Don’t force disbanding of a foreign army

This issue came up concerning peace with North Korea. Some pundits and some experts (there’s a difference between the two) are suggesting that North Korea disband its army in exchange for a peace treaty with South Korea.

While this idea has merit, it is unwise. North Korea’s military is a huge employer — perhaps the largest employer in the country. How would these men earn a living otherwise? Disbanding North Korea’s army would disrupt their society, and who needs that?

Advertisements

Me and The Washington Post

It started with a current event – President Donald Trump announced that the U.S. would be relocating its embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

I found current information about this news story from the digital Washington Post. The digital content included a video of U.S. Vice President Pence’s speech to Israel’s Knesset (parliament) in Jerusalem. I had also been looking at official sources such as the U.S. Department of State and the president’s official site, whitehouse.gov.

After viewing a few online articles from The Washington Post, they offered me a trial subscription – one dollar for the first month and “only” ten dollars for each month after.

My subscription to The Washington Post, digital edition, came in handy last month when I was thinking about how President Trump’s statements and policies aggravate me (if I let them). The President has, in effect, become my bête noire for March and now for the first part of April (only).

Little did I know that Mr. Trump would be railing against the Post and its owner Jeff Bezos of Amazon.com. Mr. Trump’s rant warrants a separate post.

If you subscribe to President Trump’s views, then you may dismiss much of what I write. However, please note that I do not take a stand in the “Culture Wars.” In addition, I’m not pleased with Amazon.com’s burgeoning hegemony over American merchandising. I don’t buy anything from Amazon. I search other online vendors rather than buy from Amazon, even if I can save a few cents with them. My savings are someone else’s loss.

Still and all, I’m generally pleased with news and opinion coverage by The Washington Post.

Trump proposes to betray an ally

A U.S. withdrawal of its troops from Syria constitutes a betrayal of Israel. Israel’s security depends on a robust American force against the Assad regime. Otherwise, the regime is liable to create mayhem for Israel.

As usual, President Trump did not consult experts when he announced a U.S. withdrawal. Judging by a reported reaction from Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu, no one in Israel’s establishment was consulted either.

What is likely to happen? Mr.Trump has made his point. Making an anti-establishment point is all that the President’s supporters expect. Now, the Pentagon and Congress will continue pretty much as if President Trump had not made his unilateral declaration.

The immigrant First Family

U.S. President Donald Trump has had two foreign born wives. Both were born in the Slavic region of Central Europe. The present First Lady is from the Slovenian region of the former Czechoslovakia. Mr. Trump’s first wife was also born in Czechoslovakia – in the Czech region.

President Trump has proposed that future immigrants to the U.S. be restricted to the most skilled people. So, I ask the question that others ask: what superior skills have his wives brought to the United States? Does the U.S. have a shortage of willowy, bosomy women?

According to Mr. Trump’s proposed standards, would his wives have qualified for anything but three-month tourist visas with round-trip tickets?

On the other hand, these two of his three wives have demonstrated the unique skill set of being married to Donald Trump, the not-yet president.

Resolved: “The federal government should allow the display of religious symbols in public spaces.”

No debate here.

The federal government already allows the display of religious symbols in public spaces.

See my careful research at nathanielsegal.mysite.com – The Ten Commandments – Public Policy Issues.

See especially “A Final Word from the Supreme Court of the U.S.

President Trump intends to levy tariffs against unfair trade partners

It seems that U.S. President Trump is invoking an arcane section of a 1974 U.S. law (as amended through February 2016) allowing him to actually levy tariffs.

Ordinary Americans — such as myself — look at the U.S. Constitution and see how Congress lays “Duties, Imposts …” and “regulate[s] Commerce with foreign Nations …” (Article I, Section 8)

However, it further seems that Congress delegated power to the president for reacting quickly to unfair trade practices. (By the way, the Congressional bill, Trade Act of 1974  [Public Law 93–618, as amended] runs 273 pages.)

Congress works slowly; the president can react swiftly.

Nevertheless, the law provides for public hearings before affected parties suffer unfavorable outcomes.

Without hearings, Mr. Trump has joined the ranks of previous imperial presidents such as Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln.