Washington, DC -- Anne you have "some" eye! Great photo indeed!
I have also "travelled" with most of the photos in DipNote. I think that SD should organize a photo exhibition (with front page photos) in N.Y., Boston, or LA? wherever? everywhere...
Just an idea..
Posted on Wed Feb 11, 2009
John in Greece writes:
@ Eric in NM & Joe in TN (Or), Joe in TN & Eric in NM (I took it alphabetically) --
Personally, (as an amateur, but "sporty" [LOL]) I love your comments. Both!!! Please, don't personalize it. You both offer us "education". Or -- at least, plenty of things and ideas to "think" about in a world that does not offer such intelligent "brain storming(s)".
We need -- we learn from you -- your posts here Sirs. And -- you know better than me -- that smart guys (as the readers in this Blog) don't look for a "winner", but only a thinking vehicle, however not a carrier. You give us life! Please keep on doing this! [chuckle]
Best regards to both of you!!!
Posted on Wed Feb 11, 2009
@ Eric in NM & Joe in TN (Or), Joe in TN & Eric in NM (I took it alphabetically) --
Personally, (as an amateur, but "sporty" [LOL]) I love your comments. Both!!! Please, don't personalize it. You both offer us "education". Or -- at least, plenty of things and ideas to "think" about in a world that does not offer such intelligent "brain storming(s)".
We need -- we learn from you -- your posts here Sirs. And -- you know better than me -- that smart guys (as the readers in this Blog) don't look for a "winner", but only a thinking vehicle, however not a carrier. You give us life! Please keep on doing this! [chuckle]
Best regards to both of you!!!
Posted on Wed Feb 11, 2009
Anne in Washington, DC writes:
Appeal to their Humanity, address their followers and embrace their differences while being proud of our own traits. Great photo.
Posted on Wed Feb 11, 2009
Appeal to their Humanity, address their followers and embrace their differences while being proud of our own traits. Great photo.
Posted on Wed Feb 11, 2009
Eric in New Mexico writes:
@ T.J. -- Thanks for your clarification, I absolutely agree with this.
"In order to defeat the Giant, which incidentally is the Constitution of Pariah States, we must understand it completely. This War cannot be won on the battlefield alone. It is the War of minds and cultures.
48 Hours for the Iranian leadership to run to the Mosques. Please NO!! The Mosque is the Pentagon of the Mullah. However, the threat, to the Mullahs existence must remain on the table.
We must help Iranian people break their chains and embrace the Human League once more as they have contributed so much in the past."
No doubt they wouldn't go away quietly, but I was thinking more in terms from the fact that not all sects of Shiitte Islam believe in poitical Islam.
In truth, political Islam is mutually self corrupting.
Sure hasn't brought about Khomeni's Utopia.
-----
@ Nuno R. -- Why Iran? Possibly because it represents the greatest "test case" for UN reform.
----
@ Joe -- RE: "Personalization is the last defense of a poor argument, any professional knows that..."
Then why do you persist in engaging in such activity?
Posted on Wed Feb 11, 2009
@ T.J. -- Thanks for your clarification, I absolutely agree with this.
"In order to defeat the Giant, which incidentally is the Constitution of Pariah States, we must understand it completely. This War cannot be won on the battlefield alone. It is the War of minds and cultures.
48 Hours for the Iranian leadership to run to the Mosques. Please NO!! The Mosque is the Pentagon of the Mullah. However, the threat, to the Mullahs existence must remain on the table.
We must help Iranian people break their chains and embrace the Human League once more as they have contributed so much in the past."
No doubt they wouldn't go away quietly, but I was thinking more in terms from the fact that not all sects of Shiitte Islam believe in poitical Islam.
In truth, political Islam is mutually self corrupting.
Sure hasn't brought about Khomeni's Utopia.
-----
@ Nuno R. -- Why Iran? Possibly because it represents the greatest "test case" for UN reform.
----
@ Joe -- RE: "Personalization is the last defense of a poor argument, any professional knows that..."
Then why do you persist in engaging in such activity?
Posted on Wed Feb 11, 2009
Jennifer in West Virginia writes:
I just wanted to say that the above is a really powerful photo!
Posted on Wed Feb 11, 2009
I just wanted to say that the above is a really powerful photo!
Posted on Wed Feb 11, 2009
Kyle in Florida writes:
We should be focusing on what these nations have to offer, not what they have that we don't like. We should be engaging them in a constructive manner, approaching their strengths as strengths and addressing their negatives as opportunities for change, integration and acceptance. We should stop using U.S. acceptance as the sole litmus test of entering the 1st world. We should be approaching the leaders of these nations with the question, "What will it take to get you on board with this, fully?" and work from there, not make a laundry list of changes they have to make before we will even talk to them. We should be partnering with other concerned nations and hosting these countries in townhall or conference style meetings on neutral ground with outside mediators. And the processes should be as transparent as possible to avoid the usual conspiracy theories and meddling by the scandal-media.
Posted on Wed Feb 11, 2009
We should be focusing on what these nations have to offer, not what they have that we don't like. We should be engaging them in a constructive manner, approaching their strengths as strengths and addressing their negatives as opportunities for change, integration and acceptance. We should stop using U.S. acceptance as the sole litmus test of entering the 1st world. We should be approaching the leaders of these nations with the question, "What will it take to get you on board with this, fully?" and work from there, not make a laundry list of changes they have to make before we will even talk to them. We should be partnering with other concerned nations and hosting these countries in townhall or conference style meetings on neutral ground with outside mediators. And the processes should be as transparent as possible to avoid the usual conspiracy theories and meddling by the scandal-media.
Posted on Wed Feb 11, 2009
Zharkov in U.S.A. writes:
What constitutes a "pariah state" and how shall we define a "pariah"?
Should "pariah" be a state whose government wants no part of surrendering their national sovereignty to a globalist agenda?
Why should a state become "Pariah" for rejecting U.N. influence?
Are nations now to be governed without their consent?
Can you guess which nation violated or ignored these U.N. resolutions?
Resolution 106
Resolution 111
Resolution 127
Resolution 162
Resolution 171
Resolution 228
Resolution 237
Resolution 242
Resolution 248
Resolution 250
Resolution 251
Resolution 252
Resolution 256
Resolution 259
Resolution 262
Resolution 265
Resolution 267
Resolution 270
Resolution 271
Resolution 279
Resolution 280
Resolution 285
Resolution 298
Resolution 313
Resolution 316
Resolution 317
Resolution 332
Resolution 337
Resolution 347
Resolution 425
Resolution 427
Resolution 444
Resolution 446
Resolution 450
Resolution 452
Resolution 465
Resolution 467
Resolution 468
Resolution 469
Resolution 471
Resolution 476
Resolution 478
Resolution 484
Resolution 487
Resolution 497
Resolution 498
Resolution 501
Resolution 509
Resolution 515
Resolution 517
Resolution 518
Resolution 520
Resolution 573
Resolution 587
Resolution 592
Resolution 605
OK, here is a hint:
Resolution 607: "...'calls' on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention
Resolution 608: "...'deeply regrets' that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians"
Resolution 636: "...'deeply regrets' Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians
Resolution 641: "...'deplores' Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians
Resolution 672: "...'condemns' Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount
Resolution 673: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United Nations
Resolution 681: "...'deplores' Israel's resumption of the deportation of Palestinians
Resolution 694: "...'deplores' Israel's deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return
Resolution 726: "...'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of Palestinians
Resolution 799: "...'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return.
Posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009
What constitutes a "pariah state" and how shall we define a "pariah"?
Should "pariah" be a state whose government wants no part of surrendering their national sovereignty to a globalist agenda?
Why should a state become "Pariah" for rejecting U.N. influence?
Are nations now to be governed without their consent?
Can you guess which nation violated or ignored these U.N. resolutions?
Resolution 106
Resolution 111
Resolution 127
Resolution 162
Resolution 171
Resolution 228
Resolution 237
Resolution 242
Resolution 248
Resolution 250
Resolution 251
Resolution 252
Resolution 256
Resolution 259
Resolution 262
Resolution 265
Resolution 267
Resolution 270
Resolution 271
Resolution 279
Resolution 280
Resolution 285
Resolution 298
Resolution 313
Resolution 316
Resolution 317
Resolution 332
Resolution 337
Resolution 347
Resolution 425
Resolution 427
Resolution 444
Resolution 446
Resolution 450
Resolution 452
Resolution 465
Resolution 467
Resolution 468
Resolution 469
Resolution 471
Resolution 476
Resolution 478
Resolution 484
Resolution 487
Resolution 497
Resolution 498
Resolution 501
Resolution 509
Resolution 515
Resolution 517
Resolution 518
Resolution 520
Resolution 573
Resolution 587
Resolution 592
Resolution 605
OK, here is a hint:
Resolution 607: "...'calls' on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention
Resolution 608: "...'deeply regrets' that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians"
Resolution 636: "...'deeply regrets' Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians
Resolution 641: "...'deplores' Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians
Resolution 672: "...'condemns' Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount
Resolution 673: "...'deplores' Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United Nations
Resolution 681: "...'deplores' Israel's resumption of the deportation of Palestinians
Resolution 694: "...'deplores' Israel's deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return
Resolution 726: "...'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of Palestinians
Resolution 799: "...'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return.
Posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009
Joe in Tennessee writes:
Everyone needs to stop beating their chest and drums; much of the world's problems can be seen in individual post herein to be honest.
For REG: Polk County Florida, home of Bernie Little and the Miss Budweiser as well as Publix; once the poorest county in Florida as well as the largest organized southern family run narcotics area in America. I can understand why you moved and have the view of America you do; but, you confuse the Government with corporate interest or greed and the fact you can even be in Europe is because of America. You are defaming the very country which gave you your freedom to be there as well. While I appreciate your freedom to have an opinion, how do you think you, as an American, make your homeland look?
THE POINT BEING:
We all, as human beings have a responsibility to do our best, where ever we are as we are the Ambassadors or our perspective homelands. We reflect what is in actuality, not newspapers, not TV, not blogs, nor broad based historical doctrines. It is all people as citizens who are civilized that respect each other and one day at a time, one handshake, one personal interaction at a time, WE MAKE HISTORY which is only reflected by governments in the long run. If you want to be led, then led you will be. If you want to make a difference, than make that difference and by example be the American that you feel America should be. This is what is, not simply nomenclature and rhetorical negativity. We do not often know everything our leaders premise decisions on; but, we do know what we premise our decisions on. It is here that the difference in the world will take place. One person at a time, one handshake at a time.
For Eric -- Quote: Joe, I've been shot at by professionals, and you'll have to do a lot better than that. END Quote...
Finite math allocated to truth statements when you debate would render a much better responses. There is no legitimate retort I see...The truth is in the tale...
You will note in early past post it clearly states I took an adverse position to get reactions Eric, then would state a stand. I am sorry your situation finds you here daily rather than a class that would be more productive, and to be honest many of the questions you answered herein can be found by your buddy the Col. or Major or whatever officer you have there: Read FM 7-03. If he is Army, he should put you up to date. This is not meant as an insult, but if you are going to invest time as you have here, why not do more research? You can even visit Iran and then tell me all the horrific happenings that exist. Oddly, there are not that many, perhaps less than a complete State by State criminal log daily here in the U.S. In Iran most problems have been caused by their current political situation and are more economic in nature. They are not backwards at all.
Personalization is the last defense of a poor argument, any professional knows that...
Posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009
Everyone needs to stop beating their chest and drums; much of the world's problems can be seen in individual post herein to be honest.
For REG: Polk County Florida, home of Bernie Little and the Miss Budweiser as well as Publix; once the poorest county in Florida as well as the largest organized southern family run narcotics area in America. I can understand why you moved and have the view of America you do; but, you confuse the Government with corporate interest or greed and the fact you can even be in Europe is because of America. You are defaming the very country which gave you your freedom to be there as well. While I appreciate your freedom to have an opinion, how do you think you, as an American, make your homeland look?
THE POINT BEING:
We all, as human beings have a responsibility to do our best, where ever we are as we are the Ambassadors or our perspective homelands. We reflect what is in actuality, not newspapers, not TV, not blogs, nor broad based historical doctrines. It is all people as citizens who are civilized that respect each other and one day at a time, one handshake, one personal interaction at a time, WE MAKE HISTORY which is only reflected by governments in the long run. If you want to be led, then led you will be. If you want to make a difference, than make that difference and by example be the American that you feel America should be. This is what is, not simply nomenclature and rhetorical negativity. We do not often know everything our leaders premise decisions on; but, we do know what we premise our decisions on. It is here that the difference in the world will take place. One person at a time, one handshake at a time.
For Eric -- Quote: Joe, I've been shot at by professionals, and you'll have to do a lot better than that. END Quote...
Finite math allocated to truth statements when you debate would render a much better responses. There is no legitimate retort I see...The truth is in the tale...
