Commenter Archive

Comments by InMD*

On “OTB: Trump Orders Syria Strikes. So Now What?

Interesting, I hadn't seen that. I guess time will tell.

"

It's a foolish position. I think there might be an argument that the Assad government is the least of the many evils currently vying for control of Syria but that's an extremely low bar. It's certainly not a regime that should be celebrated (and I'm hoping my earlier comments in this discussion don't suggest that I think otherwise).

As I said to Kolohe above I think we work to overthrow it at our own peril. Even if Assad himself has to go I think the nominally secular Ba'athist state, repressive as it is, is a better starting point for the future than what the militias have on offer. After Iraq there should be no illusions about what happens when you purge the secular nationalist class from the government of a country seething with sectarian strife.

"

Where are you seeing definitive evidence that it was delivered by aircraft? Chemical weapons can be delivered with mortars and rockets. There's also the possibility that it wasn't released intentionally (I'm seeing some sources that say Assad forces bombed a rebel chemical weapons site and gas was released).

Now the Assad government obviously lacks credibility but I don't really get why equally sketchy groups invested in the conflict somehow have more credibility. No one really knows what happened at this juncture.

"

This is one of the reasons I think that jumping to the conclusion that Assad's forces were behind the attack is premature. There have been articles over the last couple years suggesting al-Nusra and other rebel groups may have chemical weapons of their own. Another interesting article from a less partisan source:

http://www.dw.com/en/is-assad-to-blame-for-the-chemical-weapons-attack-in-syria/a-38330217

"

Very astute, and accurate as well.

"

Simple answer- yes and I think his failure to obtain it violated the Constitution. The fact that war making has de facto become the decision of a single person and almost totally divorced from the democratic process is terrible for our country.

"

I don't think we should prop him up (the Russians can do that if they want) but nor do I think we should do anything to hasten his demise. I also wouldn't be so quick to say he, or someone else from the Allawite class operating in his place, can't keep the (relative) peace as long as he has support from Russia, Iran, and other regional actors. At the very least I think the government headed by Assad or part of his clan has a better shot at it than the possible alternatives.

"

All of this assumes that removing Assad is sound strategy. Don't take this as an endorsement of his government but I don't believe there is anything better available to replace him, now or in the future. At absolute best you get another sectarian government, beholden to foreign powers and unable to control it's own territory, much like the regime at Bagdhad. The likely outcome is something like Libya.

"

And all without a single vote in Congress on the actual issue.

"

No disagreement from me. What I think is good is the overview of the sketchy sources policy makers and American journalists rely on when making hysterical claims and urging military action. It's maddening to me that even after Iraq supposedly reliable media will spoonfeed the claims of activists and charlatans with stakes in the conflict to the public as objective and unbiased.

"

Joyner and everyone else knows exactly what happens now. Now we do the same stupid thing we always do every time our government intervenes in messy civil wars across the globe. We destabilize existing states and feed the chaos and fanaticism that sets the stage for the next intervention, heedless of the humanitarian cost and whether or not any of this is actually in the interest of the American tax payer.

The gas attack (assuming it was a gas attack and it was carried out by Assad forces, both things which are far from clear) is just a pretext for what establishment hardliners have wanted from the beginning. The fact that the mainstream media immediately trumpeted this as an Assad atrocity and began beating the drum for war shows why, despite all their crying to the contrary of late, they don't deserve the trust of the public.

Edit to add, anyone who thinks its clear that the gas attack, again, assuming it was one, was committed by Assad should read this analysis of the sources of information that the government and mainstream media are relying on:

http://www.alternet.org/world/trump-going-commit-next-great-american-catastrophe-syria

On “Morning Ed: Society {2017.04.04.T}

I think the 13th Warrior is criminally underrated in some respects. They sliced and diced it so much that it was never going to be good but I thought it had a lot of cool concepts, including the educated, urbane Arab scholar among barbarian Vikings. I liked it even more when I found out ibn Fadlan was an actual historical figure.

"

I'm a bit of a hater on the super hero movie genre but my understanding is that Hollywood tried to include a cameo of famous Chinese actors in one of the Iron Man movies and it was so unsubtle that it blew up in their faces. They've probably learned their lesson and are now trying to weave stars from each country into films so that they can emphasize accordingly in the advertising. I bet all of the posters over there for Independence Day 2 prominently featured Angelababy for this reason, while ours prominently featured the American cast. Same deal with this. We see a Matt Damon movie, they see a movie starring a prominent Chinese actor.

