Winter Olympics 2014 in Russia !?!?!?!?

The time has finally come - Winter Olympics 2014 are about to commence.

The whole World awaits summer and winter Olympics with the great deal of anticipation.  We all cheer our athletes, wishing them to overcome shortcomings and to be better than the athletes from other teams.  The Olympics come very often with the great deal of controversy.  2014 Winter Olympics follow the suit.  
They are very expensive, exceeding 50 million Euro, and organized in the usual Summer Russians resort, instead of Winter resort - as it would be expected.  They have been, from the very beginning, the ‘pet’ project of the President Vladimir Putin.  Done in a very Soviet way, defying the impossible, very hard on the local population and the environment.  
We've heard already the horror stories, about the whole villages, destroyed or subjected to severe degradation of the livelihoods, because of the construction projects related to the Olympics.  The new highways have been built, with total disregard to the local population, separating the villages, and cutting off the supplies.  Just yesterday, I watched a very interesting reportage on France 24, describing one of these cases.  The summer resort Sochi was completely unprepared for the Olympics.  It’s estimated, that more than 90% of infrastructure had to be built.  Thus, such an incredible price tag.  Not counting, of course, the overwhelming corruption. Corruption is nothing new to Russians, inherited from Soviet Union and growing every day in the New-Old country.  Looking from our perspective, one may say, it's not our business.  It's not our business, until if it affects us, or our athletes.
Quite recently, Russia has introduced the anti-gay laws.  When the whole World grows in acceptance of the gay community, Russia moves in the opposite direction.  After the mass protest all around the World, against these ridiculous laws, Pres. Putin softened his position and welcomed members of gay and lesbian community to the Olympics, prohibiting only, what he called ‘gay propaganda’.  
It didn't stop, what these laws released: a wave of violence against gays in Russia.  Criminals and anti-gay militants started taking the law in their own hands and acted with impunity – I will leave it without further comment. 
These laws are just the latest example of the treatment, being received by all the people who think differently or behave differently from what the Government would like them to think or behave, in Russia.  Since the fall of the Soviet Union, when Russia put a new face on the old system, and pretended to accept the ideological change incorporating the market economy and talking highly and loudly about abuse of human rights in other countries, the dissidents and the journalists who were dissidents, or just tried to follow the truth, were disappearing.  Many of them, disappeared and never resurfaced, and others turned out dead.  The world protested, but as expected, it couldn't, and didn't produce any results.  The Russian human rights record remained ‘spotless’ and untouchable, as in the Soviet Union.
For quite some time, Russia has been involved, in an un-winnable war with the Islamist extremists in Chechnya.  In a Very Soviet way, Chechnya has been under siege by Russian military for years.  No one in the free world sympathizes with the extremists, no matter what agenda, or political affiliation they may present.  The Chechnya extremists want to separate from the Russia, and establish the Muslim state with the Sharia law in its extreme form.  To prove their point, and force Russian government to accept their demands, they organized, numerous bombings, killing a great number of civilians as a result.  They have been considered ‘terrorists’, by both Russians and the outside world. 
In the 1980, during the Summer Olympics in Moscow, some countries of the Western world boycotted it because of what was going on in Afghanistan, and other Republics of, then, communist Russia.  The Russian involvement in Afghanistan started on the full-scale in 1979. Even though the Russians were granted Summer Olympics before it started, when the war unfolded and no one could do anything about it, the World was outraged.  Russians were isolated and punished for not respecting human rights and the international law.  It was a slap on the hand but at least something was done to communicate the message to the arrogant Russians.

When Russia was granted the winter Olympics of 2014, all the human rights abuses were well known to the World.  Of course not proven, since no one could actually investigate all the allegations, but the general consensus was set -  even though they changed the name and the face, the modus operandi stayed the same. 

I never could understand, why the International Olympic Committee granted the right to organize Winter Olympics (or the Summer Olympics, for that matter) to the Dictatorial State, like Russia (or China), just to satisfy the Dictators’ thirst for success, and in a way legitimize them in the eyes of the World.  Let’s not forget that the same Committee granted the right to host the Summer Olympics to Nazi Germany (1936).  
This right should the highest privilege, a reward for being a champion of Democracy, bringing the joy to all the people in the World including those who host the Olympics, and those who spent years to build the infrastructure.  Instead, some migrant workers from the neighboring countries, who worked on creation of the Olympic Park in Sochi, were deported forcefully right after the work was done. 
The reality is a little bit different.  The conflict in Chechnya, spread to the surrounding territories, and can produce the real threat to the life and well being of all participants in the Olympics.  There have been numerous warnings against bomb attacks, which can be orchestrated using the suicide bombers.  In order to prevent this from happening, the Russian security forces, flooded all the Olympics facilities and surrounding areas in thousands.  No one knows actual number of the security functionaries used to control the Olympics venues.  The probability of attack by so-called ‘black widows’ is huge.  Can all the participants be protected?  Can all the visitors be protected?  Can all the journalists be protected?
Two American warships are stationing right now on the Black Sea in a vicinity of Sochi.  Filled with antiterrorist specialists, they are ready to react to any threat.  I'm not sure if it makes me feel good about the safety of people in Sochi and surrounding facilities.

But what I am sure about, is that the winter Olympics of 2014 should have been organized somewhere else. They should have been organized in a country with much better record for human rights, and being able to provide the security without making it a police state.  Because of what is happening, related to Chechnya and its extremists, the travel in this part of Russia is impossible without the permit.  The heavy surveillance on the streets and the video surveillance in the hotel rooms, thousands of uniformed and plainclothes security officers, restriction of travels…  Those who remember the Soviet Union can't help but recognize the state of affairs.
When the international Olympic Committee granted the right to organize Summer Olympics to China - another country with a ‘spotless’ human rights record (!!!), I had the same reservation.  But at least in China there was no open war and no threat of terrorism.