You will note in early past post it clearly states I took an adverse position to get reactions Eric, then would state a stand. I am sorry your situation finds you here daily rather than a class that would be more productive, and to be honest many of the questions you answered herein can be found by your buddy the Col. or Major or whatever officer you have there: Read FM 7-03. If he is Army, he should put you up to date. This is not meant as an insult, but if you are going to invest time as you have here, why not do more research? You can even visit Iran and then tell me all the horrific happenings that exist. Oddly, there are not that many, perhaps less than a complete State by State criminal log daily here in the U.S. In Iran most problems have been caused by their current political situation and are more economic in nature. They are not backwards at all.
Personalization is the last defense of a poor argument, any professional knows that...
Posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009
Nuno R. in Portugal writes:
So, after all this is about Iran? I thought it was about "pariah states" in general...
"Pariah" is the ostracized one, the ugly kid on the block, the one that rejects the external universe, and is rejected by it, etc. etc.
But even "pariahs" have friends (few) and some aacquaintances that are sometimes embarrassed when meeting them.
Let's not forget that, for some, Israel is a pariah. As was Rhodesia. Or pre-PM Tsvangirai Zimbabwe. Or Noriega's Panama. Or -- for Beijing -- Taiwan. Or -- for Taiwan -- China during the "Cultural" Revolution period.
But there are some "technical" pariahs: states that have almost no international relations, only one or two foreign partners/patrons, total secrecy about its inner workings, a fantasy island version of their history, a paranoid view of the world, etc.
Case Study 1, Pariah 101 Class: Spot the pariah state in the map.
Nuno R.
Posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009
So, after all this is about Iran? I thought it was about "pariah states" in general...
"Pariah" is the ostracized one, the ugly kid on the block, the one that rejects the external universe, and is rejected by it, etc. etc.
But even "pariahs" have friends (few) and some aacquaintances that are sometimes embarrassed when meeting them.
Let's not forget that, for some, Israel is a pariah. As was Rhodesia. Or pre-PM Tsvangirai Zimbabwe. Or Noriega's Panama. Or -- for Beijing -- Taiwan. Or -- for Taiwan -- China during the "Cultural" Revolution period.
But there are some "technical" pariahs: states that have almost no international relations, only one or two foreign partners/patrons, total secrecy about its inner workings, a fantasy island version of their history, a paranoid view of the world, etc.
Case Study 1, Pariah 101 Class: Spot the pariah state in the map.
Nuno R.
Posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009
REG in France writes:
I am an American residing in Europe. I am registered to vote in Polk County, Florida.
Your question assumes that the United States is not a pariah. That is an erroneous assumption.
The United States had a wonderful relationship with Iran, as long as Iran was ruled by the Shah of Iran, one of the most savage and brutal tyrants of the 20th Century.
The Shah's depravity, conducted on behalf of the United States, easily ranks with that of Adolph Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Joseph Stalin and Pol Pot (Saloth Sar to his friends).
Of course, he was America's puppet tyrant, installed to permit American and British oil companies to steal the wealth of the Iranian people. So, hey, "NO PROBLEM!" as far as the U.S. is concerned. "He may be a monster, but he's OUR monster."
At one time, Iran enjoyed one of the most vibrant and legitimate Democracies in the world. But this Democratic government represented the interests of its people -- a concept abhorrent to the U.S. and the U.K. So, the United States and the United Kingdom overthrew the Democratic government and installed the Shah as their puppet dictator.
So, who's the pariah?
By the way, the reason Iran has a nuclear program is because the United States talked the government into having one, and of course, buying the technology from the United States. Take a look at who filled their pockets on that deal some time. You'll see some familiar names, and some not-familiar names that should be watched, even today.
If the United States truly wants a partnership with those states that it calls "pariahs," a good start would be to stop peddling such a load of hypocrisy.
Having said that, I think the administration of Barack Obama is off to a good start. For the first time in 8 years, there is at least cause for hope that the United States could, one day, become a positive force in the world.
And join the community of civilized nations.
We'll see.
Posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009
I am an American residing in Europe. I am registered to vote in Polk County, Florida.
Your question assumes that the United States is not a pariah. That is an erroneous assumption.
The United States had a wonderful relationship with Iran, as long as Iran was ruled by the Shah of Iran, one of the most savage and brutal tyrants of the 20th Century.
The Shah's depravity, conducted on behalf of the United States, easily ranks with that of Adolph Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Joseph Stalin and Pol Pot (Saloth Sar to his friends).
Of course, he was America's puppet tyrant, installed to permit American and British oil companies to steal the wealth of the Iranian people. So, hey, "NO PROBLEM!" as far as the U.S. is concerned. "He may be a monster, but he's OUR monster."
At one time, Iran enjoyed one of the most vibrant and legitimate Democracies in the world. But this Democratic government represented the interests of its people -- a concept abhorrent to the U.S. and the U.K. So, the United States and the United Kingdom overthrew the Democratic government and installed the Shah as their puppet dictator.
So, who's the pariah?
By the way, the reason Iran has a nuclear program is because the United States talked the government into having one, and of course, buying the technology from the United States. Take a look at who filled their pockets on that deal some time. You'll see some familiar names, and some not-familiar names that should be watched, even today.
If the United States truly wants a partnership with those states that it calls "pariahs," a good start would be to stop peddling such a load of hypocrisy.
Having said that, I think the administration of Barack Obama is off to a good start. For the first time in 8 years, there is at least cause for hope that the United States could, one day, become a positive force in the world.
And join the community of civilized nations.
We'll see.
Posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009
Georgiann in California writes:
When I am attempting to build a relationship with an individual who has attached a perceived negative label to me, the first thing that I ask is that they [drop] the negative title.
Labels often come with preconceived perceptions, the perceptions themselves often inaccurate. Labels also dehumanize the individual(s),making them things, not people.
Iran is a nation made up of people (not just things), unique and diverse. America is the same (unique and diverse). I am sure that the peoples of both of these nations do not perceive themselves as pariahs or as 'the great evil."
It would benefit all nations, now more than ever, to dispense with name calling, acknowledge our will to serve our people(s) and open dialogue with the understanding that we are nations with different beliefs and political systems. But no matter our differences, we can sit together and talk, without fear of our basic ideological principles being slammed.
It is often difficult for me to understand the ideological principles of other nations. My freedom and devotion to my liberties remains paramount and I honor the system that allows me to live as I do. However, there seems to be billions of others on this planet who live differently than I. Some through choice, others without choice and/or hope.
If the great nation of the United States is unable to retain open dialogues with governments that we disagree with and do not understand, then we remain in grave danger of removing any hope that might benefit that nations people(s).
When someone calls me a name, my first and usual response is to walk away. Rarely if ever have I resorted to the latter two. The second is to insult them as they did me. The third is, if provoked, personal protection at all costs.
Posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009
When I am attempting to build a relationship with an individual who has attached a perceived negative label to me, the first thing that I ask is that they [drop] the negative title.
Labels often come with preconceived perceptions, the perceptions themselves often inaccurate. Labels also dehumanize the individual(s),making them things, not people.
Iran is a nation made up of people (not just things), unique and diverse. America is the same (unique and diverse). I am sure that the peoples of both of these nations do not perceive themselves as pariahs or as 'the great evil."
It would benefit all nations, now more than ever, to dispense with name calling, acknowledge our will to serve our people(s) and open dialogue with the understanding that we are nations with different beliefs and political systems. But no matter our differences, we can sit together and talk, without fear of our basic ideological principles being slammed.
It is often difficult for me to understand the ideological principles of other nations. My freedom and devotion to my liberties remains paramount and I honor the system that allows me to live as I do. However, there seems to be billions of others on this planet who live differently than I. Some through choice, others without choice and/or hope.
If the great nation of the United States is unable to retain open dialogues with governments that we disagree with and do not understand, then we remain in grave danger of removing any hope that might benefit that nations people(s).
When someone calls me a name, my first and usual response is to walk away. Rarely if ever have I resorted to the latter two. The second is to insult them as they did me. The third is, if provoked, personal protection at all costs.
Posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009
Zharkov in U.S.A. writes:
T.J. in the UK, inquiry to your Iranian half:
1. What kind of help do the Iranian people want to get themselves a government willing to obey a global government?
2. Would bombing the mosques help, or would they prefer random attacks on nuclear facilities?
3. Does it matter which nation bombs them, jews or gentiles, or would they prefer buddists or atheists?
4. Or would it be better to wait and allow the Iranian government to fall on its own initiative after they waste most of their money on the extravagant luxury of nuclear power?
The whole idea here is that someone must do SOMETHING about Iran. We just can't leave Iran alone because someday they might get a nuclear arsenal like Israel has. Nobody knows whether to send cookies or cluster bombs to Iran. So what specifically should we do? Talk them to death?
Posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009
T.J. in the UK, inquiry to your Iranian half:
1. What kind of help do the Iranian people want to get themselves a government willing to obey a global government?
2. Would bombing the mosques help, or would they prefer random attacks on nuclear facilities?
3. Does it matter which nation bombs them, jews or gentiles, or would they prefer buddists or atheists?
4. Or would it be better to wait and allow the Iranian government to fall on its own initiative after they waste most of their money on the extravagant luxury of nuclear power?
The whole idea here is that someone must do SOMETHING about Iran. We just can't leave Iran alone because someday they might get a nuclear arsenal like Israel has. Nobody knows whether to send cookies or cluster bombs to Iran. So what specifically should we do? Talk them to death?
Posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009
T.J. in the United Kingdom writes:
Dear Eric,
I shall make this simple for all concerned to understand.
I am half English and half Iranian and thus understand both cultures. I may be an asset or a hindrance. It depends which side of fence you are. At times it is not easy for me to define the ultimate right or wrong, but where sanity prevails against the Cult like mentality of ANY religious doctrine, the basic truth about Human Rights comes to my mind.
Let me expand on this issue first, Guantanamo Bay for instance has been highlighted as a double standard of the Western Culture. However, in my opinion, I am for its survival. I truly believe that, those who disregard OUR Human Rights, should forfeit theirs. Sadly it is not easily possible to get the truth out of the Brain washed and there are naturally instances where the good and bad are bunched together.
There is no perfect method, and there is no Utopia yet.
The fact that, the Mullah is branded with the "Made in UK" stamp, although true, but all Iranians must realise -- very fast -- that, if you leave the doors open, you will get burgled. They must STOP putting the blame on the Colonials and put the onus on themselves. If the Snake bites, it is in its nature.
We are really reaping the rewards of Colonial practices. There is struggle going on between those who want to go forward and those who still live in the past. The very far past.
It is not uncommon for us to think that, the Human Race has progressed in many fields, because he has managed to unshackle himself from the bounds of religion. However, the resistance to change is fierce and evident. This is the sleeping Giant.
In order to defeat the Giant, which incidentally is the Constitution of Pariah States, we must understand it completely. This War cannot be won on the battlefield alone. It is the War of minds and cultures.
48 Hours for the Iranian leadership to run to the Mosques. Please NO!! The Mosque is the Pentagon of the Mullah. However, the threat, to the Mullahs existence must remain on the table.
We must help Iranian people break their chains and embrace the Human League once more as they have contributed so much in the past.
Posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009
Dear Eric,
I shall make this simple for all concerned to understand.
I am half English and half Iranian and thus understand both cultures. I may be an asset or a hindrance. It depends which side of fence you are. At times it is not easy for me to define the ultimate right or wrong, but where sanity prevails against the Cult like mentality of ANY religious doctrine, the basic truth about Human Rights comes to my mind.
Let me expand on this issue first, Guantanamo Bay for instance has been highlighted as a double standard of the Western Culture. However, in my opinion, I am for its survival. I truly believe that, those who disregard OUR Human Rights, should forfeit theirs. Sadly it is not easily possible to get the truth out of the Brain washed and there are naturally instances where the good and bad are bunched together.
There is no perfect method, and there is no Utopia yet.
The fact that, the Mullah is branded with the "Made in UK" stamp, although true, but all Iranians must realise -- very fast -- that, if you leave the doors open, you will get burgled. They must STOP putting the blame on the Colonials and put the onus on themselves. If the Snake bites, it is in its nature.
We are really reaping the rewards of Colonial practices. There is struggle going on between those who want to go forward and those who still live in the past. The very far past.
It is not uncommon for us to think that, the Human Race has progressed in many fields, because he has managed to unshackle himself from the bounds of religion. However, the resistance to change is fierce and evident. This is the sleeping Giant.
In order to defeat the Giant, which incidentally is the Constitution of Pariah States, we must understand it completely. This War cannot be won on the battlefield alone. It is the War of minds and cultures.
48 Hours for the Iranian leadership to run to the Mosques. Please NO!! The Mosque is the Pentagon of the Mullah. However, the threat, to the Mullahs existence must remain on the table.
We must help Iranian people break their chains and embrace the Human League once more as they have contributed so much in the past.
Posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009
Rizwan in India writes:
The Palestinians need to be treated as equals in this discussion. Look at the actual history of Israel's founding. Thousands of Palestinians were driven out of their ancestral villages and out of the country, with no compensation for the land and life they lost. Currently their so-called terroritories are occupied by Israel; the people are not free and Israel has the upper hand. Israel's current racist policy results in genocide and is not working towards a two state solution. Israel's government wants all Arabs out of both Israel and the Palestinian territories. The U.S. must no longer support the international war crimes Israel is committing.
Posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009
The Palestinians need to be treated as equals in this discussion. Look at the actual history of Israel's founding. Thousands of Palestinians were driven out of their ancestral villages and out of the country, with no compensation for the land and life they lost. Currently their so-called terroritories are occupied by Israel; the people are not free and Israel has the upper hand. Israel's current racist policy results in genocide and is not working towards a two state solution. Israel's government wants all Arabs out of both Israel and the Palestinian territories. The U.S. must no longer support the international war crimes Israel is committing.
Posted on Tue Feb 10, 2009
Ramiro in Bolivia writes:
I think it is a good approach. Rawls wrote , as a title of one of his books, "International Law :the possible utopia".
I agree: if the foreign policies of the world, States would follow as a guiding principle the norms they themselves have created, ours would be a much better planetarian home. If the "consiglieri" of today's Princes follow that principle , much is to be gained. It is better if the advice of a great power is given not trough words but by means of example:many governments will have a receptive conduct.
Posted on Mon Feb 09, 2009
I think it is a good approach. Rawls wrote , as a title of one of his books, "International Law :the possible utopia".
I agree: if the foreign policies of the world, States would follow as a guiding principle the norms they themselves have created, ours would be a much better planetarian home. If the "consiglieri" of today's Princes follow that principle , much is to be gained. It is better if the advice of a great power is given not trough words but by means of example:many governments will have a receptive conduct.
Posted on Mon Feb 09, 2009
Lonnie C. in Virginia writes:
Recommendation: In order to influence other cultures in positive ways we need access. Let's engage the other cultures like Iran and North Korea through sporting events. With this interaction between the two countries we can mitigate our differences through shared sportsmanship.
I fully believe that the average Iranian or North Korean wishes no harm to anyone.
Lastly, we need to pray to God above for wisdom and show love towards our preceived enemies.
Posted on Mon Feb 09, 2009
Recommendation: In order to influence other cultures in positive ways we need access. Let's engage the other cultures like Iran and North Korea through sporting events. With this interaction between the two countries we can mitigate our differences through shared sportsmanship.
I fully believe that the average Iranian or North Korean wishes no harm to anyone.
Lastly, we need to pray to God above for wisdom and show love towards our preceived enemies.
Posted on Mon Feb 09, 2009
Linda in New York writes:
The Palestinians need to be treated as equals in this discussion. Look at the actual history of Israel's founding. Thousands of Palestinians were driven out of their ancestral villages and out of the country, with no compensation for the land and life they lost. Currently their so-called terroritories are occupied by Israel; the people are not free and Israel has the upper hand. Israel's current racist policy results in genocide and is not working towards a two state solution. Israel's government wants all Arabs out of both Israel and the Palestinian territories. The U.S. must no longer support the international war crimes Israel is committing.
Posted on Mon Feb 09, 2009
The Palestinians need to be treated as equals in this discussion. Look at the actual history of Israel's founding. Thousands of Palestinians were driven out of their ancestral villages and out of the country, with no compensation for the land and life they lost. Currently their so-called terroritories are occupied by Israel; the people are not free and Israel has the upper hand. Israel's current racist policy results in genocide and is not working towards a two state solution. Israel's government wants all Arabs out of both Israel and the Palestinian territories. The U.S. must no longer support the international war crimes Israel is committing.
Posted on Mon Feb 09, 2009
Jonathan in South Dakota writes:
Iran is a unique case. Their rhetoric indicates that they intend to make their foreign policy a zero sum game over the issue of Israel. The question we have to ask ourselves regarding our relationship with Iran is how "unconditional" is our support for Israel? This is the only question that the current regime will respond to if we take their words at face value.
As for the broader question, of transforming countries from pariahs to partners, there are two options: 1) Negotiate agreements that build upon a foundation of common objectives and incrementally lead to a mutual exchange of values. 2) Determine that the current regime's intentions are mercenary and strive to make their assertions in global politics irrelevant.
The first approach is obviously preferrable but will be ineffective if our foreign policy objective is simply to create good feelings. The agreements must be tangible if they are to be relevent.
If we determine that our tactical, operational and strategic objectives are at odds with the regime, we need to move to isolate this country by seeking to set up broad based regional coalitions who share our concern about the obstinate regime's political objectives. In the case of Iran, this can be accomplished by uniting the wealthy gulf states around a common point of interest, specifically the revival of the region's Babylonian heritage.
The concept is simple: Individuals with enough money to build palm tree islands in the ocean are looking for something meaningful to invest in. Attempting to revive a sense of regional pride in a common cultural apex could create an influx of (regional) foreign investment to the fledgling Iraqi state. Each state with individuals who engage in the project would be materially invested in regional stability and would naturally oppose any regime who seeks to upset the stability.
Posted on Mon Feb 09, 2009
Iran is a unique case. Their rhetoric indicates that they intend to make their foreign policy a zero sum game over the issue of Israel. The question we have to ask ourselves regarding our relationship with Iran is how "unconditional" is our support for Israel? This is the only question that the current regime will respond to if we take their words at face value.
As for the broader question, of transforming countries from pariahs to partners, there are two options: 1) Negotiate agreements that build upon a foundation of common objectives and incrementally lead to a mutual exchange of values. 2) Determine that the current regime's intentions are mercenary and strive to make their assertions in global politics irrelevant.
The first approach is obviously preferrable but will be ineffective if our foreign policy objective is simply to create good feelings. The agreements must be tangible if they are to be relevent.
If we determine that our tactical, operational and strategic objectives are at odds with the regime, we need to move to isolate this country by seeking to set up broad based regional coalitions who share our concern about the obstinate regime's political objectives. In the case of Iran, this can be accomplished by uniting the wealthy gulf states around a common point of interest, specifically the revival of the region's Babylonian heritage.
The concept is simple: Individuals with enough money to build palm tree islands in the ocean are looking for something meaningful to invest in. Attempting to revive a sense of regional pride in a common cultural apex could create an influx of (regional) foreign investment to the fledgling Iraqi state. Each state with individuals who engage in the project would be materially invested in regional stability and would naturally oppose any regime who seeks to upset the stability.
Posted on Mon Feb 09, 2009
Donald in Virginia writes:
9 Feb 09
I just found out one of the terrorist responsible for the USS Cole was released. Read this story about the USS Stark. Navy Shipmates is a brotherhood that goes back over 200 years along with the U.S. Marines in this country. My feelings are with those of the family members. All Sailors in the United States Navy will feel the same way once they hear the news! Very Sad and Disgraceful!
Stark was deployed to the Middle East Force in 1984 and 1987. Captain Glenn R. Brindel was the commanding officer during the 1987 deployment. The ship was struck on May 17, 1987, by two Exocet antiship missiles fired from an Iraqi Mirage F1 fighter during the Iran-Iraq War. The fighter had taken off from Shaibah at 20:00 and had flown south into the Persian Gulf. The fighter fired the first Exocet missile from a range of 22.5 nautical miles, and the second from 15.5 nautical miles, at about the time the fighter was given a routine radio warning by the Stark.[1] The frigate did not detect the missiles with radar and warning was given by the lookout only moments before the missiles struck.[2] The first penetrated the port-side hull; it failed to detonate, but spewed flaming rocket fuel in its path. The second entered at almost the same point, and left a 3-by-4-meter gash?then exploded in crew quarters. Thirty-seven sailors were killed and twenty-one were injured.[2]
Stark listing following two hits by Exocet missilesNo weapons were fired in defense of Stark. The Phalanx CIWS remained in standby mode, Mark 36 SRBOC countermeasures were not armed, and the attacking Exocet missiles and Mirage aircraft were in a blindspot of the defensive STIR (Separate Target Illumination Radar) fire control system, preventing use of the ship's Standard missile defenses. The ship failed to maneuver to bring its weapons batteries to bear prior to the first missile impact.[2]
On fire and listing, the frigate was brought under control by its crew during the night. The ship made its way to Bahrain where, after temporary repairs by the tender USS Acadia (AD-42) to make her seaworthy, she returned to her home port of Mayport, Florida, under her own power. The ship was eventually repaired at Ingalls Shipbuilding in Mississippi for $142 million.
A view of external damage to the port sideThe question of whether or not Iraqi leadership authorized the attack is still unanswered. Initial claims by the Iraqi government (that Stark was inside the Iran-Iraq War zone) was shown to be false, so the motives and orders of the pilot remain unanswered. Though American officials claimed he had been executed, an ex-Iraqi Air Force commander since stated that the pilot who attacked Stark was not punished, and was still alive at the time.[3]
Stark was part of the Standing Naval Forces Atlantic Fleet in 1990 before returning to the Middle East Force in 1991. She was attached to UNITAS in 1993 and took part in Operation Support Democracy and Operation Able Vigil in 1994. In 1995, she returned to the Middle East Force before serving in the Atlantic in 1997 and in 1998.
Stark was decommissioned on May 7, 1999. A scrapping contract was awarded to Metro Machine Corp. of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on 7 October 2005. The ship was reported scrapped on June 21, 2006.[5]
Posted on Mon Feb 09, 2009
9 Feb 09
I just found out one of the terrorist responsible for the USS Cole was released. Read this story about the USS Stark. Navy Shipmates is a brotherhood that goes back over 200 years along with the U.S. Marines in this country. My feelings are with those of the family members. All Sailors in the United States Navy will feel the same way once they hear the news! Very Sad and Disgraceful!
Stark was deployed to the Middle East Force in 1984 and 1987. Captain Glenn R. Brindel was the commanding officer during the 1987 deployment. The ship was struck on May 17, 1987, by two Exocet antiship missiles fired from an Iraqi Mirage F1 fighter during the Iran-Iraq War. The fighter had taken off from Shaibah at 20:00 and had flown south into the Persian Gulf. The fighter fired the first Exocet missile from a range of 22.5 nautical miles, and the second from 15.5 nautical miles, at about the time the fighter was given a routine radio warning by the Stark.[1] The frigate did not detect the missiles with radar and warning was given by the lookout only moments before the missiles struck.[2] The first penetrated the port-side hull; it failed to detonate, but spewed flaming rocket fuel in its path. The second entered at almost the same point, and left a 3-by-4-meter gash?then exploded in crew quarters. Thirty-seven sailors were killed and twenty-one were injured.[2]
Stark listing following two hits by Exocet missilesNo weapons were fired in defense of Stark. The Phalanx CIWS remained in standby mode, Mark 36 SRBOC countermeasures were not armed, and the attacking Exocet missiles and Mirage aircraft were in a blindspot of the defensive STIR (Separate Target Illumination Radar) fire control system, preventing use of the ship's Standard missile defenses. The ship failed to maneuver to bring its weapons batteries to bear prior to the first missile impact.[2]
On fire and listing, the frigate was brought under control by its crew during the night. The ship made its way to Bahrain where, after temporary repairs by the tender USS Acadia (AD-42) to make her seaworthy, she returned to her home port of Mayport, Florida, under her own power. The ship was eventually repaired at Ingalls Shipbuilding in Mississippi for $142 million.
A view of external damage to the port sideThe question of whether or not Iraqi leadership authorized the attack is still unanswered. Initial claims by the Iraqi government (that Stark was inside the Iran-Iraq War zone) was shown to be false, so the motives and orders of the pilot remain unanswered. Though American officials claimed he had been executed, an ex-Iraqi Air Force commander since stated that the pilot who attacked Stark was not punished, and was still alive at the time.[3]
Stark was part of the Standing Naval Forces Atlantic Fleet in 1990 before returning to the Middle East Force in 1991. She was attached to UNITAS in 1993 and took part in Operation Support Democracy and Operation Able Vigil in 1994. In 1995, she returned to the Middle East Force before serving in the Atlantic in 1997 and in 1998.
Stark was decommissioned on May 7, 1999. A scrapping contract was awarded to Metro Machine Corp. of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on 7 October 2005. The ship was reported scrapped on June 21, 2006.[5]
Posted on Mon Feb 09, 2009
Eric in New Mexico writes:
@ Ann in Colorado, I don't think caving in to , or legitimizing Iran's bad behavior by giving them a diplomatic reward for killing our troops in Iraq will get the results the U.S. gov seeks.
Now I do believe in taking a creative approach, so why don't you look at what I posted on Fri Feb 06, 2009 (second post of thread, bottom of page) and tell me if I'm giving the President some sound advice or not.
(chuckle) I'd love a liberal's opinion on "puppy love".
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
@ Ann in Colorado, I don't think caving in to , or legitimizing Iran's bad behavior by giving them a diplomatic reward for killing our troops in Iraq will get the results the U.S. gov seeks.
Now I do believe in taking a creative approach, so why don't you look at what I posted on Fri Feb 06, 2009 (second post of thread, bottom of page) and tell me if I'm giving the President some sound advice or not.
(chuckle) I'd love a liberal's opinion on "puppy love".
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Eric in New Mexico writes:
@ Nuno R., Indeed comprehention can be conditions based, but you came in loud and clear. Thanks for your perspective!
( A coffee inundated keyboard, and a feline saboteur who thinks my mouse is the real thing is not exactly helpful either, so you have my sympathies ....chuckle.)
