You are currently browsing Laurence Nixon’s articles.
When President Woodrow Wilson made his famous speech at the Paris Peace Conference he made a pledge for the world to open its doors to the thought of a global system of security and freedom. One of his 14 points advocated the need for open seas in which all countries could be assured of the protection of merchant ships traveling in international waters and through territorial seaways. For almost 90 years the seas were open and welcome to any merchant ship traveling abroad securing the function of free trade and international commerce.
However, the freedom and security of merchant ships traveling in international waters has come under recent threat from a band of Sudanese pirates. Both German and Greek shipping companies have paid large ransoms, some in the millions, for the recovery of oil tankers and cargo ships worth in the hundreds of millions. These Euro countries set the bar for these pirates and propelled them to continue terrorizing ships off the coast of Sudan.
French Navy Captures 11 Sudanese Pirates
Then they attacked an American ship and the game changed. Last week four Sudanese pirates raided the Maersk Alabama and took Capt. Richard Phillips hostage. After days of negotiating between the terrorists and the American shipping company, the White House gave orders for a daring rescue mission. The Navy Seals assassinated the four pirates and grabbed the captain without skipping a beat.
In response to the killing of four of their peers, the pirate gang captured four vessels within 24 hours of the American captain being rescued. Now it comes out that the French have detained 11 of these pirates in a raid on one of their mother ships.
My question is this: Why are the French, of all people, taking action against this terrorist group when America’s foreign policy is determined to combat global terrorism. The answer can be found by taking one look inside the oval office at the administration running the show.
Yes, President Obama gave the go for an offensive to rescue Capt. Phillips, but is he going to turn his back and walk away? Considering the four pirates that took control of the American ship made their move on a rubber dingy, it is clear how pathetic the scale to which they operate on is. Why don’t the Americans station a couple submarines in the area and torpedo these dinghies to hell. This is just one case where, at the very least, Obama could easily pass a resolution through the UN to grant international naval assistance to secure the area for merchant ships. But once again, Obama plays the middle ground waiting for these pirates to strike again.
This whole pirate situation is quite a joke. Thomas Friedman, an accomplished writer for the New York Times, highlights in this article the uselessness of diplomacy in a time like this. There is a reason why America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists. In the most recent international crisis the Obama administration finally showed it had balls and gave the go for a navy seal mission to rescue an American captain captured by four Sudanese pirates. I have to give Obama credit for his decision to kill these terrorists, but I feel more credit is due to both the capitain and the American Seals.
Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times
Thomas L. Friedman
I’ve been thinking lately of starting a new school of foreign service to train U.S. diplomats. My school, though, would be very simple. It would consist of a single classroom with a desk and a chair. At the desk would be a teacher, pretending to be a foreign leader. The student would come in and have to persuade the foreign leader to do something — to pull this or that lever. At one point, the foreign leader would nod vigorously in agreement and then reach behind him and pull the lever — and it would come off the wall in his hands. Or, he would nod vigorously and say, “Yes, yes, of course, I will pull that lever,” but then would only pretend to do so.
I’m wondering if President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton aren’t those students, trying to deal with the leaders of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran and North Korea. I say that not to criticize but to sympathize. “Mama, don’t let your children grow up to be diplomats.”
This is not the great age of diplomacy.
A secretary of state can broker deals only when other states or parties are ready or able to make them. In the cold war, an age of great powers, grand bargains and reasonably solid client states, there were ample opportunities for that — whether in arms control with the Soviet Union or peacemaking between our respective client states around the globe. But this is increasingly an age of pirates, failed states, nonstate actors and nation-building — the stuff of snipers, drones and generals, not diplomats.
Hence the déjà vu all over again quality of U.S. foreign policy right now — the sense that when it comes to our major problems (Afghanistan and Pakistan and North Korea and Iran), we just go around and around, buying the same carpets from the same people, over and over, but nothing changes.
“We are dealing with states and leaders who either cannot deliver or will not deliver,” notes the Johns Hopkins University foreign policy professor Michael Mandelbaum. “The issues we have with them look less like problems that can be solved and more like conditions that we have to manage.”
The ones who can’t deliver — the leaders of Afghanistan and Pakistan — are the ones who promise to do all sorts of good things, and pull all sorts of levers, but at the end of the day the levers come off the wall because the governments in these countries have only limited powers. The ones who won’t deliver — Iran and North Korea — time and again tell us: “Yes, we need to talk.” But at the end of the day, their hostile relationships with America or the West are so central to the survival strategy of their regimes, so much at the core of their justifications for remaining in power, that it is not in their interest to deliver real reconciliation, but just to pretend to deliver it.
