Day: January 20, 2020

Closing Thought–20Jan20

As the nation awaits the start of the Senate Trial…..how about a little humor to lessen the pain of the impeachment wait?

We think that our politicians are bold when they have a heated argument with an opponent or a voter….but these are very mild compared to the rest of the world…..

These are clips from around the world and the differences of opinion and how they are resolved…..

Parliaments around the world communicate dissent in various ways. In some cases, yelling is enough. Elsewhere, ministers express themselves with fistfights, kicking, elbowing, gouging eyes, spraying tear gas, and throwing things (including eggs, chairs, microphones…). 

In Jordan, after a heated debate, one MP wanted to shoot another but was not allowed to bring his AK-47 into the parliamentary chambers. (And he, or perhaps someone else, seems to be wielding a knife.) He was ordered out into the hall, where he fired a shot, the noise of which interrupted a speech. 

Well, there are limits to what will be tolerated. As shown in the video below, an emergency meeting was held, after which one member announced, “Some are suggesting to sack the member of parliament who did that.”

Violence in the US Congress was once fairly common, as a recent book documents. If the political culture grows any more polarized, could it return? 

House of Pain: Watch Crazy Parliament Fights From Around the World

Watch all the short clips…they are wonderful.

Now that is how we should be settling our opposition…..a good fist and the winner takes the day in politics.

Maybe extend it to international situations…..leaders of the two countries meet in a neutral area and have a 3 round fist fight…..the winner is declared by a panel of neutral judges or a knock out….the winning side gets the dispute settled in their favor.

Pretty simple and straight forward….this is a violent world we live then use that violence to settle disputes….other tan killing each other.

Just a thought!

“lego ergo scribo”

What Is The Purpose Of Impeachment?

Paper #5 of 5

This is a thought in a series of thoughts on the impeachment process.

The Senate Trial begins tomorrow…..all the jurors have been sworn in and signed the oath….time to get down to business.

Is Trump guilty or not?

I care not this series of posts are about the impeachment process not some silly notion of tribalism.

An easy answer for those that look for easy answers…..for those that want to pass on the whining of politicians and pundits.

Yes one of the purposes for the process of impeachment is to remove the president from office (a process that has not been very effective by the way)…..but it is NOT the only purpose for the process.

Time to look t the Founding Fathers and their opinions and thoughts on the process need to be brought out…..

As Congress considers formal charges of impeachment against President Donald Trump, they should consider words spoken at the Constitutional Convention, when the Founders explained that impeachment was intended to have many important purposes, not just removing a president from office.

A critical debate took place on July 20, 1787, which resulted in adding the impeachment clause to the U.S. Constitution. Benjamin Franklin, the oldest and probably wisest delegate at the Convention, said that when the president falls under suspicion, a “regular and peaceable inquiry” is needed.

…statements made at the Constitutional Convention explaining that the Founders viewed impeachment as a regular practice with three purposes:

  • To remind both the country and the president that he is not above the law
  • To deter abuses of power
  • To provide a fair and reliable method to resolve suspicions about misconduct.

https://www.juancole.com/2019/12/founders-removal-purpose-impeachment.html

If one is to debate or bitch about the process of impeachment then maybe a little knowledge would help……(Hahahaha…..I know in the era of mass stupid knowledge the last thing these mental midgets need)…..

Does anyone know what the term “oversight” means?

(Look it up…I am sure you can use Google by now)

The Founders were concerned that there could be an “imperial president” if there were no oversight…..

I have a problem…I do not care whether Trump is convicted or not, my problem is the oath taken by people that have already made up their minds…..this will be a joke for late night TV….not a political exercise.

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

"He Said Bad Stuff"

I am as most already know that I like foreign policy and conflict management…..I have studied many forms of the execution of foreign policy but I have never heard of one that is actionable because of Rhetoric.

Most Americans know that we recently killed a top Iranian general in an airstrike…..there is a story that there were plans to attack American embassies and a couple of other reasons for the assassination.

But Trump has said now that he was killed because he said “bad things”……seriously?

President Trump has struggled with legal justifications for the US assassination of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, failing to back up claims of an “imminent” threat, claiming that didn’t matter because of bad things he’d done. On Friday, Trump suggested to donors that Soleimani was killed not because of what he did, but because of what he said.

Trump made the comments at a Mar-a-Lago fundraiser, saying that he heard Soleimani’s comments, and asked “how much of this shit do we have to listen to?” Trump made no mention of any threats in his decision to kill Soleimani.

This is particularly noteworthy because it represents another example of the president changing his story on the controversial assassination, one which very easily could have led to a major war with Iran.

Claims of an “imminent threat,” true or not, are always made by the US military after an attack because it is one of very few legal pretexts established for carrying out an otherwise aggressive attack. Being insulted by what Soleimani was saying, naturally, is not a legal justification of any sort.

That in less than two weeks the president has repeatedly changed his justification isn’t a good sign, and that this most recent narrative was offered only during a private dinner to his donors, suggests that this was neither meant for public consumption, nor a very good justification at all.

This also came just a day after Trump warned Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei to “be careful with his words” after a critical sermon. In this new context, we are clearly meant to understand that if Trump didn’t like what he said, it might easily be a reason for him to be killed.

(antiwar.com)

If they is an adequate reason to assassinate a leader then h why have we not done so for North Korea’s Kim, who has said more “bad stuff” than just about anybody?

I truly would like to know just what style of foreign policy does Trump subscribe to….that is besides the “Pasta Technique”……

I Read, I Wrote, You KNow

“lego ergo scribo”

Professor’s Classroom

This one I need help with…..when I posted it in 2007 I had my notes well those have gone…..so I will be open for you to help the old professor out…..thanx….chuq

In Saner Thought

Since it is Labor Day and hopefully everyone will make a burnt offering of scorched flesh to the God of BBQ, I will make this a short and simple question. Hopefully all will enjoy.

Who was the American film idol that was an avid supporter of Stalin and left the US just ahead of subpoenas, to never return?

EASY? Good luck and have a good Labor Day. Peace–Out!

View original post

Afghanistan

Going on 19 years of troop deployments and conflict and what have we got to show for it?

The American people have lied to for at least 15 years on the progress of our exercise in regime change (a post on that coming)…..

So let us consider what exactly they are hiding from us. It began with last year’s announcement that the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) – the congressionally mandated watchdog on all aspects of this war – would no longer report Afghan Security Force (ASF) casualty data. It’s now classified. I wonder why. Could it be that the US trained and equipped (to the tune of some $70 billion) Afghan military is suffering unsustainable casualties, is losing troops faster than it can recruit? Maybe its because Washington finds it inconvenient to admit that the ASF is nowhere near its target personnel strength, that desertions and absence without leave are rampant in the ranks, and that the Afghan GDP is insufficient to pay for its own security forces.

After all, every president from Bush to Obama to Trump has told us that advising the ASF is America’s number one priority and the key to a successful exit. Given that, one would think it rather important to face the truth about the utterly insufficient Afghan military and police force. Instead it’s classified. You’re no longer allowed to know that discomfiting truth.

Classifying Defeat: Hiding Data on the Losing Afghan War

This country has spent billions on the training of the Afghan police and military and for damn near two decades and what is the prognosis?

“The Afghan military – and particularly the Afghan police – has been a hopeless nightmare and a disaster,” Sopko told lawmakers on Wednesday. “And part of it is because we rotate units through that aren’t trained to do the work, and they’re gone in six-to-nine months. I don’t blame the military, but you can’t bring in a Black Hawk pilot to train an Afghan policeman on how to do police work. And that’s what we were doing — we’re still doing.”

Sopko testified before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday following the Washington Post’s publication of the “Afghanistan Papers,” a series of interviews that SIGAR has conducted in which top U.S. officials have privately conceded that the war in Afghanistan has provided few — if any — tangible successes.

https://taskandpurpose.com/afghan-troops-police-disaster-sopko

So we have got NOTHING in return for our money spent…is that about right?

It is time to cut our losses on a hopeless endeavor….and I am not alone with this feeling…..

Even conservative veterans are now calling for an end to Afghanistan…..

Those two voices were among five unveiled Thursday in a 30-second television ad that will air in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, urging voters to demand their lawmakers put an end to “endless wars.” As part of that effort, the first order of business for the sponsor of the ad, Concerned Veterans of America, is to get America out of Afghanistan.

“We would like to see a full withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan as soon as possible,” said Nate Anderson, an Army Green Beret and executive director of CVA, a conservative veterans’ group.

“The reality for us is that leaving our forces there only puts them at further risk in a country where we don’t have a strategic objective that we have not already met,” Anderson said, recalling the death of Osama bin Laden, punishing the Taliban for harboring al Qaeda, and largely uprooting the terror group from the country. “All those things happened,” he said.

And yet, 18 years, 3 months, and 9 days after Operation Enduring Freedom officially launched, the war continues to grind on, albeit under a different name. This past weekend, two American service members were killed and two others were wounded after their vehicle was struck by an improvised explosive device. Their deaths were the first in the new year.

https://taskandpurpose.com/cva-ad-endless-wars

A new ally for the call to end our endless wars……slowly but slowly the antiwar movement is gaining popularity….

Yes, Conservative Vets Want Out of Afghanistan, Too

The question is….is anyone listening?

I Read, I Wrote, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”