Release and Surrender

US Navy Seals snipers killed three Somali pirates to rescue American ship captain Richard Phillips this past Sunday. 

While browsing comments on a NY Times article about the recent incident I came across mixed views of the military action. The majority of commenters praised the snipers and wished the captain well. A good deal of the comments were nationalistic shouts that bordered on bloodlust and called for increased military presence off the coast of Somalia. 

However, a very small percentage of the comments were from people who did not think the military action was necessary. 

Daisy from Brooklyn commented that "we have simply murdered three people who had not dome the same to the Captain" and that she could "never applaud killings." Other comments alluded to the lopsided nature of the standoff (US Navy vs. raggedy lifeboat) and the fact that the pirates are only concerned with money and have never actually harmed any of their hostages in the past.

Imagine if your child had his/her money taken every single day by a bully at school. You go to the school and demand that the extortion end immediately. But, the principal says the bullying is allowed because your child has never been hurt. As long as the bully doesn't harm your child it's okay to have the money stolen. 

The above analogy may oversimplify the situation because there is a lot more going on behind the scenes. You have to empathize with the Somali kids who see no other option than crime to make ends meet. A young man's career choices are severely limited in the regions of Somalia where pirates abound. There is information that suggests the pirates use some of the ransom money and stolen cargo to feed hungry Somalian civilians. There is probably some profound reason why the bully is taking your child's money also. But you don't want to hear anything about that when you are responsible for your child's well-being. Likewise, the US (Barack Obama) had to make a decision here. 

The pirates have been successful in hijacking commercial ships for millions of dollars in ransom for many years now. They had to draw the line somewhere though. And the line was drawn once they saw the US flag waving on the Maersk Alabama ship. Not because the US is better than other nations. But simply because the pirates should understand US history and foreign policy. All of the hijacking made the pirates brazen and arrogant. They never thought there would be any retaliation and money would continually flow from insurance company coffers while the ransom game remained status quo. The United States doesn't play these games. Especially not with the world watching. 

I don't want to see anyone get killed. Especially not teenagers, because the three Somalis ranged in age from 17 to 19. But, if nothing else, people have to realize the history of the US when it comes to military action. As we have recently seen in Iraq, the US will launch a preemptive strike for no reason at all. In this particular situation, FBI negotiatiors were brought in to control the talks with the pirates. The pirates repeatedly tried to secure a "ransom" and were repeatedly told to release the captain and surrender themselves. There is no negotiation.  

Response to NY Times Article: No More Excuses?

Charles Blow, op-ed columnist for the NY Times, wrote an interesting piece about black children's opportunities in America in the wake of Obama's election. Check it out here. And then read my response below:

Let's take it easy on Rep. Clyburn.

I am a fifth grade teacher. I have been telling my kids the same thing since Obama was elected last year. You have no more excuses. I will continue to tell them that until they leave my class in June. I have told all of my students to leave their excuses at the door even before I knew who Barack Obama was. Is the alternative to tell them that they "should" have excuses? My job as a teacher is to make sure that they succeed in life. I am responsible for giving them the tools to move forward. Obama is a perfect symbol of what they can be.

Is every student in my class going to succeed. No. I see exactly what goes on in the children's home lives. It's sad. Not all of the situations, but too many of them. Parenting and opportunity are the key and Mr. Blow is spot on with that assessment. However, opportunity is not afforded to everyone. If everyone was successful then "success" would have no meaning. If everyone was an employer then there would be no employees. And that's where the institutional aspect of opportunity begins to rear its head. This world is not designed for everyone to achieve. Someone always has to be at the bottom while others stay on top.

I know all of this and I will still tell my students to "have no excuses". They know better than anyone else how hard their lives are.

The Celebrity You Don't Know

At first, Barack Obama was a celebrity. But now, you don't know Barack Obama. This is the new attack strategy that was fed by McCain's camp and is being disseminated by the media.

Well, which one is it? Is Obama a celebrity or don't we know him?

There's a lapse in logic here. Let's look at the two celebrities that were compared to Obama in the attempt to humiliate and emasculate him. Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. Two reckless white girls who are in the news all the time for the most scandalous affairs money will allow. The main point is that they are "in the news all the time."