The only thing that could change this is a greater exercise of U.S. and allied power. In the case of Afghanistan and Pakistan, that power would have to be used to actually rebuild these states from the inside into modern nations. We would literally have to build the institutions — the pulleys and wheels — so that when the leaders of these states pulled a lever something actually happened, and the lever wouldn’t just break off in their hands.
And in the case of the strong states — Iran and North Korea — we would have to generate much more effective leverage from the outside to get them to change their behavior along the lines we seek. In both cases, though, success surely would require a bigger and longer U.S. investment of money and power, not to mention allies.
Instead, I fear that we are adopting a middle-ground strategy — doing just enough to avoid collapse but not enough to solve the problems. If our goal in Afghanistan and Pakistan is nation-building, so they will have self-sustaining moderate governments, we surely don’t have enough troops or resources inside devoted to either. If our goal is changing regime behavior in Iran and North Korea, we surely have not generated enough leverage from outside. North Korea’s defiant missile launch and Iran’s continued development of its nuclear capability testify to that.
So, in sum, we have four problem countries at the heart of U.S. foreign policy today that we don’t have the will or ability to ignore but seem to lack the leverage or the allies to decisively change. The big wild card — a critical mass of people who share our aspirations inside these countries, rising up and leading the fight, which is ultimately what tipped Iraq for the better — I don’t see. As such, I fear we are sliding into commitments in Afghanistan and Pakistan without a real national debate about the ends or the means or the exits. That is a recipe for trouble.
Given all that is on his plate, you cannot blame President Obama for looking for a middle ground — not wanting to abandon progressives and women in Afghanistan and Pakistan, but not wanting to get in too deeply. But history teaches that the middle ground can be a perilous place. Think of Iraq before the surge — not enough to win or lose, but just enough to be stuck.
I have yet to write a piece on the brutal job President Obama is doing running the free world but i have had enough. Not only does he take a shot at mentally challenged athletes saying that his bowling score was something resembling the special olympics, but it has been nothing but hypocracy coming out of that guys mouth since day 1!.
Beef 1) The Detroit school district reported that in 2008 only 18% of its highschool graduates continued on to post secondary education and less than 30% of highschool kids actually graduated. There is a serious problem with Detroit school board and something needs to be done about it. There are several solutions including federal regulatio. But, what would Obama have us do? Fork over $500+ million and hope for the best. The Detroit school district is missing $56 million from its 2008 budget and has reported to be $200 millions dollars in debt! Once again, Obama looks to his money tree to solve another one of America’s regularoty problems.
Beef 2) Before appearing on Jay Leno’s late night talk show, the President met with research groups who are looking in to the development of electric cars. Hey Hussein! Been there! Done that! The electric car is not viable in today’s market. Maybe when the price of oil was well over $100 a barrel but spending millions of dollars into R&D for something that is out of your hands is BS! Not only is it hypocritical that he was preaching about electric cars in Californa, state that has to IMPORT its electricity from Beautiful British Columbia, Canada, but number of people who can barely afford electricity as it is would see a drastic increse in utilities! Once again, Obama spening money not to enhance the economy, but to promote his partisan agenda! what an OBAMAnation!
Beef 3) Again, a comment made on Jay Leno’s talk show was about how his plan for massive investment into healthcare and clean energy will improve the ecnomy. BOGUS! It is proven that things like healthcare, minimum wage and “equalization”, in some bilingual countries north of the 49th parallel, actually slow economic growth! Do you think that China would be where it’s at if it was sending equalization to Tibet?! HELL NO! Obama’s socialist agenda is pushing this government stiumlous plan way overboard. This recession has been for the democrats what 9/11 was for the neo-conservatives: A God send! I can’t wait to get this left leaning HACK out of the whitehouse!
SCALLYWAGS
This week’s Scallywag is not one person but a band of many who insist on being a menace to society. As previously mentioned in a Mans Inc. piece, the Canadian Auto Workers Union has taken over a plant in Windsor Ontario in order to stage a protest against recent job cuts and pay cuts made by GM and Chrysler. These people should all be arrested and imprisoned for the rest of their natural born lives as they clearly have no intention of living with the rest of society. Not only do they make upwards of $60 and hour, they have no education, no skilled labour or trade status and they do a job that machines can easily do for them. I believe it was Karl Marx who said that technology and machinery was a good thing because it would allow the human race to develop to the point that machines could do everything and men could be free. Obviously this isn’t true in all cases but in this case it is! These jobs are not needed as a machine could easily do the job without the bullshit union crying about things that show they are already more privileged than most blue collar workers. Unions are scum and especially this one, the Canadian Autoworkers are scallywags for being sloppy individuals who don’t give a shit about the country and the economic situation we face.