The world in the second decade of the 20th century has become more violent and unpredictable.  I don't think that this process will reverse itself.  Taking this under consideration, we shouldn't create the situation when the terrorism would affect our everyday activities, or endanger the most peaceful endeavor like the Olympics - giving them to Russia created such a situation.

We can only hope that the Winter Olympics 2014 will be recorded in annals of history, as the celebration of brotherhood, well meant friendly competition, and all in all, joyful even - as it's supposed to be - not a blood bath.

Let the Games commence!

Chinese New Year is coming… - and why?

For some it may be a subject, which is not as important as others I wrote about so far.  Nevertheless, bear with me for a moment…

One of my friends (a great guy, American, white, professional… ) has sent me recently an invitation to the Chinese New Year's celebration.  As he counted - it's going to be already a 35th celebration of the sort, he has organized.  When he started doing so, we didn't know about each other's existence.  But since we first met, almost 20 years ago, I skipped only a few of these events.  Always fun, always a great gathering of 40-50 friends, and friend of friends… We meet sometimes in between the events, but this celebration brings together all of us.  We all laugh, eat strange food (sometimes afraid to ask: what's in it), drink some alcoholic beverages, bringing immediate association with a gasoline or a paint stripper… basically - have fun.

Chinese New Year's is an event known around the World.  Chinese calendar in its peculiar references to the animals - 'symbols' of a year - is well known.  Almost everybody is familiar with the animal, which is associated with the year one was born, and search within oneself for the particular traits of such an animal.  I, for one, am a monkey…  Almost everyone, at least once in their life-times violated the local Police restrictions and shot some (illegal) fireworks for the occasion...

The invitation came, as always, well expected, or I would say eagerly anticipated…  And then it dawned on me… Why do we do it, besides the obvious - 'any occasion for a party is a good one'?

Really - why do we all celebrate the Chinese New Year's, and not any other, also based on a Lunar calendar (or LuniSolar, not a Solar, like most of the World)?  Why not Arab New Year's, or Jewish New Year's…

Let's look into that fascinating matter a little bit deeper, maybe let's weigh (or try it at least) how deeply our Culture - the Culture of the Western Civilization has been affected by the various cultures with the Lunar based calendar.

Here we go:

1. China and it's culture has been always far from the West.  Far in a physical distance, and so different from all we have known.  It was a great mystery.  Early trade brought us the silk.  And later, the gun powder.  Finally we weren't limited to the hand thrown projectiles, or a trebuchet.  From that time on we could stuff this compound into the iron, round containers, and eject them from the elongated bronze tubes, called canons.  The effect on the receiving party was 'hear warming'…  Finally, a devastation, our enemies deserved.  Of course we haven't stopped there.  Cruise Missiles and 'Daisy Cutters' are just a natural progression…

Imported from this wast and far away land was a 'china' on everybody's table (later too expensive to import, si in XIX c. most of Western Countries manufactured their own 'imports' - almost like originals. 

It has been absorbing our technology (not always legally), manufactured goods, and sent them back to us.

China has been always isolated, by distance, by the Chinese Wall (and their attitude toward the West), and then, since the beginning of the XX c. by politics.  At the end it gave the World: Confucius, Chairman Mao, Chinese New Year's, and cheap sneakers and electronics.  It also gave the World a fad of cryptic Chinese tattoos on so many young necks, arms and abdomens…  If only the proud bearers knew the meaning…

2. When in the 7th Century, Muslim religion was noticed by the Christian World, everyone knew - it was the beginning of the great era of conquest and exploitation of the still young and divided Culture associated so closely with this strange, new religion.  When the Holy Inquisition was doing it's 'best' to destroy the thousands years long literary heritage of Greece - it's philosophy, epics, science etc., the Arab scribes meticulously                  copied all the ancient works they could put their hand on and stowed them away from the claws of the Christian Church for safe keeping.  If it wasn't for Arabs, 'Homer' would be an abstract word… and no one would calculate the area of a triangle…

And then the 'beautiful' concept of the Crusades… I am getting all fuzzy inside… So big adventure, so much of spoils… Unfortunately for us in the Western Civilization, Arabs can't keep their liquor, so Koran forbade the use of it,  but they keep the grudge, quite well.  We have been reminded of it on the numerous occasions in the history - when Vienna almost fell in 1529 to the Ottoman Empire army, or when Twin Towers did fall in 2001 in New York City.  As a result, the Western Civilization has changed dramatically, refining the old Chinese import (gun powder) to the new heights, and new applications,  and reducing our overly free societies to fear and war mongering.

So, Arabs gave the Western Civilization all, otherwise lost Ancient literature and Science, wonderful art and architectural patterns in the Europe, The Patriot Act and NSA spying scandals.  

3. Since its founding father Abraham (ca. 1800 BCE) Jews were a huge influence on the surrounding cultures.  Living among other cultures, in more or less the same part of the Asia Minor, have always been a very strong and unified society.  Rather peaceful peoples, often found themselves on the receiving end of the bad will of one or another monarch in the area.  As a result forced to flee, relocate, travelled in small or bigger groups around the World settling down in many far away countries of the World.  As I mentioned, their influence on the World's Culture has always been strong.  When our calendar started, the Christianity began, created by the people who then, for years surrounded and followed (a person and his teachings) a Jewish Prophet Jesus of Nazareth, who quickly disassociated himself from the society he sprang from.  Christianity soon became the most powerful religion in the World.

Jews created a very strong and unified Diaspora in other countries.  As most of the rulers have never tolerated any strong, hard to control groups, the persecution of the Jews in many countries occurred, sometimes with a passive acceptance of the host societies, or with armed support to the Jewish community - like during the Warsaw Uprising in 1944.  No one can even try to understand what the Jews suffered during The Holocaust.  Nazis tried to wipe them out of the planet surface.  Thankfully they failed.  But this period of the XX Century brought a very important event - a massive exodus of the Jews fleeing the Nazi occupied Europe to the USA and other countries.

