Day 219- The coming nuclear holocaust

Without a doubt the best thing I've ever seen Rick Larsen do:



Oh Rick, I take back (almost) every thing I said about your spinelessness in 2006. Now if only you could take back your vote on the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act.

Dear Mr. President,

Just last night two friends and I were debating the respective cases for Kim Jong Il or President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad being the best crazy dictator. Today I feel pretty guilty for not even mentioning Fidel Castro, but even when accusing you of leading the world toward nuclear holocaust, he sounds considerably more reasonable than the leaders of either North Korea or Iran. Castro warns that it is up to Cuba and other nations to convince the US not to use the bomb.

Asked by one parliamentarian if Obama would be capable of starting a nuclear war, Castro replied, "No, not if we persuade him not to." (from Jpost)

The sentiments in this statement are hopeful and even encouraging. While I may cling to my faith that you are not in fact trying to start a global nuclear war, I'm glad to know that Castro at least has the optimism to believe that you can be talked out of it. That your better angels might be reasoned with, even by nations of less geo-political power. Considering that Glenn Beck recently compared America under your administration to the Planet of the Apes, I think that Castro is actually sounding more reasonable than much of the FOX news staff.

For the first time since we dropped the bomb on Hiroshima, the US is participating in the memorial service. To me, this is a moving symbol of the healing that has occurred since the war's end; a sign, even, of your administration's commitment to a future without nuclear weapons. I didn't realize this might be controversial. FOX posed this issue to readers on its website:

The U.S., for the first time, is sending an official delegation to Friday's Hiroshima anniversary ceremonies in Japan. There is concern that this change in longstanding policy could be interpreted as an apology. Do you think the U.S. should send this delegation?

Possible answers to this question are:

Yes -- It's been 65 years, and it's time to heal old wounds.
No -- America has nothing to apologize for, and this is completely inappropriate.
Not sure, but I'm curious, why now?
Other (post a comment)

The poll is not scientific by any stretch, but 85% of almost 25,000 responses were "No -- America has nothing to apologize for, and this is completely inappropriate." This actually frightens me more than Iran, North Korea and Cuba combined. Our inability to apologize for the terrible things we have done, even decades later, when it doesn't hurt any one or cost us anything, astounds me. The war with Japan was complicated and horrific for both sides- I would never make the argument that I know, for sure, that President Truman made the wrong call. Using the atomic bomb may have ended the war and ultimately saved lives. But it was still an awful, world-altering thing to do. The terrible and lingering civilian toll of that decision is still worth apologizing for. Who does an apology harm? After 65 years, can't we just be satisfied that we won? I don't understand the mentality that says victory at war excuses, justifies or exempts us from apology for the means by which we achieved that victory.

So Fidel Castro may have misjudged your own hunger for war, but I am truly afraid he has not misjudged the American people's. Far more ridiculous than hating Paul the psychic octopus or dressing like Elvis or even an old man desperately clinging to the illusion of his own significance, our own iron-clad belief in the righteousness of America's conduct is the most dangerous delusion of all. We have made mistakes. We will make more. People will die, and suffer needlessly because of this. It is the cost of being a global power, and if we cannot summon the humanity to empathize and apologize and admit our own culpability, we don't deserve this kind of power any more than Castro. Thankfully, Mr. President, I think that you are a calmer American leader than the world is used to, and I am grateful that we are represented to the world more reasonably than many on the right deserve.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey

Day 123-Predators

Dear Mr. President,

I enjoyed watching your jokes at the correspondent's dinner. While I think that Jay Leno was a poor choice, I respect that other people may have different tastes than mine. I assumed that, with a major environment crisis in the Gulf, a foiled car bomb in New York, an election imminent in the UK, several contentious state primaries, and the legislation aimed at the torment of pregnant women passed recently in Oklahoma, people would have more important things to talk about than the jokes you told at dinner. But I was wrong. (This is sort of your fault. If you hadn't encouraged me to embrace the spirit of civility by reading the Drudge Report, I'd never have found out about this.)

Anyway, it seems that some people feel that your Jonas Brothers/Predator drone joke wasn't really a laughing matter, considering the number of people even less threatening than the Jonas Brothers who are actually killed by these weapons every year. I'm a big fan of the "politically correct" and even I don't get this. Back in high school my dad used to joke about his gun collection/police buddies/access to criminal background checks to any boy who wanted to date me. It's lame dad humor. Every dad jokes about that, right? No one believes you're actually using the Predator drone as your own personal play-toy, right? I think the wars we're waging abroad are awful, morally baseless and catastrophically unfair, but I think getting upset over people actually getting killed is a far more useful way to spend one's emotional energy than to get upset over a joke that (no offense) was certainly not an original one.

Speaking of fatherly humor, I read some remarks by the First Lady about your daughter Malia's concern for saving the tiger population. I thought you should know that you're getting outpaced by Russia and Iran on this issue, or at least missing out on the heads of state big cat exchange. I'm sure Malia would agree with me that getting a Persian Leopard would be pretty freaking cool, so maybe you and Ahmadinejad could work through your differences and get Bo a new playmate? I'm sure the question "Dad, why can't you be more like Vladimir Putin?" is not one you want to hear over dinner.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey

Day 39- Iran

Dear Mr. President,

I'm not a fan of President Ahmadinejad. I find his policies infuriating and his rhetoric dangerous. I have strong doubts, if not outright disbelief, in the legitimacy of the election that empowered him. I'm also not a fan of nuclear weapons. I think it's probably a good idea to try to prevent, whenever possible, their creation and use. So, while I clearly agree that it is essential to keep Iran from becoming a nuclear power, I don't think you're going about it the right way.

I'll admit straightaway that my foreign policy knowledge doesn't live in the same galaxy as your own. You probably know better. But from the perspective of one who doesn't get daily intelligence briefings, let me just say that I think we could get more success with a different approach. For one thing, it's foolish to pretend that Israel isn't already or at least very close to being a nuclear power itself. Not only does this make our anti-proliferation stand sort of a joke, it overlooks a very real threat to Iran. Israel may be our ally, but they demonstrate, year after year, their willingness to fight threats, real and otherwise, by punishing civilian populations. The people of Gaza, Al-Khalil, and Beirut have experienced this first-hand. The people of Iran may wonder if they are next.

Also, the more we isolate Iran, the more popular support Ahmadinejad will have to go nuclear. For one thing, The Bomb can be seen as the only defense against an alliance of so many other nuclear powers. Wouldn't it make more sense to bring Iran to the table? To work with them directly instead of reinforcing the idea that the whole world opposes them? If Ahmadinejad and his ilk didn't have America and Israel to vilify, where would they generate the fear they need to stay in power?

Maybe it's hopelessly naive, but I honestly think that we'll make more progress by treating Iran as an ally- and expecting the Iranian government to behave accordingly, both with regards to nuclear power and human rights- than by more sanctions and isolation.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey