Photo of the Week: Advancing International Security

Posted by Hannah Johnson
February 3, 2012
Assistant Secretary Gottemoeller Delivers Opening Statement at 2012 Conference on Disarmament

This week's "Photo of the Week" comes to us from the First Plenary of the 2012 Session of the Conference on Disarmament (CD) in Geneva, Switzerland, on January 24, 2012. Assistant Secretary of State for Arms Control, Verification and Compliance Rose E. Gottemoeller delivered the opening statement for the United States on the progress on arms control and disarmament that has been made over the course of the past year.

Assistant Secretary Gottemoeller said, "The New START Treaty entered into force on February 5, 2011.… The treaty represents a strong foundation for further bilateral reductions and an important step on the path towards a world without nuclear weapons. Discussions between our two governments on the next steps are underway."

Assistant Secretary Gottemoeller also discussed beginning negotiations on a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT). She said, "If the CD fails to deliver an FMCT negotiation this year, we will again have shirked our responsibility to move forward towards a world without nuclear weapons…. We recognize that this is a crucial year for the CD as an institution and that the UN General Assembly is monitoring our progress closely. Let's seize the opportunity to make real progress here and restore the vibrancy of this once vital institution. Business as usual is a recipe for disaster."

On February 3-4, 2012, global leaders gather for the 48th Munich Security Conference, an annual event that addresses common security challenges. The 2012 Munich Security Conference agenda includes a broad range of issues. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton will address the conference, where she will reaffirm the fundamental importance of the transatlantic relationship and Europe's role as an essential partner in addressing global security challenges. You can follow her travel to Germany on state.gov's trip page as well as on Facebook and Twitter.

Comments

Comments

down67
February 5, 2012

W.W. writes:

international security : when a spiritual country leader states as the following and he is not condemn from an international community as a brutal tribal belleaver then International security has an huge problem

Iran is waiting for the Mahdi

Amid crippling sanctions over its nuclear weapons program, Iran is continuing to prepare itself for war against the West, and now is warning of a coming great event. “In light of the realization of the divine promise by almighty God, the Zionists and the Great Satan (America) will soon be defeated,” Ayatollah Khamenei, the Iranian supreme leader, is warning.

Ashim C.
|
India
February 5, 2012

Ashim C. in India writes:

Issue of arms control of both conventional and non conventional type is most critical for Asia, which is hot bed of some of the most explosive territorial, water resource related dispute in which some of the strongest millitary powers with nuclear arms. This is incidentally also the largest concentration of poorest population of world, which have the highest levels of defense spending. Such conferences should be held in Beijing, New Delhi and Islamabad in rotation. Without their defense outlays, this region can be harbinger of unprecedent growth of trade and commerce of civilian goods and services among nations in this region and between this region and rest of the world. Process can start with realistic appreciation of threat perceptions of these nations and holding out to people of the region promise of better life. Add up the defense budget of the region and see how realistic the proposition is. But international diplomacy for this has to begin at the level of next generation of population who have the greatest stake in the issue.

John P.
|
Greece
February 5, 2012

John P. in Greece writes:

@ W.W.

We sometimes regret for things we had not read in the past.

Ayatollah Khamenei will surely regret that he didn’t take advantage of what the “Idiot’s guide” could offer him in terms of helping his nation.

Besides, he will feel very disappointed when he realize that “Why not to make war with America”, EJ’s web-bestseller, is absolutely FREE (CHUCKLE) through the archives of our BLOG and only for a fraction of what the Iranian government will cost to their country in case they don’t find the courage and time to go through the provided study cases and analysis in order to develop a more clever strategy.

I hope they stop all these childish nuclear experiments and threats and start reading from Political Science 101 till the “guide”. It’s their only chance… to defrag their future.

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
February 6, 2012

Eric in New Mexico writes:

@ John in Greece,

Dude, the thing about free advice is that it's worth absolutely nothing as long as the other guy ain't listening.

And with the "supreme leader" of Iran, the only way that's going to happen is if the State dept. dresses me up as the Mahdi, and convinces him I've posted the word of Allah (raw and unedited) on "the great Satan's" blog, otherwise affectionately called Dipnote...(chuckle).

Considering the Title;

"The Cure for Political Stupidity, and /or How Not to go to War with America (the idiot's guide)"

And knowing how much Iranians generally like conspiracies, it will take folks @ State quite the Oscar-winning diplomatic effort to convince the grand ol' pissed off preacher I'm the real deal, but they can start by explaining to him that it was written in such a way as folks in the wild, wild, infidel West could understand and appreciate, knowing he of course could make heads or tails of it regardless, since the grand poobah of Iran is the sole authority authorized to interpret what may be "Satanic verses" and what may be created from a higher intelligence than his own.

As for things past read, posted, and digested, I've regurgitated a few links on this thread so the readership may not have any regrets, or miss out on all the fun I've had Divinely trying to inspire the masses...as well as my Gov.,.. to think...LOL!

"http://blogs.state.gov/index.php/site/entry/unesco_education_holocaust#C..."

Disclaimer;

( I hereby indemnify the US dept. of State for any and all responsibility or damages incurred for any Fatwa that may be placed on my head by any Iranian official after having published this work on their official blog)

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
February 6, 2012

Eric in New Mexico writes:

@ Ashim C. in India,

You might find this site to be informative;

'http://gsn.nti.org/gsn/'

...as Sam Nunn - Senator, Co-Chairman and CEO, Nuclear Threat Initiative spoke at the security conference;

'http://www.securityconference.de/Samuel-A-Nunn.824+M52087573ab0.0.html'

---

here's a few more links to video of various speakers including Sec. Clinton;

'http://www.securityconference.de/Hillary-R-Clinton.827+M52087573ab0.0.html'

Main link to access all speakers;

'http://www.securityconference.de/Speeches.422+M52087573ab0.0.html'

I would caution you that prosperity cannot be achieved at the expense of security, simply because humanity does not live in an ideal world in peaceful coexistance, and so a balance must be achieved in what kind of future one invests in to create a more peaceful and prosperous existance.

