Monday, August 24, 2020

August 24, 2020--Trump Keynoters

To be responsible, I've been planning to watch as much of the Republican convention as I did the Democrats. Well, almost as much. OK, half an hour a night.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I've been hoping that Clint Eastwood would return and again, as he did in 2016, talk to his chair. Anticipating that would keep me awake well into primetime.

To prevent Clint from showing up uninvited and doing something unhinged (that role is reserved exclusively for the commander in chief), a leftwing conspiracy theorist reports Eastwood is being held in a cell in Guantanamo.

My plans for this week are unravelling because of who will be on the program. Desperate to demonstrate the GOP has at least some diversity--the speakers will include six party loyalists, including presidential aspirant and former ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley (a woman); African-American South Carolina senator Tim Scott; Mike Pence; and Iowa Senator Joni Ernst who is likely to lose in November. 

Balancing the ticket will be Trump, who is planning to speak all four nights, and five other Trumps, including his adult children, from Don Jr. to the semi-estranged Tiffany.

On the other hand I was sad to hear that Trump's sister the judge will not be there nor will his niece.

You expect me to stay up to midnight with his lineup? So much for responsibility. There's a limit to what I'm willing to do for the sake of responsibility. I flunked that test long ago (car, cat, tree).

A friend said she'd watch the whole thing if they gave her the peroxide concession.

It was not disclosed if the Trump kids will be vaccinated on stage.

Labels: , , , , , ,

Monday, June 02, 2014

June 2, 2014--Negotiating With the Enemy

"Now you're the one who sounds like a Republican." I was happy to have the opportunity to turn the tables on Rona.

"You mean because I'm against the prisoner exchange with the Taliban?" I just smiled. "Well, I am against it so I that makes me a Republican, so be it."

"I'm just fooling with you," I said. "Some Democrats are raising questions too."

"Mainly those facing tough reelection challenges in November. Some of the same one who early on called for General Shinseki's resignation because of the VA debacle."

"I can see your point. At least, to some extent."

"You mean you're OK with us negotiating with the Taliban?" Rona asked, "The enemy?"

"I know that was the GOP talking-point way of discussing this on the Sunday talk shows."

"But they conveniently forgot that a Republican president, Richard Nixon, with Henry Kissinger, negotiated secretly for years with the Vietcong, the enemy, before finally making a deal to end the war in Vietnam."

"And, another Republican president, Eisenhower, agreed to negotiate with the enemy, the North Koreans, to end that war."

"To end wars, unless you can get away with demanding unconditional surrender, like at the end of World War II, you always negotiate with whom your fighting."

"And even with Japan, in WW II, we negotiated with them about keeping the emperor. Many in the U.S. wanted him deposed, but we allowed him to remain. So what's your problem this time?"

"I have a problem with exchanging prisoners before a larger deal can be struck with the Taliban."

"I have some trouble with that too," I conceded.

"A couple of things. First, I don't like the idea that we agreed to release five very bad guys who have been imprisoned in Guantanamo--hold off for a moment about that issue--allowing them to go to Qatar of all places. The deal calls for the Qatar government to keep an eye on them and not allow them to travel for a year--you know how much that agreement's worth--in exchange for an American soldier who has been held as a prisoner of war for five years."

"Among the five Taliban, according to the Times, which I have right here, so let me read what it says--two at least are 'senior military commanders said to be linked to operations that killed Americans and allied troops as well as implicated in murdering thousands of Shiites in Afghanistan.'"

"Correct. One was the head of the Taliban army. Bad enough guys to be held at Gitmo without trial for more than 10 years but OK to release for one American soldier. Which brings me to my other point."

"Which is?"

"About the soldier. When you sign up for combat, and all our troops are volunteers, you know the risks. You could be wounded, killed, and even taken prisoner. And the deal is that if you're captured you're likely to be held until the war is over, a full truce is worked out, and all prisoners are then exchanged. And in the particular case, to make matters worse, he may have been a deserter, going over to the Taliban side."

"But, Susan Rice and Chuck Hagel, on the same Sunday shows, implied that this may be a prelude to a larger agreement with the Taliban. We've been trying to engineer something like that for years."

"Which would be a good thing," Rona said, "But why can't we wait until a deal is struck, or at the minimum, when we're real close to having one, before exchanging prisoners? This feels very premature and, who knows, very political."

"Political?"

"You know, with the VA mess and the resulting bad political news for the Obama White House, maybe they wanted to do something that would show dramatic concern for the troops."

"And if the released Taliban get back into the fray, how many more Americans will they maim and kill? How good for our troops would that be?"

"Fair point. But I have another idea. Admittedly a crazy one."

"Shoot," Rona said.

"While we busy exchanging prisoners, why not release everyone we're holding in Guantanamo? You know, all 150. That way Obama would get to fulfill at least one of his campaign promises--to shut it down."

"Now, you're going too far."

"At least, I don't sound like a Republican!"

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,