Here, try this:
http://www.ahmadinejad.ir
Best of luck......
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
@ Nuno R., Indeed comprehention can be conditions based, but you came in loud and clear. Thanks for your perspective!
( A coffee inundated keyboard, and a feline saboteur who thinks my mouse is the real thing is not exactly helpful either, so you have my sympathies ....chuckle.)
Here, try this:
http://www.ahmadinejad.ir
Best of luck......
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Ann in Colorado writes:
First and foremost by showing all countries respect, as President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton have started to do. I believe that economic sanctions are a total waste and only hurt the common people. Look at Cuba and Iran for example; sanctions have not changed the governments one iota. Instead of threats and asking the governments to change their approaches before we'll talk with them (like Iran. I heard that the Obama administration is still requiring Iran to stop its development of nuclear power and energy before talks will begin. That's a one-way street to repeating the failures of the last 8 years!!), we should be talking and incentivizing to the max. So stop demanding pre-conditions and start talking and start offering incentives and above all, show these countries and their governments and people respect.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
First and foremost by showing all countries respect, as President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton have started to do. I believe that economic sanctions are a total waste and only hurt the common people. Look at Cuba and Iran for example; sanctions have not changed the governments one iota. Instead of threats and asking the governments to change their approaches before we'll talk with them (like Iran. I heard that the Obama administration is still requiring Iran to stop its development of nuclear power and energy before talks will begin. That's a one-way street to repeating the failures of the last 8 years!!), we should be talking and incentivizing to the max. So stop demanding pre-conditions and start talking and start offering incentives and above all, show these countries and their governments and people respect.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Nuno R. in Portugal writes:
To the moderator: sorry. My previous entry was totally incomprehensible and unusable (never write on a rented wireless with a faulty keyboard and a jammed mouse, on a bumpy road, while doing other things)
A revised version:
Actually this is the "question of the year", and one that doesn't have only one set of answers, or definitive ones.
But the question itself already indicates an important direction: the awareness that political conflict is not a metaphysical issue (at least not most of the times), but a state of tension that can be reduced, minimized, eliminated or transformed.
Although the word "pariah" implies not only adversarial notions towards one country, but antagonism towards the whole humankind, international law or international society (v.g. piracy states), there could be some room for tension management:
*If "pariahs" are not monoliths (nothing in life really is), dialogue and confidence-building interface with "unclenched fist" sectors of their society, with intellectual, cultural, arts/sports, business and even political structures, with individuals rather than with institutions could be very productive.
*If "pariahs" are ready to discard the most serious of their international violations (as opposed to all violations abhorrent to decent people), maybe there would be room for additional dialogue.
*If "pariahs" are given some room to escape, that in itself doesn't constitute amnesty of serious guilt, amnesia or a renunciation of decency, but only amounts to a technical way of avoiding worst evils, maybe an internal process of reform (and, who knows, transfer of power), could start. Carrot and stick, I suppose...
*If the dialogue with "pariahs" on "common values" is often impossible (besides lip service and double speak), and a contradiction, the contact and discussion of "common objectives" or "common threats" (v.g. resources, environment, human security, etc) could produce some results.
*If there could be "prizes" to be achieved by "pariah" states ready to reform themselves (either prizes tested on other reformed regimes, or new ones), internal processes could accelerate.
Finally:
*There are several "degrees" of transforming a "pariah" into "partner": alleviation of grievances of local citizens or populations under a pariah's administration is only one. Others, for example, can evolve persuasion, political debate, propaganda, etc. Where is the USIA when we need one?
*Transforming "pariah" into "partner" should not ignore the venial sin of naivete. Sometimes military and political pressure, hard and soft power, among other state tools, should never leave the table. At any rate, sound analysis and the need to select in a case by case basis is crucial. Don't treat as equal what is different. Don't treat as different something that is equal. Always analyse and determine similarities and differences in national case studies.
*At the end of the day, some pariah states are irreformable, or impossible to transform into more than opportunistic, unreliable partners. This is the case of "ideological" or "fundamental" pariahs, as opposed to ones driven into pariah condition by accident, need, hostility or error of others, etc.
Regards and thanks for this blog.
P.S. -- If a pariah state would ever have a blog, and if there could be ample access and debate to it, that would be good news.
Nuno R.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
To the moderator: sorry. My previous entry was totally incomprehensible and unusable (never write on a rented wireless with a faulty keyboard and a jammed mouse, on a bumpy road, while doing other things)
A revised version:
Actually this is the "question of the year", and one that doesn't have only one set of answers, or definitive ones.
But the question itself already indicates an important direction: the awareness that political conflict is not a metaphysical issue (at least not most of the times), but a state of tension that can be reduced, minimized, eliminated or transformed.
Although the word "pariah" implies not only adversarial notions towards one country, but antagonism towards the whole humankind, international law or international society (v.g. piracy states), there could be some room for tension management:
*If "pariahs" are not monoliths (nothing in life really is), dialogue and confidence-building interface with "unclenched fist" sectors of their society, with intellectual, cultural, arts/sports, business and even political structures, with individuals rather than with institutions could be very productive.
*If "pariahs" are ready to discard the most serious of their international violations (as opposed to all violations abhorrent to decent people), maybe there would be room for additional dialogue.
*If "pariahs" are given some room to escape, that in itself doesn't constitute amnesty of serious guilt, amnesia or a renunciation of decency, but only amounts to a technical way of avoiding worst evils, maybe an internal process of reform (and, who knows, transfer of power), could start. Carrot and stick, I suppose...
*If the dialogue with "pariahs" on "common values" is often impossible (besides lip service and double speak), and a contradiction, the contact and discussion of "common objectives" or "common threats" (v.g. resources, environment, human security, etc) could produce some results.
*If there could be "prizes" to be achieved by "pariah" states ready to reform themselves (either prizes tested on other reformed regimes, or new ones), internal processes could accelerate.
Finally:
*There are several "degrees" of transforming a "pariah" into "partner": alleviation of grievances of local citizens or populations under a pariah's administration is only one. Others, for example, can evolve persuasion, political debate, propaganda, etc. Where is the USIA when we need one?
*Transforming "pariah" into "partner" should not ignore the venial sin of naivete. Sometimes military and political pressure, hard and soft power, among other state tools, should never leave the table. At any rate, sound analysis and the need to select in a case by case basis is crucial. Don't treat as equal what is different. Don't treat as different something that is equal. Always analyse and determine similarities and differences in national case studies.
*At the end of the day, some pariah states are irreformable, or impossible to transform into more than opportunistic, unreliable partners. This is the case of "ideological" or "fundamental" pariahs, as opposed to ones driven into pariah condition by accident, need, hostility or error of others, etc.
Regards and thanks for this blog.
P.S. -- If a pariah state would ever have a blog, and if there could be ample access and debate to it, that would be good news.
Nuno R.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Sharon in California writes:
WE need to change our language toward those who don't agree with us. For instance "pariahs" -- this is bound to elicit negative reaction. Is this what we want? How about "non-partners to partners." This is just a start to the changes that need to be made to elicit different reactions from these non-cooperative people.
WE need to become world-centric rather than U.S.-centric in our approach to other nations -- they have histories, cultures and ways of conducting their lives very different from ours. We can't set world standards regardless of how much we would like to. The boomarang will come back to haunt us again and again if we don't cease these behaviors.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
WE need to change our language toward those who don't agree with us. For instance "pariahs" -- this is bound to elicit negative reaction. Is this what we want? How about "non-partners to partners." This is just a start to the changes that need to be made to elicit different reactions from these non-cooperative people.
WE need to become world-centric rather than U.S.-centric in our approach to other nations -- they have histories, cultures and ways of conducting their lives very different from ours. We can't set world standards regardless of how much we would like to. The boomarang will come back to haunt us again and again if we don't cease these behaviors.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Eric in New Mexico writes:
@ T.J. in the United Kingdom,
Your post made me think of Admiral Yamamoto's statement shortly after his forces had attacked Pearl Harbor:
"I fear we have awoken the sleeping giant."
Bin laden should have studied a little more history in my opinion, as we tend to oblige our enemies with total and devatstating defeat, unconditionally.
And we all know how that war ended.
I'm a little unclear on your "sleeping Monster" reference, but I don't think you're refering to the U.S. in this regard.
As for post-colonial cold war hangovers, I was once told by an Iranian that underneath every Mullah's beard is tatooed, "Made in UK."
Perhaps this is the mindset you are refering to, so I thought I'd ask.
Both you and Nuno R. in Portugal spoke of an "escape rout" for Pariahs...OK
What if the international community gave the leadership of Iran 48 hours to go back to their Mosques and never participate in politics again to avoid inevitable "serious concequences" as a last ditch diplomatic effort before the last option left on the table is used?
Would that satisfy your criteria for "escape"?
---
@ Ron in New York
When the U.S. government call things as it sees it, it definately should act on it.
If it calls it Genocide, or Terrorism, or a Crime against Humanity...or a nation a "pariah"... We cannot afford to sin by silence and inaction.
That's how pariahs are allowed to become such in the first place.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
@ T.J. in the United Kingdom,
Your post made me think of Admiral Yamamoto's statement shortly after his forces had attacked Pearl Harbor:
"I fear we have awoken the sleeping giant."
Bin laden should have studied a little more history in my opinion, as we tend to oblige our enemies with total and devatstating defeat, unconditionally.
And we all know how that war ended.
I'm a little unclear on your "sleeping Monster" reference, but I don't think you're refering to the U.S. in this regard.
As for post-colonial cold war hangovers, I was once told by an Iranian that underneath every Mullah's beard is tatooed, "Made in UK."
Perhaps this is the mindset you are refering to, so I thought I'd ask.
Both you and Nuno R. in Portugal spoke of an "escape rout" for Pariahs...OK
What if the international community gave the leadership of Iran 48 hours to go back to their Mosques and never participate in politics again to avoid inevitable "serious concequences" as a last ditch diplomatic effort before the last option left on the table is used?
Would that satisfy your criteria for "escape"?
---
@ Ron in New York
When the U.S. government call things as it sees it, it definately should act on it.
If it calls it Genocide, or Terrorism, or a Crime against Humanity...or a nation a "pariah"... We cannot afford to sin by silence and inaction.
That's how pariahs are allowed to become such in the first place.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Emman in Illinois writes:
It has been over 60 years of pure hell for Palestinians since the founding of the state of israel. Gerald Kaufman, a son of Holocaust survivors and himself a Jew stated that 'Israel was founded under terrorism". Israel has terrorized Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza strip since 1967 by demolishing their homes, confiscating their lands, installing pointless checkpoints, the apartheid wall, illegal detentions for people thrown into prisons with no charges. When activists attempt to show the world what israel is doing, they are murdered like Rachel Corrie was. Our government continues to support israel, blindly, and frankly many people are starting to realise this and know that this unwavering policy is wrong. It must stop. The racism, the humiliation, the mass murder of children in Gaza using phosphorous and other chemical weapons is illegal. When we stand by israel we are dimished in the world community. Justice has to be served and as Americans we must boycott, divest, and sanction israel like we did with South Africa.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
It has been over 60 years of pure hell for Palestinians since the founding of the state of israel. Gerald Kaufman, a son of Holocaust survivors and himself a Jew stated that 'Israel was founded under terrorism". Israel has terrorized Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza strip since 1967 by demolishing their homes, confiscating their lands, installing pointless checkpoints, the apartheid wall, illegal detentions for people thrown into prisons with no charges. When activists attempt to show the world what israel is doing, they are murdered like Rachel Corrie was. Our government continues to support israel, blindly, and frankly many people are starting to realise this and know that this unwavering policy is wrong. It must stop. The racism, the humiliation, the mass murder of children in Gaza using phosphorous and other chemical weapons is illegal. When we stand by israel we are dimished in the world community. Justice has to be served and as Americans we must boycott, divest, and sanction israel like we did with South Africa.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Chris in the United Kingdom writes:
First of all, treat all countries as equal.
That does not mean giving them equal treatment. That means that the standards by which treatment is decided are the same for everybody.
The U.S. cannot expect to have any legitimacy to talk about pariah states and international politics, when it continues to financially sponsor racist and terrorist state (you know what I'm talking about). It also cannot be seen as anything else than a hypocrite when it keeps promoting historical revisionism and historical lies about the international world. Again you know what I'm talking about.
There are many international hotspots in the world, many better, many worse, but as long as the U.S. not only fails to criticize one of the most racist and oppresive states in the world, carrying our the longest standing attrocity of the modern world, but also presents that state as the 'victim', and grants it massive benefits no other state in the world enjoys, it can never truly convince the world that it cares at all about 'pariahs' and 'non-partners'.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
First of all, treat all countries as equal.
That does not mean giving them equal treatment. That means that the standards by which treatment is decided are the same for everybody.
The U.S. cannot expect to have any legitimacy to talk about pariah states and international politics, when it continues to financially sponsor racist and terrorist state (you know what I'm talking about). It also cannot be seen as anything else than a hypocrite when it keeps promoting historical revisionism and historical lies about the international world. Again you know what I'm talking about.
