Nicolas19
- 288 comments
- 47 likes given
- 132 likes received
Bio not provided
@Xenophon @videmus It is true. But you shouldn't expect otherwise. FP is an American source. It is vying to be "politically correct". The current PC mindset in the US is the "what we're doing is good, what others do is bad"-mantra (it is not unique to the US, mind, but it is also not universal).
You should just read it, discard the BS in your mind, hoping that there is some useful information beneath it. Oh, and not feed brainwashed trolls like videmus.
Well, the current US administration has lost all the credibility it had when Obama declared that America will support Israel even if the construction of illegal settlement continues and/or Israel ceases to become a democracy. Thus the US has now openly chosen sides. What initiative the Arabs have to enter into negotiations brokered by an agent of the opposite party?
It may be wise to seek a less compromised third party, but is a very hard pick. Maybe the EU? Good question...
Being a lawyer myself, I wholeheartedly agree with the article. The "unwilling or unable" doctrine was always dismissed because it is no more than a weak pretense for aggression. The cited US lawyers are trying in vain to find any legal basis for the actions of their government, the same as the lawyers of any invading nation usually do.
The only open question is that of consent. Pakistan may have given its "tacit consent" (it is disputable that consent to military action may be tacit at all or it has to be express), but as soon as they take any action against military aircraft in their airspace, the consent shall be considered withdrawn, as they have every right to do so. Of course the US may claim the price of the drone shot down as reparation, but it may not dispute Pakistan's decision. End of story.
All this because he doesn't attack a country halfway round the globe on the sole casus belli of some shady reporting? I thought this was the norm.
Remember, you are talking about a president escalating a war, launching another (both with disastrous results), authorizing the extrajudicial killing of US citizens and foreign nationals abroad.
Hey, George W. Bush also didn't attack North Korea, give him a peace prize!
Alternative title: from relative stability to chaos, how the misguided US involvement forces Central Asia to militarize. Go, Obama, go!
Its Iraq and Libya all over again. "It'll be easy, cheap, quick, our troops will be home by Christmas! The bad guys will disappear, and democracy-loving, US-crazed masses will sprout like weed! It is a very professional assessment, look, I even threw in a few military-sounding three or four-letter words!"
I especially like the part about the Libyan campaign turning out to be less expensive than predicted, because the majority of the burden was carried by Europeans and Canadians. Yet during the campaign FP was full of "we are doing the heavy lifting, those pesky Europeans are just free-riding our victory". Oh, well...
@AaronJA I agree that this might be the core problem. Even with the constant influx of cheap labor could keep manufacturing costs down even temporarily.
@pedro bundol The author implies that Kerry should tell Russia that the US will be showing a "big stick" to them. As if there ever were carrots...
The funny thing is that the american media seems to think that the whole world owes the US a favor. What incentive has Russia to abandon its allies just because the US doesn't like them?
@johnboy4546 Well, I got it back:)
@catfitz How about fighting a war for a full decade that was admittedly not justified? The SC was powerless to stop it, yet they would be powerful enough to persecute the leaders and masterminds (including the American presidents GWB and BO)? Remember, US is in the SC.
Well, I don't know why I am feeding you as a troll here. go back to the delusional thinking that America is still fighting terror. America IS the terrorist now.
"Stand u" against Russia? Why, that is some Fox News reporting. What do you mean exactly, apart from big, meaningless words?
Legitimacy? In what sense is Russia (the country, no less!) illegitimate? You don't know what you're talking about.
In this age of media-policy (basing actual policy on the opinion and perceived reaction from the media), the Obama administration is remarkably careless. With all the talk about "red lines", "all options are on the table", "we will not tolerate this or that", Obama cannot look credible unless he follows up on every single jingoistic speech/op-ed/tweet his administration makes. So the issue is not about credibility anymore, but personal PR.
Beating the drums of war on every minor occurrence (like the talk about war with Russia after the Boston bombing) has become the norm. Declaring red lines and not following up on them is also habitual to the regime. They why is credibility so important if Obama has already lost it in the first place?