I mean it would be great if every nation with nuclear missiles duck-taped all the world's pissed off preachers to them so the rest of humanity could one night soon watch a a grand fireworks display on the moon, and never have to worry about nuclear war again, but my friend, we're a long way off from getting there from here, so long as what is in the common interests of humanity is still up for debate while dictators and terrorists are on the loose, and much handwringing about what to do to relieve ourselves of them runs amok in political fora in never ending position papers and a lack of trust among those in the international community.

best,

EJ

million95
February 6, 2012

W.W. writes:

@ John P. in Greece -- well your message is too complicated to be interpretated for my central average intelligence mind but I just know one thing and one thing only and is that we are in front of something that human kind has never faced and experienced before in world history...

John
|
Canada
February 6, 2012

John in Canada writes:

Always fascinating to read the comments on here. How much are you guys paid?

@ WW - hate to break it to you but the Jews and Christians are waiting for someone and are just as passionate as the Iranians. Or have you overlooked this or just plain forget the inconvenience of this?

@ Eric & John P in Greece - you guys remind me of the old muppets that sit up on the balcony - you know who/what im talking about?

Do you guys get your information on reality or from Hollywood?

How many wars has America engaged in since WW2? What has it really done for America? What point is war if your country gets hammered into the ground financially? What country/empire has ever engaged in war that does their people worse? The British empire comes to mind.

look around - do Americans have more freedom or less? Are Americans better off financially because of these wars? NO and that is not just reality - that is epic stupidity of the highest order.

How long have so many nations been fighting the Taliban? Surely if the American military is all that you spew - then that war should have been done in 6 months - 10 years on and you probably will have to hand back power to the Taliban. You call that a success?

In Iraq - look at the place - you call that a success? Give me failure over your Muppet perception of success any day.

If these two latest wars are anything to go by - what the heck would war look like with multiple million man armies coming from the east? Not good IMHO. SCREWED comes to mind.

America funded Pakistan (a country if you grease some palms with cash you can find out anything) while the most hunted terrorist hid within her borders. Not only did he hide but seems he was living with his wives no less, in a very large home. Not what you would expect from the most wanted terrorist; hunted supposedly by how many security services in the world? You call that a success?

Clearly he felt safe to do so. Or do you think someone who feels threatened hides with his family in such a way?

Seems he felt so safe he even got married while on the run. Do you really think that elements within Pakistan could offer him such safety and security for so long by themselves? Not a chance - I would speculate that there are elements within your supposed friendly countries that America shares info with, that had a heavy hand in this protection of such a loser for so long. Ever crossed your Rambo minds or has the obvious eluded you?

Now if this guy had help from so called friendly countries - I would say America has a much bigger problem than AQ or Iran. I would go so far as to say that conflict with Iran just furthers the goals of those that wish harm to America and muppets like you guys further it like unwitting fools.

While people like you busily bark at the moon day or night - you remain totally utterly clueless in the light of day of what stares you in the face.

War with Iran would prove devastating for America. But don't take my word for it - go to war and see for yourself.

Its not rocket science.

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
February 6, 2012

Eric in New Mexico writes:

@ WW,

Sorry to butt in on your innocence of mind, but John's message was more of an inside joke, and really all I can do is provide the links to the tail end of the story...(chuckle)...as no "spoiler" to a novel without end, for this book John's refering to is an invention born of a common understanding, co-authored by the citizens of every nation that comments here, including those who'd think it would take an "act of God" to get the mullah's and ayatollahs of Iran along with the rest of the power structure of the Islamic Republic of Iran to become truly democratic, a nation of free individuals, free from the oppression of the State.

I personally agree with your assesment by the way, as there is a distinct difference in the ability of a nation or a group of nations to "contain" or to achieve "behaivior change" of a totalitairian theocracy based upon a militarist architecture and quasi-socialist economic model and expect global peace and tranquility to prevail.

That's flat expecting pigs to fly....(chuckle).

It's not like the Soviet Union when we outspent on defense of Europe, to the point that keepin' up with the Jones' on the Soviet system nearly bankrupted them trying to keep pace with us, and there was no real trade between West and East on the Eurasian continent.

It is far easier to change a Socialist Totalitarian model of government into a true democratic experiment than it is to bring a theocratic based milataristic dictatorship ruled by a "supreme leader" who accuses his detractors among the public to be "warring against God".

Note:

[ No insult to policy makers intetended, but

I think it's time to put policy

"under review"....if that's what folks

call - thinkin' about it -...(a logical

conclusion derived from a cause and effect

continue-in). ]

I keep tryin to get on with "Change we can live with, but there are those idiots out there that keep me writing in new chapters of Political stupidity to provide imputus for a different kind of diplomatic lexicon to emerge.

Starting with;

"Regime Replacement Therapy" as to replace the tired ol' "Regime Change" that just doesn't fit a proper description of the notion anymore.

The Therapy be all about winning the peace.

best,

EJ

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
February 6, 2012

Eric in New Mexico writes:

@ John in Canada,

Re: @ Eric & John P in Greece - you guys remind me of the old muppets that sit up on the balcony - you know who/what im talking about?

Look, you can refer to us as "the Smurfs" for all I care, but really....we are as "old" friends after 4 + years having conversations on this blog. Yet never having met in person.

Such is the potential "unintended consequence" of this blog, but being just sinply a social side effect of of the continue -in.

As for your perceptions of America's "security posture" in the world, what you are witness to is a work in progress, with some on the job training thrown in.

Pretty tough to know just what will unfold in the future, but governments make assesmemts by probabilities and estimates.

"Fluid" is just another word for change.

As Karzai once put it;

"We got to do a million times better."

The people will remember who supported their freedom and who did not.

It's why America has no permanent enemies.

I get my understanding from experience with the Iranian opposition insofar as I've helped them have a voice in the matter at points in time past, and it's been an honor working with folks lookin' to be free.

You ought to come on down South here and pay a visit I'll show you freedom. And a multi-ethnic culture all living in peace for hundreds of years.

best,

EJ

John P.
|
Greece
February 6, 2012

John P. in Greece writes:

@ John in Canada

Why do you ask? You can't afford us anyway "Sir"...

We are not for sale. We just write.

By the way, how much are you paid?... for asking this?

It's not a rocket science for sure. Iran has done it a rocket science and threat.

I am near by the area and i wnat to live!

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
February 6, 2012

Eric in New Mexico writes:

P.S. @ John in Canada,

If you were to follow the link I provided, then follow the last link on the cxomments I provided on that other thread "never again"--you'l come to an exact understanding of what I actually get out of this.

Payment comes in different forms than a paycheck.

regards,

EJ

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
February 7, 2012

Eric in New Mexico writes:

@ John in Canada,

Regarding your assesment that a war with Iran would do vast harm to America;

I...the citizen consider this a "tag team" match....rather than "The long war"...no offense...but I , speaking only for myself as an individual, find the concept of "the long war" wholy unacceptable for one basic fundamental reason, it will be my kids and their kids who'll have to win it.

And if I may, 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.

So please accept this citizen's National Intelligence Estimate in the spirit of mindset that the war on terror is evolving struggle, but not neccesarily pre-determined to be of a generation or more's duration.

Having read Sun Tzu, and understanding one of his basic military precepts was that one never allows the enemy to dictate the place or timing of battle.

So then, in the interests of global peace and security, we must not remain in static defense of freedom, but place the war on terrorism in its proper place, not in the streets of those we have liberated, but on the home turf of our enemy.

No offense do I mean to anyone in saying this....wish I knew a better way to articulate what I see as "the bottom line" as it were.

We have failed to tap the greatest ally in the war on terrorism, which is the Iranian people and their thirst for freedom. Half measures and underfunded, lack of global moral support, and continued hand-wringing as to proper international measures , when it is self-evident that it would be criminally negligent to support the Islamic Republic of Iran one day longer via trade or diplomatic ties, our allies also face a clear choice, and the Iranian people will remember who supported their freedom after the inevitable fall of the regime in Tehran.

As long as the leading sponsor of terrorism exists as safe haven next door to the fledgling democracies we've helped establish over the last 5 years, no amount of troops, no amount of diplomacy, and no amount of money spent in nation building will change the dynamics of the instability created by those who want, and have been engaged in war with the US over several decades.

That said, I am in full agreement with the President when he said,

"And the Shia extremists have achieved something that al Qaeda has so far failed to do: In 1979, they took control of a major power, the nation of Iran, subjugating its proud people to a regime of tyranny, and using that nation's resources to fund the spread of terror and pursue their radical agenda."
(Excerpt from speech-President Discusses Global War on Terror
Capital Hilton Hotel ,Washington, D.C.)

We don't want to give them 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 terms.

--- EJ 2006 CNIE for the NSC

Seems to be exactly what congress is doing via targeted sanctions on Iran's economic and banking sectors , and as long as Iranians keep attacking embassies, they are diplomaticly "self isolating".

Fact is Pres. Obama & team have done a pretty fair job of furthering the kind of international partnerships which were formed
in the post 9/11 , but have now just come to some kind of maturity in most cases.

I'm not one to say diplomacy with Iran is useless, it's just in how one delivers on it that has folks all tied up in knots.

Simply because bombs fall doesn't mean diplomacy stops, but rather certainly changes form and function.

And most certainl;y one must weigh thought on it in order to prevent bombs from falling, knowing words can sometimes be seen as weakness...

Wheras Sun Tzu stated "When strong, apear weak"

And vice versa.

Wherby a lot of folks think Iran blusters and overstates its capabilities to do us harm, while others might seek to exaggerate their capabilities, or simply take them at their word.

So in terms of probabilities and estimates of; Whether or not Iran today is capable of fielding a medium range missile with a crude gun-type uranium based atomic bomb on the scale of "little boy" (Hiroshima) and a working nuclear deterrent thereby?

In fact, Congress called in experts to testify a few years back ;

THE REPORT OF THE COMMISSION TO ASSESS THE THREAT TO THE U.S. FROM ELECTROMAGNETIC PULSE ATTACK

'http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/security/has204000.000/has204000_0.HTM'

'http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/ask/69001.htm'

---

Point being, if you think it's dangerous to remove the government of Iran from power in order to prevent the leadership from having such a capability, just wait until they have it, if it's not too late already.

In the meantime, I'll take the President at his word that he'll work to prevent this.
Using "all options on the table", if necessary.

EJ

interest83
February 7, 2012

W.W. writes:

Jewish or not jewish :

Last week, the principal Palestinian Authority religious leader, the Mufti Muhammad Hussein, presented the killing of Jews by Muslims as a religious Islamic goal. At an event celebrating the 47th anniversary of the founding of Fatah, he cited the Hadith (Islamic tradition attributed to Muhammad) saying that the Hour of Resurrection will not come until Muslims fight the Jews and kill them:

"The Hour [of Resurrection] will not come until you fight the Jews. The Jew will hide behind stones or trees. Then the stones or trees will call: 'Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.'"

Palestinian Media Watch reported regularly during the PA terror campaign (Intifada, 2000-2005) on the repeated use of this Hadith by PA clerics on official PA TV to motivate Palestinians to terror attacks, preaching that Muslims had an Islamic obligation to kill Jews. The fact that the Mufti quotes this now indicates that this may have remained part of the PA's religious establishment's teachings, even though it is less frequently promoted on PA TV.

