Skip to comments.
So Popular and So Spineless [looking into world with weaker America]
nytimes.com ^
| July 16, 2008
| THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Posted on 07/16/2008 7:30:16 AM PDT by Tolik
Agreeing with THOMAS FRIEDMAN:
...<excerpt> ...
... But when it comes to pure, rancid moral corruption, no one can top South Africas president, Thabo Mbeki, and his stooge at the U.N., Dumisani Kumalo. They have done everything they can to prevent any meaningful U.N. pressure on the Mugabe dictatorship.
As The Times reported, Americas U.N. ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad, accused South Africa of protecting the horrible regime in Zimbabwe, calling this particularly disturbing given that it was precisely international economic sanctions that brought down South Africas apartheid government, which had long oppressed that countrys blacks.
So let us now coin the Mbeki Rule: When whites persecute blacks, no amount of U.N. sanctions is too much. And when blacks persecute blacks, any amount of U.N. sanctions is too much.
Which brings me back to America. Perfect we are not, but America still has some moral backbone. There are travesties we will not tolerate. The U.N. vote on Zimbabwe demonstrates that this is not true for these popular countries called Russia or China or South Africa that have no problem siding with a man who is pulverizing his own people.
So, yes, were not so popular in Europe and Asia anymore. I guess they would prefer a world in which America was weaker, where leaders with the values of Vladimir Putin and Thabo Mbeki had a greater say, and where the desperate voices for change in Zimbabwe would, well, just shut up.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: china; mugabe; russia; southafrica; thomasfriedman; thomaslfriedman; un; zimbabwe
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
1
posted on
07/16/2008 7:30:17 AM PDT
by
Tolik
To: Lando Lincoln; neverdem; quidnunc; .cnI redruM; Valin; King Prout; SJackson; dennisw; ...
Agreeing with
THOMAS FRIEDMAN:
... Perfect we are not, but America still has some moral backbone. There are travesties we will not tolerate. The U.N. vote on Zimbabwe demonstrates that this is not true for these popular countries called Russia or China or South Africa that have no problem siding with a man who is pulverizing his own people.
So, yes, were not so popular in Europe and Asia anymore. I guess they would prefer a world in which America was weaker, where leaders with the values of Vladimir Putin and Thabo Mbeki had a greater say, and where the desperate voices for change in Zimbabwe would, well, just shut up.
Nailed It!
This ping list is not author-specific for articles I'd like to share. Some for the perfect moral clarity, some for provocative thoughts; or simply interesting articles I'd hate to miss myself. (I don't have to agree with the author all 100% to feel the need to share an article.) I will try not to abuse the ping list and not to annoy you too much, but on some days there is more of the good stuff that is worthy of attention. You can see the list of articles I pinged to lately on my page.
You are welcome in or out, just freepmail me (and note which PING list you are talking about). Besides this one, I keep 2 separate PING lists for my favorite authors Victor Davis Hanson and Orson Scott Card.
2
posted on
07/16/2008 7:32:48 AM PDT
by
Tolik
To: Tolik
“So Popular and So Spineless...”
I thought this was going to be an article about Barack Obama. Or Democrats in general.
3
posted on
07/16/2008 7:34:43 AM PDT
by
WayneS
(America's Commies Love Their Obami !!!!)
To: WayneS
I wish to offer my most sincere apology to EVERYONE who is reading this thread.
I am sorry that I capitalized the word “democrat” in my previous post.
I hope you can forgive me.
4
posted on
07/16/2008 7:37:22 AM PDT
by
WayneS
To: WayneS
It is, in a way. Obama and Democrats would prefer a more “humble” America, i.e. weaker America. The are “decrying the decline in American popularity around the world under President Bush”. They want to be “popular”. Here is a good analyzes of how to earn the popularity.
5
posted on
07/16/2008 7:39:42 AM PDT
by
Tolik
To: WayneS
Oh, I see you are back from a re-education camp? LOL
6
posted on
07/16/2008 7:41:21 AM PDT
by
Tolik
To: WayneS
I haven’t heard much from the Messiah about Zimbabwe, or Sudan for that matter. He wants us to believe if he is elected he can talk to Mugabe and the President of Sudan and things will be fine. Spineless will be the best one word description for Obama.
7
posted on
07/16/2008 7:42:13 AM PDT
by
milwguy
(........)
To: milwguy
He speaks with his “vote” in the Senate.
Something like 70% of the pieces of legislation he has sponsored or co-sponsored in the Senate have had to do with sending U.S. taxpayer dollars to tin-pot dictatorships in Africa.