Of course, there is a solution. Obama should regulate his own house, his own administration. When a government talks, it should matter. Now it is not so, and it is Obama's incompetence.
@johnboy4546 I think you get it wrong. Israel doesn't attack anybody. It merely "does the right thing", whether it is called "preemptive strike", "retaliation", "self-defense", or, as you put it, "carefully-measured use of force".
Israel is a peaceful democracy with evil neighbors (even the Mediterranean is evil). Israeli soldiers don't kill, Israeli weapons don't hurt and non-Israeli civilians don't die. Israel has the right to do the above-mentioned "right things", which may include endangering civilian nuclear reactors, displacing refugees, illegal colonization and practicing apartheid. But they are also right things, because Israel does them.
Where would the world be without the ever-clear US journalism?
"Vladimir Putin, who perversely is enabling a mass-murderer as part of a campaign to remain globally relevant" . of really? When did Putin start to become irrelevant? He is the president of the world's largest and most resource-rich country as far as I know.
Assad is a mass-murdered. True, he has been at war with rebels since March, 2011. Then what is Obama? He presided over two wars, escalated one and authorized extrajudicial killing of hundreds is not thousands since 2008. How is he NOT a mass murderer?
Now you urge Kerry to threaten Russia into abusing their place in the Security Council. And you call that international law? It was America who recently launched an unprovoked, baseless attack in defiance of international law, the world is glad that the other SC countries are not assisting the US this time!
The US boycotting the Olympics because Russia doesn't launch a military campaign against a third party? Mr. Rothkopf, are you out of your mind?
Luckily, Kerry is full of hot air. He can't even pressure the closest allies into cooperation (Israel anyone?) much less Russia. The US is losing its leverage around the world, and trying to pressure others to act on its behalf hardly helps. Back in the golden days of the US being a world power, such a question wouldn't have even arisen. You had competent diplomats and a consistent policy, you sat down with the adversary and resolved the issue. Now on the contrary, Obama sends an envoy to Russia begging for help to regulate a tiny, disorderly country. Isn't it the more of a quest for Obama to stay relevant, because apparently Putin is more important if Obama is asking his help. No diplomacy, no leverage, no policy, Obama has reduced the foreign presence of the US into PR-stunts (like the Nobel peace prize) and photo-ops (like the "victory" in Iraq). Nobody takes you seriously anymore, not even the puny Assad.
@poi Nope. The hundreds hunted down by the US in Pakistan is wanted by the US, not Pakistan. So in Pakistan, they are not criminals, it is illegal to pursue them. Quick reminder: extrajudicial execution is illegal in the US, too.
Let meg give you an example: I go into your house, claiming that one of your relatives is a criminal according to the rules of my house. Can I do this? According to your reasoning, I can.
"risky, to destroy chemical-weapons stocks from the air" - you are talking about a regime that has admittedly launched a cyber-attack against a civilian nuclear power plant. Israel does not care for the lives of non-Israeli civilians at all. The massacre at Mavi Marmara further confirmed that.
@SJH Exactly. US media got so deluded by the apparent "traditional-US-hero-story" about the weak good guys sweeping away the strong bad guys, that they are forgetting that the realities of the transitions in the Arab countries are completely different. Dream on, keep thinking that Assad is the bad guy and the heroic revolutionaries are the good guys. The picture is not black and white.
Oh, and another thing. When China violates Indian territory (if it is Indian at all), China is picking a fight. When US conducts military operations inside another country, it is "doing the right thing". Nice journalism.
I don't agree. The two nations will try to resolve the border issue in their next official talks, coming in late May (I think). China is positioning itself, these incursions are mere bargaining chips.
Claiming that this border is more dangerous than the DMZ is... well, an overstatement. Imagine similar "incursions" happening there.
No! Please, GB, don't go there! The American use of the term "conclusive evidence" is a sinister one, it may mean Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (which there weren't), Iranian nukes (which there aren't), but definitely not real things.
You were taken for a ride by Bush II. Now Bush III (aka Obama) is trying to do the same.
Don't worry America! Israel is right behind you! You are free to protect it with your own body!