Sisyphus

[billvon 3,090]

Over the past few days I've found myself hoping that Colin Powell can play the same role that Jimmy Carter did during 1978, bringing Israel and Arabs together at a modern-day Camp David to iron out at least some of their differences. The more I hear about his efforts, though, the more I think his role will be like that of Sisyphus, the mythological figure doomed to roll a heavy stone uphill, only to have it roll back down and crush him with its weight.
This was really hammered home this morning when I was listening to a news show. An interviewer asked a State Department official why we saw it as our duty to intervene in the Middle East. His answer was that the world looks to the US for leadership, and we should try to lead the way to peace.
Now, even though I don't believe that statement 100% (I think it also has a lot to do with supporting an oil-driven economy and making sure certain people get re-elected) I thought that was at least a good goal to have. But I've learned two things over my thirty some odd years of watching people interact - one, people learn all the time, not just when you tell them to learn, and two, people believe in actions more than words.
And with that in mind I've been watching what we, the country the world "looks to for leadership," has been doing and saying during the Israeli conflict.
We tell the world "From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime." We tell the world that there is to be no compromise with terrorists or the countries that support them. Indeed, we then go and use the full power of our military to destroy the government of Afghanistan, a government we claim is sponsoring terrorism. Yet when the Israelis, who act with even more justification than we had (they have written statements linking Arafat to financing of suicide bombers!) we say "Mr. Sharon is going to have to show some willingness to compromise." We send one of our best diplomats to negotiate with the leader of an organization that supports terrorism.
Compromise? With terrorists? What sort of leadership is the US showing here? Are terrorists to be negotiated with, their demands listened to, their objectives considered? Or is there to be no negotiation?
I think it's true that the US is seen as something of a leader in world politics. Unfortunately, I think Israel has learned the lessons we teach a little too well. They have learned that violence is preferable to negotiation, and that military action is a good substitute for diplomacy. I find myself wishing they had a better teacher.
-bill von

[ChromeBoy 0]

At first I thought this was going to be about some sort of VD. But I guess the spelling is different.
Yes, the United States is not doing what they said about countries harboring terrorists. I seriously doubt Colin Powell will have much success due to the amount of time this war has gone on. I could be wrong though. My belief is that the United States should back off and let the them handle the situation themselves. However we should continue the war on terrorists plotting against the U.S. no matter where they are.
Because of the lack and costs of importing oil the U.S. is contemplating drilling in the Northeast section of Alaska. This virgin land which houses several wildlife species will possibly become drilling fields. I hope this does not happen. As time progresses our refuges and parks will be non- existent and our country will just be one piece of concrete.

[Viking 0]

"As time progresses our refuges and parks will be non- existent and our country will just be one piece of concrete."
Well lets get to work *grabs a sack of quickcrete*
I swear you must have footprints on the back of your helmet - chicagoskydiver

[billvon 3,090]

>My belief is that the United States should back off and let the them handle
>the situation themselves.
I think this is the only reasonable answer. We shouldn't spend our time and money first building up a massive military in Israel, and then spend our time trying to stop them from using it. Everyone concerned would be better off if we did neither one.
>Because of the lack and costs of importing oil the U.S. is contemplating drilling
> in the Northeast section of Alaska.
I saw a great commentary on that. Check this out.
>As time progresses our refuges and parks will be non- existent and our country
>will just be one piece of concrete.
What, you mean the ultimate goal is not to put mini-malls and parking lots every few miles? Where will people park their SUV's?
-bill von

[AndyMan 7]

As a Canadian, I'm humored every time I see the US claim to be world leaders. They seem to only lead when they want to. Leading implies that people follow you, which only seems to happen in a few recent military conflicts. By this standard alone, the US clearly is not a leader.
The democracies of the world has been gleefully going along just fine without the US in terms of Land Mines, Global Warming, Political Reform, and abolishing the death penalty.
The only reason I see the US as a world figure at all are those occaisions such as 9/11 when the us is forced onto the world stage. On all other occaisions the world sees the US as a country that would much rather hide within its walls. The classic example is that Jesse Helms who recently retired as that chairman of the Foreign Relations comitee has literally NEVER travelled abroad.
There is only one true world "leader", and that's the UN. It seems however that the US seems to almost vandalise the political process (through using their veto) and the military power (by depriving funds and troops). The US has the ability to be world leaders when they want to only because they continue abrogate the ability of the UN to do that same thing.
_Am
ICQ: 5578907
MSN Messenger: andrewdmetcalfe at hotmail dot com
AIM: andrewdmetcalfe
Yahoo IM: ametcalf_1999