8
posted on
07/16/2008 7:44:30 AM PDT
by
WayneS
(And now I shall return to my hovel and cling to my guns ... until it is time to go to Church)
To: Tolik
I wll not go to the NYTimes to read this lttle POS Friedman. Did he ever mention Iraq and Afganistan as examples of US Morality...if not it is just more of TM’s grandstanding BS!
9
posted on
07/16/2008 7:45:11 AM PDT
by
iopscusa
(El Vaquero. (SC Lowcountry Cowboy))
To: iopscusa
Friedman and Krugman are so consistently wrong due to their lack of economic knowledge and their lack of morals. Neither one of them knows the difference between right and wrong. They are both over-educated, nonintellectual nitwits posing as some of the great thinkers of our time. Nobody with common sense pays attention to these light-in-the-loafer elites, nor would they enjoy sitting down and having a beer with these odd “fellows.”
I think their clothes should be checked to see if they have the same DNA protein stains on them that were on Monica’s blue dress. Seriously. They are not economists - they are Bill Clinton’s concubines.
10
posted on
07/16/2008 7:51:46 AM PDT
by
mallardx
To: iopscusa
I am in uncomfortable position of defending Tom Friedman. It is a good article. There is one sentence there (14 words) where I disagree, in the whole article of 814 words. (Thanks to MS Word for the word count tool).
Make an exception and go read the article. Its short. No, he is not discussing everything, but is very precise in condemning unprincipled behaviour of Russia and China, and he is NOT welcoming the world of weaker America.
11
posted on
07/16/2008 7:57:57 AM PDT
by
Tolik
To: Tolik
Any mention of Russia and China refusing to sign onto the sanctions introduced by the USA?
12
posted on
07/16/2008 8:10:07 AM PDT
by
Carley
To: Carley
YES, Russia and China refused to sign onto the sanctions introduced by the USA (quite limited sanctions, I'd say). Quote form the article:
"The U.S. put forward a simple Security Council resolution, calling for an arms embargo on Zimbabwe, the appointment of a U.N. mediator, plus travel and financial restrictions on the dictator Mugabe and 13 top military and government officials for stealing the Zimbabwe election and essentially mugging an entire country in broad daylight.
...Vitaly Churkin, Russias U.N. ambassador, argued that the targeted sanctions that the U.S. and others wanted to impose on Mugabes clique exceeded the Security Councils mandate. We believe such practices to be illegitimate and dangerous, he said, describing the resolution as one more obvious attempt to take the Council beyond its charter prerogatives. Veto!
Mugabes campaign of murder and intimidation didnt strike Churkin as illegitimate and dangerous only the U.N. resolution to bring a halt to it was illegitimate and dangerous. Shameful. "
13
posted on
07/16/2008 8:21:24 AM PDT
by
Tolik
To: Tolik
thanks for the tip on TF / NYTimes art. Maybe I should give him the benefit of the doubt...
14
posted on
07/16/2008 8:28:46 AM PDT
by
iopscusa
(El Vaquero. (SC Lowcountry Cowboy))
To: Tolik; iopscusa
I am in uncomfortable position of defending Tom Friedman. It is a good article. The "Broken Clock Rule" is clearly in play. Little Tommy stumbles upon something so obvious that even he can't ignore it.
Apartheid was not a good system but the "cure" seems to be worse than the disease.
15
posted on
07/16/2008 8:29:30 AM PDT
by
AreaMan
To: Clive
16
posted on
07/16/2008 8:33:26 AM PDT
by
Tolik
To: iopscusa
“Maybe I should give him the benefit of the doubt...”
This time, yes, but careful! I had to deconstruct his articles as a volunteer service to my liberal friends oh too many times. Still, I prefer to keep my eyes open - this IS a good article.
17
posted on
07/16/2008 8:38:40 AM PDT
by
Tolik
To: Tolik
He may citicize the Russians and the Chinese, but what does he propose to do about it? Friedman decries the use of force in Iraq and argues against it in Iran. Like the haloed one and his acolytes, Albright, Christopher, and Perry, Friedman is a believer in soft power, using diplomacy and like minded allies to persuade the bad guys. Funny how soft power doesn't have any effect when the bad guys have big and powerful friends who do not pass up the opportunity to humble the US.
I am sure Friedman does not advocate the unilateral use of force in Zimbabwe. I am sure he rejects McCain's plan for a League of Committed democracies. For all the do gooder words in today's column Friedman would be enraged if a Marine MEU suddenly appeared in Zimbabwe or Darfur to put an end to the terror.
To: Tolik
Thomas J. Friedman and me on the same page, WTF? Has the world begun to spin out?
Thanks for the ping.
To: WayneS
Don’t let it happen again.
20
posted on
07/16/2008 9:39:46 AM PDT
by
DFG
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson