söndag 29 januari 2012
Substancial patience: Megabombs and antisemitism
Substancial patience: Megabombs and antisemitism: Anyone here who this week questioned which clever mind came up with the idea of putting the world's strongest bomb into the hands of trigger...
Megabombs and antisemitism
Anyone here who this week questioned which clever mind came up with the idea of putting the world's strongest bomb into the hands of trigger-happy israelian government?! I read an article this week stating that the megabomb (MOP) is not considered to be strong enough, that the United States government asks for another 82 million USD to build a bigger, stronger, deadlier bomb to be able to destroy supposed nuclear plants hidden in bunkers deep down in the iranian desert's ground. And not enough with these fabolous news. There even seem to be rumors circulating that the USA could put the bomb into israelian hands to avoid being the one doing the dirty job. Dirty job? We are talking about a bomb with a weight of 14 tons and that detonates 60 meters under the ground. Imagine the total destruction, imagine the impact on local civilization and imagine the effect on world poltics and peace.
Is this not the simple fact that USA is building bombs but the fact that they might wrap them into some gift wrap and give them away to a nation that is at war with several countries and in the middle of a region with, and even direct neighbour of, several instabil governments as i.e. Syria. And just to make it even more complicated, those instabil countries are the once that Israel is at war with. So do the maths... is it or is it not an act of total crazyness to even consider giving away weapons of mass destruction to this region? If the reason is the security of Israel's safety, one should think about how the storage of even more and stronger weapon can assist in bringing back the feeling of safety and calm when the neighbours around the very same country become more and more insecure and nervous.
Are we back at the edge of a cold war? Is the new archenemy of the Western Governments, and espescially the USA, now located in the middle east instead of Russia? Maybe they just did not want to change the slogans too much. The enemy is still in the east... but not as far away as it was just 2 decades ago.
At the same time it is the memory day of the holocaust today and pictures and articles are spread all over the world to remind the people of all the happenings during world war ÌI. Yes, I agree, it was awful, the murdering of millions of jews, handicapped and disabled, gypsies, left wing politicians, and other enemies of the state was and is a historical low point of humanity. As is the almost total extinction of the Armenians by the Turks, the slaughtering of libyans by the Italians, the genocide of Indians in the USA and not to forget the ongoing fatal dispatch of Palestinians by Israel. Point is: yes it is horrible, but it seems as if the human kind is unable to learn.
Why would the israelian government otherwise act as it does against Palestina and its habitants? Should not Israelians be the first to stand against all kind of racism and genocide? Should not Israel be the country to represent brotherhood and fight against ignorance? Instead history is keeping repeating itself. Hatred is giving birth to hatred, children are raised in ignorance and brought up hating their neighbours. Governments support all kind of terrorism, both through forbidden channels but even through their very own politics. Will we never learn?
Is this not the simple fact that USA is building bombs but the fact that they might wrap them into some gift wrap and give them away to a nation that is at war with several countries and in the middle of a region with, and even direct neighbour of, several instabil governments as i.e. Syria. And just to make it even more complicated, those instabil countries are the once that Israel is at war with. So do the maths... is it or is it not an act of total crazyness to even consider giving away weapons of mass destruction to this region? If the reason is the security of Israel's safety, one should think about how the storage of even more and stronger weapon can assist in bringing back the feeling of safety and calm when the neighbours around the very same country become more and more insecure and nervous.
Are we back at the edge of a cold war? Is the new archenemy of the Western Governments, and espescially the USA, now located in the middle east instead of Russia? Maybe they just did not want to change the slogans too much. The enemy is still in the east... but not as far away as it was just 2 decades ago.
At the same time it is the memory day of the holocaust today and pictures and articles are spread all over the world to remind the people of all the happenings during world war ÌI. Yes, I agree, it was awful, the murdering of millions of jews, handicapped and disabled, gypsies, left wing politicians, and other enemies of the state was and is a historical low point of humanity. As is the almost total extinction of the Armenians by the Turks, the slaughtering of libyans by the Italians, the genocide of Indians in the USA and not to forget the ongoing fatal dispatch of Palestinians by Israel. Point is: yes it is horrible, but it seems as if the human kind is unable to learn.