SCHOLAR
While March 17 marks St. Patrick’s Day on the calendars of most, it also marks the anniversary of the death of a very important political and historical figure. George F. Kennan died March 17, 2005. Kennan is a scholar because of the contribution he made to the United States Cold War efforts against the Godless Soviet Union. He is thought to be the father of “containment policy” as he served as the deputy head for the US mission in Moscow until 1948.
He wrote in his famous ‘long telegram’, “[The Soviet Union] warrants the United States entering with reasonable confidence upon a policy of firm containment, designed to confront the Russians with unalterable counter-force at every point where they show signs of encroachment upon the interests of a peaceful and stable world…Thus the decision will really fall in large measure in this country itself. The issue of Soviet-American relations is in essence a test of the over-all worth of the United States as a nation among nations. To avoid destruction the United States need only measure up to its own best traditions and prove itself worthy of preservation as a great nation. Surely, there was never a fairer test of national quality than this.”
For being one of the original Cold Warriors, George F. Kennan is a true Scholar.
My vendetta against sloppiness is under way and I have received a great deal of support as this issue weighs heavily on the hearts and minds of fellow gentlemen and scholars. It is clear that there are many who share with me this goal of eradicating that which lessons a man’s ability to present himself in a clean, proper, and confident manner.
While the first of my multipart editorial on sloppiness outlined the history of term, this piece will look at one area in which sloppiness can have too big an impact on: lifestyle.
The ways in which a man can choose to live his life in the 21st century are endless. However, it is now more than ever that men need role models and examples to follow. As I will describe, there are certain things that men should strive to do and there are things that men should turn their backs to.
Priority number one in any man’s life should be productivity. A real man does not wake up at 1:30 p.m., grab the box of lucky charms and proceed to eat a salad bowl portion of cereal. Rather, a man who looks to get the most out of his day wakes up no later than 930 a.m. and makes himself a well balanced meal giving him the energy he needs to go out and grab life by the balls.
Secondly, a man needs to be up to date on day-to-day politics and economics. This means spending at least 15-20 minutes a day reading the news paper, listening to news radio or, if you’re always on your computer, reading a couple online news sources like Mans Inc. One does not update themselves on the state of society by watching MTV News or surfing Perezhilton.com. Ignorance is a crime!
Third, after a long work week it is absolutely necessary for a man to unwind and let loose before he must get jacked to do it all over again. Although a colleague of mine has coined this phrase, it encompasses everything that a working man should be: Weekend Warrior. The weekend is the time for men to have a few drinks, share some laughs and otherwise dominate the social scene as the work put in all week makes men deserving of this fact.
It is how men let loose that is key. Note that I said men should have a few drinks, clearly the term ‘few’ is left open to interpretation. What I did not say is, “men should smoke a ‘J’ and crush fast food”. Men do not smoke marijuana, hit up taco bell and sit back and watch sci-fi movies on their Friday and Saturday nights. And don’t get me started about women and their frivolous nature, Men are not floosies. Men drink purposefully and in establishments that exude class and prestige.
College Know-It-All Hippie
Lastly, a man’s attire speaks loudly within social circles. A real man is a champion of the suit. A shirt and tie is a must during the week as it is important for a man to look professional. This does not mean sweatpants, tie-die shirts, and baggy hoodies will cut it. A man must be clean shaven, well kept and fit, and should want to look crisp in a new suit.
The sloppiness that I have highlighted here is that of a sloppy lifestyle. While I have given examples of how men should avoid sloppy behaviour in their household, workplace and social life, there is room for temptation. A sloppy roommate, co-worker or stoner buddy could make being an example of excellence tough. But men must prevail, stay strong to that which you know is scholarly and always fight against the perils of a sloppy lifestyle. Our enemy will always be the College know-it-all hippie who tempts us with theories of how the system will fail. ARONIOUS! The system will succeed on the backs of hard working gentlemen who commit to this common creed of brotherhood!
A Gentleman and a Fine QB
The US-Mexican border has been a massive thorn in the side of American homeland security for decades. The latest threat has been a bad mixture of illegal immigration and gang violence. Gang violence related to the drug trade has gotten so bad in the city of Ciudad Juárez that Mexico has sent in the army to get a handle on things. The US State Department has stated that over 2000 people have been murdered in the city since January 2008 and they believe that the gangs are buying their weapons in the United States and trafficking them over the border.
