If they were school kids, and if the consequences of this latest round of violence weren’t so tragic, you’d spank Hamas on the backside for being idiotically pigheaded and send the Israelis home from school for bullying. When Hamas notified Israel that they were terminating their truce last Friday; and punctuated that announcement by firing rockets into Israel and threatening a wave of suicide attacks they essentially challenged the school bully to a fight in front of his buddies – a challenge Israel felt it could not turn a blind eye to.
Every time these two tribes go to war, analysts everywhere rush to proclaim the situation so complex that whatever position is taken, there are a dozen counter positions - and thereby casting as inevitabile or intractable the tragedy that follows. The sooner the ordinary people of both sides force their leaders to acknowledge their wrong doings and negotiate a compromised agreement the better. Hamas has proven once again they are good for nothing except prolonging misery for the Palestinians by constant fighting – having failed completely to govern Gaza - and Israel continues to flout the international conventions (as problematic as they were) that defined the borders of a the Palestinian state in 1947. By Israel maintaining a constant state of war against the people with whom they share their geography, their only dividend has been the creation of new generations of Palestinian youths whose minds have been perverted by hatred and loathing towards them.
Taking a side in this dispute is not part of the solution…indeed it is the heart of the problem. Both sides are wrong and there is absolutely no good outcome possible in this unending conflict without negotiation and compromise. If the good citizens of Gaza and Israel cannot see this and force their leaders to rise above their stubborness, then they too must bear responsibility for the thousands of innocent lives that will be lost as a result. It was the political theorist Mr Edmund Burke who is credited with the phrase "all that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing." This applies equally to Palestinians and Israelis. Quite apart from all the weighty concerns of morality and civilized behavior, the truth is that war almost never solves anything and certainly never results in enduring peace.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Friday, December 26, 2008
Trust Me; I'm a Funds Manager.
I am a long time subscriber to the theory that if it ain’t bricks and mortar don’t invest in it. Of course the global economy wouldn’t survive long if everybody shared this view; but then again how much worse can it get. At least with home prices depreciating you can still see where your investment went – and as history will testify; its all cyclic and in measuring property values the trend over time is always upwards.
Who the hell would be a market investor these days when it is so patently obvious that (1) management fees are a rip off, (2) you will have no idea where your funds are really going or if you will ever get them back and (3) regulatory agencies are so ineffective you would be better off stuffing your funds under your mattress.
Have you been following the Bernard Madoff affair here in the States? What an incredible story of felony, greed and incompetence. Felony by Madoff who, it is alleged, has defrauded investors out of up to $50 billion. Greed on the part of investors who kept lining up to give money to Madoff despite most of them now confessing they believed his returns were “too good to be true”. And incompetence by the Securities and Exchange commission who failed to investigate Madoff’s company despite complaints and early warning indicators that can be traced back to almost a decade ago.
What makes this story more remarkable is that the victims in this “ponzi scheme” (using funds from new investors to pay previous investors in the guise of returns) are not just greedy individuals; indeed they are some of the world’s biggest banks, charities, pension funds, other investment funds and multinational corporations – most of whom have (or say they have) their own screening and oversight systems and Risk Managers. Indeed some of these companies employ Fund Managers who are actually paid a lot of money (and I mean a LOT of money) to safeguard and “manage” the funds of investors - but it now turns out there was no “management” being undertaken at all…they just dumped investor’s funds into Madoff’s firm and waited for the returns to flow in, while receiving literally millions in “management fees” in the meantime. In the case of these firms who have charged hefty management fees to provide such screening and oversight on behalf of investors I hope the SEC does find them accountable and makes them pay back the money that was lost through their careless investment in Madoff.
I heard a guy being interviewed on National Public Radio the other morning; he was the President of a large New York based investment firm . When asked how investors can avoid losing money to schemes such as Madoff’s he replied simply "do your own homework but frankly, at the end of the day there's a fair amount of trust that goes into it". Trust eh?…now there’s an idea worth exploring in the investment industry – they might even consider calling it a “trust account”. Go figure.