Strong and unified, already being scientist, actors, doctors in other countries they brought their skills to the US, where their skills and knowledge fell on a fertile ground and flourished.  The science exploded, the Broadway and Hollywood opened up and became not only cultural entities, but strong industries.

So, what did they bring to the Western World? - Inventiveness and technology (Atom Bomb among others), great literature, music, and the whole Entertainment Business.

I know that the above comparison comes short, and it's not in any way a scientific summery.  I quoted, selectively, only a few aspects, although important and undeniable, only a few.

But tell me now: Why do we celebrate a CHINESE NEW YEAR'S and not an ARABIC NEW YEAR'S or a JEWISH NEW YEAR'S?  Beats me... 

Syrian predicament…

Since President Obama threatened to order a 'limited', punishing attack on Syria a few days have passed.  Few days, bringing 24/7 warmongering debate on some TV channels, also a few days with some major international political developments…

Tonight President Obama spoke to the Americans from the White House.  In the very well written, and passionately delivered speech the President tried to make a case for the punishing strike on Basher Al Assad (Syria), as our duty to the Humanity, since the use of the chemical weapons is, and has been condemned even by the countries we usually do not associate with freedoms and respect to the World's Law - like Iran… but as a second option - if the political option fails…

Let's not get ahead of ourselves.  In these short few days since the day when Obama announced to the World his decision to bomb Syria to today, a whole avalanche of events happened:
We first learned about the possibility that the Syrian Army attacked 11 neighborhoods in Syria (near Damascus), defiant to Assad to that point, on August 21.  These locations were places where Syrian rebells lived and which they defended bravely.  These were neighborhoods, unbreakable by conventional weapons to that day.  
During a few next days we learned the whole scope of the attack.  Although the Regime denied the attack claiming that it was a provocation, and actually the rebells did it…  We learned that Sarin gas was used (most likely by Assad, since the delivery methods belonged to the organized army, not the disorganized rebells).
We witnessed the injured gasping for air in the last hours of their lives, since no one could help them at that point.  We saw hundreds, upon hundreds of dead on the floors of the make-shift hospitals…  The doctors complained that in a first few hours they run out of the only medicine which might have helped - atropine, and afterwards they could only watch people die, but couldn't help…

For most of us the Syrian Government's guild is not in question.  After killing more than 100,000 people using conventional weapons, Assad's regime moved to one of the most horrific weapons of ever invented - poisonous gas - Sarin. 

On August 28, US President Obama started making the case for the military strike, which would punish Assad's regime for the use of chemical weapons and prevent him from doing it again.  "I have not made a decision" on Syria military strike - Obama stated, but he added that all the options were on the table and "We have concluded," the president said, that Assad's regime in fact carried these out.  And if that's so, there needs to be international consequences" (5*).

On August 29, British Parliament voted against British involvement in the military intervention in Syria, leaving Prime Minister David Cameron stunned.  On the same day, the Italian Prime Minister Enrico Letta said that: "If the United Nations doesn't back it, Italy will not participate…"(1*)

On August 31, President Obama announced that, although he is convinced that the US should attack Syria, he would seek the Congress authorization of that action (6*).

At the beginning of September the so called G20 started, this time in St. Petersburg, Russia.  As expected at the Leaders Summit, one of the main, and the most controversial subject was the War in Syria and the possibility of the military intervention, to which the Russian leader, Vladimir Putin decisively opposes. On September 6, the European indices and the Wall Street took a dive after the Russian President warned to aid Syria, if America attacks militarily. (3*).  "We have our plans…" - Vladimir Putin warned US (4*), and he ordered the military buildup in the East Mediterranean (missile cruiser Moskva).

Although our media didn't emphasize the whole gravity of the situation, Obama's decision to peruse the military option creates a very dangerous situation, not only in the Middle East, but worldwide.  It brings to mind the infamous 13 days in 1962 - known afterwards as "Cuban Missile Crisis".  I do not want to draw parallels too far.  Times are different, the state of the US-Russian affairs is not as bad as it was than.  But it seems like the same game of "chicken" JFK was playing with Nikita Khrushchev (the leader to the USSR at that time).  Game, which was played a few steps too far for comfort...

During the G20 Summit the Syria didn't go out of agenda.  America was trying to get as much support for the attack, aided by French, British (only words, since the Parliament voted it down), Turks.  Russians were strongly opposed, and threatening.  On another front - The UN - on September 5, the US Ambassador to the UN accused Russia to held the UN hostage on the Syrian subject, preventing any resolution of the problem (7*).  Nothing changes - Russians won't give up support to Syria, since it's their only zone of influence in the Middle East, and they desperately want to cling to it.  If Assad is too weak to stay in power, their influence may not last long...

As the Guardian reported on September 9, according to the German Intelligence services: "President Bashar al-Assad did not personally order last month's chemical weapons attack near Damascus that has triggered calls for US military intervention, and blocked numerous requests from his military commanders to use chemical weapons against regime opponents in recent months…"(2*)

On the same day the US Secretary Of State John Kerry presented the ultimatum to the Syrian regime, that they had a week to surrender all the chemical weapons in the whole country, or the US would strike.  Immediately afterwards he appeared very skeptical about the success of such a proposal (8*).  And yet, it seams that President Putin welcomed this idea as one that would help him to keep his hands on this part of the Middle East a bit longer (9*).  Supposedly Assad agreed to that, and he promised to surrender all stash of his chemical weapons to the international community with no reservation.  
No one can imagine how it would be possible to execute, taking under consideration that Syria is in the state of Civil War, there would be an 'army' of international inspectors, and security personnel… At any given time, if the communication, or transportation fail, or there is no cooperation from the regime, or too much of the red tape… the US may strike.  But then the Russian fleet will be in place, at the shores of Syria.
Russian President jumped on the wagon of the almost impossible to perform peace initiative just to play "chicken" more efficiently, to have more 'arguments'.
___________________

This finally brought us back to what I started this article with - Obama's speech in the evening of the September 10.  President postponed the Congressional vote on authorizing the military option, while giving more time to the diplomatic option, coined by Kerry and picked so eagerly by Putin (whatever his intensions might be - and I am sure the World Peace is the last thing he though about).
Obama referred to the populous opposition to the possible military strike, but at the same time our moral obligation toward the Humanity would be to prevent any possibility of Syrian Regime using this kind of weapons again, or proliferation of these weapons in the region or farther, when Assad looses control over the stash.
I agree, that these are legitimate concerns.  I agree that the chemical weapons in the hands of the madman like him or someone like his 'replacement' (if he is to fall) is the very dangerous situation.  I agree with all these arguments.  There is no doubt in my mind that it is a tinder box and the World has to deal with it.