The last time official PA TV broadcast a sermon during which this Hadith calling to kill Jews was quoted was in 2010.

The years of PA promotion of killing Jews and PA religious leaders' citing this Hadith to justify it, may have contributed to the high acceptance of it in PA society. A poll sponsored by the Israel Project last year found that 73% of Palestinians "believe" this Hadith. [July 2011, Greenberg Quinlan Rosner.]

The moderator who introduced the Mufti at the Fatah event last week reiterated another Islamic belief; that the Jews are the descendants of apes and pigs:

"Our war with the descendants of the apes and pigs (i.e., Jews) is a war of religion and faith."

The Mufti did not distance himself from this hate statement that Islam is in a religious war with the Jews, but added to it that Islam's goal is to kill Jews.

There are numerous collections of Hadith, some of which are not accepted as reliable. However, the Mufti stressed that the Islamic belief that Jews will be killed by Muslims as a precursor to Resurrection, is an authentic Islamic belief because it appears in "the reliable" and trusted Hadith collections of Al-Bukhari and Muslim.

This Islamic tradition asserts that as the killing of Jews will progress, Jews will hide behind stones and trees, but even they will expose the Jews and call out: "Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him." One tree however, called the Gharqad, will hide the Jews from the Muslims. The Mufti in his talk at the Fatah event claimed that in response to this Islamic belief, Israelis have been planting Gharqad trees around their cities and towns, in order to have a place to hide from the Muslims who will be coming to kill them.

This is not the first time the Mufti has incited to hatred against Jews in the name of Islam. In a sermon at the Al-Aqsa Mosque in 2010, he preached that the Jews are the "enemies of Allah."

The Mufti is appointed by PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. He voiced this latest hate speech, that Jews are to be killed by Muslims, at an official Fatah celebration. Abbas is also the Chairman of Fatah.

The following is an excerpt from the Fatah ceremony broadcast on PA TV:

Moderator at Fatah ceremony:

"Our war with the descendants of the apes and pigs (i.e., Jews) is a war of religion and faith. Long Live Fatah! [I invite you,] our honorable Sheikh."

PA Mufti Muhammad Hussein comes to the podium and says:

"47 years ago the [Fatah] revolution started. Which revolution? The modern revolution of the Palestinian people's history. In fact, Palestine in its entirety is a revolution, since [Caliph] Umar came [to conquer Jerusalem, 637 CE], and continuing today, and until the End of Days. The reliable Hadith (tradition attributed to Muhammad), [found] in the two reliable collections, Bukhari and Muslim, says:

"The Hour [of Resurrection] will not come until you fight the Jews. The Jew will hide behind stones or trees. Then the stones or trees will call: 'Oh Muslim, servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.'
Except the Gharqad tree [which will keep silent]." Therefore it is no wonder that you see Gharqad [trees] surrounding the [Israeli] settlements and colonies.."

John
|
Canada
February 7, 2012

John in Canada writes:

@ WW - Jewish or not Jewish -

You posted a very long example of a misguided Muslim, You could post endless amounts of this same misguided thought and interpretation from Christian and Jewish sources.

All branches of these faiths have been killing each other (and even those within their own group)) for a very long time.

Is it a surprise to hear this? No. Is it really that shocking? No.

In America a Christian group burned Qur'an s - should all Christians then be viewed as Qur'an burners - NO.

Recently in a Jewish article from Atlanta it was suggested that it is OK to kill a US president to preserve the state of Israel - this is not a new thought - he was brave or stupid enough to pen it - Should we view all Jewish people now as possible assassins of the president? NO - Yet America seems to have no problem continuing support for Israel while some Jewish people hold such treacherous views, yet as an American you accept this?

You pointed out a problem but it is not just a Muslim problem - there is a problem in all three branches - If you look at one group and pretend the same problem does not exist within the other groups - you are just playing pretend or willfully blind.

Why do you think the Holy land has been so brutal, long before America was America. Its not new, its not right but it is there and its roots are older than America.

Calling one group out over another gives legitimacy to the same delinquency that persists in ALL three faiths. That wont fix the problem.

Do you know that Iran has a population of Jewish people? I think about 60000 if I am not mistaken.

Does Israel care for these Jewish people?

Does America or American Jews think how this community might be impacted by the recent activities? Or does Israel think these people are not Jew enough because they remain in Iran? Or does America and Israel view this group of Jews as insignificant and worthless? Get my point.

Dont you find it strange or at least a bit curious why Iran who calls for the destruction of Israel has a Jewish population at all?

I think most Americans don't understand the religious subtlety or context behind what the Iranians say. They say something and others without religious understanding misinterpret. This is not an endorsement of the Iranian view but more to suggest that the folks in government learn the religious subtleties -you may just find an answer or common ground to begin talking. If I am not mistaken Iran has a big beef with Zionism - Not all Jews are Zionists and not all Zionists are Jews. If you dont understand what is being said - how can you ever come to a solution?

The news does not tell the full truth - it reports news that favors who pays the outlet the most - get your feet on the ground and talk to the actual players and quite a different picture emerges, in most cases it is not what is pumped across the TV screens or Google bubbled to you at your computer.

Interesting read thanks

John
|
Canada
February 7, 2012

John in Canada writes:

@ Eric - you can tag team all you want but your not recognizing the other team your up against - not just Iran.

It wont be short and it wont be simple -

Didn't they think this before going into Iraq?

The art of war Eric sometimes requires patience. The mind can go where bullets cant.

look at WW2 - Do you think Nazi mentality disappeared with the end of war? No - it thrives and possibly could prove dangerous in Europes future.