"

Precisely. Its why I think a lot of post-modern cultural criticism on this issue strikes me as off the mark, or at least (perhaps ironically) ethnocentric. The majority of the profits on blockbuster movies aren't being made in America, or even necessarily the West.

"

It's also quite possible for violence to be remote. 1984 doesn't dwell on life in the trenches for those in the perpetual war between Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia, but it isn't really the point of the story. Maybe the remoteness of the violence is itself illustrative of something.

"

I haven't seen the movie but it's funny how that can happen. Based on your assessment I'm guessing they put Matt Damon in it to get American (and to a lesser degree European) asses in seats for a movie otherwise designed to get Chinese asses in seats.

"

I tend to agree and have a similar discomfort with it. I also think that we haven't yet adapted well to the realities of social media. A chuckle to yourself at someone else's expense in the circumstances described is ugly and wrong but also human. It can be a teachable moment. Something about making someone else's shame go viral just to get kicks, and the popularity of it, says something very ugly and harder to remedy about human society more generally.

"

Berlatsky would have a much more interesting point if he didn't veer off into intersectionality foolishness at the end. The threat of violence is real in totalitarian societies, and I think it's fair to consider its absence in some of our more famous allegories (1984, Brave New World). However in his zeal to he misses how arbitrary, inane, and stifling modern attacks on free speech can be, from the illiberal campus left, to British libel law, to German comedians facing charges for mocking Recep Erdogan. You don't need highly personalized torture to stifle free thought any more than you need a body count (though the latter no doubt helps).

He also needs to update his research on World War 2. Now that we've got records from former Eastern Bloc countries Auschwitz really should fade from the forefront as our image of the holocaust. The better one is a silent forest and men with rifles herding civilians to be shot into cold, unmarked graves. Of course considering historical research might also require him to try to square the fact that most civilian deaths caused by Soviet and Nazi policy in eastern Europe were white Christians (Kulaks, ethnic Poles, Ukranians, Belarussians, and Baltic peoples). God forbid we consider the limitations of modern American identity politics in explaining history.

On “The Reading Railroad

@kazzy thanks for the insight and yes, please do shoot me an email if it isn't too much trouble.

"

The places the author warns about sound a lot like what other parents have described to me. My cousin's wife told me their son is coming home from 6 hours of kindergarten with several hours of math homework. No idea if this is an exaggeration but I just don't see that as productive for most 5 year olds.

"

The advice is very much appreciated. My wife and I are tentatively considering that depending on the financial outlook and what our student loan situation is when the time comes. Luckily we've still got plenty of time to think.

"

All of this focus on methodology and testing in education worries me more than a little. I've got my first born due in September. The stories some of my relatives and friends who have kids starting school tell me about heavy homework assignments in kindergarten and inscrutable approaches to problem solving make my stomach tie into knots.

Maybe I'm just being conservative but it all sounds so different than the Catholic school I went to I'm my early years. Discipline was pretty harshly enforced (including occasionally with the rod) but I don't recall pressure for particular results in tight timelines. I was able to read at the end of 1st grade which seemed in line with most of the other boys (girls on balance seemed to be a bit ahead). Some kids showed up already reading well and some stragglers took until the beginning of second grade but I don't recall that being cause for alarm.

My son isn't even born yet and I already have visions of teachers trying to get blood from a stone in order to meet an arbitrary mandate. I know it's kind of taboo to say in this country but I suspect that socio-economic factors will determine how most students perform, regardless of what magic wands we require teachers to wave.

On “Morning Ed: World {2017.03.30.Th}

I'm still not really connecting these dots. If you want me to say Trump is a buffoon who lies and references events that did not occur or characterizes events that did occur in extremely misleading ways I will (and I agree that he does). The fact that he does these things does not justify others doing it or jumping to extreme conclusions, facts (or lack thereof) be damned. I don't see anything controversial about that.

"

I guess I don't see what's fucked up about urging calm and waiting for evidence? I think I'm missing your point (not trying to be flip at all).

I feel like my life has turned into a mirror image of the moral panic that went on in the conservative ecosystem for much of Obama's first term. I don't like it.

"

I think your suggestion is the best way to handle these discussions but I do get Damon's frustrations. If we're going to roll our eyes at conservatives latching onto every wild-eyed story about Muslims or illegal aliens that falls apart under scrutiny we need to hold liberal voices to the same standard.

*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.

The commenter archive features may be temporarily disabled at times.