Why would the israelian government otherwise act as it does against Palestina and its habitants? Should not Israelians be the first to stand against all kind of racism and genocide? Should not Israel be the country to represent brotherhood and fight against ignorance? Instead history is keeping repeating itself. Hatred is giving birth to hatred, children are raised in ignorance and brought up hating their neighbours. Governments support all kind of terrorism, both through forbidden channels but even through their very own politics. Will we never learn?
torsdag 19 januari 2012
Substancial patience: Democracy - a right for everyone?
Substancial patience: Democracy - a right for everyone?: It has been a while since my latest post... so many things are happening around the world and espescially in the middle-east, that I was (an...
Democracy - a right for everyone?
It has been a while since my latest post... so many things are happening around the world and espescially in the middle-east, that I was (and still am) kind of paralyzed. I have difficulties to put in words, all the thoughts that go around in my mind. Still, I will try, I will write, I want to awake new discussions and thoughts. There are no limits for what the human mind can achieve, measured in amount of thoughts and feelings...
The arabic spring has grown into summer, autumn and winter. Democracy has reached northern africa and it is working its way up to Asia and the middle-east. Syria is still struggling, fighting on the edge of civil-war. Some say the Syrian people want democracy, some say Syrian people are yearning for a shift of the presidency. Others say that all of the fights, the pictures we see every day in media are just an illusion, shown by western governments to destable the country and its strong leadership.
Yes, I do agree, that many arabic cities are looking alike. there is no evidence assuring that the pictures we see really are taken in Syria. I do agree, taht I get news from Syria, saying that everything is as usual: schools are open, shops and coffeeshops are full with visitors and everyday life just goes on as normal. At the other hand I hear stories of refugees, people who foten have been hurt by the Syrian regim for the greater purpose of having everything as usual.... The country and its people seem to be schizophrenic, fighting in one town, when everything is as usual just a couple of miles from the very same place. And I wonder.... who is interested in implementing democracy? Who is interested in destabilizing the middle-east? What is on stake?
Could it be that the wrong questions are asked? Should we not ask what democracy is all about? In the west we always propagate for the greatness of democracy, democracy meaning be able to elect our own leaders. By definition the word democracy in its purest or most ideal form would be a society in which all adult citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. This of course is impossible as it would stop all kind of action in a countries politics and economics. Still, this should mean that democracy should be present not only for the once who want to elect their leards but even for those who want to hold on to their old ways of being led.
Please do not mnisunderstand me, in my opinion democracy stands for so much more as i.e. for equality of gender, race and sexuality, freedom of speech and right to make my own choices. But this is also the problem of the Syrian situation: a democracy as by western standards is most likely leading to an islamization of the government and the society. An islamization in a multi-religious country as Syria can subsequent lead to many different problems as the opression of other religions and the tyrannisation of other cultural groups and dissidents. I can see no good in blending religion and politics! And I can not see that there will be any poisitve outcome from democratical elections. Sorry...
Syrian interest should stand upfront, as should the right of the woman and dissidents. If an election only leads to new terms of oppression, one should look for new ways, own ways of implementing democray. Hopefully it is not too late to find an agreement throughout the Syrian people that will protect Alawits (president's religion) from being slaughtered, Christians and Jews from being oppressed and the poor and illiterate to reach enlightenment. For the sake of freedom and equality!
The arabic spring has grown into summer, autumn and winter. Democracy has reached northern africa and it is working its way up to Asia and the middle-east. Syria is still struggling, fighting on the edge of civil-war. Some say the Syrian people want democracy, some say Syrian people are yearning for a shift of the presidency. Others say that all of the fights, the pictures we see every day in media are just an illusion, shown by western governments to destable the country and its strong leadership.
Yes, I do agree, that many arabic cities are looking alike. there is no evidence assuring that the pictures we see really are taken in Syria. I do agree, taht I get news from Syria, saying that everything is as usual: schools are open, shops and coffeeshops are full with visitors and everyday life just goes on as normal. At the other hand I hear stories of refugees, people who foten have been hurt by the Syrian regim for the greater purpose of having everything as usual.... The country and its people seem to be schizophrenic, fighting in one town, when everything is as usual just a couple of miles from the very same place. And I wonder.... who is interested in implementing democracy? Who is interested in destabilizing the middle-east? What is on stake?
Could it be that the wrong questions are asked? Should we not ask what democracy is all about? In the west we always propagate for the greatness of democracy, democracy meaning be able to elect our own leaders. By definition the word democracy in its purest or most ideal form would be a society in which all adult citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. This of course is impossible as it would stop all kind of action in a countries politics and economics. Still, this should mean that democracy should be present not only for the once who want to elect their leards but even for those who want to hold on to their old ways of being led.