[Haeloth 0]

You may remember the Albanian rebellion in FYROM last summer, even if they did blow up stuff, NATO always referred to them as extremists or rebels to keep the option of negotiations open.
You never negotiate with terrorists, but if you still want to, you have to name them something else:
-terrorist, negotiations not desirable
-extremist, negotiations possible
-millitsia/rebels, probably ongoing negotiations
-freedom fighters, no negotiations needed, these guys are already on our side, and is fighting someone we do not want to negotiate with.
Don't be too surprised if armed palistinian groups suddenly change status from terrorists to something else.

[billvon 3,090]

>The US has the ability to be world leaders when they want to only because they
>continue abrogate the ability of the UN to do that same thing.
Oh, I think the reason is a lot simpler than that - we tend to blow up countries we don't like, even when they are not taking action against us directly. That makes the US a pretty good 300 pound gorilla. The only time we really support the UN is when they agree with us and we can use them as a shield to deflect international criticism. (If anyone thinks we support the UN any more than that, take a look at how much the US owes the UN in terms of unpaid dues.)
-bill von

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

That makes the US a pretty good 300 pound gorilla.

Doesn't this in and of itself show that the US is not a world leader? Or more specificly "the leader of the free world"? A 300 pound gorilla sounds a lot more like a bully then a class president.
Are there significant events in recent history beside the gulf war and 9/11 where the wold community actually followed the US lead?
_Am (obviously, doesn't think powell will be succesful, but hopes he's wrong)
ICQ: 5578907
MSN Messenger: andrewdmetcalfe at hotmail dot com
AIM: andrewdmetcalfe
Yahoo IM: ametcalf_1999

[quade 4]

Quote

A 300 pound gorilla sounds a lot more like a bully then a class president.

Ever hear of an anthropological concept called the "Alpha Male"?
Being the biggest, baddest, 300 pound gorilla might actually make you a bully, but it also ensures that you are the leader.
The unfortunate aspect is that there will always be some upstart Beta in the troop that wants to challenge you.
quade
http://futurecam.com

[nacmacfeegle 0]

Odd thing, Penguins talking about Alaska.....I thought most penguins lived south of the equator, cept those in zoos......
I would also watch the Caspian and Caucasus regions, I hear there are some recently arrived American specialised mountain forces "advising" in the Chechenya region (I'm not having a go at the good people that make up the US armed forces, I'm questioning the politicians who send them there).........Or mebbe they are trying to stabilise a region that is about to see some pipeline construction work to take produce from Kashagan, Karachaganak, and Tengiz, which are all massive (and I do mean 'massive', people..) oil fields out there...........Avoiding the need to route the pipelines through say Iraq, Afghanistan, or Russia....
Paranoid, we should be....
Cya
D

[billvon 3,090]

>Doesn't this in and of itself show that the US is not a world leader? Or more
> specificly "the leader of the free world"? A 300 pound gorilla sounds a lot more
> like a bully then a class president.
Yep, but the bully gets your lunch money.
>Are there significant events in recent history beside the gulf war and 9/11 where
> the wold community actually followed the US lead?
I think you're using "leader" in too narrow a term - someone wise, whose leadership is respected and observed. We lead by polluting more than any other country and thereby dooming Kyoto to failure. We lead by outspending every other country on the planet when it comes to oil, and thereby prop up oil exporters. We lead by making it clear that we'll bomb anyone who threatens our close allies.
In the case of the US, leadership has nothing to do with being a good leader. It has to do with being a strong enough economic and military force that one prospers by sticking close to the US money teat.
-bill von

[bill2 0]

I think it's true that the US is seen as something of a leader in world politics. Unfortunately, I think Israel has learned the lessons we teach a little too well. They have learned that violence is preferable to negotiation, and that military action is a good substitute for diplomacy. I find myself wishing they had a better teacher.
_________________________________________
While it's wrong to always use military force as a first option, diplomacy many times simply will not suffice. If Neville Chamberlin had used less diplomacy and more force, WWII might have not been so bloody. As it was, Hitler was the type who saw negotiations as a sign of weakness. He kept taking, and the western powers kept talking. Look what it led to.

[nacmacfeegle 0]

Agreed,
"Neville Chamberlin " (sp?) but not nit picking....
Aha, that'll be the guy (then prime minister of Great Britain)who stepped off the plane waving a piece of paper that he assured the world promised 'peace in our time', shortly afterwards Germany invaded Poland, hmmmm.....
Another reason never to trust politicians......
Cya
D

[bill2 0]

As a Canadian, I'm humored every time I see the US claim to be world leaders. They seem to only lead when they want to. Leading implies that people follow you, which only seems to happen in a few recent military conflicts. By this standard alone, the US clearly is not a leader.
__________________________________
As an American, I'm amused when every other country thinks the US way of doing anything is so wrong, and when everything hits the fan runs to us for help. and of course American lives since they have spent so little on their own militaries that they are not much use themselves. Canada should feel free to take charge anytime it thinks it can do better.
The only reason I see the US as a world figure at all are those occaisions such as 9/11 when the us is forced onto the world stage. On all other occaisions the world sees the US as a country that would much rather hide within its walls. The classic example is that Jesse Helms who recently retired as that chairman of the Foreign Relations comitee has literally NEVER travelled abroad.
__________________________________
You're right, Americans do tend to have a tendency to be isolationist. We also tend to get tired of cleaning up other people's messes - Kosovo, WWI and II, Korea. and being taken for granted in this too. As for the remark about Jesse Helms, in any instititution you get assholes. I'm sure there's plenty of them to go around in Canada. Based on your logic, I should say that the French (who's Ambassador to Britain referred to Israel as "that shitty little country") is composed of anti-semitic scum. Of course based on the number of synagogues that have been burned and the number of Jews attacked lately in France maybe that's true.

[bbarnhouse 0]

HUmmmmm the fight against terrorism?
I remember......Cambodia,Somalia,Yugolslavia,Iran,Iraq to name a few, where terrorist actions as well as genocide took place. It has been happening for decades, the difference now however, is that it happened here. Other countries may smirk, but this is a great nation, and we stand united.
It only takes a little pixie dust......

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

concept called the "Alpha Male"?

Someone's been watching TLC...Seriously:
The US is a leader in the world on many levels and with out the US the history of the past century would have been very different. Hell, our friends across the pond would probably be speaking German. Either way, take a step back and think about the world's economy if the US stepped out of it.
Its discussions like this that makes me think about Manifest Destiny and how cool it would have been if it would have actually been fulfilled...
A human cannonball, I rise above it all
Up higher then a trapieze, I can fly

[Shark 0]

The 300 pound gorilla also has a FAT wallet. Just think of when he won't open it up or share his jump tickets. When he shares or offers, everyone loves him....

[quade 4]

Quote

Its discussions like this that makes me think about Manifest Destiny and how cool it would have been if it would have actually been fulfilled.

Well, I need some ed-u-ma-cation then 'cause I always thought Manifest Destiny simply meant the expansion of the U.S. from coast to coast.
You got another definition?
quade
http://futurecam.com

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

As an American, I'm amused when every other country thinks the US way of doing anything is so wrong, and when everything hits the fan runs to us for help. and of course American lives since they have spent so little on their own militaries that they are not much use themselves. Canada should feel free to take charge anytime it thinks it can do better.

I think if you looked you would find that countries like Canada do take the lead. I even gave you a few keys in some of my previous posts as pointers as to where you might start looking. The only difference is that countries like Canada, Swiss, Japan, and a few others believe in a form of leadership that DOESN'T involve Bill's 300 pound Gorilla.
It's not too dificult to look through history and see that self appointed leaders rarely survive long. I'm pretty sure that objections to this notion is actually one of the founding principles of the USA.
_Am (wouldn't disagree about your comments regarding the French, though)
ICQ: 5578907
MSN Messenger: andrewdmetcalfe at hotmail dot com
AIM: andrewdmetcalfe
Yahoo IM: ametcalf_1999

[AggieDave 6]

There were some proponates that wanted to take Canada and Mexico too, claiming the entire thing. It wasn't the most popular version of it, but it was still there.