There are many international hotspots in the world, many better, many worse, but as long as the U.S. not only fails to criticize one of the most racist and oppresive states in the world, carrying our the longest standing attrocity of the modern world, but also presents that state as the 'victim', and grants it massive benefits no other state in the world enjoys, it can never truly convince the world that it cares at all about 'pariahs' and 'non-partners'.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Taliah writes:
In order to transform from pariahs to partners, one must show respect and dipomacy. That is the only way to go personally. Violence will get no one anywhere.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
In order to transform from pariahs to partners, one must show respect and dipomacy. That is the only way to go personally. Violence will get no one anywhere.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Zharkov in U.S.A. writes:
@ Eric in New Mexico, think Vietnam and how we were sucked into that war on the basis of a bogus "Gulf of Tonkin" incident manufactured by LBJ. Think of Iraq, a war we never needed because the threat was never imminent but manufactured and exploited by exaggerated paranoia over 9/11.
The Iran offers the same "opportunity" if we make the same mistakes, and oddly enough, we find our government officials who were against that war now suggesting we ought to start another war like we did for the last two.
The Iranian people are not praying for an Israeli or U.S. bombing run to set them free.
Iranians see themselves capable of governing themselves, and as they have proven with the Shah, they have the capacity to throw off any government they find oppressive or uncaring. The Shah's own son strongly advised against attacking Iran. Most Iranians agree with him. If Iranians reach a consensus that they dislike or distrust their own government, they will change it as they have done in the past, either with or without our help.
Paranoia can be a good thing, but our government has reached the point where airline passengers risk being labelled "a terrorist" if they reject a genital search, or question a stewardess about food quality, or ask for too many blankets, or spank their child.
If you are on the "no-fly list", you will not be celebrating your safety as you are led away for questioning. If you are locked away for 3 months without any opportunity for a court hearing or a lawyer, as was the mother who spanked her child on a flight, you will not be thanking anyone in the government for that.
Wendy in California gave good advice -- first we must be an example worthy of the pariah nation to envy.
So far, we have succeeded in making pariah leaders envy our nuclear arsenal and imitating us. Now if we could get them to envy our sanity, honesty, and trustworthyness, we might get somewhere in talking to them.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
@ Eric in New Mexico, think Vietnam and how we were sucked into that war on the basis of a bogus "Gulf of Tonkin" incident manufactured by LBJ. Think of Iraq, a war we never needed because the threat was never imminent but manufactured and exploited by exaggerated paranoia over 9/11.
The Iran offers the same "opportunity" if we make the same mistakes, and oddly enough, we find our government officials who were against that war now suggesting we ought to start another war like we did for the last two.
The Iranian people are not praying for an Israeli or U.S. bombing run to set them free.
Iranians see themselves capable of governing themselves, and as they have proven with the Shah, they have the capacity to throw off any government they find oppressive or uncaring. The Shah's own son strongly advised against attacking Iran. Most Iranians agree with him. If Iranians reach a consensus that they dislike or distrust their own government, they will change it as they have done in the past, either with or without our help.
Paranoia can be a good thing, but our government has reached the point where airline passengers risk being labelled "a terrorist" if they reject a genital search, or question a stewardess about food quality, or ask for too many blankets, or spank their child.
If you are on the "no-fly list", you will not be celebrating your safety as you are led away for questioning. If you are locked away for 3 months without any opportunity for a court hearing or a lawyer, as was the mother who spanked her child on a flight, you will not be thanking anyone in the government for that.
Wendy in California gave good advice -- first we must be an example worthy of the pariah nation to envy.
So far, we have succeeded in making pariah leaders envy our nuclear arsenal and imitating us. Now if we could get them to envy our sanity, honesty, and trustworthyness, we might get somewhere in talking to them.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Ron in New York writes:
How to bring all Nations into the Global Community:
1st
Stop using terms like "Paraiah"
How we speak sets us up for how we act.
2nd
Find a mutual goal and work toward it.
Iran has many needs;we can assist with.
A golden opportunity for cooperation was lost when Iran was faced with drug addiction and HIV/AIDS crisis in the late '80's and '90's.
3rd
Creat strong bridges between US Irani and Irani citizens.
Synergize our positive activities. Stay on the high road.
4th
Resist the urge to define nations as "Axis of Evil" states.....The result was an "Axis of Oval".
5th and final:
If USG sets nuclear power as the gold standard; don't act shocked when other nations seek this power...Iran now has the Atomic symbol emblazoned on its currency!
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
How to bring all Nations into the Global Community:
1st
Stop using terms like "Paraiah"
How we speak sets us up for how we act.
2nd
Find a mutual goal and work toward it.
Iran has many needs;we can assist with.
A golden opportunity for cooperation was lost when Iran was faced with drug addiction and HIV/AIDS crisis in the late '80's and '90's.
3rd
Creat strong bridges between US Irani and Irani citizens.
Synergize our positive activities. Stay on the high road.
4th
Resist the urge to define nations as "Axis of Evil" states.....The result was an "Axis of Oval".
5th and final:
If USG sets nuclear power as the gold standard; don't act shocked when other nations seek this power...Iran now has the Atomic symbol emblazoned on its currency!
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Nuno R. in Portugal writes:
Actually this is the "question of the year". And one that doesn't have only one set of answers, or definite ones.
But the question itself already indicates an important political direction: the awareness that political conflict is not a metaphysical issue (at least not most of the times), but a state of tension that can be reduced, minized, eliminated or transformed.
Although "pariah" implies not only adversarial notions towards one country, but antagonism towards the whole humankind, international law or international society (vg piracy states, there could be some room for tension management:
*If "pariahs" are not monolyths (nothing in life really is), dialogue and confidence building with "unclenched fist" sectors of their society, intellectual, cultural, arts/sports, business and even political structures could be productive.
*If "pariahs" are ready to discard the most serious of their international violations (as supposed to all violations abhorrent to decent people), maybe there would be room for additional dialogue.
*If "pariahs" are giving some room to escape, that doesn't constitute amnesty of serious guilt, amnesia or a renounce to decency, but only technical ways of avoiding worst evils, maybe an internal process of reform (and, who knows, transfer of power, could start).
*If the dialogue with "pariahs" on "common values" is often impossible (besides lip service and double speak), the contact and discussion of "common objectives" or "common threats" (vg resources, environment, human security, etc) could produce some results.
*There are several "degress" of transforming a "pariah" in "partner": alleviation of local citizens or populations under a pariah's administration is only one.
*Transforming "pariah" into "partner" should not ignore the venial sin of naivete. Sometimes military and political pressure should never leave the table. At any rate, sound analysis and the need to select case by case is crucial.
Regards and thank you for the blog.
If a pariah state would have a blog, and if there could be ample access and debate, that would be good news.
Nuno R.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Actually this is the "question of the year". And one that doesn't have only one set of answers, or definite ones.
But the question itself already indicates an important political direction: the awareness that political conflict is not a metaphysical issue (at least not most of the times), but a state of tension that can be reduced, minized, eliminated or transformed.
Although "pariah" implies not only adversarial notions towards one country, but antagonism towards the whole humankind, international law or international society (vg piracy states, there could be some room for tension management:
*If "pariahs" are not monolyths (nothing in life really is), dialogue and confidence building with "unclenched fist" sectors of their society, intellectual, cultural, arts/sports, business and even political structures could be productive.
*If "pariahs" are ready to discard the most serious of their international violations (as supposed to all violations abhorrent to decent people), maybe there would be room for additional dialogue.
*If "pariahs" are giving some room to escape, that doesn't constitute amnesty of serious guilt, amnesia or a renounce to decency, but only technical ways of avoiding worst evils, maybe an internal process of reform (and, who knows, transfer of power, could start).
*If the dialogue with "pariahs" on "common values" is often impossible (besides lip service and double speak), the contact and discussion of "common objectives" or "common threats" (vg resources, environment, human security, etc) could produce some results.
*There are several "degress" of transforming a "pariah" in "partner": alleviation of local citizens or populations under a pariah's administration is only one.
*Transforming "pariah" into "partner" should not ignore the venial sin of naivete. Sometimes military and political pressure should never leave the table. At any rate, sound analysis and the need to select case by case is crucial.
Regards and thank you for the blog.
If a pariah state would have a blog, and if there could be ample access and debate, that would be good news.
Nuno R.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Eric in New Mexico writes:
Since nobody has mentioned Libya yet, I'll just pose the thought that sanctions do work occasionally, and one might anticipate miracles vis a vis Iran if the suggestions included here (originally Posted on Fri Feb 15, 2008) are followed to the letter.
If the U.S. is going to refer to the Iranian regime as a pariah, it should be treated like one.
The Iranian economy is suffering 28-30% inflation not because of the sanctions now upon the regime, but because the regime itself is totally incompetent, and the state owned, and Rev. Guard owned economic model is not viable in a world that thrives on free markets.
So, if they are cut off by the EU, Russia and China to the point where nations accept no exports from Iran period without exception, and the only things the P5+1 exports to Iran is food and basic medical supplies, how long will it take till the regime goes belly up?
The problem has been for a long time now one of the p5+1 nation's economic sectors not being in line with its governments policies to illicit a change of behavior.
This inconsistancy must end for effective diplomacy to work.
There is no compromise to be had with the regime, no "grand bargain" to persue.
As long as the regime knows it it will be propped up by trade, it will continue to abuse its people, abuse international law, murder the innocent through military support for terrorist org's (including Al-Quaida and the Taleban as well as their regular proxi), and persue weapons of mass destruction.
In light of this fact, it would be criminally negligent for any law abiding nation to have any trade relations at all with a state sponsor of terror. Period. For any reason.
As well, how can this regime be called a pariah when it still enjoys the privilage (not an inherant right of a nation) of having by charter membership, a seat and a vote in the UN?
Will someone @ State please explain this long standing paradox to me?
"Law is Logic" but this makes no sense at all to many people inside and outside Iran trying to end their 30 year national nightmare.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Since nobody has mentioned Libya yet, I'll just pose the thought that sanctions do work occasionally, and one might anticipate miracles vis a vis Iran if the suggestions included here (originally Posted on Fri Feb 15, 2008) are followed to the letter.
If the U.S. is going to refer to the Iranian regime as a pariah, it should be treated like one.
The Iranian economy is suffering 28-30% inflation not because of the sanctions now upon the regime, but because the regime itself is totally incompetent, and the state owned, and Rev. Guard owned economic model is not viable in a world that thrives on free markets.
So, if they are cut off by the EU, Russia and China to the point where nations accept no exports from Iran period without exception, and the only things the P5+1 exports to Iran is food and basic medical supplies, how long will it take till the regime goes belly up?
The problem has been for a long time now one of the p5+1 nation's economic sectors not being in line with its governments policies to illicit a change of behavior.
This inconsistancy must end for effective diplomacy to work.
There is no compromise to be had with the regime, no "grand bargain" to persue.
As long as the regime knows it it will be propped up by trade, it will continue to abuse its people, abuse international law, murder the innocent through military support for terrorist org's (including Al-Quaida and the Taleban as well as their regular proxi), and persue weapons of mass destruction.
In light of this fact, it would be criminally negligent for any law abiding nation to have any trade relations at all with a state sponsor of terror. Period. For any reason.
As well, how can this regime be called a pariah when it still enjoys the privilage (not an inherant right of a nation) of having by charter membership, a seat and a vote in the UN?
Will someone @ State please explain this long standing paradox to me?
"Law is Logic" but this makes no sense at all to many people inside and outside Iran trying to end their 30 year national nightmare.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Jane in the United Kingdom writes:
Maybe the U.S. government should reconsider its unconditional one-sided support for Israel. Not totally sever its ties with Israel but take into account the Palestinians' point of views...
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Maybe the U.S. government should reconsider its unconditional one-sided support for Israel. Not totally sever its ties with Israel but take into account the Palestinians' point of views...
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Eric in New Mexico writes:
@ Catherine in the Philippines,
http://www.state.gov/video/
Since President Arroyo just met w/ Sec. Clinton (DoS video), I would say that the U.S. is not forgetting.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
@ Catherine in the Philippines,
http://www.state.gov/video/
Since President Arroyo just met w/ Sec. Clinton (DoS video), I would say that the U.S. is not forgetting.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Catherine in the Philippines writes:
The U.S. Government had always been worrying with a lot of things but it seems like the government is forgetting one thing: The Product of the American-Filipino Alliance. Its the ABANDONED G.I. KIDS IN THE PHILIPPINES. Are we really have to be left out? Is the new president of America is also concern about us? Is he ready to give us back our fathers and help us mentally, financially, spiritually, and morally?
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
The U.S. Government had always been worrying with a lot of things but it seems like the government is forgetting one thing: The Product of the American-Filipino Alliance. Its the ABANDONED G.I. KIDS IN THE PHILIPPINES. Are we really have to be left out? Is the new president of America is also concern about us? Is he ready to give us back our fathers and help us mentally, financially, spiritually, and morally?