At the same time I am certain, that we can't afford entering this conflict.  I am sure that there is no clean way out of it if we get militarily involved.  The Russians will make sure that we are to blame for all the instability in the region, and loss of life it carries with it.  The loss of life which is unavoidable in any military action.  
Obama planned to use Cruise missiles, stealth bombers, what not.  I can foresee the regime presenting to the international community images of the atrocities caused by the strike.  I can foresee hundreds of the bloody corpses piled up, or layed down evenly on the floor showing 'alleged victims' of the 'imperialist's' attack.
Obama stated:  'It won't be another Irak, nor even Lybia…'.  That's right, it won't be - it will be much worse.  In Libya the World wanted to get rid of the Regime, and Russians didn't have anything to say.  It was too obvious.  Syria is different.  Also, the public opinion in the whole World is weary of war.  The public opinion in the whole World is weary of the American 'trigger happy', self appointed role of the 'fixer' of the World's problems.  
'We have the moral obligation to the Humanity to act…'.  Maybe we do, but every time, someone has to weigh very carefully what we can and what we cannot do.  We know what the wars we have been involved in costed us, financially, morally, in human toll… After so many failed plans of limited involvement, one should ask oneself a question if  the 'limited strike' is at all possible.  
We are not to topple Assad.  OK.  We will hurt him, kill a lot of soldiers, and probably a lot of civilians…  In his last chemical attack he killed around 1500 people.  How many corpses are we going to add to that?  Are we going to be the champions of the Free and Moral World.  Champions against tyranny of the Dictators?  Are we going to be the Champions for the weak and meek of the World?  But these weak and meek of the World want our help only when they start struggling alone against what ails them.  Right after they feel a bit supported they turn agains us.  The history repeats itself over and over.  

Every single time we act as a 'Policeman' of the World, every time when some 'collateral damage' occurs the multiple characters get radicalized, and join our enemies.  We are feeding the hatred.  Let's stop that. 

British Prime Minister had to agree with the voice of the nation when he lost decisively in the the Parliament vote.  There is a very good chance that the Congress of the USA won't authorize the military action against Syria.  But the President of the USA has the power to call for execution of his plan even if the Congress votes against it.  
I only hope that President Obama will not do that.  He did a lot of good things for America already.  He ended the Irak war, finishes the Afganistan war.  He introduced so long overdue healthcare reform (of course not ideal, but workable).  For the first time people can change Insurance without being not covered for the 'preexisting conditions'.  I could multiply the evident achievement of President Obama.  But, he made the issue of the strike against the Assad regime so personal to him, that it looks like he lost perspective…  If his "chicken game" backfires and Russians or anybody else catches our bluff and forces the US to strike we will all suffer.  I do not believe in a possibility of keeping the conflict contained, if we get into it.  And what will be Obama's legacy?  Syrian War (10*).




___________________
1*  -  http://news.yahoo.com/pm-says-italy-not-join-syrian-operation-unless-141415354.html
2*  -  http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/08/syria-chemical-weapons-not-assad-bild
3*  -  http://www.milanofinanza.it/news/dettaglio_news.asp?id=201309061619527359&chkAgenzie=TMFI
4*  -  http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/04/putin-warns-military-action-syria
5*  -  http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57600534/obama-i-have-not-made-a-decision-on-syria-military-strike/
6*  -  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/31/president-obama-says-us-must-act-on-syria/
7*  -  http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/world/middleeast/new-us-envoy-to-un-strongly-condemns-russia.html?_r=0
8*  -http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/09/kerry_gives_assad_one_week_to_surrender_chemical_weapons_or_face_attack.html
9*  -  http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/09/10/putin-chemical-weapons-united-nations-obama/2794529/
10* -  LBJ is known as the President who escalated Vietnam - not a revolutionary President who proclaimed the WAR on POVERTY, and introduced many successful social programs

NO - to war on Syria

The Arab Spring bringing down the old and compromised regimes in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen and then Libya took all the world by surprise.  And yet, it happened… after the decades of the abuse, the citizens of these countries said: Enough is enough… down with dictators… and the revolution began.
I wrote about it extensively, while it was happening.  I wrote about my (and others') frustration by the American indecision.  
All the promises contained in Obama's speech in Cairo University, kind of faded away, un-addressed in the real life.  
Yes, we helped in Libya.  The French took a lead, leaving us with the support role.  I was happy, that at last Americans do not have to be the Policeman of the World.  To be honest - the Libyan intervention was done in a perfect, limited way, without endangering our troops, and without loosing the face internationally.  
When the Egyptians elected in a democratic way the new President who happened to be one of the leaders of Muslim Brotherhood, we all almost choked… But as many said: FROM HUSSEIN TO JEFFERSON THE ONLY WAY IS THROUGH KHOMEINI (what translates loosely to:  From dictatorship to democracy the only way is through the support of religion).  The history proved that it was the common way of development (Poland in the Nineties, etc).  However, this democratically elected president (who stated previously that would support all multi religious and gender rights) quickly denied his democratic promises and put Egypt on the path to dictatorship and Sharia…  After months of the protests, Morsi's government was deposed by Egyptian Army responding to the populous demand.
And at that point America roared agains this action.  Like all the events of Morsi's abusive presidency didn't happen…  Army is not a good solution, by if they intent to pass the power to the civilian, elected government and stand aside… 

