While the headlines are
dominated by the perpetual crisis in Syria, the infighting in the White House
and the continuing investigation into Russian interference with our 2016
election, less attention is being paid to the problem of North Korea, which can
be far more serious than any of the aforementioned items.
If we lob a few Tomahawks at them to get them to stop their aggressive
posturing, they very well might attack neighboring South Korea, conceivably with nuclear
weapons, which in effect makes South Korea their hostage, not to speak of the
almost 30,000 American troops we maintain there. They are crazy enough to do that!
Logic and reason are both in short supply in North Korea, making negotiations with them difficult at best. That’s why they are so dangerous, and why we must maintain good relations with China, which is in a far better position than we are to exert pressure on Kim Jong Un.
Jack Lippman
Logic and reason are both in short supply in North Korea, making negotiations with them difficult at best. That’s why they are so dangerous, and why we must maintain good relations with China, which is in a far better position than we are to exert pressure on Kim Jong Un.
Jack Lippman
Okay, so we shot 59 missiles into Syria, just to show President Assad that he cannot get away with brutally murdering his people, most of whom just want the slaughter to end in their country. He has been murdering them for some time now, but using poison gas crosses a line and it is good that we have shown him that line. Barack Obama had showed him that line verbally but Donald tRump did in much more dramatically with missiles. Whether or not the two approaches differ depends on what happens next; whether tRump's approach is more productive than Obama's. This is yet to be seen. The damage inflicted to the Syrian airbase is far less of an issue than the message it brought and the response, or change in Syria, if any, resulting from it. A sidebar to it is the effect it might have had on the North Koreans and the Chinese.
Syrian Airbase Attacked
The Syrian tragedy is
based on the ancient Sunni-Shia division in Islam. Assad is an Alawite Muslim, which is a
variety of Shia. Hence, he has the
political and military support of Shia Iran which would love to dominate the
Fertile Crescent stretching westward from it across Iraq, Syria and
Lebanon. There are two obstacles to
this. The Sunni Muslims in these
countries don’t want that to happen because of their almost twelve century-old
feud with the Shia. In fact, they are so
against it that some of them support the Sunni Islamic State (ISIS) which is
the other obstacle to Iranian ambitions, and which has parallel ambitions of
its own involving the same territory which it calls its Caliphate.
Opposition to Assad in
Syria, beside coming from ISIS, also comes from rebels, mostly Sunni, who
oppose him. His murderous attacks have
been primarily directed at them. His destruction
of Aleppo, which was basically a rebel city, well illustrates this. And of course, Russia, playing this
geopolitical game, has taken the side of Assad and the Iranians, ostensibly in
battling ISIS, but never ignoring its own interests, which include a
Mediterranean port in Syria at which its naval vessels can refuel.
Our role in this
quagmire has been to support the Sunni nations, like Jordan, the Gulf States
and Saudi Arabia, and the Iraqi army which is primarily Shia, in their struggle
against ISIS. Unfortunately, the Saudis
and some of the Gulf States also are cozy with ISIS at the same time as they
are our allies. We also have supported
the Kurds who have fought with some success against ISIS and who want to be
free from control by Iraq, Iran and of course, ISIS. We support the Kurds, but in doing so,
alienate our ally, Sunni Turkey, who fear an independent Kurdistan would spread
into Kurdish-populated areas of Turkey.
It’s no easy task to
figure out what we should do next, now that we’ve suggested to Assad that he
cannot get away with murdering his own people with impunity. Remember, a single attack is not in itself a
strategy. But here is my advice to our
decision-makers in Washington. Listen
carefully.
( 1. We must first work together with the Russians and the Iranians to defeat
ISIS. They are better partners than the
Saudis and other Sunnis in combatting Sunni ISIS.
( 2. Once that is done, or they are at least reduced to a minimal threat to
the region, we must convince the Iranians and the Russians to send Assad
packing to a lovely retirement somewhere on the French Riviera.
( 3. Naming a Shia-friendly government
to succeed him will satisfy the Iranians and cater to their geopolitical
ambitions, and the Russians as well just so long as they have a place to dock
in the Mediterranean. We just must make
sure that the new Syrian government is not as bloodthirsty as was Assad’s and
recognizes the rights of Sunni Muslims in Syria. With diplomatic pressure from us, in terms of
economic sanctions, the Iranians could help make that happen. The Shia government in Iraq, a country which
contains both Shia and Sunni, is an example of how this might work.
Of course, better
relations between the United States and Iran will not make Russia happy. Once ISIS and Assad have been taken care of,
they will become concerned with a more powerful Iran on their southern flank,
an Iran that might be willing to work with the United States in preserving
Middle Eastern peace, on its own terms.
This would not be an ideal solution for the United States, and the
remaining Sunni nations, but nevertheless it could be a peaceful one. Achieving it is an ambitious, demanding long-term
assignment for the diplomats of the nations involved, particularly those of the
United States, Russia and Iran.
Now
that you have my take on a solution for Syria, let’s see what a real expert says
about it. Courtesy of BloombergView (online), read the words
of Professor Hal Brands. a Henry A. Kissinger Distinguished Professor of Global
Affairs at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International
Studies.
He knows more than I do. Just click here to read what he has to say!
JL
Git Outta Dat Seat!
What businesses in this
country sell customers non-existent products?
Airlines! Every day they might
sell 104 tickets on a plane that seats only 100, assuming four customers won’t
show. Unless it were due to late
connecting flights, these “no-show” customers usually don’t get refunds, or pay
a hefty penalty if they reschedule, but assuredly, the airlines don’t lose
money on them.
The recent United
Airlines incident is illustrative, although overbooked seats were not the issue. United needed to immediately move four
employees from Chicago to Louisville.
