Cory1848

And more, it doesn’t even matter if Milley and people at DOD have a hankering to attack Iran; contingency plans for such an attack have existed at least since the days of Mosaddegh, regardless of whether neocons or isolationists are running the show at any given time. As well as similar attack plans for dozens of other places (Canada maybe?). Because you never know when you may need to take action because of some sudden emergency. Trump seems to be saying that, because Milley drew up these plans (?) ("This was him!"), rather than (Trump himself drawing up the plans?), that exonerates Trump of the desire to attack Iran. None of this is of any pertinence whatsoever; the plans were there well before either of these men came to power, and the whole exchange shows yet again how utterly clueless Trump is about how US security (or anything else) actually works.

The venality of much of African leadership is indeed criminal, but most of the population is too busy trying to put food on the table to put much thought into overthrowing their government. And I don’t know anything about family planning initiatives in Africa, but obviously more needs to be done. As for responsibility, I tend to think of borders and the countries they define as purely political structures, and as such they play no part in our obligations toward each other as human beings. Practically speaking, of course, suddenly opening all borders would quickly bankrupt the Global North, but as a gradual, long-term process, it makes sense. Europe is a good model: right now, you can get in a car in Lisbon and drive all the way to Tallinn without once having to stop and pull out a passport. Thirty years ago, this would have been unthinkable, and eighty years ago it would have been a lunatic idea.

Try putting yourself in their shoes (if they even have shoes) for a moment. You likely have sufficient resources to feed and clothe yourself and pay the rent, and the leisure to sit idly behind your computer and vent. As, to be fair, do I. By accident of birth. For most of these refugees, however, risking their necks in a flimsy boat trying to get to the Canaries, or Greece, or Lampedusa is their best option at feeding their families, of survival: the situation they are fleeing is that bad. Again, by sheer accident of birth. Just as easily, you could be in their shoes, and they in yours. Grant them the right to do whatever it takes to ensure their own survival and that of their families, and acknowledge that their humanity is in common with yours.

Fair enough, but I was talking about “balance” specifically on Taiwan: Taiwan doesn’t declare independence, and they can maintain de facto independence, even be armed by and have their security guaranteed by the United States. And I’m not sure what you would propose instead at this point: what’s the solution, if not the status quo? China doesn’t exactly take what it wants: they’ve built up some islands in the South China Sea, but US warships still regularly sail through, not to mention sailing through the Taiwan Strait. As mentioned elsewhere here, the US ability to project power far exceeds that of any other nation on earth. Are the Chinese sailing carrier groups between Grand Bahama Island and Miami? No, the best they can do are the balloons. That said, a war over Taiwan would be unimaginably catastrophic, and Taiwan itself would likely be obliterated. (So, we had to destroy the village in order to save it?) I don’t see any alternative to continuing to try to talk and find common ground, and “off-ramps” as needed.

On shooting down the balloon, I’ve read good arguments that the US actually learned a fair amount about the balloon itself by letting it sail overhead for awhile, and at the same time prevented it from gathering much useful information. As for recognizing Taiwanese independence, while I agree with you that Taiwan ought to be a fully recognized, independent nation, with membership in the UN and other international bodies, simply because that’s what most people who actually live on that island want, a unilateral declaration on the part of the US at this moment would lead directly to a shooting war (over a balloon?), which would be disastrous for all. Plus, neither Japan nor anyone else in the region would be on board with this. I agree, one loses patience with decades of “diplomacy” that seems to lead nowhere. But there have been no calamitous wars, the people in Taiwan have been living freely and prosperously, and this balance has somehow been maintained for almost 70 years. As long as this remains the case, I think we have to continue to wait it out.

Whatever comes of the visit, it seems to me that having a channel of communication is better than not having a channel of communication. As for BRICS, I’m no economist, but I’m also not much for conspiracy theories. A common BRICS currency seems far off. And if it occurred, what current currencies would be backing it? The rupee (meh); the Brazilian real and South African rand (really?); the ruble (I don’t think you want rubles); and the renminbi. And while the latter may be interesting as an alternative reserve currency, it is entirely controlled by the Chinese Communist Party and thus is vulnerable to political calculations. The Federal Reserve in the US is at least theoretically an independent agency (although subject to oversight). And even then, so what? The dollar became the world’s primary reserve currency after Bretton Woods in 1944, supplanting the pound sterling, which had held that status for 150 years prior. And what’s happened to the pound since then? It’s still good, isn’t it? Frankly, I’d rather have pounds in the bank than renminbi.