Syria.  The civil war in this Middle Eastern country exceeded our worst fears.  It's been already 2 years of the conflict.  In first months the whole world was shocked and disgusted by the indiscriminating killing performed by Assad regime, claiming fighting with terrorists…  The daily death toll was rising to more than a hundred a day…
It's September 2013.  By now Assad killed more than a hundred thousand people.  Not the army, or rebel fighters.  He has been decimating the whole neighborhoods, cities, indiscriminately shelling and with artillery, tanks, shooting from air…  
For two years Obama set quiet and America did nothing but the insignificant UN protests.  There were the congressional debates, plenty of White House rhetoric about how bad it was in Syria, and that it should stop immediately, and nothing real was coming out of it.  

For quite some time the rebels were bringing reports of the use of the chemical weapons on the population in Syria.  The White House rhetoric started to be more harsh and aggressive… President Obama started to 'draw a red line', which if crossed would result in the American military action.  
In the resent weeks Assad regime indeed used the Chemical Weapons - they gassed about 1500 cyvilians with Sarin gas.  The UN inspectors went to Syria and gathered evidence, but before they brought it back, the Obama Administration announced to have enough evidence to authorize a strike against the Syrian-Assad assets with a limited missile attack.  

More than a hundred thousand casualties by the conventional weapons was not enough, and didn't push out Administration even to arming the rebels - before they got fragmented and infested with Alkaeda. 

The Russians supported Assad  since the inception of his father.  He assured their access to the Middle East and together with Iran created a strong counterweight to the Western influence.  This fact alone creates the situation, in which Syria is a tinder box, and one has to very careful with fire around it...

And yet, Obama is pushing for a military, limited missile strike.  After days of empty rhetorics and threads, and after the British, and Italians refused to be part of the coalition in the war agains Syria, suddenly the President asks the Congress for the authorization of the strike.  I am not a constitutional lawyer (he actually is), but I know that this is not the proper order of things.  
The Congressional approval or disapproval should precede any form of actual action, and flexing of our military muscle.
Sent by the hasty decision of the President, there are already several US Navy ships armed with Cruise missiles ready to fire, at the shores of Syria.  
In our TV news channels, like CNN the nation is bombarded by the reheated Domino Effect Theory (introduced by President Dwight Eisenhower in 1954 in the context of Vietnam and the Indochina in general).  It's pathetic and repulsive that the theory which didn't work in Vietnam is brought as an argument now in the context of Syria.  
We should have learned that Vietnam war destroyed our credence in the World, but didn't bring anything positive in return.  We lost 58K troops and we lost a face at the same time.
None of other wars which we launched left and right hasn't brought anything beyond the exhaustion, economical crisis, and total hatred of the World.  

Beside that point, all the wars have already proven that there has been no such thing, like a limited conflict.  Going to Syria in any capacity we open a Pandora's box.  It's easy to win the war with a inferior army of a Third World country.  It took us 2 months to 'finish'  Saddam… And then, 10 years later the war is still on and we quietly leave the mess behind us.  

I read on the subject, from the various sources.  No one ever concluded, that any military action now (not 2 years ago, which might have been successful) would bring any positive, and long lasting effects.  We simply missed our window of opportunity.
Now we can sit and watch - maybe supporting the 'chosen' rebels with weapons and supplies… 

We can't take out the Assad regime, because the void would be even more dangerous.
We can't bomb the chemical weapons themselves, because the contamination would be like a chemical attack itself.
We can take out some delivery systems (the key word is "some").
We can take out his air force (not helicopters) and air strips, and this will make him just angry…
So, why doing so?  Just to make sure that the President's words are not in vain ? - it is just plain stupid.  He shouldn't make this threat at the first place.

We brake it - we buy it…  It may be our war for the rest of our days.

Warren Buffett is right again...

I strongly believe, that the content of the interview with Warren Buffett (quoted below) should be known by every American.
PLEASE, PASS IT ON TO AS MANY AMERICANS YOU CAN.  When we all talk about it, we may make a change.

The presidential elections are just round the corner.  In less, than 2 weeks we will have the second term of HOPE-GENERATING PRESIDENT (Pres. Obama), or turn back to the DARK AGES, where all minorities including women have no rights, the sick simply die without the health coverage on pre-existing conditions, and where the Super-Rich are carried on the shoulders of the middle class.
Although, the Warren Buffet interview doesn't have a direct bearing on the result of the elections - it may have a long lasting impact on who is elected in the nearest congressional elections, and who is creating the laws of this country.

******************** QUOTED AFTER LIVELEAK (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=712_1319407857) ****************

Warren Buffett in Recent interview with CNBC, offered one of the best quotes about the debt ceiling "I could end the deficit in 5 minutes," he told CNBC. "You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election.

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000031948
http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000033852

The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18-year-old's) took only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in 1971 - before computers, e-mail, cell phones, etc. Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took one (1) year or less to become the law of the land - all because of public pressure.

Congressional Reform Act of 2011

1. No Tenure / No Pension.

A Congressman/woman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they're out of office.

2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.

All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people. It may not be used for any other purpose.

3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.

4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.

6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.

7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen/women are void effective 01/01/12. The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen/women.

Congressmen/women made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.

Warren Edward Buffett: (born August 30, 1930) is an American business magnate, investor, and philanthropist. He is widely regarded as one of the most successful investors in the world. Often introduced as "legendary investor, Warren Buffett", he is the primary shareholder, chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway. He is consistently ranked among the world's wealthiest people. He was ranked as the world's wealthiest person in 2008 and is the third wealthiest person in the world as of 2011.