Please do not mnisunderstand me, in my opinion democracy stands for so much more as i.e. for equality of gender, race and sexuality, freedom of speech and right to make my own choices. But this is also the problem of the Syrian situation: a democracy as by western standards is most likely leading to an islamization of the government and the society. An islamization in a multi-religious country as Syria can subsequent lead to many different problems as the opression of other religions and the tyrannisation of other cultural groups and dissidents. I can see no good in blending religion and politics! And I can not see that there will be any poisitve outcome from democratical elections. Sorry...
Syrian interest should stand upfront, as should the right of the woman and dissidents. If an election only leads to new terms of oppression, one should look for new ways, own ways of implementing democray. Hopefully it is not too late to find an agreement throughout the Syrian people that will protect Alawits (president's religion) from being slaughtered, Christians and Jews from being oppressed and the poor and illiterate to reach enlightenment. For the sake of freedom and equality!
tisdag 4 oktober 2011
Substancial patience: War or no war - that is the question
Substancial patience: War or no war - that is the quesiton: Dear friends: I am totally confused about the happenings in the middle-east, especially Syria. My former angryness about family-members and ...
War or no war - that is the quesiton
Dear friends: I am totally confused about the happenings in the middle-east, especially Syria. My former angryness about family-members and friends travelling to Syria changed into total perplexity in my head, my brain, my inner common sense... Media tells us a story about Syria, a country on the edge of civilwar. The once coming back from holidays in Syria and even the once living there and who come here to Sweden to visit family and friends tell us that everything is calm, that there are a couple of clashes between police and a couple of demonstrators but that the majority of people just want peace to come back.
So now, there we have media's war-scenes on one side and residents and visitors tellings on the other. Who shall we believe, which story shows us the real happenings, what does the Syrian people actually want to happen?
If you read the paper's stories about the opposition's group, about the people behind the scenes, who now are busy lobbying throughout the world for support, you will see arabic names, assyrian names all with different background with one thing in common: they are actually not living in Syria... So why trust in people that have emigrated from their country, sometimes many years ago, and who now see their chance to get a cut out of the political power that will be distributed if Al Assad decides to leave. Why trust in people who most probably will look for their very own benefit at first? Why trust in people living outside their own country and who now want to be engaged? I understand that some of opposition outside the country had political reasons for their emigration but who will be able to decide which one has the very good of the country in mind and which do not?
A revolution, the fight for democratic freedom, should come from the people and not from outsiders. Otherwise there will be an imminent risk that the revolution will end in chaos and civil war as most of the people do not understand the need and urge for democracy. On this point I want to repeat one thing that I wrote once a couple of months ago: democracy has to be taught, understood and wanted to be genuin. Otherwise the question is and willl be: who is the big winner?
So now, there we have media's war-scenes on one side and residents and visitors tellings on the other. Who shall we believe, which story shows us the real happenings, what does the Syrian people actually want to happen?
If you read the paper's stories about the opposition's group, about the people behind the scenes, who now are busy lobbying throughout the world for support, you will see arabic names, assyrian names all with different background with one thing in common: they are actually not living in Syria... So why trust in people that have emigrated from their country, sometimes many years ago, and who now see their chance to get a cut out of the political power that will be distributed if Al Assad decides to leave. Why trust in people who most probably will look for their very own benefit at first? Why trust in people living outside their own country and who now want to be engaged? I understand that some of opposition outside the country had political reasons for their emigration but who will be able to decide which one has the very good of the country in mind and which do not?
A revolution, the fight for democratic freedom, should come from the people and not from outsiders. Otherwise there will be an imminent risk that the revolution will end in chaos and civil war as most of the people do not understand the need and urge for democracy. On this point I want to repeat one thing that I wrote once a couple of months ago: democracy has to be taught, understood and wanted to be genuin. Otherwise the question is and willl be: who is the big winner?
tisdag 20 september 2011
Greece - or why a country may not become bankrupt
The troj, ECB, EU and IMF, have set their standards: Greece will not receive any more money until they are convincened of Greece's budgetplans and stimulation package in action. That will bring Greece even a little closer to state-bankruptcy and who knows, maybe this is the way to go...