Quote

I think if you looked you would find that countries like Canada do take the lead.

Have you noticed that ever since they won the gold, they've been about has hard to deal with as a brand new ZP canopy...
A human cannonball, I rise above it all
Up higher then a trapieze, I can fly

[ChromeBoy 0]

Quote

Manifest Destiny simply meant the expansion of the U.S. from coast to coast.

I thought Manifest Destiny was when manifest squeezed you in on a load that was thought to be booked!

[bill2 0]

I think if you looked you would find that countries like Canada do take the lead. I even gave you a few keys in some of my previous posts as pointers as to where you might start looking. The only difference is that countries like Canada, Swiss, Japan, and a few others believe in a form of leadership that DOESN'T involve Bill's 300 pound Gorilla.
_____________________________________
Are you saying I need to do some serious looking to find examples of Canadian leadership? The US has taken the lead in a number of nasty incidents, mainly because its military was the only one that could handle the requirements. As for all those countries that practice such a great form of leadership, who will ending up footing the bill? I have a feeling that it won't be Canada, Japan, or Switzerland. We pay the most, in terms of dollars and lives, so we should be able to call the tune the way we want to. If you don't like that, put up your own money,lives and military.

[billvon 3,090]

>While it's wrong to always use military force as a first option, diplomacy many
> times simply will not suffice. If Neville Chamberlin had used less diplomacy and
> more force, WWII might have not been so bloody.
Well, I have to disagree with that. I think that, if reducing bloodshed is your objective, we have more to learn from Ghandi, Martin Luther King, and Mandela than Roosevelt, Churchill or Stalin. If there is a 'good' way to have a revolution against an opressive government, India discovered it in 1947.
-bill von

[bill2 0]

Well, I have to disagree with that. I think that, if reducing bloodshed is your objective, we have more to learn from Ghandi, Martin Luther King, and Mandela than Roosevelt, Churchill or Stalin. If there is a 'good' way to have a revolution against an opressive government, India discovered it in 1947.
____________________________________
And here I have to disagree with you. Pacifism works fine in theory, until you are up against someone with no moral standards or inhibitions. Bin Laden/Hitler, people who hate a particular group of people, simply will not stop unless force is used against them. Britain cared about world opinion; Ghandi made them look bad. But that only matters if you care about world opinion. if like Hitler, you plan on running the whole planet, you won't give a damn about what other people think, or if they suffer, or even if they live. Pacifists, for all their courage in doing what they do, ultimately still need someone who will stand up for them. If not, they will be slaughtered. Just ask descendents/relatives of all the Jews who went to the ovens in such a cooperative fashion in WWII.

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

Are you saying I need to do some serious looking to find examples of Canadian leadership? The US has taken the lead in a number of nasty incidents, mainly because its military was the only one that could handle the requirements. As for all those countries that practice such a great form of leadership, who will ending up footing the bill? I have a feeling that it won't be Canada, Japan, or Switzerland. We pay the most, in terms of dollars and lives, so we should be able to call the tune the way we want to. If you don't like that, put up your own money,lives and military.

Actually, I'm saying you really wouldn't have to look far at all. You also wouldn't have to look far to see that these countries also cough up far more both in terms of dollars, AND soldiers lives. Either per capita as individual countries, or as a whole.
The most recent example I can think of is Ruwanda(sp?), with Canadian sodiers on the ground begging for more UN staff, the US using it's veto on the security counsel to prevent any more forces being used and withdrawing their own from UN staff, meanwhile literally millions of tootsies are being slaughtered, rivaling the genocide of the jews in WWII, and making 9/11 look like a car accident at the side of the Interstate. True, real leaders don't do that.
Going back to Bill's comment that the US leads through weapons and money, I'd agree. However, weapons and money are not going to end the Israeli / Palistinian conflict, just as Jimmy Carter didn't use it the first time.
I have a lot of respect for Colin Powell. I think he's perhaps one of the most significant figures my generation has seen in US politics. Unfortunate, I also think US foreign policy since Carter has poisioned so many parts of the world to any goodwill Powell might have.
_Am
ICQ: 5578907
MSN Messenger: andrewdmetcalfe at hotmail dot com
AIM: andrewdmetcalfe
Yahoo IM: ametcalf_1999