Who the hell would be a market investor these days when it is so patently obvious that (1) management fees are a rip off, (2) you will have no idea where your funds are really going or if you will ever get them back and (3) regulatory agencies are so ineffective you would be better off stuffing your funds under your mattress.
Have you been following the Bernard Madoff affair here in the States? What an incredible story of felony, greed and incompetence. Felony by Madoff who, it is alleged, has defrauded investors out of up to $50 billion. Greed on the part of investors who kept lining up to give money to Madoff despite most of them now confessing they believed his returns were “too good to be true”. And incompetence by the Securities and Exchange commission who failed to investigate Madoff’s company despite complaints and early warning indicators that can be traced back to almost a decade ago.
What makes this story more remarkable is that the victims in this “ponzi scheme” (using funds from new investors to pay previous investors in the guise of returns) are not just greedy individuals; indeed they are some of the world’s biggest banks, charities, pension funds, other investment funds and multinational corporations – most of whom have (or say they have) their own screening and oversight systems and Risk Managers. Indeed some of these companies employ Fund Managers who are actually paid a lot of money (and I mean a LOT of money) to safeguard and “manage” the funds of investors - but it now turns out there was no “management” being undertaken at all…they just dumped investor’s funds into Madoff’s firm and waited for the returns to flow in, while receiving literally millions in “management fees” in the meantime. In the case of these firms who have charged hefty management fees to provide such screening and oversight on behalf of investors I hope the SEC does find them accountable and makes them pay back the money that was lost through their careless investment in Madoff.
I heard a guy being interviewed on National Public Radio the other morning; he was the President of a large New York based investment firm . When asked how investors can avoid losing money to schemes such as Madoff’s he replied simply "do your own homework but frankly, at the end of the day there's a fair amount of trust that goes into it". Trust eh?…now there’s an idea worth exploring in the investment industry – they might even consider calling it a “trust account”. Go figure.
Sunday, December 21, 2008
Showing the "Sole" of Democracy
Al-Zaidi has become somewhat of celebrity in Iraq after having tossed his shoes at George W. Bush during his surprise trip to that country last week. Whatever else you think about the war in Iraq, with the exception of Israel, Iraq is now probably the only country in the middle east where an attack of this nature could have been attempted without the perpetrator fearing being tortured or killed for his efforts. If you truly believe in the principles of democracy, I’d call that progress wouldn’t you? I can only imagine what would have become of al-Zaidi if he had tried that against Saddam Hussein.
As Robert Burns said, in his poem "Here's to them that's awa'":
Here's freedom to him who would speak.
Here's freedom to him who would write.
For there's none ever feared,
that the truth should be heard,
than he whom the truth would indict.
Al-Zaidi may well deserve his celebrity status – depending on how you feel about heads of state being insulted in such a manner. But what is truly worth celebrating is the introduction of a freedom from suppression in Iraq that allows such political expression to be tolerated.
To our service personnel everwhere, working to install or uphold the principles of democracy...I wish you all a very Happy Christmas and congratulate you on the great work you are doing.
As Robert Burns said, in his poem "Here's to them that's awa'":
Here's freedom to him who would speak.
Here's freedom to him who would write.
For there's none ever feared,
that the truth should be heard,
than he whom the truth would indict.
Al-Zaidi may well deserve his celebrity status – depending on how you feel about heads of state being insulted in such a manner. But what is truly worth celebrating is the introduction of a freedom from suppression in Iraq that allows such political expression to be tolerated.
To our service personnel everwhere, working to install or uphold the principles of democracy...I wish you all a very Happy Christmas and congratulate you on the great work you are doing.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Doggone Crazies
“We, the people, reject Vice-President elect Biden’s nomination for the Second Dog! The time is now for the Biden family to admit their mistake and make the right choice - Adopt, don’t shop!” So says a website targeting Joe Biden's choice to buy a new puppy from a breeder instead of "rescuing" a dog. Are you kidding me!! With all that is going on in the world right now, give thanks that one little puppy has found a home – and I’m sure a very nice once as well. This preoccupation with having to “rescue” a dog as opposed to buying one from a shop or a breeder is another example of sociopolitical correctness gone crazy. What is more, it has become very obvious to me that many of the “rescue only” brigade get their dogs in this way because it makes them somehow “holier than thou” at the doggie park. Don’t dogs bred in other ways deserve a good home home too. Next thing you know it will only be socially acceptable to some people to adopt children instead of breeding them yourself. Give me a break. Nice dog Mr. Biden. Great choice!!
