MYANMAR

[texaspackerbacker]

Who said anything about replacing NATO with this League of Extraordinary Nations? It's the God damned worthless UN that would be replaced. NATO was, and to a lesser extent, is a DEFENSE organization--an alliance dominated by America, and consisting of allies choosing to be loyal to us. Yeah, I know the French are in NATO, but they have kinda bounced in and out of participation.

The key is that it is dominated by us--U.S. For the "League" to be successful, it too, would necessarily need to be dominated by America--which should also answer the question of who decides who gets in and stays in.

Venezuela would be the least likely of that group with the current regime, as it is a cancer--an active destroyer of democracy in the western hemisphere. Some of those others may not BE democratic, but they are at least, not actively harming democracy.

If it was up to me, it would be a League of nations standing for good in the world--even if they weren't textbook democracies. That, however, probably would be too easy for the anti-America forces in the media and Democrat Party to shoot down.

[Harlan Huckleby]

it too, would necessarily need to be dominated by America--which should also answer the question of who decides who gets in and stays in.

this is sounding more like the tree fort in Spanky & Our Gang.

[Joemailman]

I understand what Mac is trying to do but take a look at Afghanistan....NATO is made up of our best friends and its like pulling teeth to get commitments from many. It would be nice to see commitment to a group/cause like that come in the way of a national vote in potential member countries. Get the backing of the people not just a short term political leader. He has a tough sell ahead of him considering how many in the world see the USA these days.

I don't think it is McCain's idea, the notion of an alternative U.N. has been percolating for a while in right-wing circles.

You're right that the U.S. is at a low point in prestige. But the U.S. does not have to lead the effort, and it wouldn't be hampered by an archaic "some pigs are more equal than others" Security Council. It would start out symbolic, but in time could do work in parallel with the U.N.

The problem with the U.N., which perhaps you are referring to, is that any one of the permanent members of the security council can scuttle anything the security council wants to do. That needs to be changed. The U.N. still serves a purpose in that it keeps a dialog going between democracies and authoritarian regimes. I don't see how isolating the two makes things better. You talk of the 2 organizations working in parallel ways, but I don't think that's what many supporters of a League Of Democracies have in mind.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I agree the U.N. remains vital. And that many proponents of League of Democracies are simply anti-U.N. I don't care. I think a LoD would have great benefits, no down side. The idea of isolating China and Russia is ridiculous and impossible, so I don't worry if some people think that will result from LoD.

[Harlan Huckleby]

any one of the permanent members of the security council can scuttle anything the security council wants to do. That needs to be changed.

Good luck! Any organization that has three European countries on the executive council, and not Japan, India, Brazil or South Africa is hopelessly archaic. It's not going to change, need to start over.

[texaspackerbacker]

Damn straight, Joe. We don't need no stinking second UN, run by the third world trash of the world.

Harlan's line of crap is pie-in-the-sky similar to the idiocy spewed by his favorite nemesis, Barak Osama (intentional typo).

What is needed is to have a group of follower nations, willing to subordinate themselves to the compassionate wisdom of the United States of America. We could easily do it ourselves, but having a few self-important wannabe nations of old Europe, etc. share the cost, sacrifice, and risk wouldn't be too bad a thing--assuming command and control is firmly in the hands of America.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Harlan's line of crap is pie-in-the-sky similar to the idiocy spewed by his favorite nemesis, Barak Osama (intentional typo).

What is needed is to have a group of follower nations, willing to subordinate themselves to the compassionate wisdom of the United States of America.

Lets pause to ponder what we've uncovered here. You object to the notion that the League of Democracies, an organization founded to honor and promote democracy around the world, should itself be organized democratically.



You put the "nut" into "right wing nut."

[texaspackerbacker]

If the "United" Nations isn't united (thank goodness), then why should the League of Democracies be democratic? Note, I called it the "League of Extraordinary Nations".

Call it whatever euphemism you want to call it, but if it isn't merely a means to get other countries involved in following America's lead in being the force for good in the world, then it's pure bullshit, just like the God damned UN.

I ask you, what is so right wing or nutty about the concept that America is the primary force for good in the world, and that we should NEVER trust command and control, much less sovreignty, to any other nation or group of them?

[Harlan Huckleby]

If the "United" Nations isn't united (thank goodness), then why should the League of Democracies be democratic? Note, I called it the "League of Extraordinary Nations".

What you have in mind is a coalition of the willing, where condition of membership is support of the United States. There is nothing wrong with such an arrangement, but it is not a starting point for building a world-side organization of democracies, and really has nothing to do with what McCain is proposing or what we are talking about.