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
Terry in Connecticut writes:
I am no doubt going to enjoy the next 4 and hopefully 8 years of great diplomacy by the way of Pres. Obama and Sec. Hillary Clinton. I believe next week Sec. Clinton with begin her first foreign visits overseas next week. I will be following her trips plus comment here on the State Dept blog. I am a huge admirer of Secretary Clinton and I am pleased that she will do fine. I just saw Vice President Biden's remarks in Munich. He is also a great asset to the new Obama Administration.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
I am no doubt going to enjoy the next 4 and hopefully 8 years of great diplomacy by the way of Pres. Obama and Sec. Hillary Clinton. I believe next week Sec. Clinton with begin her first foreign visits overseas next week. I will be following her trips plus comment here on the State Dept blog. I am a huge admirer of Secretary Clinton and I am pleased that she will do fine. I just saw Vice President Biden's remarks in Munich. He is also a great asset to the new Obama Administration.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
R.R. in the United Arab Emirates writes:
The best method to deal with unresponsive 'pariah' regimes is not to threaten them with military actions or to enforce sanctions on them. Although the latter option weakens their economic base, it empowers their domestic influence which in turn makes them more resilient and resistant to methods of isolation and containment.
Sanctions did not work on Iraq, North Korea, Cuba or any other nationalist 'pariah' state. The only result of these methods has been domestic hostility to the West, especially the U.S., fermented by the ruling caste, not to mention the perpetual suffering of the domestic population which in turn intensfies their hate and anger towards the West.
I agree that some form of sanctions should be used but not to the degree where the population is denied basic requirements of living, a fact abused by leadership to render the entire process counter-productive. Prior to the implementation of these methods there should be constructive efforts by international organizations and NGOs to provide the best services available to this population, through Western monetary, political and logistical support to esentially win the people over.
Sanctions have been part of the daily life of the Iranian regime for the better part of the past 30 years with no progress on the diplomatic and international front towards friendly or even amicable relations with the US and the West. On the contrary. Iran has emerged as an influential and powerful force in the region with a semi-self sufficient economy based on its own natural resources and enterprises, and although not having enough money to be considered a rich nation, can still manage to dole out hundreds of millions of dollars to its 'friends' around the world, aside from modernizing its military, space program as well as its nuclear capabilities.
So sanctions are clearly not working as they were supposed to and the military threat will further worsen relations and domestic opinion, especially in the light of two wars on Muslim countries in the past 8 years.
The ideal solution, despite the fact that its too late, was for the West to win the population over through USAID, education programs, health services, and developmental projects. But this option should have been exercised in the 80s and not now.
For now, I think President Obama is on the right track and should first begin with the removal of sanctions on non-military and non-defense imports, investment and aid. Once the Iranian people realize that their standard of living has improved in an environment of economic and social development, domestic opinion will start to move away from the regime that has caused them suffering since 1979 and they will come to see the West as a force for opportunity, development and freedom.
Only then can regime change be achieved, through the people and not F-16s.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
The best method to deal with unresponsive 'pariah' regimes is not to threaten them with military actions or to enforce sanctions on them. Although the latter option weakens their economic base, it empowers their domestic influence which in turn makes them more resilient and resistant to methods of isolation and containment.
Sanctions did not work on Iraq, North Korea, Cuba or any other nationalist 'pariah' state. The only result of these methods has been domestic hostility to the West, especially the U.S., fermented by the ruling caste, not to mention the perpetual suffering of the domestic population which in turn intensfies their hate and anger towards the West.
I agree that some form of sanctions should be used but not to the degree where the population is denied basic requirements of living, a fact abused by leadership to render the entire process counter-productive. Prior to the implementation of these methods there should be constructive efforts by international organizations and NGOs to provide the best services available to this population, through Western monetary, political and logistical support to esentially win the people over.
Sanctions have been part of the daily life of the Iranian regime for the better part of the past 30 years with no progress on the diplomatic and international front towards friendly or even amicable relations with the US and the West. On the contrary. Iran has emerged as an influential and powerful force in the region with a semi-self sufficient economy based on its own natural resources and enterprises, and although not having enough money to be considered a rich nation, can still manage to dole out hundreds of millions of dollars to its 'friends' around the world, aside from modernizing its military, space program as well as its nuclear capabilities.
So sanctions are clearly not working as they were supposed to and the military threat will further worsen relations and domestic opinion, especially in the light of two wars on Muslim countries in the past 8 years.
The ideal solution, despite the fact that its too late, was for the West to win the population over through USAID, education programs, health services, and developmental projects. But this option should have been exercised in the 80s and not now.
For now, I think President Obama is on the right track and should first begin with the removal of sanctions on non-military and non-defense imports, investment and aid. Once the Iranian people realize that their standard of living has improved in an environment of economic and social development, domestic opinion will start to move away from the regime that has caused them suffering since 1979 and they will come to see the West as a force for opportunity, development and freedom.
Only then can regime change be achieved, through the people and not F-16s.
Posted on Sun Feb 08, 2009
T.J. in the United Kingdom writes:
Pariah Regime? Let us see first of all who is responsible for it's creation and why an escape route was not thought of and see if the colonial mindset overshadowed clear wisdom. We can think of ways to contain and subdue the Monster afterwards.
There was a time when Communism was THE major threat to Capitalism and the Western way of life. A number of " Rulers " were put into power in the logistically and commercially important countries to safeguard the Western interests with total disregard for the people of those countries.
The invasion of Afghanistan by the USSR led to the creation of the Islamic movement which consequently led to the 9/11 event.
The 9/11 event shows us that,the sleeping Monster maybe should not have been woken up. It was being weakened by the gradual cultural changes taking place in those countries.
All of a sudden there was a major reaction and those Governments which safeguarded the Western interests and Economy became the new Pariahs. Afghanistan and Iraq are the examples.
Do I agree with that course of action? Yes I do. Doing nothing is more costly.
Engaging the Iranian regime diplomatically can prove very costly. Iranian people should be engaged and supported instead while military action should not be disregarded. Iranian people accept the concept of a massive breakout from the jail that, they have been put in by their Government. Culturally, they easily accept that, there is a price to pay, which the innocent have paid throughout the history of Iran.
Economic sanctions alone are an insult to the Iranian people. It actually has increased their suffering.
Time is short as the point of " No return " is very near.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
Pariah Regime? Let us see first of all who is responsible for it's creation and why an escape route was not thought of and see if the colonial mindset overshadowed clear wisdom. We can think of ways to contain and subdue the Monster afterwards.
There was a time when Communism was THE major threat to Capitalism and the Western way of life. A number of " Rulers " were put into power in the logistically and commercially important countries to safeguard the Western interests with total disregard for the people of those countries.
The invasion of Afghanistan by the USSR led to the creation of the Islamic movement which consequently led to the 9/11 event.
The 9/11 event shows us that,the sleeping Monster maybe should not have been woken up. It was being weakened by the gradual cultural changes taking place in those countries.
All of a sudden there was a major reaction and those Governments which safeguarded the Western interests and Economy became the new Pariahs. Afghanistan and Iraq are the examples.
Do I agree with that course of action? Yes I do. Doing nothing is more costly.
Engaging the Iranian regime diplomatically can prove very costly. Iranian people should be engaged and supported instead while military action should not be disregarded. Iranian people accept the concept of a massive breakout from the jail that, they have been put in by their Government. Culturally, they easily accept that, there is a price to pay, which the innocent have paid throughout the history of Iran.
Economic sanctions alone are an insult to the Iranian people. It actually has increased their suffering.
Time is short as the point of " No return " is very near.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
Eric in New Mexico writes:
VP Biden's Munich Security Conference Speech:
"When it comes to radical groups that use terror as a tool, radical states that harbor extremists, undermine peace and seek or spread weapons of mass destruction and regimes that systematically kill or ethnically cleanse their own people - we must stand united and use every means at our disposal to end the threat they pose."
-Joe Biden, US Vice President
I would urge folks to read the whole speech and keep in mind that this is the prepared version and that it should be checked with the delivery of his speech.
For those interested in everyone else's, here's the link:
I look forward to tommorrow's session.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
VP Biden's Munich Security Conference Speech:
"When it comes to radical groups that use terror as a tool, radical states that harbor extremists, undermine peace and seek or spread weapons of mass destruction and regimes that systematically kill or ethnically cleanse their own people - we must stand united and use every means at our disposal to end the threat they pose."
-Joe Biden, US Vice President
I would urge folks to read the whole speech and keep in mind that this is the prepared version and that it should be checked with the delivery of his speech.
For those interested in everyone else's, here's the link:
I look forward to tommorrow's session.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
Donald in Virginia writes:
7 Feb 09
I still remember the (444) Days Americans were held hostage in the country of Iran. It would be great if the new Administration was able to communicate and get the results needed. I hope our people never put ourselves in a situation like that ever again.
Let us also remember when one of their airlines was accidently shot down by the United States.
Since Iran started launching Satellites, it should send a signal to our Nation what their true intensions are in the field of intelligence gathering.
This should be of "grave concern" to our National Security that Iran now wants to spy on countries, and most likely the United States.
My gutt feeling is the real reason they want the Satellite coverage is because then they can start putting in the Lattitude and Longitude of future targets. Which also means the missile system they were working on must be in the Advance stages by now. We cannot under estimate what Iran might or might not do.
The real problem faced with President Obama is a combination of many elements that could go wrong. He's worried about the economy and global warming. His number one concern should be to protect the constitution of the United States first. Identify who are our enemies in the world today -- Who would betray the United States? Along with knowing what the Russians intensions are as well. Puton is not going to play a game of checkers with the President. He will no doubt play a game of chess. The stakes will be high.
We should be very concerned, or grave concerned about the intensions of Iran at this moment of time...also keep in mind the relationship Russia has with Iran. Let's also remember Mr. Chavez since he was all prepared to host the Russian war ships at his front door. When you tie in Russia, Iran and Venezuela. You also should include North Korea and any other rogue third world nations. When you talk about Global Warming or Climate Change, if things do not improve in Pakistan, always remember one thing, If Usama bin laden and his terrorist group does get a hold of those 60 plus nuclear warheads, you can count on plenty of ice caps melting if they use them. Along with millions of body bags...
Godbless and praying for Peace!!!
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
7 Feb 09
I still remember the (444) Days Americans were held hostage in the country of Iran. It would be great if the new Administration was able to communicate and get the results needed. I hope our people never put ourselves in a situation like that ever again.
Let us also remember when one of their airlines was accidently shot down by the United States.
Since Iran started launching Satellites, it should send a signal to our Nation what their true intensions are in the field of intelligence gathering.
This should be of "grave concern" to our National Security that Iran now wants to spy on countries, and most likely the United States.
My gutt feeling is the real reason they want the Satellite coverage is because then they can start putting in the Lattitude and Longitude of future targets. Which also means the missile system they were working on must be in the Advance stages by now. We cannot under estimate what Iran might or might not do.
The real problem faced with President Obama is a combination of many elements that could go wrong. He's worried about the economy and global warming. His number one concern should be to protect the constitution of the United States first. Identify who are our enemies in the world today -- Who would betray the United States? Along with knowing what the Russians intensions are as well. Puton is not going to play a game of checkers with the President. He will no doubt play a game of chess. The stakes will be high.
We should be very concerned, or grave concerned about the intensions of Iran at this moment of time...also keep in mind the relationship Russia has with Iran. Let's also remember Mr. Chavez since he was all prepared to host the Russian war ships at his front door. When you tie in Russia, Iran and Venezuela. You also should include North Korea and any other rogue third world nations. When you talk about Global Warming or Climate Change, if things do not improve in Pakistan, always remember one thing, If Usama bin laden and his terrorist group does get a hold of those 60 plus nuclear warheads, you can count on plenty of ice caps melting if they use them. Along with millions of body bags...
Godbless and praying for Peace!!!
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
Terry in Connecticut writes:
We should talk to less than desirable rigimes on a secondary level for conditions then top level when real dialog can policy change come forward. I hope Pres. Obama and Sec. Clinton adopts this like they say they would.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
We should talk to less than desirable rigimes on a secondary level for conditions then top level when real dialog can policy change come forward. I hope Pres. Obama and Sec. Clinton adopts this like they say they would.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
Wendy in California writes:
First, if we make our own country a shining example of tolerance; eradicating of poverty; funding and extension of superb education; minimizing our military budget in a smart way so we can rebuild our civic society; creating a smart universal health care system; building out concentrated solar thermal -- as examples -- then we will have more of a right to preach mildly to others. Thus preach to ourselves first. Preach to ourselves first, second, and third -- then maybe fourth say some thoughtful words to others.
With this unflinching awareness of the lumber in our own eye, simultaneously we can reach out in earnest collaboration to chip away mutually -- mutually! -- at these challenges with all other countries, many of whom see *us* as a pariah and bully, as a country which shamefully neglects its poorer citizens and our common-wealth responsibilities.
The world could have a Best Practices Conference and folks could bring to the table their cleverest solutions. This respect would bolster the whole world's efforts to become more wholesome for its citizens.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
First, if we make our own country a shining example of tolerance; eradicating of poverty; funding and extension of superb education; minimizing our military budget in a smart way so we can rebuild our civic society; creating a smart universal health care system; building out concentrated solar thermal -- as examples -- then we will have more of a right to preach mildly to others. Thus preach to ourselves first. Preach to ourselves first, second, and third -- then maybe fourth say some thoughtful words to others.
