Obviously, not everyone agrees. There must then be more than one side to the story. Russia, China, India, et al were maneuvered into ‘agreeing’. They agreed by voting ‘present’ – which is a way of saying, “Do what you want, but we’ll have no part of it.”
Action involves risk. Risk must be balanced by benefit. For far too long American foreign policy has excluded any notion of ‘benefit’. It has been unbalanced. In Iraq we never insisted on payback. Its oil is now going to our rivals. As the chaos and killing there continues, we cannot even claim ‘victory’ on that front. Neither do we insist on Libya’s oil in exchange for our effort. And indeed, Libya’s oil is already spoken for and going to those who voted ‘present’.
You would think that Obama, of all people, would understand the benefits that accrue by voting ‘present’; that voting otherwise engenders risk which, in turn, invites loss. It has been my contention that Obama – whether by way of retribution or an affinity for victimhood - deliberately invites loss. Neither revenge nor national suicide are attractive to anyone but himself.
Saw the French film “Of Gods and Men” last night. As my friend and I settled ourselves outside afterwards to discuss the merits of the film, a woman approached us. She clearly had been disturbed by it. She said it was the worst film she had ever seen. She said it was good to have someone to talk it out with and hoped that she would not have bad dreams.
It was basically an anti-war film. In addition, it blamed the West. As such, it entered the realm of propaganda. Propaganda can never rise to the level of art. It targets those lacking any clear cut principles …and leaves them sleepless.
http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/
Posts
