Whatever Happened to Do No Harm?

The potential US attack on Syria has become a political football. Congressional Repubs like Mitch McConnell oppose a US strike even while they call for a more "muscular" foreign policy. But then the Repub demographic base consists of people who don't get the concept of cognitive dissonance. The Obama administration, however, has the same problem. How would bombing Syria help matters? It would say that "We're angry with you" but bombs and missiles but what would be the actual result? If Assad stays in power it will be a failure for the US. But if he is overthrown Syria could be merely destabilized like Egypt and Libya. The real moral imperative is not to "do something anything" but to not make matters worse.

What Is the Liberal Position Anyway?

It has become common lately for liberals to complain that President Obama has "betrayed us" on issues like NSA surveillance or the recent drift into attacking Syria. But at the same time the Obama administration has not received much useful advice on the questions of defense and security. The problem is that any Democrat who is elected President, no matter how Liberal his or her inclinations may be, will be confronted with an environment in which the Conservative view of national security, defense, and much of foreing policy has become the "default" view. There are no liberal policy positions to serve as alternatives to the conserative view.

The reasons for this are complicated. Since the 1980's many liberals have taken the position that "We don't have to propose any alternatives, all we have to do is criticize." But in order to have an impact on policy, we need to have credible policy alternatives on issues like national security and defense. These are real problems that need to be addressed. It is not enough to criticize existing policies, we need to offer credible alternatives.

The Fog of Crisis

The term Fog of War has come to refer to the lack of certainty in military operations. If you stop and look at it, not only wars but other kinds of crises can also produce a "fog" of uncertainty and ambiguity. The war in Syria is an example. Allegations that the Assad regime has used chemical weapons have been flying around the media and have been accepted as fact by Sec. of State John Kerry. These allegations have not been conclusively proven, however, but nvertheless the Obama administration is now been pushed to take military action against the Assad regime.

Such action would accomplish nothing. The US could drop bombs or fire missiles at Syria and that would not solve anything. Syria's problems are for the Syrians themselves to resolve. Syria isn't ours to fix anymore than was China, Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan.

While America Burns

The Roman Emperor Nero did not actually fiddle while Rome burned in 64 AD; the violin hadn't been invented yet and some historians think Nero wasn't even in Rome at the time. But today we have a Congress that is screwing around while California burns. Even while the California Repub Dana Rohrabacher maintains that global warming is a "hoax." In the meantime funding for fighting wildfires has been cut by Congress. This is on top of cuts to education and scientific research. Oh yeah, and the nation's bridges are falling apart. A person with brains would think that the Repubs are deliberately trying to destroy America.

Can We Deal with Irrationality?

When we consider the events that led to WW2, we are haunted by one question. At what point should people have realized that Adolf Hitler was not just an "aggressive nationalist" but a threat to world peace, and possibly to civilization itself? It's a complicated question and one that has many dimensions. But I think that one important indication is that Hitler was unappeasable. He continued to make more and more demands, and there was no end point except world domination.

Irrationality, of course didn't end with Hitler. Political extremism, takes many forms. We can see Al Qaeda, who's extreme and twisted version of Islam has led it to conduct a global campaign of terror, much of it directed at Muslims they don't approve of. In the wake of the attacks of 9/11/2001 we Americans thought that Al Qaeda was going to lead some kind of Pan-Islamic Jihad. In reality, all they have done is wreak death and destruction.

The problem happens when people adopt beliefs that are unarguable, that must be accepted or rejected. When persons adopt the position that you are either with them or against them, then how can they be dealt with?

Rancid Priebus Passing Gas

Rancid Reince Priebus, chairman of the RNC, is venting gas because CNN is planning to make a movie about Hillary Rodham Clinton. Priebus and the RNC are threatening to exclude CNN and NBC from covering the 2016 GOP debates. The Gopers don't seem to realize that they would only be hurting themselves. The Gopers still insist that the "liberal media" is against them. The fact the media is actually controlled by corporate interests doesn't bother them. Gopers believe what they believe even that the earth is flat and the moon is made of cheese.

GOPer Doubletalk and BS

Mitch Daniels, the GOPer ex-governor of Indiana and current President of Purdue University, is trying to censor Howard Zinn's book A People's History of the United States. Daniels thinks that Zinn's book is

is a truly execrable, anti-factual piece of disinformation that misstates American history on every page. Can someone assure me that it is not in use anywhere in Indiana? If it is, how do we get rid of it before more young people are force-fed a totally false version of our history."

Notice the language that Daniels uses; he wants to "get rid" of a particular book simply because he disagrees with it. This is the tendency of a potential dictator. The right wing war on science has turned into a war on intellectual freedom. The simultaneous attacks on science, trying to surpress the evidence for global warming , for instance, is part of the same tendency. It is right-wingers like Daniels who are trying to shove their propaganda down everybody's throat. When called on it, Daniels is now trying to make himself out to be the victim. Which is another trick that conservatives at all levels like to pull (compare, for instance, the Paul Deen kerfuffle). Another instance that the rightists might talk about "freedom" but are actually trying to impose their ideology on evryone else.