Buffett is called the "Wizard of Omaha", "Oracle of Omaha" or the "Sage of Omaha" and is noted for his adherence to the value investing philosophy and for his personal frugality despite his immense wealth. Buffett is also a notable philanthropist, having pledged to give away 99 percent of his fortune to philanthropic causes, primarily via the Gates Foundation. He also serves as a member of the board of trustees at Grinnell College.


******************** QUOTED AFTER LIVELEAK (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=712_1319407857) ****************

I am back! - a personal note in the troublesome political climate.

I took a 'sabbatical' for a year.   Even though my blogging endeavor was only one year old, I had to put it aside, to commit myself to other, quite absorbing issues.  Blogging went on a 'back burner'…

The presidential campaign already started to be the most idiotic political background one could imagine.  Republicans started proving to the America and the World that the truth was important only to the 'weaklings' and they - 'alpha males' didn't care about it at all, and bent it the way they felt fit.

Many things got into play at that time, but one of the most unsettling was - cancer.  In May, last year I was diagnosed with an early stage of prostate cancer.  I lived with this 'Sword of Damocles' for years, since my father fell victim to this condition, not-diagnosed on time.

To my surprise, and more to the surprise of others, I didn't react to this news with the typical panic followed by psychological triad: denial, anger, depression.  

I was constantly waiting for it - this natural, human reaction to the news of a terminal disease…  But, no.  It didn't come (although any American might have gone into panic just thinking about the direction the Country might be going if the Republicans were at the helm).
Instead, it proved to be a 'Reset Button'.  It brought the clarity, absolute clarity about my life, with it's achievements and it's failures.

Clarity, which reorganizes the life in a very positive way, beginning with the new look at some relationships, friendships, business ties, which were taken for granted till that point.  Some didn't stand a chance under this review…, some grew stronger.  

Many, facing a possible demise, dive into the awaiting arms of religion, becoming born again, devotees, religious freaks… 

In my case, instead, my growing clarity reinforced my pragmatic, atheist outlook.  No BS in life, no BS in business, no BS in politics, no BS, period.

It took a few months of 'second opinions', and additional tests to make sure that the condition is as it was diagnosed, treatable in it's early stage.  It took months of rapid educational course on a subject, including reading the CT and MRI scans, various methods of treatment and various approaches to living with it.

And then - preparation, surgery, a very brief hospital stay, a few months of recovery…  normal life again - slimming down, and more energetic than ever...

The news about Republican, medieval approach to women rights, medieval approach to minorities, both ethnic and sexual, were overwhelmingly flooding the media.  Inquisition like approach to the role of the religion in the private lives and in the functioning of the State was spewing from the lips of the Bible Belt born and raised Presidential Candidates (all in spite of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the USA).  There was nothing else on any news channel, beginning from MSNBC, NBC, CNN to Al Jazeera (sorry, I do not even acknowledge the existence of FOX News - since FOX NEWS is an oxymoron).  

And yet, all that time, my clarity grew stronger.  I realized, that life itself doesn't have a value.  What really matters is what one does with it, what one experiences in one's life and how trustworthy one becomes.  Life can end any time for one of the countless reasons - completely independently from how one leads the life and what it matters in one's mind.  

Religious teachings (in many religions) put emphasis on living one's life, like there is no tomorrow (although this term is generally misinterpreted).  The judgment day may come tomorrow and one will face the maker and weigh their souls against a feather… and so on...  

A near brush with death (or it's emissary - cancer) made me realize, that, although there are countless things I would like to achieve in the remaining part of my life, I have already had a life which provided me with what is important.  My life has already given me - knowing places and working on 4 continents, participating in preserving the World's Cultural Heritage, learning languages and things which changed me, having interesting and stimulating job, trying things others would be afraid to, knowing deep feelings like real love, having good and interesting people around me, and being with right life-companion (my wife of 21 years).

I never cared about the material gains (sometimes it would be nice to have more of it).  It was always more important to do interesting things, to be involved in interesting development, to do something better for bettering oneself.

This is the main reason why I evolved to be a liberal, who I am at this point.  This is the reason why I can't agree with the Republicans when they say (OK, Mitt Romney said that on one of fundraisers in Florida) that 47% of US population doesn't pay income taxes - and he doesn't care about them (since they would vote for Obama anyway).  Republicans believe (on record) that only the way it was delivered is wrong, but the message was right (!!!!!!!!!). 

This is outrageous.

I do not believe in redistribution of wealth (as they accuse President Obama of having this as a desired goal).  But I strongly believe (as our President believes) that those who do not worry about their economical status - because they have an accumulated wealth - have to make their contribution high enough, to allow the poor and the meek to live their lives without the constant appearance of their 'Sword of Damocles' - hunger, or homelessness.  

I do believe that the Republicans' efforts to shift the burden of maintaining the Country (with it's military might) even more to the shoulders of the Middle Class is UNPATRIOTIC.  Yes, I dare calling the most socially detached Presidential Candidate - Mitt Romney and his cronies UNPATRIOTIC.

There is nothing patriotic also in treating the 'unsuccessful' economically people who fell under the poverty level, like trash - because Mitt Romney and his likes closed their factories and sent the jobs oversees.  We still talk about the American Dream, but it's only a talk… Soon we will read about it in Wikipedia:  "Once upon the time…" - no one alive will actually experience it (thanks to Republicans' economical plans).

I have spent 50% (exactly this year) of my life outside of my 'country of origin'.  What means, that most of my adult life has been spent in the United States, and traveling through, or briefly living in other countries.  

2012 - being the "YEAR OF CLARITY" for me, is also a year of my 20th Anniversary of my US Citizenship.  I care about the USA and it's population.  It goes without saying.  This is my HOME.

At no point in my life I experienced so much anxiety about the future of the USA.  I still believe, that the USA is (still IS!) the best real system, so far created - with the freedoms never experienced anywhere else - including the most advanced societies of the Western Europe.  It's a fragile system, which requires as much giving to it and caring for it, as taking out, and benefiting from it.  