The violence has been spilling over the border into the US. As a result, a House hearing has been set up in which a subcommittee will ask members of homeland security questions about possible solutions and where the US has been failing to protect its border.
Chairing this committee is, of course, Republican Loretta Sanchez.
Mexico’s military and police have been embroiled in increasingly violent clashes with drug cartels, which are battling among themselves for control over an ever-growing market in the United States.
Rep. Loretta Sanchez, chairwoman of the House committee holding the hearing, said Thursday that what’s happening in Mexico is becoming a growing problem for the United States.
“Well, it certainly has always been a problem at the border, but in the last couple of decades, it’s gotten even worse. Now we see some spillover, just a little bit, coming into the United States,” she said on CNN’s “American Morning.”
“I think it’s time that we make a comprehensive plan to figure out, not just what we do about the violence at the border — but it’s all tied together with the economy down there, with our economy, … commerce routes between the two countries.”
The Border, Maritime and Global Counterterrorism Committee hearing on border issues focuses on violence and the transfer of guns from the United States to Mexico to arm the cartels.
Sanchez said it’s a crime to sell some of the guns from stores within the United States and traffic them to Mexico. Most of the gun stores selling these weapons, she said, are within a mile of the U.S.-Mexico border.
Sanchez suggested looking at what types of guns are being sold in those stores and perhaps instituting some provision against assault weapons.
This is where I get jacked. If you think back to the presidential race when the liberal media claimed that Senator Barack Obama was supposedly winning debate after debate, you will recall that Senator John McCain was staying strong to his belief that the US Border was one of the greatest threats to US homeland security! How fitting is it that a war has broken out in a city just miles away from US soil and there is nothing there to stop the violence from spilling over but a few cacti and a picket fence.
Had McCain won, there state of the US-Mexican border wouldn’t even come into question because it would already be in lockdown. However, now that we have that progressive socialist in the white house, we are spending millions of dollars on carbon capture programs and billions of dollars protecting the “helpless” Palestinians who so “innocently” toss bombs into Israeli elementary schools.
I can’t wait for Obama’s balls to be tested on a real international crisis. Only then will everyone see how yella he is!
As most things that piss me off take place in a class room this topic is no different. While listening to my professor lecture about the “social contract” I couldn’t help but notice the woman in front of me so blatantly not taking notes.
Instead, she was ass deep into the popular blog “perezhilton.com’. It got me thinking about what everyone’s infatuation with celebrities is. People like Perez Hilton make a living reporting the latest in celebrity gossip. Perez calls HIMself the “Queen of all media”…spare me!
What is more pathetic than grown men committing their lives to reporting on useless celebrity gossip is the people who read it! Instead of listening to my professor speak about political philosophy, something that will actually be of benefit, this woman would rather learn about some BS cat fight between the Jonas Brothers and 50 Cent.
This Perez Hilton person is contributing to the dumbing down of society. You wonder why we struggle to get even 50 % of the population to actively take part in the election of their leaders. Yet, the second one of these over paid, self righteous, ass hole actors or actresses opens their mouth because KFC kills chickens so we can eat their delightfully crispy original recipe, all hell breaks loose.
If people spent as much time reading the news paper or blogs like mans inc., then maybe society wouldn’t be so retarded! Talk about powerful lobbies, Hollywood is probably one of the most powerful lobbies in North America because of the strangle hold it has on all the morons who care more about Chris Brown beating up Rihanna then they do the shitty job Obama is doing running the free world.
So, on that note, Perez Hilton can BEAT IT!
WHO CARES!! ENOUGH OF YOUR STUPID QUIPS!
I hereby proclaim my vendetta against sloppiness! In this, the first of a multi-part editorial on sloppiness, I will introduce both the theory of sloppiness and the reasoning behind my hatred for it.
To be sloppy is to either (1) contain too much liquid, (2) be careless and disorganized or (3), of a garment, be casual and loose fitting. For the purposes of this piece I will be focusing, of course, on the second and third definitions.
Now, to me, being sloppy is a much more general term. I believe that being sloppy encompasses numerous aspects of ones appearance, attitude and speech. It is about presenting yourself in an ill prepared, slapdash, dazed appearance with a laissez-faire attitude.
PART ONE: HISTORY
Now, to see why the civilized world faces this band of guerrilla style scum bags imposing their sloppiness on hard working people, we must look to history in order to see where we went wrong.