With this unflinching awareness of the lumber in our own eye, simultaneously we can reach out in earnest collaboration to chip away mutually -- mutually! -- at these challenges with all other countries, many of whom see *us* as a pariah and bully, as a country which shamefully neglects its poorer citizens and our common-wealth responsibilities.
The world could have a Best Practices Conference and folks could bring to the table their cleverest solutions. This respect would bolster the whole world's efforts to become more wholesome for its citizens.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
Eric in New Mexico writes:
@ Zharkov, think Tibet...it's not exactly a good example of "bigotry into tolerance" on any level. China's still a long way off, but we are rubbing off on them as ties improve.
I'm not sure I can properly articulate how strange an honor it is to have my usual opposition in debate use my own terminology ( "group therapy" ) in context with positions I've taken up in the past:
http://blogs.state.gov/index.php/entries/us_record_un/
Mr. Assistant Secretary,
Folks compare dealing with issues in Congress like "herding cats" I've been told. In the UN's case, it seems to me to be like herding the entire zoo.
UN reform may still be riding on the back of a snail in terms of progress made overall, but you and the good folks as USUN have given it legs due in no small part to a certain Texan often accused of "Cowboy Diplomacy".
Well Brian, as anyone West of the Pecos will tell you, the job description entails the mending of fences and leading the herd to greener pastures, and is fully dependant on the strength and temperament of the horse ridden.
I've been watching the group therapy sessions for this dysfunctional family of nations that occures regularly in the Security Council and committee for the last 8 years, and I do believe the efforts are showing the promise of potential in that the UN can indeed prove to be greater than the sum of its parts.
Now if only state sponsors of terror in the UN were to be doing the "thorazene shuffle" out the door sans membership, the rest of humanity could dance a jig.
The ideological struggle with extremism is a tag team match in my opinion, and if I may be so bold to suggest this, a lot of folks have "tagged up" prior, and it's the same on the international stage....change is inevitable.....peacefull change is desirable.....and democracy R US, sayeth the people.
We've been fortunate as a nation to have a Commander in Chief with the presence of mind to understand that we don't want to give terrorists the war they want nor expect....on their terms. We give them the war they are neither prepared for nor able to fight...on our's.
A President with the guts to stand with both feet firmly on principal and with compassion for the human condition.
A word of thanks is due.
Godspeed and good luck in your next endeavor sir. Please pass my best regards on to Ambassadors and staff alike.
EJ
Posted on Fri Jan 16, 2009
--end archived post--
"cross pollination" at work I guess....(chuckle).
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
@ Zharkov, think Tibet...it's not exactly a good example of "bigotry into tolerance" on any level. China's still a long way off, but we are rubbing off on them as ties improve.
I'm not sure I can properly articulate how strange an honor it is to have my usual opposition in debate use my own terminology ( "group therapy" ) in context with positions I've taken up in the past:
http://blogs.state.gov/index.php/entries/us_record_un/
Mr. Assistant Secretary,
Folks compare dealing with issues in Congress like "herding cats" I've been told. In the UN's case, it seems to me to be like herding the entire zoo.
UN reform may still be riding on the back of a snail in terms of progress made overall, but you and the good folks as USUN have given it legs due in no small part to a certain Texan often accused of "Cowboy Diplomacy".
Well Brian, as anyone West of the Pecos will tell you, the job description entails the mending of fences and leading the herd to greener pastures, and is fully dependant on the strength and temperament of the horse ridden.
I've been watching the group therapy sessions for this dysfunctional family of nations that occures regularly in the Security Council and committee for the last 8 years, and I do believe the efforts are showing the promise of potential in that the UN can indeed prove to be greater than the sum of its parts.
Now if only state sponsors of terror in the UN were to be doing the "thorazene shuffle" out the door sans membership, the rest of humanity could dance a jig.
The ideological struggle with extremism is a tag team match in my opinion, and if I may be so bold to suggest this, a lot of folks have "tagged up" prior, and it's the same on the international stage....change is inevitable.....peacefull change is desirable.....and democracy R US, sayeth the people.
We've been fortunate as a nation to have a Commander in Chief with the presence of mind to understand that we don't want to give terrorists the war they want nor expect....on their terms. We give them the war they are neither prepared for nor able to fight...on our's.
A President with the guts to stand with both feet firmly on principal and with compassion for the human condition.
A word of thanks is due.
Godspeed and good luck in your next endeavor sir. Please pass my best regards on to Ambassadors and staff alike.
EJ
Posted on Fri Jan 16, 2009
--end archived post--
"cross pollination" at work I guess....(chuckle).
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
Eric in New Mexico writes:
Actually Joe, the Iranian regime behaves worse than animals towards its own people, and if you think I was refering to The People of Iran in my last post as "animals" then that is your problem of willfully misinterpreting the metaphor and as such, everything I've had to say on this subject to date including the history of Persia and Cyrus the Great.
Joe, I've been shot at by professionals, and you'll have to do a lot better than that. Suggest you review your own posts on this archived thread, since your opinions blow every which way the wind does while mine never change on this subject. Though I do present them with some colorful language from time to time...(chuckle)
Let's start with this.
Eric in New Mexico writes:
Right about now I'd say Amanutjob should take his 3-D rose colored glasses and see something besides a green glow emanating from his egotistical megalomaniacal fantasies.
Right about now I'd say most of Iran wishes someday to not be considered the leading state sponsor of terrorism.
Save those that have the responsibility for being such, that is.
Right about now I wonder what changes be the result of a change in policy from "Behavior change" to that of "Regime Change," or more correctly: "Regime Replacement Therapy."?
Right about now I could see sanctions being part of either policy.
Right about now would probably be good , if the intent is to "isolate the regime ", to boot the regime strait out of the UN.
In revoking membership , the regime reaps the reward for having violated every aspect of the UN charter and Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Convention on the Prevention of Genocide, as well as being in standing violation of SC resolutions on terrorism, Iraq, Lebanon, the "Quartet " agreements on a two-state solution, and the Conventions on Biological and Chemical weapons, in addition to the ones recently passed by the SC regarding the nuclear issues ...with another on the way.
Right about now I suggest we all put on 3-D glasses and look at the whole enchilada, because what hasn't been effective yet is due to the fact that a piecemeal approach has been taken up to this point.
This is not to say that the many issues have not been addressed by the U.S. government in concert with other nations. I mean to say that they are considered separately, and not as a holistic analysis as an approach to sanctions.
I am not impressed with the press' role in all of this, exhorting speculative strike scenarios, and spin offs of dire consequences.
Right about now folks might need a few ideas on how to make the international system work in Iran's case.
I'd start from a simple premise.
"Do right by the people. "
1. Implementation of full international economic and military sanctions on the Islamic Republic regime via UN security council resolution based on human rights, support for terrorism, and this to be tabled with or without IAEA board recommendation on the nuclear threat the theocracy poses.
These two issues alone should be viewed as circumstance the world cannot turn it's back upon, at risk of civilization itself.
2. Full diplomatic sanction and closing of Iranian embassies world-wide. Diplomatic sanction by the UN, and removal of representation from this international forum.
3. Freezing of any and all financial assets of the Islamic Republic regime, their current and former leadership, and corporate interests world-wide.
4. Repeated statements by world leaders publicly calling for the leadership of the Islamic Republic regime to step down peacefully, and to relinquish the government to the hands and will of the Iranian people.
If these basic things cannot be implemented in full, in totality without loopholes, being unanimously " seized of the matter " as an instrument of global political will enforced by the international use of force of arms if needed; Then the chances of realizing " behavior change " are slim indeed.
Whereas regime replacement therapy looks good to a lot of Iranians, and a few of those are convinced it can be done without U.S./Coalition bombs.
Right about now might be a good time to show a little solidarity, and not just with words, but diplomacy.
Lot of hard work to get folks on the same page as it was, over enrichment. Maybe what I've suggested is not possible to achive in the UN. Iran becomes a "test case" for UN reform in multiple ways.
Posted on Fri Feb 15, 2008
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
Actually Joe, the Iranian regime behaves worse than animals towards its own people, and if you think I was refering to The People of Iran in my last post as "animals" then that is your problem of willfully misinterpreting the metaphor and as such, everything I've had to say on this subject to date including the history of Persia and Cyrus the Great.
Joe, I've been shot at by professionals, and you'll have to do a lot better than that. Suggest you review your own posts on this archived thread, since your opinions blow every which way the wind does while mine never change on this subject. Though I do present them with some colorful language from time to time...(chuckle)
Let's start with this.
Eric in New Mexico writes:
Right about now I'd say Amanutjob should take his 3-D rose colored glasses and see something besides a green glow emanating from his egotistical megalomaniacal fantasies.
Right about now I'd say most of Iran wishes someday to not be considered the leading state sponsor of terrorism.
Save those that have the responsibility for being such, that is.
Right about now I wonder what changes be the result of a change in policy from "Behavior change" to that of "Regime Change," or more correctly: "Regime Replacement Therapy."?
Right about now I could see sanctions being part of either policy.
Right about now would probably be good , if the intent is to "isolate the regime ", to boot the regime strait out of the UN.
In revoking membership , the regime reaps the reward for having violated every aspect of the UN charter and Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Convention on the Prevention of Genocide, as well as being in standing violation of SC resolutions on terrorism, Iraq, Lebanon, the "Quartet " agreements on a two-state solution, and the Conventions on Biological and Chemical weapons, in addition to the ones recently passed by the SC regarding the nuclear issues ...with another on the way.
Right about now I suggest we all put on 3-D glasses and look at the whole enchilada, because what hasn't been effective yet is due to the fact that a piecemeal approach has been taken up to this point.
This is not to say that the many issues have not been addressed by the U.S. government in concert with other nations. I mean to say that they are considered separately, and not as a holistic analysis as an approach to sanctions.
I am not impressed with the press' role in all of this, exhorting speculative strike scenarios, and spin offs of dire consequences.
Right about now folks might need a few ideas on how to make the international system work in Iran's case.
I'd start from a simple premise.
"Do right by the people. "
1. Implementation of full international economic and military sanctions on the Islamic Republic regime via UN security council resolution based on human rights, support for terrorism, and this to be tabled with or without IAEA board recommendation on the nuclear threat the theocracy poses.
These two issues alone should be viewed as circumstance the world cannot turn it's back upon, at risk of civilization itself.
2. Full diplomatic sanction and closing of Iranian embassies world-wide. Diplomatic sanction by the UN, and removal of representation from this international forum.
3. Freezing of any and all financial assets of the Islamic Republic regime, their current and former leadership, and corporate interests world-wide.
4. Repeated statements by world leaders publicly calling for the leadership of the Islamic Republic regime to step down peacefully, and to relinquish the government to the hands and will of the Iranian people.
If these basic things cannot be implemented in full, in totality without loopholes, being unanimously " seized of the matter " as an instrument of global political will enforced by the international use of force of arms if needed; Then the chances of realizing " behavior change " are slim indeed.
Whereas regime replacement therapy looks good to a lot of Iranians, and a few of those are convinced it can be done without U.S./Coalition bombs.
Right about now might be a good time to show a little solidarity, and not just with words, but diplomacy.
Lot of hard work to get folks on the same page as it was, over enrichment. Maybe what I've suggested is not possible to achive in the UN. Iran becomes a "test case" for UN reform in multiple ways.
Posted on Fri Feb 15, 2008
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
Aidara in New York writes:
First, congratulate the state on an issue that it has successfully tackled within its country or the local area. Second, segue into how the state can play a role in improving relations within the larger community. It must be stated who in the international community feels the need for the national regime to transform and why, perhaps reps from those countries should be there as well (this should be executed in a manner that is easily recognized in that country's culture as comfortable or friendly). The members should include neighboring states so that the target nation feels an immediate interest in fixing the issue. Third, it must be stated how this transformation will benefit the respective state and its relationship with its neighbors and the broader community. Fourth, it must be stated how the present condition of the state negatively affects or undermines the state's affairs with its neighbors and the broader community and the state's national interests. The focus should always be on the country and how it can improve its status in the broader community, in this way it will not feel as if someone is demeaning or bullying it. One must preface these suggestions with why an improved version of that state is meaningful to the rest of the community. By giving examples of how such a transformation has improved another state's political and economic relationships, one doesn't have to tell the state what will happen if it doesn't comply. We must keep the ball in the states court and approach the situation as an advocate, not as an expert who knows what is best for the state better than does the state, even if that is the truth. A more engaging and team oriented approach will less likely create a sudden enemy, than the self righteous or ultimatum approach, which should only be used as a last resort.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
First, congratulate the state on an issue that it has successfully tackled within its country or the local area. Second, segue into how the state can play a role in improving relations within the larger community. It must be stated who in the international community feels the need for the national regime to transform and why, perhaps reps from those countries should be there as well (this should be executed in a manner that is easily recognized in that country's culture as comfortable or friendly). The members should include neighboring states so that the target nation feels an immediate interest in fixing the issue. Third, it must be stated how this transformation will benefit the respective state and its relationship with its neighbors and the broader community. Fourth, it must be stated how the present condition of the state negatively affects or undermines the state's affairs with its neighbors and the broader community and the state's national interests. The focus should always be on the country and how it can improve its status in the broader community, in this way it will not feel as if someone is demeaning or bullying it. One must preface these suggestions with why an improved version of that state is meaningful to the rest of the community. By giving examples of how such a transformation has improved another state's political and economic relationships, one doesn't have to tell the state what will happen if it doesn't comply. We must keep the ball in the states court and approach the situation as an advocate, not as an expert who knows what is best for the state better than does the state, even if that is the truth. A more engaging and team oriented approach will less likely create a sudden enemy, than the self righteous or ultimatum approach, which should only be used as a last resort.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
Zharkov in U.S.A. writes:
Group therapy by the "international community" is best left for the U.N. Making friends out of enemies is always a one-on-one adventure for each national leader.