But Mitt Romney and others (all his competitors before his nomination) have proven that what they are interesting in, is just SUCKING IT DRY - like leaches.

I dream about the situation when one would look at the 2 (or more) candidates for President, compare their agenda, and had difficulties choosing because in all agendas would be something good for the country and good for it's people.

I believe, that even when President Reagan (so readily called as an idol or demigod of the Republican agenda) was reelected there was still something in both parties agendas which was worth considering.

But it was the last such moment in history so far.  

We all know the METROPOLIS - a famous psychological sci-fi picture directed in 1927 by Fritz Lang - showing the soulless industrial Moloch 'devouring' it's living underground, working class…

It seems like today's Republicans (at least those who are loudly heard) lead the country to a metaphorically similar predicament.

I only wish, that American people recover their eyesight in time, and in about 50 days will be wise enough to cast their votes for the only candidate who has the Nation's benefit in mind - incumbent President - Barack Obama.

Obama’s weakness - Elections? - why not a single 6-years-long term?

I am tired of watching never-ending, always starting earlier (every half a term), National Elections Frenzy (perfectly fed - instigated by the media).  I am tired of watching the President juggling all the “special interest groups”, and instead of choosing GOOD solutions, choosing only “plausible” solutions.

It’s time for a change.

__________________

During the Presidential Electoral Campaign, the Candidate Barack Obama talked passionately about the common people problems, about the social rights of the minorities, about immigration.  He talked passionately about restoring America as a shining beacon of Democracy, extending her hand to all the nations who would like to follow our, Democratic example…

He talked about restoring America for Americans, bringing us up from the depths of ‘Hell’ created by the two terms of the misguided, and trigger happy, Commander in Chief – Bush “the 2nd”…

When Obama took the Office of the President of the United States, no one could imagine a better circumstances: the first Black President, a Democrat, intelligent and outspoken, having on his side both houses of the Congress (both with decisive Democratic Majority), and having been backed up by almost ALL Americans, tired of the “post 911 decade”, and the financial collapse…

2 years later, the congressional elections proved that America felt a bit disillusioned, a bit cheated… and the Democrats lost the Majority in Congress (still having it in the Senate).  The Tea Party (not heard about beforehand) with it’s extremists started dictate the new order in Washington.

________

We all know it by heart.  There is no need to elaborate on it. 

What I want to talk about is the situation often mentioned by the pundits and media commentators, the situation related to the upcoming Presidential Elections of 2012. 

What dawned on me recently is, that the relationship between the performance of the President in his First Term, is in direct correlation with the Presidential Campaign.  Although it became drastically obvious this year, in case of Obama’s complacency and continuous trials to please certain voters groups, it was visible also during the presidencies of the previous Presidents of the USA.

The influence of the second term Presidential Elections on the policies of the current President has been increasing throughout the years.  Also, amount of money spent on the elections has been increasing exponentially, getting into the neighborhood of a Billion USD, or even more.  These funds come from the donations of the general population (in case of Obama’s first term the number of $5.00 donations from the supporters from all walks of life, was unprecedented), but also from the Big Industry (majority of the donations). 

Although the system allows for donations from the Industry, it’s illegal to put pressure on the President in Office to pass the legislature favoring the donor and it’s Industry.  It is illegal, but lobbyists are part of the Washington political climate, and it’s obvious that this pressure exists. 

One may speculate that the demands for the return on the “investment” are proportional to the donations…

Let’s have a quick look at the two-term Presidents in the post WWII American History (*1):

1.             Harry S. Truman – D(1945-1953)

Although a Democrat – the end of the War President ordered A-bombs to be dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  Contrary to the first term, he did run the second electoral campaign in 1948 on a liberal “The Fair Deal” token.  Although the conservative Congress rejected most of his proposals, he managed to win the raising of the minimal wage, and expanding of the Social Security.  His popularity plummeted in with the growing anti-communist atmosphere and a birth of McCarthyism, as well as involving the US in an unpopular war to defend South Korea against the Communist invasion.

2.             Dwight D. Eisenhower – R(1953-1961)

A popular War Hero and a moderate Republican, spent most of his energy and American resources on creating and ‘feeding’ the Cold War.  He wasn’t a “people’s president”, and even the school desegregation, ordered by the Supreme Court, wasn’t high on his agenda.  He used his influence to quietly diminish influence of the Junior Senator McCarthy.  At the end of his second term, not caring for reelection, Eisenhower also "waged peace," hoping to improve U.S.-Soviet relations and negotiate a treaty banning nuclear testing in the air and seas.

3.             Lyndon B. Johnson – D(1963-1969) – took office after the assassination of JFK – elected in 1965.

L.B. Johnson has been the most misunderstood (or wrongly judged) President in the US modern history.

I wrote about him in the article: “Martin Luther King Jr. Birthday observed - Presidents of that era”.  He inherited the Vietnam War from JFK, when, after JFK’s assassination he took Office of the President.  Yes, he is responsible for escalation of that war – I would say – sign of the time.  However, he pushed the social agenda to the limits, not caring for re-election (in fact he deliberately refused to be nominated by his party).

Let’s see what he was able to realize, not being pressured any more:

   * 1963: Clean Air Act of 1963
    * 1964: Civil Rights Act of 1964
    * 1964: Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964
    * 1964: Wilderness Act
    * 1964: Food Stamp Act of 1964
    * 1965: Higher Education Act of 1965
    * 1965: Older Americans Act
    * 1965: Social Security Act of 1965
    * 1965: Voting Rights Act
    * 1965: Immigration and Nationality Services Act of 1965
    * 1966: Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
    * 1967: Age Discrimination in Employment Act
    * 1967: Public Broadcasting Act of 1967
    * 1968: Bilingual Education Act
    * 1968: Fair housing
    * 1968: Gun Control Act of 1968

4.             Richard M. Nixon – R(1969-1975) – reelected in 1974.

Smart, but controversial figure, who, during his second term (cut short by WaterGate, and his resignation to avoid the impeachment), completely subscribed to the “above-the-law-statue” and believed in the total “impunity” of his actions – what led to braking in to the Democratic Party Headquarters and the subsequent cover-up.