I have followed Greece's financial development throughout a couple of years thanks to my sister who actually is living there. Budget tightening hits the people of Greece and espescially the once who already are suffering. The richest in Greece have successfully avoided paying taxes and the country is now suffering from interest payments for both old and, even worth, new loans. Loans that financed a huge administrative sector and a non-existing industry. Where did the money go? Well, I wrote once a couple of months ago about the construction of the greek highway. It took the country more than 30 years to build it, during which the government got paid through road taxes, and still: a loan was needed to finish construction.... where did the money go? No one knows.
Now, the government is creeping on its bare knees, the heavy weight of internationally financed loans on its shoulders. So, why not apply for bankruptcy? Why not letting it all go and try to restart economics? A country can not, by definition, become bankcrupt. Yes, it would initially lead to higher interest rates, currency depreciation and become more difficult to sign on new loans. But out of most depressions, comes something good. A bankruptcy would acutally make international lenders cut loans, implying lower interest payments. This could actually give Greece the possibility to catch some breath and to start all over again. So why not?
I think, one has to look at who will loose most if a bankruptcy would occur, to be able to find an explanation. The once who loose most if greek loans are cut, are banks throughout the world, espescially in other EU-countries i.e. Germany and France. German economic gains today more thanks to interest payments made by Greece, than it loses. A deflation of greek loans would cause the need of big depreciation in those bank's receivable ledgers, prompting an even bigger economical disaster throughout Europe. Please do not forget that european banks already are on the step of bankruptcy themselves and that it took the whole force of big governments as Germany to secure the survival of some of the world's oldest banks, such as Deutsche Bank. So what could happen then?
Well, nightmare scenario is the bankruptcy of a country, lead by financial and economical earthquake shaking both Greece, EU and even the world's market in a situation when stability is needed to outride the effects of the latest depression. Upsides? Of course, in a bright pink world, greek loans would be cut, followed by lower interest payments and a more stable economical situation in Greece and even the EU, as financial markets could focus on transactions instead of worrying about the question of one country's survival. One thing is for sure: reality will catch up with both Greece and EU and when bankruptcy no longer can be avoided, we will find new ways to go and the thought behind the european market will be tested for real. Will the European Union survive? It is all written in the stars.... both on the flag and in the sky.
I have followed Greece's financial development throughout a couple of years thanks to my sister who actually is living there. Budget tightening hits the people of Greece and espescially the once who already are suffering. The richest in Greece have successfully avoided paying taxes and the country is now suffering from interest payments for both old and, even worth, new loans. Loans that financed a huge administrative sector and a non-existing industry. Where did the money go? Well, I wrote once a couple of months ago about the construction of the greek highway. It took the country more than 30 years to build it, during which the government got paid through road taxes, and still: a loan was needed to finish construction.... where did the money go? No one knows.
Now, the government is creeping on its bare knees, the heavy weight of internationally financed loans on its shoulders. So, why not apply for bankruptcy? Why not letting it all go and try to restart economics? A country can not, by definition, become bankcrupt. Yes, it would initially lead to higher interest rates, currency depreciation and become more difficult to sign on new loans. But out of most depressions, comes something good. A bankruptcy would acutally make international lenders cut loans, implying lower interest payments. This could actually give Greece the possibility to catch some breath and to start all over again. So why not?
I think, one has to look at who will loose most if a bankruptcy would occur, to be able to find an explanation. The once who loose most if greek loans are cut, are banks throughout the world, espescially in other EU-countries i.e. Germany and France. German economic gains today more thanks to interest payments made by Greece, than it loses. A deflation of greek loans would cause the need of big depreciation in those bank's receivable ledgers, prompting an even bigger economical disaster throughout Europe. Please do not forget that european banks already are on the step of bankruptcy themselves and that it took the whole force of big governments as Germany to secure the survival of some of the world's oldest banks, such as Deutsche Bank. So what could happen then?
Well, nightmare scenario is the bankruptcy of a country, lead by financial and economical earthquake shaking both Greece, EU and even the world's market in a situation when stability is needed to outride the effects of the latest depression. Upsides? Of course, in a bright pink world, greek loans would be cut, followed by lower interest payments and a more stable economical situation in Greece and even the EU, as financial markets could focus on transactions instead of worrying about the question of one country's survival. One thing is for sure: reality will catch up with both Greece and EU and when bankruptcy no longer can be avoided, we will find new ways to go and the thought behind the european market will be tested for real. Will the European Union survive? It is all written in the stars.... both on the flag and in the sky.
Prenumerera på:
Inlägg (Atom)