I'll just mark you down as opposed to creating a League of Democracies.

You are also off base in talking about sovereignty. Maybe it is a concern that would need addressing 50 years from now, but I doubt it.

[texaspackerbacker]

"What you have in mind is a coalition of the willing, where condition of membership is support of the United States. There is nothing wrong with such an arrangement, but it is not a starting point for building a world-side organization of democracies, and really has nothing to do with what McCain is proposing or what we are talking about."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now you've got the right idea, Harlan.

I'd like to think this indeed IS what McCain has in mind. McCain, however, for better or worse, keeps everybody guessing exactly what he means and which side he's on.

As I have said, whether I'm for it or against it depends on exactly what IT is.

You never really answered my question about exactly what you think is right wing or nutty about considering America the primary force for good in the world, and why we shouldn't dominate and lead the civilized nations in promoting goodness, compassion, etc.

[Harlan Huckleby]

You never really answered my question about exactly what you think is right wing or nutty about considering America the primary force for good in the world, and why we shouldn't dominate and lead the civilized nations in promoting goodness, compassion, etc.

I don't believe we should dominate the world. I think this attitude reflects the cold war era, when most of the world was far behind us economically. I think we need to think of other countries as our peers, and that is the coming reality. I have no problem with the U.S. taking a leadership role where it can.

But that's not why I suggested you are nutty. You are nutty because of the extreme, our-way-or-the-highway ideology that you think can form the basis for an international organization. You are not daled into the real world.

[texaspackerbacker]

You never really answered my question about exactly what you think is right wing or nutty about considering America the primary force for good in the world, and why we shouldn't dominate and lead the civilized nations in promoting goodness, compassion, etc.

I don't believe we should dominate the world. I think this attitude reflects the cold war era, when most of the world was far behind us economically. I think we need to think of other countries as our peers, and that is the coming reality. I have no problem with the U.S. taking a leadership role where it can.

But that's not why I suggested you are nutty. You are nutty because of the extreme, our-way-or-the-highway ideology that you think can form the basis for an international organization. You are not daled into the real world.

So given the record of America indisputably preserving civilization at least three times in the last century from three separate and distinct evils that would have driven the world into a new dark age (or are you loony enough not to believe that?)--Nazism, Communism, and radical Islam, and given the abject evil of some of the rest of the world and the wishy-washy spineless attitude of most of the rest of it, you honestly are taking the position that there is something "nutty" about wanting America in charge of accomplishing any good that really needs to be accomplished? Sheesh, who do you want calling the shots? The God damned French? The worthless UN?

You show me a nation that comes close to being our "peer" among the stinking rabble of the world--with the possible exception of Britain, and I'll think of them as our peer--but I assure you, such does not exist.

Harlan, you can't even SPELL "dialed" into the real world--literally.

I haven't accused anybody of being an America-hater since I've been posting in this forum, and I'm not going to start with you, but your words are SO idioctically naive as to approach America-hate--or at very least, gross disrespect.

[Kiwon]

Priorities...new constitution more important than getting aid to 2.5 million people at risk.

Cyclone-wracked Myanmar says constitution approved

Myanmar's junta announced Thursday that voters overwhelmingly backed a pro-military constitution — a move critics claim was an attempt to divert attention from its failure to deliver aid to victims of a devastating cyclone.

State radio said the draft constitution, which critics dismissed as a sham document designed to entrench the military's rule, was approved by 92.4 percent of the 22 million eligible voters. It put voter turnout Saturday at more than 99 percent.

Voting was postponed until May 24 in the Irrawaddy delta and Yangon areas, which were worst hit by Cyclone Nargis. But state radio said the results of the late balloting could not mathematically reverse the constitution's approval.

The constitution announcement came a day after Myanmar's government issued a revised cyclone casualty toll, saying 38,491 were known dead and 27,838 were missing.

But the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies said its estimate put the number of dead between 68,833 and 127,990. U.N. officials have said there could be more than 100,000 dead in the May 2-3 cyclone.

Human Rights watch slammed the timing of the constitution announcement and questioned the accuracy of the results.

David Mathieson, a spokesman in Bangkok, Thailand, said the junta hopes that by announcing the results now it would divert attention away from its handling of the disaster and its refusal to cooperate with the international community.

"It seems strategically timed because you would have thought with how busy they were in cleaning up the cyclone that they never would have had time to count this properly," he said.

With up to 2.5 million people in urgent need of food, water and shelter, aid agencies were preparing or moving in a wide-range of relief supplies including material for temporary shelters, rice, drinking water, kitchen utensils and medicines, including 2,000 anti-snake bite kits. The World Health Organization said an increase in snake bites was feared in coming days.