Since the beginning of society and the creation of the state, men and women have always presented themselves in a way that respected their bodies equally. For men in 16-18th centuries, the common attire was knickers, button up white shirts and handkerchiefs while businessmen and politicians wore wigs to show their status. This was a time of neatness, manners and conformity. All was well in society.
Then, the industrial revolution happened and the cotton gin made it easier and faster to produce cotton garments and fashion began to spread rapidly. However, men kept a handle on things and as times changed it was still commonplace for a man to wear a shirt and tie on the weekends and suit to work during the week. But it wouldn’t be long until the system changed forever.
Soon after the golden days of the 1920s came the dreaded 1960s. And it was in this decade the term sloppiness entered the hearts and minds of the world’s youth. In a span of ten years guerrilla scallywags terrorized high schools and colleges spreading their liberal propaganda and converting young well mannered youth into authority questioning, ill mannered ass holes, one hit of their bongs at a time.
President Richard Nixon
After the 1960s all was lost. The 1970s brought in an era of disco where it became cool to experiment with drugs and sexuality. Then what happened? STDs! Then enter the 1980s and the emergence of rap and punk rock. Now you had kids not only wearing jeans, but jeans with holes in them! At the same time, you had kids wearing their hats sideways and ditching their doc martins for ‘sneakers’. The 90s were, of course, dominated by grunge and this is where the world entered a sloppy depression. It is now time that we fight our way back to the golden era of the suit wearing, scotch drinking, gentlemen! We must stay the course and overcome this problem of sloppiness once and for all!
So I say to you all: Next time you meet with friends, attend class, go to the theatre, visit the mall or enter public life of any kind, please wear a collared shirt! It is the least you can do!
“Scholars and Scallywags”
Now, I introduce to you a segment much like Bill O’Reilley’s “Pin Heads & Patriots”. I call my version: “Scholars and Scallywags” Our first scallywag is Arizona Cardinals quarterback Kurt Warner for losing the Super Bowl due to his SLOPPINESS. With less than one minute remaining in the first half, the Cardinals were down inside Pittsburgh’s ten yard line. Warner, looking sloppier than ever wearing his XXL jersey, threw an interception which was run back 100 yards for a Steelers touchdown. Clearly if Warner had worn a jersey that fit him properly he would have thrown a touchdown to lead going into half time.
Our first Scholar is, of course, the late General George Washington. Not only did General Washington lead the Continental Army in a crushing defeat over the British Empire, secure American independence and become the first president of the United States, he did so while looking scholarly, well kept and handsome. We should all strive to be a little bit more like General Washington.
While attending class the discussion moved to the United States and the period of the Bush Administrations. The comments, as expected, were quite hostile and very anti-sympathetic. Some of the comments were as follows:
George Bush and his administration has created a culture of fear within the United States. You notice it when you enter an airport or government building, men with machine guns greet you and intimidate you.
The Patriot Act was created to build fear among the US citizens because if the people fear the government, it can do whatever it wants.
The US media is a branch of the government used to keep the people in fear so that they are always suspicious of one another and let the government do what it wants.
Firstly, if you are one who believes that the mass media is teamed up with the government to coerce you into doing anything against your will, you my friend are just as much a product of the system as I am for believing in journalistic integrity. For you see, people like Michael Moore, Noam Chompsky and Al Gore are all making a large profit off of your naivety . The endless amount of documentaries, books and outright propaganda is outrageous. Yet, they continue to openly badmouth their country’s leader for policies which keep their children sleeping soundly at night not fearing a real threats: missiles from gaza, columbian druglords
Seconldy, Mass media has been trying so hard not to be bias that they have, in my opinion, crossed over to being consistently liberal minded. CNN, for example, can almost be considered one of Barack Obama’s campaign contributors as it won him the Democratic primaries by constantly slandering Senator Hillary Clinton.
Thirdly, the Patriot Act has been critized for apporpriate reasons but unrealistic situations. Yes, the Patriot Act does infiringe on some people’s rights, but only those who commit crimes. So, after Barack Obama closes GTMO and the terrorists are moved to US prisons, we can all cheer on the savior of the free world for truly bringin terrorism back to American soil.
Lastly, if you call armed guards at US airports and government buildings a plot to scare people, think back to 911 when armed terrorists highjacked planes and flew them into the world trade center. 911 is exactly the reason it is necessary to have armed personel at airports to ensure YOUR security while flying.
For all of those who are scared of their government and hate it because it may treat some criminals like criminals, remember, FREEDOM ISN’T FREE.
