President Obama has warned Russia that invading a sovereign nation is a violation of international law that will not be tolerated. He has announced various economic and other sanctions. Clearly the United States would never have anything to do with anything like that.
Sovereignty
Ted Rall
Ted Rall is a syndicated political cartoonist for Andrews McMeel Syndication and WhoWhatWhy.org and Counterpoint. He is a contributor to Centerclip and co-host of "The Final Countdown" talk show on Radio Sputnik. He is a graphic novelist and author of many books of art and prose, and an occasional war correspondent. He is, recently, the author of the graphic novel "2024: Revisited."
25 Comments. Leave new
Cheneybush amputated our leg to stand on when it invaded Iraq.
And O’Bomber amputated the remaining leg.
I can’t believe how short the memories of so many Americans have become. If they could remember half the bullcrap that come from the mouths of their leadership they would die laughing.
And not have to wait for remedial education by excellent cartoons from Ted
Secretary of State John Kerry: “I can’t imagine that an occupation of another country is something that appeals to a people who are trying to reach out to the world, and particularly if it involves violence.”
Jimmy Kimmel: “Yeah, I mean we stopped doing that like – last month!”
😀
Or was that Jimmy Fallon??? 😀
OMFG. Flawless! My favorite toon in sooo long!!! Well played, sir. 🙂
Thank you Jack. Much appreciated.
You tell me. How can Obama spount crap like this when he knows that we have done the same thing many times ourselves? Does he really think the American public is that clueless or has such a short memory? – or does he think that if he repeats something enough that it will become true?
They count on the general disinterest in foreign affairs and self-absorbed jingoist nature of so many USAians. Although I may be wrong about the jingoism, people may just not care period. Not about them, all this posturing.
And sovereignty sure don’t apply to those countries who harbor economically important quantities of OUR
______________ (insert name of dwindling natural resource here.)
(Raising hand and waving excitedly) I know! I know! The answer is: “SUNLIGHT!!!!”
😀
With only a few distinct exceptions (Israel and Taiwan, for example) the only countries whose sovereignty matters are those who were already listed as nation-states in 1900….excepting of course if said country has the military strength to defend itself….or if it gets in our way….
Actually, if Zionland has its way, there will only be two capital cities left on Earth after YHWH’s grand conquest, and that will be the Capital of the West, (New York), and the Capital of the East (Jerusalem).
Go ahead, tell me that J-Street doesn’t control New York.
DanD
An incomplete list of the countries in which the US has «intervened militarily» has been compiled by Dr Zoltan Grossman : http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/interventions.html. It goes back to 1890, but since these interventions are listed in chronological order, one can easily ascertain which ones have occurred after the close of WW II. But that’s alright, of course, for those violations of the territory of sovereign states were no doubt all done to promote «democracy» and protect «human rights»….
Henri
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdimK1onR4o
Ted….Sovereignty is…..Sovereignty…..you understand? It’s like….Insoverenity…..if you go to the Reservation, you’ve been Soverized…..you get a PhD in Soveravication!!!!! You understand? I don’t think you understand…..
International law is not law…it’s international good manners….and it ultimately only matters in prosecuting the losers of a conflict.
Ted has a very good article which explains things, here:
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/03/04-0
Danke für den Link, Herr Lehrer ! Ted here points out some salient facts which should be more widely known and acknowledged in North America and Europe. Perhaps you could forward it to Ms Clinton,, who seems to find it appropriate to compare Mr Putin to a certain Adolf Hitler, although I suspect that she, like Mr Obama, is far more interested in taking advantage of the US sponsored coup d’état in Kiev to transmogrify the Russian naval base in Sevastopol to a US base analogous to «Camp Bond Steel» in Kosovo….
Henri
I wish I had either Bill’s or Hillary’s contact information. I think they “Unfriended” me! 😀
Derlehrer, I am given to understand that this pair are not without a certain streak of vindictiveness – but on the other hand, you know them better than I do….
Henri
@ mhenriday –
I’m sure that everyone has a “certain streak of vindictiveness” and maybe they more than others – but maybe not. They certainly have the power to make their displeasure known to offenders! 🙂
.
I drove Hillary’s press corp to the election celebration in North Little Rock, and heard some stories that I haven’t yet forgotten!
.
I still wish I had closer contact to them and better communicative possibilities.
I have to agree with that. Hell, I have a certain streak of vindictive this myself. Certainly anyone who works in politics does, and I don’t really know how they could without one.
My experience in dealing with psychiatric patients tells me that we all, as derlehrer and Ted note, indeed have tendencies towards vindictiveness ; however, basing government policy on a sense of personal injury does not, as history informs us, generally lead to good decisions. This is what worries me about the prospect of Ms Clinton becoming US president ; I should not like to see her answering that proverbial telephone call at 3 AM, even if – or perhaps especially if – it did not concern Bill’s latest escapade….
Henri
@ mhenriday –
I saw nothing in your 1st post that intimated
“… basing government policy on a sense of personal injury….”
Even more lacking is the basis for your suggestion that “… history informs us [it] generally [does not] lead to good decisions.”
What history might that be?
Derlehrer, I’m not quite certain what you’re after when you write that « saw nothing in your 1st post that intimated “… basing government policy on a sense of personal injury….”» ; did you mean that I had provided no evidence that Ms Clinton would do so in the event she were to become US president ? If so, I confess to possessing no such evidence, which by the nature of things can only be provided post festum ; this is simply a judgement based upon what I have read about her character. As I said, you know her better than I do, and I may be entirely off base. But I should prefer not to take the risk….
With regard to your second point, I confess myself surprised ; surely you are aware of situations in which policy has been determined by a leader’s sense of personal injury, with deleterious consequences. To take one example : it is said that one of the motives for George Walker Bush’s decision to go to war against Iraq was his belief that Saddam Hussein had tried to assassinate his (GWB’s) father. While I do not believe that this was the main reason those leading the US went to war on Iraq – a course of action decided upon long before the younger Bush was selected by the US Supreme Court as US president – such a belief may well have played a role in convincing the «Decider» to sign off on the war. As Sun Wu noted some two and a half millennia ago, «主不可以怒兴军，將不可以慍攻战», i e, «a ruler must not launch his military in a fit of anger, nor a general launch an attack in a fit of pique»….
Henri
@ mhenriday –
1) I simply meant that it seemed that horses had been switched in the middle of the stream and a tangential tack was taken which differed from your initial point.
2) I was discussing U.S. politics in asking for the history to which you referred.
(Note: To suggest that *GWB* was acting out of “personal injury” is a bit far-fetched, don’t you think?)
All-in-all, I’m enjoyed the discussion and respect your contributions.
😉
The West (AKA USA) does not respect those who would resort to elections to change governments. See how little elections mean in the our own USA?
No, the West has a history of respecting violence, as exemplified by Obama’s meeting in Washington with the newly anointed leadership in Kiev, while calling next Sunday’s vote on the future of Crimea’s self determination invalid before it even takes place.
This brings to mind the pre-invasion Vietnam elections, cancelled because they could not be controlled, and a predetermined result in favor of the US had no chance of happening. What else could the City on the Hill, the light of democracy to the world, do but to bomb then into the next world?