C'est What?

In Paris, a mere three weeks after a terror attack in that city, president Obama says mass shootings just don't happen outside of the United States.  That level of out-of-touchness should immediately call into question every other statement this president has made. Ever.

That's not to say he's been wrong on everything, I'll let you come to that conclusion on your own.  But the mainstream media should simply be agog with incredulity at his lack of nuance, his lack of awareness and his simple inaccuracy on this and be saying to themselves "Hey, wait a minute..."

Alas, not going to happen.

Sorry Charlie.

The terror attack in Paris today on the offices of satirist magazine Charlie Hebdo,  like every other terror attack, was a pointless, senseless tragedy. It was heartening though to see the French out en mass holding up pens in a tribute to free speech as much as in sympathy for those slaughtered by crazy jihadists.  But it brought to  mind another thought.

The pen is mightier than the sword.  Today, it wasn't exactly the case, but in general that;s a truism because the pen is a metaphor for an idea. An idea can survive a person being slaughtered because once ideas are born they cannot simply be killed out of existence.  There are still people who identify with Nazism and Hitler's ideas, and those were some really, really bad ideas.

The point is that while so many people are not on board for a holy war in the Middle East to eradicate radical Islam, they don't always realize that a war can be waged with a pen rather than a sword. Right now, an all out war on the evils of these radicals is what is needed.  These attacks will continue, and without a worldwide condemnation from the West, the East and from the Muslim world itself, they will continue.  The idea that this is pure evil must take root and it must be driven home around the world.  Jihadists should see themselves not as martyrs and heroes but as wrong.  That starts by spreading the word that that is what they are

I urge anyone out marching, holding a pen, to let it not be a simple vigil but also serve as a symbol of a future effort to truly share the idea that needs to be shared, and to educate the uninformed  - radical Islam is evil and will not be tolerated. Period.

Lies, Damn Lies, and Obama (on Sony this time)

President Obama: Never talked to Sony about the hackers before they pulled The Interview from it's future showings in theaters across the country.

Truth: Um, hold on a minute.

Via Deadline:

UPDATED: Sony CEO Michael Lynton further contradicted President Obama’s criticism that Sony had “made a mistake” in handling the release of The Interview in his full sit-down with CNN on Friday. Obama said today that the studio did not come to him for help when cyberterrorists crippled the studio in a November hacking attack ordered by North Korea, but Lynton said the President was the mistaken one. “We definitely spoke to a senior advisor in the White House to talk about the situation,” he confirmed. “The White House was certainly aware of the situation.”

What’s more: Sony also consulted with the US State Department before the November hacking attack to assess any potential political heat the Seth Rogen/James Franco comedy might provoke.

Mumbai - more analysis

In light of the recent terror attacks in Mumbai, it seemed possible that the United States could turn the problem into a renewed relationship opportunity with India. Given the timing and the impracticality of action during a lame-duck presidency, the opportunity may have been missed. Condoleeza Rice has demanded that Pakistan come clean and co-operate. Or else? Not much. There's no carrot, and no real stick in play here. And consequently, the U.S. offers little to India that India cannot get elsewhere and more to it's advantage. Meanwhile Pakistan has gone back to the path of denial. And now InterPressService is reporting that India is seeking support from China in dealing with Pakistan.

According to sources, Mukherjee has conveyed New Delhi's dissatisfaction to Washington.

"With six American citizens killed in the Mumbai attack, we expected that Washington would apply effective pressure on the Pakistani military,’’ Uday Bhaskar, leading strategic analyst and former deputy director of the Indian ministry of defence -funded Institute of Defence Studies
and Analysis.

"That Washington could not act beyond a point proves that the U.S. dependency on the Pakistani military for the safety of its supply convoys to support its troops in Afghanistan is a greater priority,’’ Bhaskar said. ‘’There is "an understanding on both sides that there are limits to the extent to which the U.S. can prevail upon the Pakistani military to deliver apropos of
terrorism.’’

So an opportunity has been squandered. At least in the short term, since I'm sure there's more the United States government could do in the region that would be of more benefit to India. And there is urgent reason to do so. The Cato Institute in an article from the Dallas Morning News, touches on the implications of reliance on Pakistan.

After months of increased attacks on supply trucks, U.S. and NATO officials are scrambling for alternative routes to sustain its forces in land-locked Afghanistan. Today, three-quarters of NATO provisions bound for Afghanistan must travel through the deteriorating security environment in neighboring Pakistan. If U.S. and NATO leaders intend to establish new routes
for the mission, they will have to make concessions to surrounding countries including Iran and Russia.

...

For the time being, the U.S. and NATO will have to rely on Pakistan. America's foreign policy in the region remains hostage to events in that increasingly unstable country. Washington would be wise to take steps immediately to repair relations with either Tehran or Moscow if it wishes to have another feasible option for sustaining the Afghanistan mission.

Stemming the rising tide of violence in Afghanistan is crucial to America's "war on terror." Success requires the ability to supply U.S. and NATO forces in that country, which in turn, requires the wisdom to engage in effective diplomacy with key powers, especially Iran and Russia.

Clearly the alternatives are unsustainable. Iran, Russia? Not good bets. Being able to leverage forward bases in India would be a way to mitigate the problem, but it requires considering their interest instead of just America's - the relationship has to be mutually beneficial. As it could be.

Instead, it appears India will look elsewhere for support, a supporter of Pakistan in the Kashmir dispute, and a competitor to the US on the world stage. Not a good triangulation for the US or India. For the US this seems like a lose, lose, lose scenario. They lose a potential relationship builder with India, they lose the opportunity to open a new forward supply station for Afghanistan-based troops and they drive a potential ally towards a potential economic and military threat. There's triangulation worth working around.