* * *
The only good things about dropping bombs from the skies or shooting shells from ships at sea or using drones to mount attacks, is that they avoid putting troops on the ground. Why? Because once the decision to do that is made, with troops involved, belligerents are far less likely to resolve their differences through negotiations.
More than half a century ago, we put ‘boots on the ground’ in Vietnam and that made negotiations elusive, if not impossible, once it became clear that victory in a ground war there was just not going to happen. ('Boots' are an easier, less human, word to sell to the public than 'troops.')
In that sense, sticking with aerial and naval bombardment of Iran and Iranian interests might be good things; they serve to avoid taking steps it might be far more difficult from which to back off, if our goals in that war, whatever they are, happen to change. Such change is possible because each time the President or his appointees approach defining our aims in this war, the goal posts seem to be moved either closer, or further away, than they were the day before.
JL
* * *
Stay on Top of the President’s Misdeeds
Do so by checking out Professor Heather Cox Richardson’s ‘Letters from an American’ as often as possibly by clicking here or copying and pasting https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/ on your device’s browser line.
Pressed for time? Just start with any one of her recent postings. April 20, 21, or 22 will do just fine. She doesn’t make this stuff up! Her sources are documented with her precision as a historian, and links to them are provided at the conclusion of her postings, enabling you to make up your own mind. That's why I steer you toward them. I do not alway agree with her. (Just most of the time.)
JL
* * *
The Art of the Deal
President Trump once supposedly wrote a book titled ‘The Art of the Deal.’ Some of the tactics therein described work fine when both sides have things they want and things they will not give up. Part of the supposed strategy is not to let the other side know what these things really are, or if they exist at all. One side, conceivably, might be bluffing.
But although this might work when it involves a lease, a piece of real estate, or a business decision, it does not apply to negotiations to end a war, as is the case with the on-again, off-again sessions to end our undeclared war with Iran, supposedly scheduled to take place in Pakistan. In that case, what cards each side really has in its hand are known to the other side through their intelligence sources and what is general knowledge.
Hard-bargaining international negotiators will never achieve the ‘deal’ they want if they refuse to put certain items on the table as open to negotiation. This is what both the United States and Iran are doing, excluding certain items from any negotiations, before even sitting down.
Both parties, desirous for a cease fire, agree that it take place but only on their terms, which differ. As a result, at this point, the meetings are not taking place.
But both sides know better and really everything is open to negotiations, although both sides will not admit it, seeing that as a sign of weakness.
If we can’t talk about this or that, both sides feel, why should we even bother showing up. Ultimately, each side will have to give up something that it does not want to give up, enabling both sides to walk away from the table and declare that they came out ahead. Both sides know that but neither wants to be the first to go down that path. And using the threat of violence to convince either side to reach that point will prove to be counter-productive in the long run.
JL
* *
'Further Comment Unnecessary' Dep't.
JL
* * *
Housekeeping on Jackspotpourri
Your comments on this ‘blog’ would be appreciated. My Email address is jacklippman18@gmail.com.
Forwarding Postings: Please forward this posting to anyone you think might benefit from reading it (Friends, relatives, enemies, etc.) If you want to send someone the blog, you can just tell them to check it out by visiting https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com or you can provide a link to that address in your email to them.
There’s another, perhaps easier, method of forwarding it though! Google Blogspot, the platform on which Jackspotpourri is prepared, makes that possible. If you click on the tiny envelope with the arrow at the bottom of every posting, you will have the opportunity to list up to ten email addresses to which that blog posting will be forwarded, along with a brief comment from you. Each will receive a link to click on that will directly connect them to the blog. Either way will work, sending them the link to https://jackspotpourri.blogspot.com , or clicking on the envelope at the bottom of this posting.
Email Alerts: If you are NOT receiving emails from me alerting you each time there is a new posting on Jackspotpourri, just send me your email address and we’ll see that you do. And if you are forwarding a posting to someone, you might suggest that they do the same, so they will be similarly alerted. You can pass those email addresses to me by email at jacklippman18@gmail.com
More on the Sources of Information in Jackspotpourri: The sources of information used by Jackspotpourri include a delivered local daily ‘printed’ newspaper (now the South Florida Sun Sentinel) and what appears in my daily email; that includes the views of many contributors, including the New York Times and other respected journals.
Be aware that when I open that email, I first quickly glance at and screen out those sent to my very old former email address and those considered ‘promotional’ by Gmail’s system as no more than advertisements or requests for donations.
Besides these sources, I also utilize the Google search engine where I can look up any subject I want.
Lately, these search results have been headed by a very generalized summary clearly labeled as being developed by AI (Artificial Intelligence). On occasion I might use such search results, but when I do, I will say that I am doing so. Generally, however, I try not to use such summaries in preparing Jackspotpourri.
Following such ‘AI’ search results, there follows the other results of my search. Unlike the anonymous AI-generated summaries, the sources of these results are clearly indicated, giving them a greater credibility than any AI summary.
It comes down to who YOU want to be in the driver’s seat in seeking information: yourself or something else (Artificial Intelligence), the structure of which somewhere along the way had to have been created by others, with whose identity I am neither familiar nor comfortable. At least when I read a column by Timothy Snyder, for example, I know from where it comes, and to some extent, what to expect.
Caution should be exercised in using Artificial Intelligence. Always!
JL
* * * *
No comments:
Post a Comment