Indian - Pakistani War?!!!

[BiscayneSunrise]

Re: Indian - Pakistani War?!!!

It was said early on in the presidential campaign that Obama was naive. Not true. it was his supporters that were naive.

We are going through a major historical inflection point that is causing a lot of people a lot of pain. Those who were supporting "change' really just wanted things to return to how they used to be. The reality of the economic and geopolitical situation is that a US president is by and large locked into a relatively narrow set of options. Any change that occurs will continue along the track that has dismayed many Obama supporters. As Condi Rice points out, Obama has very few options and many of his supporters will be disappointed to see he will be following a foreign policy very similar to Bush.

[ricket]

Re: Indian - Pakistani War?!!!

It was said early on in the presidential campaign that Obama was naive. Not true. it was his supporters that were naive.

We are going through a major historical inflection point that is causing a lot of people a lot of pain. Those who were supporting "change' really just wanted things to return to how they used to be. The reality of the economic and geopolitical situation is that a US president is by and large locked into a relatively narrow set of options. Any change that occurs will continue along the track that has dismayed many Obama supporters. As Condi Rice points out, Obama has very few options and many of his supporters will be disappointed to see he will be following a foreign policy very similar to Bush.

That's a cop-out. During the most difficult of times is when the most "change" can take place. It's only when things are going smoothly does the status-quo have the strongest grip on circumstances. Only in times of chaos do alternative actions actually seem like reasonable/possible ones.

There is nothing that is going on in this world that would ever stop me from being the leader that tirelessly tries to get everyone to sit down and discuss real world, rational solutions to the problems that our country and our world faces. To not attempt this, is to give up on the very ideals that you are professing to "protect". The only failure that Obama will truly accomplish is if he "gives up" and indeed continues down the same road of Bush's failed policies. His options arent limited by ANYTHING. To say his options are limited on the world stage is cowardly at best, and sinister at worst. ANYTHING is possible, but we do at least know that the previous policies of the previous administration are completely unsustainable if we want to live in a world with true peace and economic freedom (which go hand in hand).

[GRG55]

Re: Indian - Pakistani War?!!!

That's a cop-out. During the most difficult of times is when the most "change" can take place. It's only when things are going smoothly does the status-quo have the strongest grip on circumstances. Only in times of chaos do alternative actions actually seem like reasonable/possible ones.

There is nothing that is going on in this world that would ever stop me from being the leader that tirelessly tries to get everyone to sit down and discuss real world, rational solutions to the problems that our country and our world faces. To not attempt this, is to give up on the very ideals that you are professing to "protect". The only failure that Obama will truly accomplish is if he "gives up" and indeed continues down the same road of Bush's failed policies. His options arent limited by ANYTHING. To say his options are limited on the world stage is cowardly at best, and sinister at worst. ANYTHING is possible, but we do at least know that the previous policies of the previous administration are completely unsustainable if we want to live in a world with true peace and economic freedom (which go hand in hand).

...Until you run up against the reality of what seems a perfectly reasonable "real world, rational solution", measured against Judeo-Christian influenced "western" values, being totally rejected by those on the "other side of the table".

Although his approach, at least initially, may be distinctly different, the policy options open to the incoming President are as limited as the options for the outgoing one.

[ricket]

Re: Indian - Pakistani War?!!!

...Until you run up against the reality of what seems a perfectly reasonable "real world, rational solution", measured against Judeo-Christian influenced "western" values, being totally rejected by those on the "other side of the table".

Although his approach, at least initially, may be distinctly different, the policy options open to the incoming President are as limited as the options for the outgoing one.

Anyone who uses threats against humanity to further their social/political agenda is a criminal and should be treated, ostracized, and punished as such. This enforcement should occur at all levels, regardless of whether it is a government official, a private entity, political party, and especially the armed forces of any country. If you cannot guarantee that the government will not act senselessly, how in the world can they expect their citizens to do the same?

And again, there is nothing on the face of this planet that can happen to anyone under any circumstance that warrants the purposeful killing of innocent children. To say otherwise is like I said, a cop-out and is symbolic of a cowardly world view.

[GRG55]

Re: Indian - Pakistani War?!!!

And again, there is nothing on the face of this planet that can happen to anyone under any circumstance that warrants the purposeful killing of innocent children. To say otherwise is like I said, a cop-out and is symbolic of a cowardly world view.

No disagreement. I should have been clearer by stating diplomatic policy options...

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Indian - Pakistani War?!!!

And again, there is nothing on the face of this planet that can happen to anyone under any circumstance that warrants the purposeful killing of innocent children.

If ala Jack Bauer on '24', you can save a major city from being blown up with a nuclear bomb by killing my innocent child, kill him. Kill me too, if that helps. I too claim innocence, though not youth.

The more interesting question here however would be who bears the responsibility for the death those innocent civilians -- those who put them in harms way, or those who were left with a difficult choice.

[Guest]

Re: Indian - Pakistani War?!!!

You are so right, PythonicCow. Ricket should mull over your comments with care, and if he did he might gain a further perspective on the fine principles he cites. Of course Ricket, we all agree with the absolute principles you cite. And we even understand the peril when moral relativity creeps in. Very likely, in a stark end-game, we would all sacrifice our own finger, or hand, or even arm or life, to save larger groups of people, or children from cynical slaughter as they get caught in the gears of these world affairs.

It is is the real world calculus that gives the impression of such profound corruption, but in fact, when it comes down to good and evil as they are acted out upon history, it is only the art of the possible that really determines outcomes whenever situations are complex - and they are ALWAYS complex. This is what a few of us have tried to impress on you. No one disagrees with your principles. But if principles remain rigidly absolute, they rarely have means with which to enter into the real world which is a minefiled of paralyzing contradictions for princples. And if they can't get out into the real world what good have even the best of principles accomplished?

PythonicCow puts his finger on the nerve of the issue. Your observations, and inclination to stand on absolute principles, have a lot of impossible gearing through which they must travel in order to find avenues into the real world. Study the past great wars for instance, and you'll find countless examples where the best of men had to sacrifice their closest comrades, to further the largest and most cherished aims they all shared. That's not just a homily for the history books - it is a horrific compromiser of morality in every day life, constantly. It was so then, and it continues to be so in our present world. Your absolute comments on who has the ethics and who does not seem curiously detached from this real-world drama.

If you were ever in an executive position, your absolutist read on ethics as being something that can never be compromised in any detail or circumstance, would merely bring your ability to decide anything to a grinding halt. This is precisely why all incomers to the office of US CIC wind up trapped in much the same narrow options when they get enmeshed in the complex gears of established US foreign policy. To imagine that incoming Presidents have unlimited and absolute choice is just naive. They are trapped in a morass of past US foreign policy decisions from day one. All of them.

If ala Jack Bauer on '24', you can save a major city from being blown up with a nuclear bomb by killing my innocent child, kill him. Kill me too, if that helps. I too claim innocence, though not youth. The more interesting question here however would be who bears the responsibility for the death those innocent civilians -- those who put them in harms way, or those who were left with a difficult choice.

[Judas]

Re: Indian - Pakistani War?!!!

Anyone who uses threats against humanity to further their social/political agenda is a criminal and should be treated, ostracized, and punished as such.

The "monopoly on the use of force" is what defines the state. Try not paying your taxes and they will use threats of violence to extract your cooperation to further their social/political agenda.

I think the real world is a bit more nuanced than you are letting on.

However, if you find a place where threats aren't used by the powers-that-be please let me know and I'll go there!