Forget about the whole terrorist BS. It makes America look weak. It also provides anyone from any group/country to attack America and make it look like something its not. That could prove devastating to America - Imagine how many endless wars America could be roped into until America cant afford nothing and the people are freaking over the quality of their lives - Oh wait it kind of looks like that now.

Never create conditions that even your weakest adversary can use against you.

Things like the patriot act and such provide a playbook for enemies to circumvent what you do and rope your country into being attacked. bet you dont get what I mean. Let me explain suppose i create an application form to root out potential fraudulent applications. What I am doing is providing a path for the serious fraudsters - as long as the right boxes are checked - no questions and fraud takes place.

Sure fire way to have a country kill itself is to make that country believe what is wrong for it, is right. Not a single shot is needed - the country commits suicide on its own. A very old tactic and if you step back from America as an observer and not as a passionate patriot - you might be a little concerned about what you see.

If your country had any wisdom they would attack no country and focus on other areas of life.

Convenient how you don't mention how the west cocked up Iran and set up this regime - so really the problems with this regime are of our own making. Seems the same minds are at work with the same nonsense today. Didnt we train Osama bin Laden?

Whats the art of war say about creating your own misfortune over and over again?

Like I said Eric no country or empire goes to war to bring their country less of what they had before, without being destroyed - NON.

Knowing when to fight is as important as fighting.Knowing when to tell supposed friends to shut up, just as important.

Iran is not what concerns me -they have no capability other than talk - let them talk - its the unintended consequences that pose risk- look at Afghanistan and Iraq - didnt go to plan did it? Well neither would this.

If you want peace Eric - you cant trumpet war and even worse if you attack the wrong people at the wrong time - you create generations of enemies - Bigger empires than America have fallen and fallen hard because they didn't know when to stop.

needed97
February 7, 2012

W.W. writes:

Security : peace is a Lyon not a lamb and there are no pact between lyon and men :

UN has lost legitimacy in any matter regarding security along with the Un security council for mainly two reason only corruption in western society and russia and china

Russia and china in front of the Syrian massacre behaved like schettino on costa concordia

@ Russia : You now get back on board and you tell me how many children, women and people in a need there are on that nation

Russia and china are today a threat for international and world peace security for their lack of governance and soviet corruption inside their nation : Russian concern for european missile defense shield but not for iranian nuclear activity after islam has bombed moscow underground...

John P.
|
Greece
February 7, 2012

John P. in Greece writes:

@ W.W.

QUOTE: Russian concern for European missile defense shield but not for Iranian nuclear activity after Islam has bombed Moscow underground...END OF QUOTE.

Precisely!

I absolutely agree with you W.W.. It’s what Susan in Florida has written in the past: “they (Russians) will never be our real friends”. Especially in this case that they sell nuclear know-how and materials.

For years, I was also writing in the Blog the same thing with Susan about Russia and China, having faced "strange" voices telling me to quit the “old school of thinking”.

But now, once again, real facts prove my fears.

Unfortunately for the ex-Soviet School of thinking “Payment comes in different forms than a paycheck”.

And now it’s my "payday"…

except21
February 11, 2012

W.W. writes:

I am writing over and over again the same thing as well ... Groundhog + groundhog - : Groundhog = tyranny

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
February 8, 2012

Eric in New Mexico writes:

@ John in Canada,

While you may feel it is in my nation's best interests to do no harm, and thus never use the kinetic option on the table (ie; war, military intervention, the use of force etc. )

To do nothing in the face of crimes against humanity being committed by tyrants IS to do harm to America's credibility and partnerships globally, for it is the act of saving lives that a kinetic approach may protect populations when diplomacy has failed to do so. As we see today in Syria.

Or to say that "it's all our fault" for a failure of diplomnacy, understand that the "tag team" I was refering to was the comings and goings of foreign policy makers on the world stage, and a certain observable consistance and patience excercized by multiple US administrations in dealing with ethical infants.

The underpinnings of the philosophy and intent that have evolved over the years can be found in "a very long letter" signed "X" that oulined a "containment" policy to deal with the Soviet Union, and Gen. Omar Bradly's 1948 Armistic Day speech.

Which posed inspiration for the premis of the following question;

'http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/ask/69001.htm'

Eric from Sante Fe, New Mexico writes:

Dear Under Secretary Joseph,

General Omar Bradley once said, \"Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants, we know more about war than we do about peace, more about killing than about living.\"

Mine is a philosophical question:

At what point does the international community determine that the ethical infant’s diapers need changing, as the smell of ill intent has become all too overwhelming and noxious to Humanity? Or will ethical infants like the leaders of Iran and North Korea be allowed to remain in power to "dump" on civilization at a time of their choosing?

I’ve noted that the diplomatic attempts at "behavior change" have only resulted in temper-tantrums, at the expense of global peace and security. But as my granddad worked with Oppenhiemer on the Manhattan project, and these issues are thus quite personal to me, I’d like to personally thank everyone involved globally seeking solutions to these problems, as well as the building of consensus among nations to address these issues in concrete terms.

Under Secretary Joseph:

"As in Omar Bradley’s time, the United States continues to offer the world ethical leadership, dedicated to partnerships that lead to lasting international peace and security, as well as to the development of democratic governments and the rule of law. The Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism will build on Secretary Rice’s vision of transformational diplomacy by building consensus among partner nations regarding our most serious international security threat, and galvanize them to take concrete and sustained steps to defeat it."

---

John in Greece,

Ruddia is like a self-serving friend that you hesitate to invite to a social get-together due to his tendancy to be "mr. negative" and shoot himself in the foot in social settings, one toe at a time.

Their instant karma has become a diplomatic train-wreck thereby.

It's not like Lavrov has been taking anyone's sound advice, least of all mine posted on the pages of Dipnote over the past year...but then I did wonder whether he was "as dumb as a box of rocks" for pretty fair reason, and he's probably miffed about that being published here- on top of everything else he's has to hear from folks.

It's not like I haven't tried to reason with him...(chuckle).

EJ

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
February 8, 2012

Eric in New Mexico writes:

Oh my! Sorry about all the "typos" in my last post folks,...now that I've got one good eye propped open with a toothpick this morning trying to type something ledgible, my bad...(chuckle).

(Unless that last post simply proves I can still think when only half awake and yet still can't spell my way out of a paper bag.)

post33
February 8, 2012

W.W. writes:

UN has lost legitimacy UN security council has failed its mission

Veto power used not to protect human lives but to keep selling arms to assad regime :

Mr Lavrov described his visit and the public commitments made during it by President Assad. The Foreign Secretary told Mr Lavrov that the UK was appalled by the continued violence, in particular in Homs.

The UK wanted an end to violence from all sides in Syria. We continued to believe that President Assad should stand down. We were not contemplating military intervention. We were in close contact with the Arab League on the way forward: their proposals for dialogue between the Syrian Government and the Opposition offered the best chance for peace. We looked forward to the outcome of their meeting at the weekend.

The Foreign Secretary raised reports that Russia was selling arms to the Syrian regime. Mr Lavrov said that such sales were not illegal.

The Foreign Secretary said that despite our disagreement over the UNSC Resolution on Syria, we would remain in contact in the search for a solution to the current crisis.

Maureen
|
Massachusetts, USA
February 9, 2012

Maureen in Massachusetts writes:

Could nations concerned aspire to secure medical and food drops for these suffering citizens -- can we agree on that, everyone?

John
|
Canada
February 9, 2012

John in Canada writes:

@ Eric

"While you may feel it is in my nation's best interests to do no harm, and thus never use the kinetic option on the table (ie; war, military intervention, the use of force etc. )"

I dont think you quite follow me Eric. Since WW2 tell me how "kinetic intervention" has helped?

Like I said Eric - nation nor Empires go to war to leave their home in worse shape then before war. Non. Has America achieved financial benefit? No. has Americans gained more freedom? No. Has America even managed to gain the moral support or even the hearts and minds of people around the world? No. Given the draconian methods of fear policies and the constant threat that some in America believe they are under - I think not. If you won at least hearts and minds America should have at least gained America more security not less. Military response in Afghanistan will likely in the end see the return of the Taliban. Success? No.

Knowing when, who and where to fight is critical.

"To do nothing in the face of crimes against humanity being committed by tyrants IS to do harm to America's credibility and partnerships globally, for it is the act of saving lives that a kinetic approach may protect populations when diplomacy has failed to do so. As we see today in Syria."

Crimes against humanity and doing nothing? Are you serious Eric.Im not even going to dignify this with a response. I really hope what you say about America is the new direction for America. America has supported some very bad human rights violators (still does) Your partners the British were doing deals with the desert rat from Libya - just prior to attacking. Don't take it personally because I dont think any country honors human rights - they talk a good talk when its convenient but when its not -the excuses fly.

"Or to say that "it's all our fault" for a failure of diplomnacy"

I never stated this - perhaps that is your perception of a comment but not what I said at all. Clearly we are talking over each others heads. Perception is everything Eric.

"Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants, we know more about war than we do about peace, more about killing than about living.

Sadly very true Eric. Now as it has been for thousands of years. Its why I would champion thinking in a different manner and perhaps we might just see something different happen.

But make no mistake the greatest ethical infants are those that think a bullet/ bomb can solve all problems. It is a method of last resort. I think policy makers owe this to the men and women that fight and their families at the very least. otherwise they haven't the integrity or respect for life to send a single soul to war.

You want to know Eric how you change the behavior of other governments - its simple.

In a race you don't stop to look at the other persons shoes, you don't run looking over your shoulder. You plant your eyes on the horizon and run like you never have run before. Imagine if a country said enough of the BS from all the 2 bit garbage - made a plan - work the plan and ran so fast for the right kind of future that other countries would look; and have no choice but to drop all BS and start running. If America wishes a leadership role then take, make it, own it or get out of the way.

If America wants to tie her self to every 2 bit crap from every country in the world friend or foe. Get into quagmires that are not in the interest of anyone with any sense- your not going to succeed at anything other than second best -America will be a bull wagged by the tail of every backward nation. She will be bled dry slowly.

That is not leadership. Change at home would do more than you can possibly appreciate Eric and given what America used to be known for the change should be easy - unless of course what your country was built on was rhetoric or hot air; a lie. I don't believe it but that is what America has become in many ways.

America has let other nations define and hog tie her into the position she is in today friend and foe.

You cant expect the world to change around you and not change; without knowing you are going to be left behind.

If any country wants a new future it is necessary to let some old things go; especially the things that don't work anymore.

Countries remind me of the very old, stuck in ways they dont know how to change. That is when nations fall apart. This is what happens in every country - look at the mid east.

Iran,Russia, China, Israel - every country will face the same dilemma. Why? because thats what has always been done (laugh).

Think America can buck a trend of thousands of years? I hope so.

John
|
Canada
February 9, 2012

John in Canada writes:

@ ww

Russia sells arms to Syria - syria commits human rights violation.

America sells Saudi Arabia arms - Saudi Arabia treats women like trash - stones people for witchcraft - How many Saudis were involved in 9/11. Saudi = Wahhabi fundamentalists.

Britain did deals with that snake from Libya a terrorist that killed Americans but then attacked libya.

on and on you can write about this.

You think perhaps -Russia and China don't care what the west is saying - because we do the same crap. Our not so biased media is just not reporting it. Bad for business.

Welcome to the world of international hypocrites -we stand together and smile for the cameras, we meet for drinks and make deals but the minute the back is turned - friend or foe means nothing. I think if you saw the backside on every internationally active politician - you would see a dozen daggers. Perhaps that is whats behind the fake smiles and awkward body language.

