I was deeply saddened yesterday to hear that Robin Williams had died, apparently at his own hand. He was to my mind the greatest comedic talent of his generation. Clearly, like his mentor and inspiration, Jonathan Winters, he had his demons which lead him to drug abuse, alcoholism, and now death.
I think it was Carol Burnett, the great comedienne of the previous generation, who characterized comedy as tragedy plus time. I do not know the pain that was the wellspring of his comedy but there simply was not enough time. His tragedy has now overtaken him.
We don’t doubt that the president was moved by the suffering the Islamic State has inflicted on the Yazidis and other victims. But the airstrikes can also be interpreted as an attempt to shore up the government of Iraq against an insurgency that Shiite Prime Minister Nouri Maliki has helped to foment by excluding Sunnis from the political process. And the president’s other rationale for the airstrikes — to protect Americans — also would justify military action to protect U.S. personnel from an attack on Baghdad. Will the U.S. be able to say no if the Islamic State continues to advance and Maliki or a successor asks for additional airstrikes — or more military advisors? And what if those measures proved unavailing?
When Obama announced in June that he was considering “all options†to help the government in Baghdad fend off the Islamic State insurgency, we argued against a U.S. air campaign in support of the Iraqi government. Distressing and tragic as recent events in Iraq may be, that’s still our advice.
My own view is that if you do not will the means you cannot will the end. Will bombing alone save the Yezidi?
I’m surprised that we haven’t heard more about the Supreme Court case Train vs. the City of New York. The background as I recall it is this. Congress appropriated money for certain environmental projects over then-President Nixon’s veto. Nixon refused to spend, i.e. “impounded”, the money. The City of New York then sued Russell Train, then administrator of the EPA for following the president’s directions in the matter.
I remember the case because it illustrated what seemed to me to be a clear example of a president overreaching his authority despite the president’s position possibly being supported by the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (that’s same act of Congress that created the CBO).
My point in bringing this up is that I have the distinct impression that if the case were to be brought before the Court now it would find that New York didn’t have standing to bring it. I could be wrong.
On ABC’s This Week program yesterday the assembled punditry agreed that Iraq was likely to absorb a good deal of the president’s time for the remainder of his presidency. Former World Bank Group President Robert Zoellick agrees and has a foreign policy to-do list that includes
Trade agreements with Asian and European countries
Updating NAFTA
More productive ties with Central American countries
Typically presidents tend to come into office uninterested in foreign policy. Eventually it overwhelms their presidencies. It’s in the job description and foreign policy will inevitably happen to a president.
Individual choice certainly has big advantages over a rigid collectivism. But solidarity sure beats impulsiveness, self-involvement and fragmentation. Right now, we’re much better at choice than we are at solidarity. We could use a neighborly national discussion about how to restore the balance.
I just took a gander at Mr. Dionne’s house. I wonder when he last shoveled the snow from his neighbor’s driveway or swept the street in front of his house? I’m guessing never.
A certain man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho and robbers fell upon him… Who, then, was his neighbor?
I don’t know that I know the answer to that question in today’s terms but I’m pretty sure that when Party A wants Party B to pay Party C to do something for Party D, A isn’t being a neighbor to anyone except, maybe, Party C. Whether Party C realizes it or not is another question.
That gets to something that’s always griped me. It might well take a village to raise a child but the DCFS sure isn’t a village.
(CNN) — Iraqi troops, security forces and tanks surged into Baghdad on Sunday as political turmoil deepened over who should lead the country.
Military tanks were deployed to several neighborhoods in central Baghdad, two Iraqi police officials told CNN. The officials said there are also significantly more troops in Baghdad’s Green Zone, the secure area where many government buildings, the military headquarters and the U.S. Embassy are located.
The stepped-up troop presence comes as Iraqi forces battle Islamist militants in northern Iraq, and just after Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki accused Fuad Masum, Iraq’s newly elected President, of violating the country’s constitution by extending the deadline for Iraq’s biggest political coalitions to nominate a candidate for prime minister.
The precise reason for the growing number of troops in the Iraqi capital was unclear. But CNN military analyst retired Lt. Col. Rick Francona described it as an “ominous” development that signals the Iraqi Prime Minister doesn’t want to hand over power.
No one knows for sure what’s going on. Possibilities that occur to me are
There’s a military coup in the offing.
Maliki is concerned about being thrown out of power.
He’s concerned that the battle for Baghdad with ISIS is about to begin.