The Chinese are skilled in turning enemies into friends, bigotry into tolerance, and landscape into food, so I would follow their example, as did president Nixon, who went to China to make friends.
What China taught us seems to have been forgotten.
If you are a president, you go to a nation's leader and ask him, in a diplomatic way, what his problems are generally, and then specifically what is problem is with us, and why we can't be friends.
Once we are friends, we give friendly advice, such as, stop flooding the world with counterfeit currency, or stop borrowing so much money that can never be repaid, or stop stuffing our foreign aid into his personal Swiss bank accounts, stop using our weapons on the neighbors, etc.
He will, of course, ask us to stop funding opposition groups to overthrow him, stop propaganda against his government, stop assassinating his ministers, stop the embargo against his country, and stop the World Bank from destroying his nation's economy.
Naturally, there are some things even a politician won't do, and at that point the magic ends. A pariah without a conscience or ethics or common sense is not going to change merely because we ask. There has to be some sort of humanity remaining in the pariah government for diplomacy to work, and some pariahs just don't have it.
There will always be some places in the world that are better left alone. Iran was once such a place and we messed them up really well, so now instead of an anti-communist government, we face an anti-human government that beats women, executes children, and kidnaps tourists. Had we left them alone to begin with, they would not likely be on our list of pariah states today. Sometimes less engagement is better.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
Group therapy by the "international community" is best left for the U.N. Making friends out of enemies is always a one-on-one adventure for each national leader.
The Chinese are skilled in turning enemies into friends, bigotry into tolerance, and landscape into food, so I would follow their example, as did president Nixon, who went to China to make friends.
What China taught us seems to have been forgotten.
If you are a president, you go to a nation's leader and ask him, in a diplomatic way, what his problems are generally, and then specifically what is problem is with us, and why we can't be friends.
Once we are friends, we give friendly advice, such as, stop flooding the world with counterfeit currency, or stop borrowing so much money that can never be repaid, or stop stuffing our foreign aid into his personal Swiss bank accounts, stop using our weapons on the neighbors, etc.
He will, of course, ask us to stop funding opposition groups to overthrow him, stop propaganda against his government, stop assassinating his ministers, stop the embargo against his country, and stop the World Bank from destroying his nation's economy.
Naturally, there are some things even a politician won't do, and at that point the magic ends. A pariah without a conscience or ethics or common sense is not going to change merely because we ask. There has to be some sort of humanity remaining in the pariah government for diplomacy to work, and some pariahs just don't have it.
There will always be some places in the world that are better left alone. Iran was once such a place and we messed them up really well, so now instead of an anti-communist government, we face an anti-human government that beats women, executes children, and kidnaps tourists. Had we left them alone to begin with, they would not likely be on our list of pariah states today. Sometimes less engagement is better.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
Joe in Tennessee writes:
Iran is not like much of what we view as the Middle East. Even Russian diplomats make that well known. They have a strong and formal culture. They are regimented and organized with a history which has affected the entire world in productive manners and they realize this. They do not view themselves as anything other than perhaps the most civilized people in their part of the world and well they may be.
Please view the history: http://www.mideastweb.org/iranhistory.htm
Iran has been deluged with Russian, American and British intervention for over eight decades, as well as their own internal problems which may well have been instigated for foreign interest. No wonder they are unpredictable. Did anyone even think of this? How would you feel? God, the civil war is just ending here in America. It is the minority who is controlling the majority, and the majority has only the past to premise false fuel to put on our Diplomatic efforts. Combined with Russia who has been overtly antagonistic in all areas in which America has interest.
FREE TRADE with the International community is THE ANSWER or they will be subjugated to Russia. If the people want to be and Independent Nation, they must realize this or be made to understand it.
To be independent, which they have the ability to; they must integrate into the International community in a profitable manner. What is so hard about that? Are they so insecure they need a foreign power to be independent? Apparently they are caught up in believing so without due cause. They have natural resources a well educated population and a strong work force.
THEY ARE NOT ANIMALS ERIC:
First know civilization by 500 years over Egypt; the first known empire; probably the inventors of free global trade; Insurance by Government; Weight, Money and Measurements were standardized in Persia; the first known bricks for construction; windmills; chess; one of the earliest Legal Codes in the world; the first Tax System; noodles were first invented in Persia;from housing to food to engineering, they have had a vast influence on all of us.
It is this proud history of productivity and invention which the world needs to extract again. They have created their own chains this time and must realize it is not the United States or Israel who is subjugating them.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
Iran is not like much of what we view as the Middle East. Even Russian diplomats make that well known. They have a strong and formal culture. They are regimented and organized with a history which has affected the entire world in productive manners and they realize this. They do not view themselves as anything other than perhaps the most civilized people in their part of the world and well they may be.
Please view the history: http://www.mideastweb.org/iranhistory.htm
Iran has been deluged with Russian, American and British intervention for over eight decades, as well as their own internal problems which may well have been instigated for foreign interest. No wonder they are unpredictable. Did anyone even think of this? How would you feel? God, the civil war is just ending here in America. It is the minority who is controlling the majority, and the majority has only the past to premise false fuel to put on our Diplomatic efforts. Combined with Russia who has been overtly antagonistic in all areas in which America has interest.
FREE TRADE with the International community is THE ANSWER or they will be subjugated to Russia. If the people want to be and Independent Nation, they must realize this or be made to understand it.
To be independent, which they have the ability to; they must integrate into the International community in a profitable manner. What is so hard about that? Are they so insecure they need a foreign power to be independent? Apparently they are caught up in believing so without due cause. They have natural resources a well educated population and a strong work force.
THEY ARE NOT ANIMALS ERIC:
First know civilization by 500 years over Egypt; the first known empire; probably the inventors of free global trade; Insurance by Government; Weight, Money and Measurements were standardized in Persia; the first known bricks for construction; windmills; chess; one of the earliest Legal Codes in the world; the first Tax System; noodles were first invented in Persia;from housing to food to engineering, they have had a vast influence on all of us.
It is this proud history of productivity and invention which the world needs to extract again. They have created their own chains this time and must realize it is not the United States or Israel who is subjugating them.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
Brenda in Maryland writes:
The first step is to take the time to carefully listen to their concerns, understand and accept their culture and embrace our differences. The U.S.A. has for too long imposed our culture on other nations. We have to give up something to gain something.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
The first step is to take the time to carefully listen to their concerns, understand and accept their culture and embrace our differences. The U.S.A. has for too long imposed our culture on other nations. We have to give up something to gain something.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
Eric in New Mexico writes:
Well folks, I think I have a practical answer to this and I do believe President Obama will appreciate the metaphorical and litteral approach presented here, since there's going to be a puppy in the Whitehouse.
It is the nature of puppies to make messes, some of which stink and are deemed socially unacceptable to humans.
So house-training the puppy becomes the first step towards its evolution as a man's best friend.
In order to do this effectively, one must speak the puppy's language.
It serves no useful purpose to talk in rational terms and try to explain things, nor plead with, or yell at the puppy to go against his nature, as puppies will do what puppies do regardless of any attempted human diplomacy.
Nor does it do any good to beat the puppy half to death in anger, you'll simply confuse him as he won't understand why you are doing so since he's simply being a puppy.
Now anyone who has observed the meeting of minds between canines will note that they wag tail on approach, stand head to tail side by side and sniff each other.
This is olfactory communication at it's most refined among the species.
So the practical method for housetraining the puppy involves the olfactory experience of your displeasure with the mess he's just made on your carpet by rubbing his nose in it and evicting him from the house on a case by case basis.
You can't cut the puppy any slack, and the method must be consistantly applied every time he makes a mess till he finally understands. In this process you can pretty well determine the puppy's general level of intelligence by how many times it takes till he gets the message and evolves out of his mess making phase into a proper and respectable dog.
Now maybe some folks reading this may be a little confused as to how this applies to pariahs among the family of nations, so I've included an interpretation for those having a failure of imagination.
The carpet is the fabric of civilized society, and the house holds the family of nations under under one roof in NYC. The messes consist of a miriad of crimes against humanity.
I remember when my dog Paco felt the irresistable urge to raid my neighbor's chicken coop, and my neighbor politely presented his now dead prize rooster, and informed my father that he would simply shoot my dog the next time he came on the property.
My Dad then tied the dead rooster around Paco's neck with bailing wire, and left it there till it rotted off. Needless to say Paco had no house privilages for a very long time. But he never, ever raided another chicken coop again as long as he lived.
I'll leave it to Undersecretary Burns and "the powers that be" in government as to how Paco's example may be best deemed applicable in regards to engaging the world's leading state sponsor of terror.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
Well folks, I think I have a practical answer to this and I do believe President Obama will appreciate the metaphorical and litteral approach presented here, since there's going to be a puppy in the Whitehouse.
It is the nature of puppies to make messes, some of which stink and are deemed socially unacceptable to humans.
So house-training the puppy becomes the first step towards its evolution as a man's best friend.
In order to do this effectively, one must speak the puppy's language.
It serves no useful purpose to talk in rational terms and try to explain things, nor plead with, or yell at the puppy to go against his nature, as puppies will do what puppies do regardless of any attempted human diplomacy.
Nor does it do any good to beat the puppy half to death in anger, you'll simply confuse him as he won't understand why you are doing so since he's simply being a puppy.
Now anyone who has observed the meeting of minds between canines will note that they wag tail on approach, stand head to tail side by side and sniff each other.
This is olfactory communication at it's most refined among the species.
So the practical method for housetraining the puppy involves the olfactory experience of your displeasure with the mess he's just made on your carpet by rubbing his nose in it and evicting him from the house on a case by case basis.
You can't cut the puppy any slack, and the method must be consistantly applied every time he makes a mess till he finally understands. In this process you can pretty well determine the puppy's general level of intelligence by how many times it takes till he gets the message and evolves out of his mess making phase into a proper and respectable dog.
Now maybe some folks reading this may be a little confused as to how this applies to pariahs among the family of nations, so I've included an interpretation for those having a failure of imagination.
The carpet is the fabric of civilized society, and the house holds the family of nations under under one roof in NYC. The messes consist of a miriad of crimes against humanity.
I remember when my dog Paco felt the irresistable urge to raid my neighbor's chicken coop, and my neighbor politely presented his now dead prize rooster, and informed my father that he would simply shoot my dog the next time he came on the property.
My Dad then tied the dead rooster around Paco's neck with bailing wire, and left it there till it rotted off. Needless to say Paco had no house privilages for a very long time. But he never, ever raided another chicken coop again as long as he lived.
I'll leave it to Undersecretary Burns and "the powers that be" in government as to how Paco's example may be best deemed applicable in regards to engaging the world's leading state sponsor of terror.
Posted on Sat Feb 07, 2009
Klint in Washington writes:
3 things come to mind..
Handle them individually. Though I despise these bullies, painting them with just one brush can hurt long term attempts to remove these cancers of humanity. They still must be identified and the world reminded of them.
Do what can be done to identify and share with the world who their support locally and perhaps internationally are. These people probably don't work alone and exposing the actual infrastructure vs. aiming it at one person may provide some help in getting some progress made.
Consider offering training refugees/escapees of these problem nations in regards to infrastructure creation and maintenance, medical etc to help turn the stress on their host countries to a benefit. To help the transition perhaps have initial years doing public support work in parts of their host country as part of a pay/scholarship agreement program. This will have additional benefit of positive press for democratic change in regards to their originating country. And perhaps also offer training things in regards to warfare should that card of desperation have to be played as their language and familiarity would be an obvious benefit.
Posted on Fri Feb 06, 2009
3 things come to mind..
Handle them individually. Though I despise these bullies, painting them with just one brush can hurt long term attempts to remove these cancers of humanity. They still must be identified and the world reminded of them.
Do what can be done to identify and share with the world who their support locally and perhaps internationally are. These people probably don't work alone and exposing the actual infrastructure vs. aiming it at one person may provide some help in getting some progress made.
Consider offering training refugees/escapees of these problem nations in regards to infrastructure creation and maintenance, medical etc to help turn the stress on their host countries to a benefit. To help the transition perhaps have initial years doing public support work in parts of their host country as part of a pay/scholarship agreement program. This will have additional benefit of positive press for democratic change in regards to their originating country. And perhaps also offer training things in regards to warfare should that card of desperation have to be played as their language and familiarity would be an obvious benefit.
Posted on Fri Feb 06, 2009
Page 1 of 1 pages