U.N. agencies and other voluntary groups have been able to reach only 270,000 of the affected people. But instead of accepting foreign help freely, the government continued to issue only a few visas to foreign aid experts, and all but shut them out of the hardest-hit areas.

The regime insists it can handle the disaster on its own — a stance that appears to stem not from its abilities but its deep suspicion of most foreigners, who have frequently criticized its human rights abuses and crackdown on democracy activists.

Critics see the May 9 referendum as another attempt by the junta to stifle democracy. In a country ruled by the feared military since 1962, few would have dared to vote against the constitution. Human rights groups dismissed the vote as a mockery, saying government officials were told to mark the ballots with "Yes" ticks for those who failed to show up at polling stations by 1 p.m.

The junta says the new constitution will lead to a general election in 2010. But it guarantees 25 percent of parliamentary seats to the military and allows the president to hand over all power to the military in a state of emergency — elements critics say contradict the junta's professed commitment to democracy.

The junta's iron-fisted rule has been clearly demonstrated in the way it has dealt with international humanitarian agencies offering their services in the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis.

The Hawaii-based Center for Excellence in Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance says seven U.N. agencies, more than 60 non-governmental organizations and about 45 nations or regional blocs are directly or indirectly involved in the aid operation.

But the junta has limited international staff to Yangon, and has also used police to keep foreigners out of the delta. It did grant approval for a Thai medical team to visit the delta as early as Friday.

Amanda Pitt of the U.N. Office for Humanitarian Affairs said that unless the disaster response was improved, more lives would be lost. "It is clearly inadequate, and we do not want to see a second wave of deaths as a result of that not being scaled up," she said.

Meanwhile, Human Rights Watch also said that countries delivering aid should insist on monitoring to ensure aid reaches the cyclone victims most in need and to prevent the military government from seizing it.

It said it has confirmed an Associated Press report this week that the junta had seized high-protein biscuits supplied by the international community and distributed low-quality, locally produced substitutes to the people.

"Simply dropping aid off at (the) airport under the control of the abusive and ill-equipped ... military will not necessarily help victims of the cyclone," it said.

The junta also said Wednesday it would accept 160 relief workers from India, China, Bangladesh and Thailand, though it was not clear if anyone but the Thais would be permitted to go to the delta.

On Thursday, the U.N. said that an emergency rapid assessment team from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN, would also head into Myanmar within 24 hours to assess the most critical needs.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080515/ap_on_re_as/myanmar

[texaspackerbacker]

I've heard estimate of a death toll of as high as 150,000 in this Myanmar cyclone--28,000 + confirmed as of several days ago.

I looked up the official death toll from Katrina--a storm at least as bad, and it was 1,810.

I just read an article about a country near and dear to me, the Philippines, specifically, the ten worst typhoons there over the last sixty years--presumably, at least some of which were as bad or worse than what hit Myanmar. One of these had an estimated 5-8,000 killed. All of the others had less than 1,000 killed.

The Philippines is not exactly a country with a sterling record of lack of corruption either. However, it has always been solidly pro-American and Christian--and thus, a legitimate member of the community of civilized nations. That is in stark contrast to a third world pro-Communist government in Myanmar which is in effect murdering its own people by indifference and neglect.

Now we have the earthquake in China--Communist China--15,000 dead confirmed, estimates of over 50,000. China does not seem to be deliberately letting people die like in Myanmar, but I have to ask, would a body count like that be allowed to occur here? Not unless the circumstances were far worse.

An 8.1 Richter Scale quake (compared to 7.9 in China) killed 10,000 in Mexico City in 1985in a more densely populated area--a huge number, but way under the China toll.

Leftists, etc. get all bent out of shape when I speak of superiority of America, the American Way, etc. Well, the evidence is right there, not only with this cyclone, but with dozens of indisputable events every year.

[Harlan Huckleby]

You show me a nation that comes close to being our "peer" among the stinking rabble of the world--with the possible exception of Britain, and I'll think of them as our peer--but I assure you, such does not exist.

It's not a problem that you think that America and its ways are far superior to those of, say, Brazil and India.

The disconnect from reality comes where you think we can treat other countries as subordinates, and this will somehow work out OK.

Brazilians and Indians are proud people too, and increasingly successful. For instance, India has beat-us out to be the brains behind China's exploding economy, they do the computer programming and business accounting for China. Brazil has built an entire auto-industry around 100% ethanol-fueled cars. These are no longer little brown people that we can lead around by the nose.