5.             Ronald Reagan – R(1981-1989)

Conservative President, who during the first term increased the tensions of the Cold War negotiating with the Soviets from the position of Strength.  “The Evil Empire” term came to the American vocabulary.  Very conservative fiscally, reducing taxes and putting the American Economy at risk. 

In his second term, however, he managed to sign the treaties with the Soviets leading to the reduction of the Global Nuclear Arsenals by 50%.  His final touch was braking down of the Berlin Wall (between the East and West Berlin) – the very symbol of the Cold War.

6.             Bill Clinton – D(1993-2001)

In the case of President Clinton it’s hard to find any un-constricted actions starting in his second term.  Paula Jones and Monica Lewinsky cases clouded successfully both the President’s judgment as well as his actions afterwards.  The second term started with the impeachment proceedings impeding the normal presidency.  However, during the first term, he failed to deliver on his promises to give the Full, and Unrestricted Health Coverage to the nation.  His Health Reform proposal was killed effortlessly and never resurfaced.

7.             George W. Bush – R(2001-2009)

This president – I dare say – The Worst President of the Modern American History, was definitely completely “mis-under-estimated” (as he would say himself – a known linguist).  By the effects of 911 (the worst terrorist attack on the American soil), he was given a mandate, which opened the Pandora’s Box.  He, and his evil shadow (Vice President Chaney), managed to ruin the hopes for the normal future to the most of currently living Americans.  His born-again-Christian routine, sparring two wars, and stealing from the Nation the chance of living a normal, debt-free life was escalating throughout his presidency with no obstacle.  To start with, he didn’t have to control his appetite during his first presidency (because of 911 and the American thirst for retribution).  He went ‘full throttle’ during the second term.           

8.             Barack Obama – D(2009 ???) – not known yet if reelected in 2012.

What we can compare is what he had promised as a presidential candidate, and what he DIDN’T deliver as a President.  Well, the list is not that short (not counting for a few “window dressings” like the end of “don’t ask – don’t tell” policy, or what was left from the “health care reform” – no preexisting condition).

Afraid of losing support for the second term election, Obama was quite timid pushing his social and economical proposals – even though both houses of the Congress had a Democratic Majority.  As a result the Tea Partiers almost succeeded killing the Health Reform.  They succeeded keeping the Temporary Bush Tax Cuts for the wealthiest 1% of society. 

Somehow closing of the “Gitmo” is not on the table any more (although it was also promised in Cairo).  On the International Theater, what he promised in his Cairo speech in 2009 has been greatly compromised, leading to the reversal of his stand on the Palestinian-Jewish conflict resolution.  In the Cairo speech he said (2*):

“(…)At the same time, Israelis must acknowledge that just as Israel's right to exist cannot be denied, neither can Palestine's.  The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.  This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace.  It is time for these settlements to stop.
Israel must also live up to its obligations to ensure that Palestinians can live, and work, and develop their society.  And just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel's security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress.(…)”

Even though Obama in the past (not that distant) presented more comprehensive and decisive statements against the Israeli settlements in the East Jerusalem and other sites in the West Bank, when the reelection campaign has started, to guarantee him the ‘devotion’ of the pro-Israeli voters, his positions softened to the point of being called “The First Jewish President” by the New York Magazine (3*).

One can pile up proofs of the Obama’s “change of heart”, with already fully blown re-election campaign.  However, let’s leave it where it is…  since the goal of this article is to show the solution, not to dwell on the problem itself.

__________________

__________________

Since in the American Political System, the re-election campaigns start more than 2 years before the actual Presidential Elections, the whole political life of the Nation is completely controlled by the campaign.  Most of the President’s decisions during this second half of the first term are determined by the political gains or other behind-the-scenes games. 

In my opinion, and I read it also between the lines of the articles written by many pundits and reporters, this status quo is harmful to the USA as a country. 

I see the relatively easy way out of this predicament.  Instead of the possibility of two consecutive terms as a President of the USA – I would limit it to only ONE – SIX YEAR TERM.

Many countries sport the six-year-terms of their elected executives.  Why don’t we appropriate it into our system? 

A single, six-year-long term, would provide the uninterrupted climate for Presidential, un-pressured by the lobbies, performance. 

The system in it’s current form clouds the president’s judgment, forcing his decisions along the lines requested (or expected) by the major donors of the campaign money, and also to please the major voter groups, to guarantee their unshaken support in the elections.  It also requires the actual, physical President’s participation in the campaign; effectively removing him from what he was hired for – the job of a President.

Most of the two-term Presidents lose the 2 years before the reelection on the campaign, leaving us with the 6 years of the effective (if so) job performance.  So, why not arbitrary reduce the time in the office to 6 years?

Taking the President OFF the road during the campaign would also benefit the country.

I know, that the US Constitution is a ‘sacred’ document.  But the World evolves around us, and the document, which was written more than 200 years ago, needs to evolve (by adding the amendments), to reflect these changes of the external World. 

Is it so hard to imagine, that the Presidents of the United States come to the Oval Office for uninterrupted six years at a time? – Is it so hard to ask, that they devote themselves just to the running of the Country during this time?

I am tired of watching never-ending, always starting earlier (every half a term), National Elections Frenzy (perfectly fed and instigated by the media).  I am tired of watching the President juggling all the “special interest groups”, and instead of choosing GOOD solutions, choosing only “plausible” solutions.

It’s time for a change.

__________________

1* - http://millercenter.org/president

2* - http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/04/us/politics/04obama.text.html?pagewanted=5

3* - http://mondoweiss.net/2011/09/new-york-magazine-on-obamas-quest-for-money-from-a-list-tribesmen.html