OUR Mess in the Middle East

Notes of Concern…

                               …Jackson Blair

The Mess WE Made in The Middle East

The Middle East has presented a problem to The United States of America since the time when we participated in establishing a Jewish homeland right in the middle of the enemies of the Jewish people.

While I study history and I understand the idea that many people find that the natural “homeland” of the Jewish people, I cannot help but wonder what the world leaders were thinking. They could not have been thinking that the Israelis would be welcome there. Further, no one could possibly have thought peaceful co-existence would be possible.

So we fast-forward to where the world finds herself today with reference to the Middle East.

Diplomats worked for years to find common ground, of which there was very little, to work with leaders of that entire area. In order to have any chance of influencing them positively, we joined up with some unsavory despots. They really were “the only game in town.”

The strategy worked until our policies became based on our preferred  philosophy rather than realism.

Years were spent either quieting or accommodating many leaders in that area who proved to be “strange bedfellows” to the west or promising Israel everything they might need.

Having said that, many mid-east nations became our “allies” of sorts. We had some chance to influence them; we lowered the voices of hatred; we kept the pot from boiling.

All of this was to our advantage.

All of it was also securing the safety of the State of Israel.

So we negotiated, aided, and I suppose on occasion bribed the leaders of that part of the world: Reza Pahlavi in Iran, Saddam Hussein in Iraq, the elder Assad in Syria, Gaddafi in Libya, etc.

Let us not kid ourselves, we did the same thing with the Israelis through “foreign aid,” in the form of money and sophisticated military equipment.

No one asked us to take on the responsibility of protecting Israel while playing nice with the Arab nations. But over time it seems to have become our job.

Then our policy changed.

We decided it was not “pure” for America to offer any help to dictators and despots. This started under President Jimmy Carter. We applied the “American model” to the Middle East.

Not smart from a worldview perspective.

Presidents since then have engaged in very public promotions (some would say arm twisting) seeking peace there. Pictures of Jewish and Arab leaders at The White House or Camp David making nice and shaking hands. It made us feel good. It often got those leaders murdered or ostracized back home.

Never worked.

More recently we supplied arms, air cover, money and encouragement to rebels in many Middle Eastern countries. We did it under the guise of encouraging democracy. We called it the “Arab Spring.”

Didn’t work.

The new leaders were worse than the old one and hated us more vigorously. We did the dirty work for the religious fanatics that would step up and take over after the youthful demonstrators, egged on by democracies, did the heavy lifting of revolution.

Our “need” to interfere in that part of the world has cost us “big time.”  We have lost both human and financial treasure in numbers that are unacceptable to me and hopefully to you.

Let us admit it. We have involved ourselves in nation building.

Our involvement there drove the Muslim people crazy. They responded by attacking us in new and not so subtle ways. Because of the realities in that part of the world the Israeli nation is an armed camp every day, one in which people cannot board buses or go to school or to the grocery without the real possibility they will not return home.

Our Arab “allies” have seen us abandon them, one after another, while we attempt to encourage governments more interested in “democracy.” Accordingly, no nation in the world should assume they could count on us down the road. There is not today any consistency to our foreign policy.

Our commitments are fickle. More often than not they reflect the individual philosophy of the man currently occupying the presidency. We accuse GHW Bush. Then we accuse GW Bush. And now we accuse Barack Obama. Many Americans think each of them had some personal vendetta or desire and that set the policy of America in the Middle East.

When I read about the assassination of our Ambassador in Libya I reached a “point of no return” in my thinking. The next day when I saw we had given $2 billion in aid to Libya and there was no talk of cutting it all off, I went as they say “’round the bend.”

I am only one American but I am taking a stand: we need to get out of The Middle East and let them settle their own problems.

Our aid and our policies have brought only bloodshed, heartache, and no resolution that has made life even marginally safer or better.

If we do not wish to work with despots and dictators and we accept that we gave it a “good try” without success, then lets just move on.

Regretfully, Israel needs to find ways to protect herself if she is to have any long term security. And the Muslim states operating in feverish mode will need to learn how to get along with the rest of the world on their own.

It is not America’s problem.

Readers, if a foreign government in The Middle East made excursions into the elections, governments and the religious philosophies of our nation, we would be beside ourselves with fury.

Therein is the “rub.”

Not one more life should be “given” nor dollar spent trying to “help” people who do not want the help or who wish to kill us. Who ever came up with that idea?

No law of man requires us to provide our enemy with the club they can use to kill us.

President-elect Nixon stated in 1968 that America would benefit from a more evenhanded role in the Middle East. He was right in 1968 but the outcry in our country was so loud he abandoned that as a pillar of his planned foreign policy.