The media frames our perceptions of issues through repetitious bombardment of images and ideas. The average American wouldn't tell you that they don't know Britney Spears. People have formed some opinion of her, good or bad, and she has been co-opted as part of the mainstream culture. The same with Paris Hilton, O.J. Simpson, Oprah, Martha Stewart, and Ronald McDonald.

It would obviously be exaggerating and misleading to say that we know Paris Hilton like she was our best friend. To say that you know a celebrity is just a way of saying "I know about them" or "I have an idea of what that person is about." Well, Barack Obama is in the news all the time. His life is being exposed and dissected in every conceivable way. I'm pretty sure the average person could tell you a lot about Obama - good or bad. So, don't they know him?

As a matter of fact, in a recent CBS/NY Times poll, 55% of the surveyed pool said that they identified with Obama. McCain received 41%.

However, this aspect of the debate is not so relevant in the media. It seems to be taken for granted that the majority of Americans relate to McCain more. Just by watching the news, you would get the impression that John McCain was actually in your kitchen right now eating grits. That's how down-home he is.

The real truth is that the average American over 17 is an uneducated voter. Most people can't tell you what committees McCain sits on, what legislation he has or has not voted for, his true stances on most issues that affect the public, and probably not even what state he's from or how long he's been in the Senate. If they even know he is a senator. All people know is held hostage for five years in Vietnam.

In all fairness, the House of Congress is so far removed from our daily lives, literally and figuratively, that we don't know that much about most politicians. Unless you have the opportunity to watch C-Span all day long or run in political circles, you know what the media tells you.

Therefore, it is completely disingenuous for the media to keep spinning the "we don't know Barack" tale. If I'm not mistaken, Obama had significant polling margins over McCain that are just recently beginning to dwindle.

Is it that people dont know Barack Obama? Or, are people trying to forget him as the elections get closer?

Update: On the Sunday, August 31 edition of Meet The Press (MSNBC): In referring to Barack Obama, presidential historian, Doris Kearns Goodwin, said "...we know him now."

A Date With A War

Last week at the gym I was near a gentleman who was watching the television on his exercise bike. He turned to the person next to him and said, "Russia is at war with Georgia and they're playing in the Olympics. That's not right."

I'm paraphrasing, but that was the jist of his comment. It's funny because a few days earlier, I made the same comment to myself. Countries at war shouldn't be competing in the Olympics. But then I had to stop and think...the USA is at war right now too.

Initially, I started this post to discuss whether it is okay for warring countries to compete in the Olympics. But now my attention has focused more on how conveniently people overlook similar situations.

The question is: why did we so easily forget that we live in a country at war also? This is an interesting question especially considering the fact that the Iraq War recently passed its fifth anniversary. However, that's precisely the point. The war has been going on for so long that we are immune to it. (From here on out, I'll take license and use "we" to mean the average person living in the US who is not a soldier in Iraq or the family of one.) It's become part of the scenery. We've been dating the Iraq War too long. Just like in a relationship, it's new and exciting at first. But after five years you just get used to it.

And, even though we suffer from the effects of the war in many ways, we are largely insulated from it. This is mainly because the war is not taking place on American soil. Most Americans are not used to experiencing war. The last time a war broke out here was in 1890. It would be hard to find a person alive who even knows someone that fought at Wounded Knee. So it's easy to relegate a war going on half way across the world to a minor role in our lives, despite all of the "footage" and reporting we receive from the media. Now if you were an Iraqi, I'm sure the war would have a totally different level of prominence. We are grateful that we haven't had to experience any modern wars here. Can you imagine your house being blown up by a tank and foreign soldiers running through your street? This is why a video game like Call of Duty could only be conceived in the USA. We are truly simulating someone else's reality.

Ultimately, the fact that the South Ossetia War broke out on the dawn of the Olympics is what initially led me to question whether the countries' athletes should participate. When I heard about Russian forces entering Georgia my mind immediately traveled to the next hot international topic; the games in Beijing. The new war made me forget about our beleagured five-year relationship with the old war and I was more concerned about punishing athletes than the welfare of the Georgian citizens.

So as we sit around and complain about gas and mortgages and unemployment and which candidate is more incompetent, remember, that we can also ride our exercise bikes and not worry about bombs dropping outside the gym.