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Short Memories
I keep saying it, but I’ll say it again. I am non-partisan when it comes to US politics. I, like most people in the world, acknowledge that I am affected by what happens in US politics, and for that reason only I remain an interested party.
Mr. George W Bush’s time has come; and as historians struggle to write the pages that will define his legacy I am overwhelmed by the 20/20 hindsight and short memories being brought to bear on the task by his critics. It is true there is much he probably regrets and might do differently, including using faulty intelligence that ultimately led to war in Iraq, the over-reliance on Cheney and Rumsfeld at the expense of true (military) experts in executing that war and the mishandling Hurricane Katrina at the expense of New Orleans HOWEVER (capitals deliberate)…lets not forget what I personally consider to be the greatest legacy of Bush’s two terms. He and his Administration have prevented another major attack on the USA homeland – and there have been attempts by terrorists to do so. This was the “one big thing he had to do after 9/11” – and much of what has become more recently unpopular, and the focus of condemnation from critics stems from the short memories of those critics- who have forgotten what Bush had to deal with in those terrifying days immediately after 9/11 – and importantly how little he had available to work with – in terms of knowledge and resources. Sure there have been failures, and some of them might have been termed colossal failures in the political atmosphere that prevailed pre 9/11. But his undeniable success at achieving what every American demanded of him above all else at the end of 2001, is that he has kept this country from experiencing a repeat attack. President-elect Obama has big shoes to fill in this regard; and I believe George W Bush’s legacy, like that of Harry Truman, will be subjected to positive re-evaluation in the long term.
Mr. George W Bush’s time has come; and as historians struggle to write the pages that will define his legacy I am overwhelmed by the 20/20 hindsight and short memories being brought to bear on the task by his critics. It is true there is much he probably regrets and might do differently, including using faulty intelligence that ultimately led to war in Iraq, the over-reliance on Cheney and Rumsfeld at the expense of true (military) experts in executing that war and the mishandling Hurricane Katrina at the expense of New Orleans HOWEVER (capitals deliberate)…lets not forget what I personally consider to be the greatest legacy of Bush’s two terms. He and his Administration have prevented another major attack on the USA homeland – and there have been attempts by terrorists to do so. This was the “one big thing he had to do after 9/11” – and much of what has become more recently unpopular, and the focus of condemnation from critics stems from the short memories of those critics- who have forgotten what Bush had to deal with in those terrifying days immediately after 9/11 – and importantly how little he had available to work with – in terms of knowledge and resources. Sure there have been failures, and some of them might have been termed colossal failures in the political atmosphere that prevailed pre 9/11. But his undeniable success at achieving what every American demanded of him above all else at the end of 2001, is that he has kept this country from experiencing a repeat attack. President-elect Obama has big shoes to fill in this regard; and I believe George W Bush’s legacy, like that of Harry Truman, will be subjected to positive re-evaluation in the long term.
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Upsetting the Democrats
You really want to know what would tick off the Democrats.?
Bush should resign now. Then his VP Dick Cheney becomes President. Then he appoints Condoleeza Rice, another Republican, as Vice President. Then Cheney resigns two weeks later and Republican Condoleeza Rice becomes the first BLACK President and the first WOMAN President !!!
I couldn't resist posting this :)
Bush should resign now. Then his VP Dick Cheney becomes President. Then he appoints Condoleeza Rice, another Republican, as Vice President. Then Cheney resigns two weeks later and Republican Condoleeza Rice becomes the first BLACK President and the first WOMAN President !!!
I couldn't resist posting this :)
Loyalty in Politics
As a foreigner living the US, it amazes me just how fickle American politicians and politics can be. But oh so compelling. I'm hooked.