It is now 2012 and it is too late for an evenhanded American policy. No one in the Middle East or in the world would believe us.

It is time our policy was one of benign neglect in the Middle East. Non of our actions through various administrations, both Republican and Democrat, have made any real difference.

We need to mind our own knitting.

It is pretty clear our knitting right here at home is unraveling and requires our immediate and intense concentration.

Sweet Mystery of Youth

Notes of Concern…

                               …Jackson Blair

Sweet Mystery of Youth

Prince Harry obviously has no “body issues” as he invited a number of people he had only known for a few minutes to come to his suite and then proceeds through games and challenges to get many, including himself, to disrobe. Probably everyone in the room had a camera phone.

Now the Duchess of Cambridge, one day to be Queen of England, drops, at the very least, the top of her bikini and provides the paparazzi with enough pictures to fill multiple pages of newspapers and magazines.

As former Senator Gary Hart found out when he was about to become the presidential nominee of the Democrats a few years back, it is not nice to tempt the press. Having numerous reports of his philandering, he was asked about his behavior and he challenged the press to follow him.

They did.

They found him on a boat aptly named “Monkey Business” with a young lady (Donna Rice,) not his wife, in his lap.

End of promising political career.

The Royals live well and they do so at the public expense. Accordingly, they do not enjoy the same anonymity that the average citizen does. The rewards for the loss of that anonymity are significant.

What is required is a combination of common sense and an understanding of how the world operates.

I am sure Kate Middleton has a very beautiful body. But she should not assume that is what attracts voyeurs, photographers and gossipmongers. They are interested in her because she is the future Queen of England.

I am sure Prince Harry is a fine fellow well met. Having said that, few magazines would be interested in his physique if he were not William’s brother and Diana’s son.

So just as Kate and Harry attract attention when they display their “privates” because of their rank in the order of things British, it is fair to hold them to a standard a bit higher than those who do not enjoy vast palaces, gardens, private planes, security guards and crown jewels.

To be fair, it seems Harry just simply tossed caution to the wind.

Kate thought she was ensconced in the home of a relative and secure from photographers.

They both made colossal misjudgments.

Oh sweet mystery of youth!

CLINTONS

Notes of Concern…

                …Jackson Blair

CLINTONS

Politics really does make strange bedfellows!

It has always been thus.

The press has been pretty good at getting people to believe all is well in “Clintonland,” that Hillary really does not want to be president, and that Bill is busy and happy traveling the world enjoying the great popularity he and the “brand” have everywhere.

It is left to me dear readers to bring some reality to all this.

Living in The White House is not a burden. It is a pleasure.

Your every creature comfort is met, you command arguably the world’s best stage, your life is better than that of the sport heroes and movie stars, not to mention all of them want to spend time with you.

You command incredible power.

You affect the entire world in which we all live, for good or bad.

Whether you are good at the presidency thing or not, you, like the Caesars, will be forever in the history books.

When you leave the White House, doors all over the world open for you, you will make many fortunes, you will be the guest of honor wherever you go, and you will continue to travel, dine, and in many ways live on the taxpayer’s dime. Private secure jets will be at your disposal. Round the clock protection available. Kings and Queens, authors and diplomats, CEOs and Nobel Laureates are all available to you.

Never before in our history has their been a chance for a second eight years in the White House.

But in our enlightened day, the “Big Dog,” Bill Clinton, has a shot at eight more years of that magnificence through the possible election of his wife.

They ran into a “detour” in the form of Barack Obama four years ago. They couldn’t believe it. A very inexperienced one term United States Senator took the nomination away from what looked like the “sure thing:” Hillary Rodham Clinton.

The Clinton’s were not happy.

And the Clinton’s do not forget.

Obama put Hillary “inside the tent” to lessen the damage she and Bill might otherwise do by appointing her to his cabinet. Fortunately for Hillary, she has been an outstanding Secretary of State and made skeptics, myself included, see her for the talented woman she really is.

As the current election approaches, Secretary Clinton will get no blame if Obama loses. She already announced she would not serve in a second administration. That permits her to do all she needs to do to prepare for a run four years from now.

If President Obama wins re-election, Secretary Clinton is very free to get her ducks in line for the next presidential campaign.

Now, perhaps most importantly, Secretary Clinton specialized in domestic issues when she was First Lady (remember health care?) She now has four years of international experience under her belt, having visited over 100 foreign lands and met with all world leaders.

In your dreams perhaps you can visualize a quid pro quo?

Maybe President-elect Obama saw this hole in Hillary’s preparation and offered to fill it by appointing her, in return for her playing nice and keeping Bill in line, too?