All sides play the same way, in some way - somewhere.

John P.
|
Greece
February 9, 2012

John P. in Greece writes:

QUOTE: While you may feel it is in my nation's best interests to do no harm, and thus never use the kinetic option on the table (i.e.; war, military intervention, the use of force etc.)END OF QUOTE

EJ, I think that you put it in the right dimension. Before we proceed to “102 step”, we shall first decide about “101”. What I mean is that some contributors on this issue consider as prerequisite the term “war against Iran”, while the question should begin just simply as this:

Do you agree that the U.S. and western allies must do something about the nightmare in Iran? (Same question about Syria)

I wouldn’t necessarily call it a “war”. I’d use the term “reaction”. Call it war, military intervention, the use of force, surgery attacks, Intelligence measures, supporting people with various means in their efforts to meet

Freedom, whatever…

If someone says NO, I personally think that there is a huge gap between the two views and I strongly disagree with the “NO take action” thesis.

If someone says YES, accepting the logical argument that U.S. is obliged to prove its role as a hyper power that helps nations, people and Democracy around the globe, then we could discuss about “102 step”, which I believe that it should better be left on the decision making persons who know the job far more better than us: The President and his Advisors, The Pentagon, Intelligence etc.; people who can wisely decide about the form of reaction.

I use the term reaction, because we did not start the fire. They started the action and threats against us and we got somehow to react!

If we don’t, very soon U.S.A. won’t be respected as hyper power, China and Russia and why not someone-new will get the ring and then we will for sure have to “react”. But then everything will be more expensive and dangerous.

So I don’t know John in Canada if “War with Iran would prove devastating for America. But don't take my word for it - go to war and see for yourself”, I am not the one to decide the form of reaction, but I am sure that we will have to do it, either now or later.

But first of all, we have to choose a strategic path; is it a No, or a YES?

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
February 9, 2012

Eric in New Mexico writes:

@ John in Canada,

If you don't do your homework and take a gaze at the suggested reading material then you will come to a misunderstanding of my intent just about 90% of the time.

War is an inevitable function of an ethical infant, combined with his political stupidity and ill intent.

It only takes one to start a war, no matter how much any democracy may seek to prevent this from occuring diplomaticly.

First off, I'm not Dipnote's resident war monger so don't try and get cute and put words in my mouth.

You want to trash talk America, then claim you arn't of the opinioon it is "all our fault" in general terms - (not your quote, just a summation of all your basis of complaint.)

The reason I've suggested policy be put "under review" is basicly so folks can determine what additional measures might be employed to better achieve the goals of policy, and failing diplomatic efforts to achieve them, to determine if physical action needs to be undertaken to end the threats to regional and global stability posed by Iran, Syria, and their connections to North Korea.

You can cite all the reasons for not taking the last option off the table, but you shouldn't be thinking I'm in a rush to bomb someone into the stone age, that's just reading a bit too much into what I've said.

(although with Assad shelling Homs and making folks there homeless, if the US were to make Assad homeless with a couple well placed bombs on his palace, that would send a pretty strong message to "get out of town, get busted, or get buried"...)

And I'm sure my government will weigh the pro's and cons' of doing so before the order's given.

But if you like myself see the trend sliding inexorable towards US led military intervention in either case, (Syria or Iran, or both at once) then you should read what I've said with a certain undertanding that I'm trying to offer my gov. some perspective, and hope they'll find a few creative options before the last one gets taken off the table.

Gone are the days the Syrian opposition had hope of engaging in "regime replacement therapy" via peaceful protest without outside help or intervention, now they a flat pleading for anyone to come help them, regardless of the nature of the intervention from the comunity of concerned democracies, even if that be armed intervention.

It is too much to expect a people being slaughtered in protests to remain peaceful, and I did warn folks last year on this blog that Syria would slip into a protracted civil war if no one was willing to use force to remove Assad.

When you take that option off the table, it gives dictators a "green light" to run roughshod over the people.

Russia will not oppose the collective will of nations and put itself physicly between a coalition of the willing and actively defend Assad's regime on the battlefield. He's just not worth the trouble.

Diplomaticly, they'll bitch and moan till they are blue in the face, but that's as far as they'll take it once folks decide to intervene militarily in Syria.

EJ

John
|
Canada
February 9, 2012

John in Canada writes:

@ John P in Greece -- "Logic" (laugh) What you call logic is simple minded.

What you call logic has been done before (people have been thinking like you guys from before America was America -not very modern).

And failed repeatedly -Dont you think its time for a new game plan - Or have the policy makers that cry innovation not able to innovate their way out of a wet paper bag when it comes to policy?

What you call logic is the same tired way. What has it gained?

What you call logic is devoid of common sense.

I think something should have been done long ago about many issues. But it seems very few have any foresight to "think" not with just "logic" but some "common sense".

If America was on the receiving end of policies you guys champion - you would freak - seems America has forgotten the "Golden Rule" but expects others to respond in a fashion America would never accept (very logical.)

America complains about fundamentalists in the mid east. Terror alerts, strip searching grannies - paranoia overload.

Look, the British have dealt with terror for decades and to their credit they did not lose the plot like America has.

You know if your worried about your house burning down - just burn it down yourself and then you dont need to worry anymore- very logical wouldn't you agree? (laugh)

American money has funded some of the worst fundamentalist (and still does) in the region creating very logically other forms of counter fundamentalists.(very foreseeable - and by the way, while you think they(fundamentalists) provide benefit - they use your country at a cost to your own people but you worry about Russian emps and china but dont see how America threatens America with stupid policy.)

The west is financially hurting but rather inconveniently we depend on oil from this fundamentalist region that we "both" complain about and support at the same time. So lets not play the ethics card.

