Brief Middle East Reflections for attention of Obam and McCain May 23, 2008, 1:15PM

For decades since the Vietnam War, and six years since the invasion of Iraq, the American policy-makers seem not have drawn proper lessons as to the appropriate use American power, both soft and hard power. The Iraqi debacle borne of uncouthed American unilateralism under President Bush, as well as over-reliance on military power to the exclusion of diplomacy has demonstrated with stark clarity the limits of that power in the face of post-cold uncertainties as characterized by the heightened risk of the proliferation of weapon of mass destruction, as well as the emergence of asymetrical security challenges to the U.S. which largely have to be confronted through extra-conventional means. Hence, the amalgamation of all elements of American power around a grand strategy that places its priorities on a balance between military and diplomatic exercise rather than sabre-rattling as fuelled by ideolgical dogmatism that has often characterize Republican-Conservative power politics.
 
With the foregoing in mind, then, it needs to be stated that the ongoing Iraqi fiasco should unambiguously highlight the under-utilization of diplomacy and over-reliance on military force as counter-productive categories that obviate the actualization of a political dispensation acceptable to all contending parties. Thus, the ongoing  U.S. military venture in carrying out what is essentially an exclusive domain of Iraqi army function, albeit without a discernible political conciliation efforts effectively impedes Iraq from emerging as a viable sovereign state.
 
As much as the U.S. invasion of Irag was woefully misguided to say the least, any contemplation of an attack on Iran without first engaging their leadership  diplomatically poses serious dilemna  for the American diplomacy in the Middle East. The Iranian influence in Iraq is real, and cannot simply be wished away, as how the U.S. handles its relations with this theocracy will have a bearing on  the both long and short term stability on Iraq itself. Hence absence of high-level diplomatic contact between the U.S. and Iran in the face of the prevailing hostility between them poses the risk of a further deteroriation and ultimate military engagement. Thus there can be no middle ground between the U.S. and Iraq, save for contrasting eventualities of either diplomatic engagement, or military confrontation.  

For decades since the Vietnam War, and six years since the invasion of Iraq, the American policy-makers seem not have drawn proper lessons as to the appropriate use American power, both soft and hard power. The Iraqi debacle borne of uncouthed American unilateralism under President Bush, as well as over-reliance on military power to the exclusion of diplomacy has demonstrated with stark clarity the limits of that power in the face of post-cold uncertainties as characterized by the heightened risk of the proliferation of weapon of mass destruction, as well as the emergence of asymetrical security challenges to the U.S. which largely have to be confronted through extra-conventional means. Hence, the amalgamation of all elements of American power around a grand strategy that places its priorities on a balance between military and diplomatic exercise rather than sabre-rattling as fuelled by ideolgical dogmatism that has often characterize Republican-Conservative power politics.   With the foregoing in mind, then, it needs to be stated that the ongoing Iraqi fiasco should unambiguously highlight the under-utilization of diplomacy and over-reliance on military force as counter-productive categories that obviate the actualization of a political dispensation acceptable to all contending parties. Thus, the ongoing  U.S. military venture in carrying out what is essentially an exclusive domain of Iraqi army function, albeit without a discernible political conciliation efforts effectively impedes Iraq from emerging as a viable sovereign state.   As much as the U.S. invasion of Irag was woefully misguided to say the least, any contemplation of an attack on Iran without first engaging their leadership  diplomatically poses serious dilemna  for the American diplomacy in the Middle East. The Iranian influence in Iraq is real, and cannot simply be wished away, as how the U.S. handles its relations with this theocracy will have a bearing on  the both long and short term stability on Iraq itself. Hence absence of high-level diplomatic contact between the U.S. and Iran in the face of the prevailing hostility between them poses the risk of a further deteroriation and ultimate military engagement. Thus there can be no middle ground between the U.S. and Iraq, save for contrasting eventualities of either diplomatic engagement, or military confrontation.  

Hillary Clinton is at it again, whining about the the media. She is doing exactly the same thing she accused Barack Obama of, following their debate in advance of the Pensylvannia primaries.What makes it particularly difficult to empathize with her is her shameless double standards and hypocricy characterizing her personality and character. She is desperately trying to garner sympathy by invoking sexism thereby prospectively trivializing real incidents of sexism that abound in our society and must be dealt with as harshly as they deserve. Hillary is riding on coattails of genuine sexism sufferers. As elitist as she would'nt accept she is, she cannot now masquerade as a standard bearer for women other than what she really is: a rallying point for political opportunism and reaction.

Hillary Clinton is at it again, whining about the the media. She is doing exactly the same thing she accused Barack Obama of, following their debate in advance of the Pensylvannia primaries.What makes it particularly difficult to empathize with her is her shameless double standards and hypocricy characterizing her personality and character. She is desperately trying to garner sympathy by invoking sexism thereby prospectively trivializing real incidents of sexism that abound in our society and must be dealt with as harshly as they deserve. Hillary is riding on coattails of genuine sexism sufferers. As elitist as she would'nt accept she is, she cannot now masquerade as a standard bearer for women other than what she really is: a rallying point for political opportunism and reaction.

Now that the dust has somewhat settled over the George Bush "appeasement" hysteria expressed before the Israeli knesset against Brack Obama, it befits this moment to note that time and time again the Republicans' double standards have never failed to betray their hypocricy as an inherent rudiment in their political culture. Their almost habitual predisposition toward saying one thing and doing another is manifest in their "circling of waggons" around President Bush in the wake of his all-out attack on Obama in a foreign land. Remember what happened to the Dixie Chicks after their innocuous comment about Bush in London years ago? As private cititizens, just for declaring before their fans that they were ashamed of the fact that they were from the same state as Bush was. Guess what ? For all their freedom of speech, and the human rights attached thereto they were trampled all over by the Repubicans and conservatives in general, and ostracised with such anger and fury the likes of which have yet to be witnessed on the American soil.   After 8 years you would think that Bush was sufficiently schooled in the ethics of presidential politics and diplomatic reticence. Yet Bush is held to a lower standard. He can criticise his country-men while abroad without reppercusions. Should a private citizen do the same against him, oh lord !  there would be hell to pay.