And maybe in your dreams you can visualize why Bill would accept the invitation to actually nominate Barack for his second term.  And why Barack desperately needed Bill Clinton to do it.

If you majored in underwater basketweaving in school you might have difficulty figuring out that the “Big Dog” did not just give that away.

His willingness and his speech bought the Clintons something. Maybe it was Obama’s endorsement in four years?

Whatever political price Obama had to pay for the Clinton nomination speech and endorsement was well worth it from my perspective. For a brief period it focused the nation on a very popular president, rather than one barely looking good in the polls. It focused the nation on a president who left a huge surplus when he retired and distracted the people from the current president’s historic national debt. And finally, it focused the nation on a Democrat president who was pretty good at schmoozing, arranging compromises, and overcoming huge negatives to leave office on a high note. These are traits even the current president’s admirers have missing in President Obama.

Barring some sort of damage to my dreaming, like a nightmare, I am expecting to see Hillary Rodham Clinton making another run at the presidency with Bill in full battle mode. Actually, I look forward to it.

With their incredible political astuteness they may well have turned Barack Obama, once their nemesis, into their new best buddy. Remember when we used to hear all about the FOBs (Friends of Bill?)

I would suggest that Barack H. Obama is the newest initiate.

And in four years, if history works out the way Bill and Hillary would like, and they return to those famous annual gatherings of the “FOB”s it will be interesting to see if they let Barack keep his membership card or if they choose to move on without him.

If I were a betting man, I know where I would place my bet!

For further information:  jacksonblair@gmail.com

FALL INSPECTION

Notes of Concern…

                        …Jackson Blair

Fall Inspection

Fall has fallen upon us!

The “kidlies” are back in school.

The freedom from schedule that so often accompanies summer has morphed into a much harder, more organized and less loose time of living.

Or has it?

I must admit that there is often comfort in a predictable schedule. There are lots of studies to suggest we humans need predictability, stability and order in our daily lives.

When I went to school we pledged allegiance to the flag first thing every morning. Some great mind determined that in the middle of the morning, as our attention spans waned, we should be permitted out on the playground for a little “recess.” The same brilliant thinkers determined that right before recess would be a great time for everybody to have a potty break! So they marched us off in a very straight line to the toilets.

But we were taught.

Our teachers and our parents were determined we would be educated. Expectations were high.

We didn’t get a recess in the afternoon because the planners knew we would be thinking of heading home. Instead, they scheduled the art class for the afternoon, knowing that using different skills would help keep us attentive. Nothing like finger paints and working with clay to ease us into dismissal for the day.

I am reading in the papers today about a class at the prestigious Harvard University. I am hoping what I am reading turns out to be untrue. But if it is true, it is certainly unsettling.

According to reports, a very popular professor told his students that he didn’t care whether they attended class or not. Further, he planned on giving almost all of them an A+ regardless of what they actually did. Finally, his tests would be “open book” and they were welcome to bring whatever they needed to the test, to help them succeed.

Believe me when I say this guy could not have been hired at my elementary school!

Now this fella’s classes were highly sought after by Harvard undergrads (only the naïve would express surprise.) He presented an opportunity for a quick fix for the old GPA.

Then trouble appeared.

It seems, even guaranteed a high grade, not expected to perform daily in discussions or even to attend class, given a blessing to bring notes, lists or even books to class to use in completing the exam, what you were not permitted to do was ask any other student questions during the exam.

Imagine the uproar.

What a dictatorial attempt to limit freedom.

This professor needed to be taught a lesson. So his students talked to one another. They got caught. The professor’s approach to education came to the attention of the Harvard Big Guys.

Now all the students in this Harvard class stand in a line to be investigated for cheating! They might even be expelled.

I admit to being a bit “long in the tooth” and “set in my ways” and continuing to think that when you pay good money for an education you are supposed to receive an education, not a day at the beach.

Knowing how fickle youth can be, I am not surprised to find that the students took advantage of the “forbidden fruit” held out by the professor.

Rather than investigating the students for betraying some sort of honor code, if I were president of Harvard I would be investigating this professor. I would also call in Louis Freeh, he of the FBI and the famous Penn State investigation, to find out how many other of my highly paid professors might also be letting the kids slide.

Finally, if I were a parent paying for a prestigious Harvard degree, I would be kicking the tires of this “academic automobile” I had bought.

If the professor is not seriously disciplined and/or terminated, not one kid should suffer a punishment for cheating. Every one of them was being encouraged to cheat in a thousand ways.

Cheating is what was being taught.

Learning was not occurring in the traditional sense.

School bells ring in the fall.

My recommendation to parents is this:

Inspect what you expect!

If you would care to read my BLOG, access it at blair-notes.blogspot.com

Website:  www.jacksonblair.org