This problem was the airline’s, not its customers’. They
asked for four volunteers to change flights (and be rewarded for doing
so). Three did and one didn’t and had to
be violently removed from the aircraft.
I believe that if there
were no seats on the plane, United should have found another way of getting the
employees to Louisville. It was their
problem. Taking back something you
already sold to a customer, under the license provided in the very small print
on the ticket, should be out of the question.
The solution is to sell
only the number of tickets as there are seats on the plane. If an airline wants to reserve three or four
for eventualities such as this one, let them do it, like those excellent “house
seats” at Broadway shows, held back for some bigwig who decides at the last
minute to see a “Hamilton,” for example.
(We once got last minute seats for a sold-out show in London which probably had been held in reserve for a
member of the Royal Family, if they had decided to come: fifth row center on the aisle.) If there are no need for
them, they could be put on sale at the gate, along with the tickets for the
“no-show’s” seats. With most airline
flights flying at capacity these days, they will not go unoccupied. And if this solution has to result in a small
increase in ticket prices, so be it.
But throwing a person
who paid for a ticket off of a flight to accommodate the movement of the
airline’s employees? No way, Jose
(Ho-say).
JL
Skool Daze
The Republican administration’s
proposed budget slashes funds for the Department of Education by 13.5 percent,
or $9.2 billion. While merely a
blueprint for Congress to act on, it shows the direction in which the government
is going.
tRump’s budget plan would remove $2.4
billion in grants for teacher training and $1.2 billion in funding for summer
and after-school programs. It also curtails or eliminates funding for around 20
departmental programs “that are not effective, that duplicate other efforts, or
that do not serve national needs.” Although
decreased funding for the Education Department will have repercussions for
students and educators across the country, low-income students are particularly
vulnerable.
In addition to eliminating
Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (SEOG), which offer need-based aid
to around 1.6 million low-income undergraduates each year, the tRump
administration wants to “significantly” reduce Federal Work-Study. Although
work-study programs have been criticized for
disproportionately aiding private institutions, they are have been
successful helping students graduate and find employment post-college.
The budget proposal also calls for
around $200 million in cuts to federal TRIO programs,
which benefit low-income, first-generation, and disabled students, and GEAR UP, a program that helps prepare
low-income middle and high-school students for college.
Overall, this decreased funding will
make resources available for one of tRump’s top education priorities, school
choice. Under the new budget, the Republican administration wants to spend $1.4
billion to expand vouchers in public and private schools, leading up to an
eventual $20 billion a year in funding.
Education Secretary DeVos, a leading advocate of charter schools,
certainly is smiling. Thomas Jefferson,
a strong advocate of public education, wherever he is, is not.
I suspect that such an attack on
public education, particularly in the area of teacher training, will have the
long-term effect of dumbing down the American population. Republicans are obviously enthusiastic about
this since a gullible electorate, not properly educated to think for themselves and voting against what is in their own interest, is key to their party’s survival. It
worked in 2016 and they do not intend to abandon this tactic.
JL
Meaningful Movie Review
Saw an amusing movie
last weekend, “Going In Style,” about three elderly gentlemen (Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman and Alan Arkin) in need of cash who decide to become bank
robbers. It’s a remake of a similar film
done 38 years ago. This time, Michael Caine
is in dire financial straits because of a “teaser rate” balloon mortgage
refinancing he secured from an unscrupulous bank and is about to lose his home
to foreclosure, as many like him did when the real estate market collapsed in
2007. That was the engine that moved the
plot of the movie.
Caine holding Forclosure Notice in Mnunchin Movie
Now get this! The Executive Producer (that means he put up
a lot of the money for it) of “Going In Style” was none other than Secretary of
the Treasury Steven Mnuchin, whose banking activities over the years earned him
the nickname of “the Foreclosure King.”
So just as this tRump appointee made a lot of money from real foreclosures
like the one which threatened Caine in the movie, he will also profit from that
film’s criticism of exactly those activities.
How do you beat these guys? But
see the movie! Lot of laughs for
everyone … and an occasional tear for those of Medicare age.
JL
HOW TO BE ALERTED TO
FUTURE BLOG POSTINGS.
Many readers of this blog are alerted by Email
every time a new posting appears. If you wish to be added to that
Email list, just let me know by clicking on Riart1@aol.com and sending me an
Email.
HOW TO CONTACT ME or CONTRIBUTE MATERIAL TO JACK'S
POTPOURRI.
BY CLICKING ON THAT SAME ADDRESS, Riart1@aol.com YOU ALSO
CAN SEND ME YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO BE PUBLISHED IN THIS BLOG AS WELL AS YOUR
COMMENTS. (Comments can also be made by clicking on the "Post a
Comment" link at the blog's end.)
MOBILE DEVICE ACCESS.
DID YOU KNOW THAT www.jackspotpourri.com IS ALSO
AVAILABLE ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICES IN A MODIFIED, EASY-TO-READ, FORMAT?
HOW TO VIEW OLDER POSTINGS.
To view older postings on this blog, just click on the
appropriate date in the “Blog Archive” midway down the column off to the right,
or scroll down until you see the “Older Posts” notation at the very
bottom of this posting. The “Search Box” in the
right side of the posting also may be helpful in locating a posting topic for
which you are looking.
HOW TO FORWARD
POSTINGS.
To send this posting to a friend, or enemy for
that matter, whom you think might be interested in it, just click on the
envelope with the arrow on the "Comments" line directly below,
enabling you to send them an Email providing a link directly to this posting.
You might also want to let me know their Email
address so that they may be alerted to future postings.
Jack Lippman
No comments:
Post a Comment