You could have knocked me down with a feather when I heard President-elect Obama had offered the post of Secretary of State to Hillary Clinton. It seems like only yesterday she was telling the world Obama wasn't capable of leading the country...and now she pledges to "give her all" to him to his Adminstration. Being a Centrist myself, I have to say Obama's choices national security are a pleasant surprise, especially James Jones. But I wonder if this talented pool of egos isn't going to be too much for the new president to handle. In particular - in Madame Secretary Clinton's case, Obama surely knows he has hired Bill Clinton as well - which has to be a weighty cause for concern in the new Administration given Bill Clinton's globe-trotting ways on the lecture circuit.
I also wonder about the "loyalty" factor. One of the unwritten (at least I think its unwritten) duties of senior presidential aides, such as those on the national security team, is to take the fall for the President when things don't turn out well. I'm sorry, but I just can't see the Clinton's being prepared to do that for their former arch-rival...and in the difficult days, weeks and months ahead for Madame Secretary Hillary, the opportunities for failure abound. How the "shadow administration" of the Clinton family deals with this loyalty issue will make for more compelling viewing than a new start up season of MASH.
You could have knocked me down with a feather when I heard President-elect Obama had offered the post of Secretary of State to Hillary Clinton. It seems like only yesterday she was telling the world Obama wasn't capable of leading the country...and now she pledges to "give her all" to him to his Adminstration. Being a Centrist myself, I have to say Obama's choices national security are a pleasant surprise, especially James Jones. But I wonder if this talented pool of egos isn't going to be too much for the new president to handle. In particular - in Madame Secretary Clinton's case, Obama surely knows he has hired Bill Clinton as well - which has to be a weighty cause for concern in the new Administration given Bill Clinton's globe-trotting ways on the lecture circuit.
I also wonder about the "loyalty" factor. One of the unwritten (at least I think its unwritten) duties of senior presidential aides, such as those on the national security team, is to take the fall for the President when things don't turn out well. I'm sorry, but I just can't see the Clinton's being prepared to do that for their former arch-rival...and in the difficult days, weeks and months ahead for Madame Secretary Hillary, the opportunities for failure abound. How the "shadow administration" of the Clinton family deals with this loyalty issue will make for more compelling viewing than a new start up season of MASH.
Friday, December 5, 2008
Mumbai
Could it really be? Is it possible that the terrorists who attacked Mumbai recently had an actual strategic objective?. I mean an objective that transcends the limited purpose most of us generally believe terrorists have in mind when committing such acts. This particular attack, reported to have been carried by as few as 10 terrorists, has the potential to have major strategic repurcussions. Not just for India. Not just for Pakistan. But for the world. Not only has it brought India and Pakistan to the brink of war again, but the shift of focus towards the country's eastern borders by Pakistan's military will not doubt provide a welcome relief to the Taliban who were obviously under pressure on the western borders.
I have read and heard many assessments by experts since the attacks took place. There is a tendency by many of them, in my opinion, to underestimate the sophistication of both the strategy and the operation of the attackers. The opening up of another "front" in Pakistan throws a massive spanner into the machinery of the war on terror. It has diverted US attention to preventing an all out war between two nuclear powers, both of whom harbor deep historical hatred and distrust for each other - and both of whom have previously stated their willingness to use nuclear force if necessary.
To quote Sun Tzu..."All warfare is based on deception"... could these terrorists have had such a grand strategy in mind when they stormed ashore in Mumbai? Perhaps their greatest achievement is deceiving us into believing they are incapable of such planning.
I have read and heard many assessments by experts since the attacks took place. There is a tendency by many of them, in my opinion, to underestimate the sophistication of both the strategy and the operation of the attackers. The opening up of another "front" in Pakistan throws a massive spanner into the machinery of the war on terror. It has diverted US attention to preventing an all out war between two nuclear powers, both of whom harbor deep historical hatred and distrust for each other - and both of whom have previously stated their willingness to use nuclear force if necessary.
To quote Sun Tzu..."All warfare is based on deception"... could these terrorists have had such a grand strategy in mind when they stormed ashore in Mumbai? Perhaps their greatest achievement is deceiving us into believing they are incapable of such planning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