America complains about the power of China who happens to be a supporter of Iran for Chinas energy needs.

America places embargos on Iran - but we all know chinas "is" going to deal, while the west gets screwed at a time they cant afford it.

All very moral/logical to empower those you fear while hurting your own people. Who is the ethical infant?

America scuttles the oil pipeline with Canada. Canada not thinking ahead has no plan "B" - Now goes to China for business.

Essentially American policy has created a situation that has secured or empowered China (viewed as a threat) While at the same time weakening western interests. How very logical and ethical.(laugh)

Now, while the world condemns China and Russia for using veto at the UN - Canada is off doing free trade deals and energy deals with China because we cant deal with our friends. All Because of Canada's unethical oil (laugh). So America/Europe will keep supporting the Wahhabi freaks around the world with oil money.(very logical - not)

Dude whatever logic America is subscribing to these days and you and Eric seem to champion - its a losing game. How far will America fall before you collectively wake up?

Same game + past performance = very predictable results.(or is this too logical to comprehend?)

I'm not sure I would call it logic - Epic stupidity but certainly not logic nor common sense.

Long ago one of your founding fathers warned that America will not be destroyed from outside but from within - Its playing out in front of you at this very moment.(guess what mindsets like you guys are doing it -100%)

Oh, ask the soldiers that went to fight in Afghanistan and their families if they think American policy was a success and worth their sacrifice - when the bloody Wahhabi Taliban move back in. (how very logical and moral)

Do you guys provide tin foil hats at the border for visitors by the way? (laugh)

Then again with some of the laws you guys have now -- a visitor might just disappear because of some paranoid, deluded bureaucrat that has not stepped out of their office in decades and reads 1940s military doctrine. (life is just so scary - so kill it - so very logical)

Eric
|
New Mexico, USA
February 9, 2012

Eric in New Mexico writes:

"I dont think you quite follow me Eric. Since WW2 tell me how "kinetic intervention" has helped?"

South Korea is a thriving prosperous democracy today because America lead a UN peacekeeping mission in 1950.

Iraq is on its way to becoming a thriving democracy with hopes for a bright economic future now that Saddam is gone.

The nations of the Balkans are set to join the EU after many years, due to genocidal maniacs being taken out of power.

Lybia is free of Ghaddafi, and the people rejoced. Now they have a nation to build in their own image.

Afghanistan is poised to take total soverighn control of its territory with a little help from its friends in ISAF.

Bin Laden is dead.

Want me to go on?

EJ

John P.
|
Greece
February 9, 2012

John P. in Greece writes:

@ John in Canada,

I’ll make some remarks for your Niagara waters,

Wherever Americans went somewhere, DID NOT “stays” there…

God Bush (the “old” one if you don’t mind for the word old,...but you fetch it on table- some of us love him) saved Iraq.

America did not stay there.

And here my argument begins… we did not stay in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan etc.

John Canadian, where the right or left side of Niagara Fall is…?

John
|
Canada
February 9, 2012

John in Canada writes:

"South Korea is a thriving prosperous democracy today because America lead a UN peacekeeping mission in 1950."

South Korea has been technically at war since. The north managed somehow to get Nukes. The north has a million man army that would fight to the death - the south has got fat on luxury. North Korea is a convenient friend of China (also a large army). Very messy situation if it turned hostile.

Not sure i would call that a success Eric - more like failure compounded.

"Iraq is on its way to becoming a thriving democracy with hopes for a bright economic future now that Saddam is gone"

Saddam was an @ss. Should have dealt with him in the first war. if memory serves me correct the Iraqis were encouraged to rise up in 1991 with promised support from America - they did and were slaughtered. Seems to me Iraq has considerable issues at the moment - issues if you understood their history were foreseeable.(not easy to address with simple logic) Iraq will take a long time to stabilize.

Given Saddam was an @ss - he also hated religious fundamentalists. How much fundamentalism is now in Iraq? What does the average Iraqi think about the future?

"The nations of the Balkans are set to join the EU after many years, due to genocidal maniacs being taken out of power."

Welcome to feudal Europe and given the right circumstance they will kill each other all over again (not just in the Balkans). problem delayed not averted.

You see Eric, in Europe the bombs stopped falling but that does not mean that the ideology behind WW2 died. It lives still to this day. The Nazis were effective because they had considerable support - very crafty evil bastards that dont just give up.

Tell you what if Europe collapses into chaos again and north Americans are called to die and bleed on that continent (they piss on the memorials over there) - we keep the land permanently and kill those that object (im serious - perhaps the fear of that would keep them in line more than the euro).

"Lybia is free of Ghaddafi, and the people rejoced. Now they have a nation to build in their own image."

i hope this is so but considerable dynamics are at play. Ghaddafi was an @ss that should have been dealt with years ago 9to bad the missile on the tent missed) - instead friends did deals him - i think some Canadians tried to help this family flee. (the lovely world of nonsense)

Afghanistan - free for the Taliban freaks to come back?

Bin Laden is dead - a payment of gold, silver and land - access to a small amount of technology/information that America has or could get - and 60 men and women - in 6 months - I would have served his head on a platter and given you his henchmen for free. For extra I might have shrunk his head, so you could display it. (laugh) Forget the war on terrorism BS of the past decade. But congratulations on that one. How is the Pakistani doctor that helped you? Dead or alive is he?

This is what I mean when I say knowing when to fight and how to fight is criticle. Its not that I disagree with your goals (question the motives sometimes) But more about how you go about achieving them.

The Roman empire didn't let rinky dinky countries and BS ragtags shape their policy (they told them how things were going to be, and things were) -- America has let policy to be shaped by interests like AQ and other half wits -- that's not super power or smart power -- that weakness.

Pages

Latest Stories

Pages