Paris attacks

[stamper]

God only knows where you are looking.

1. Western society is not becoming increasingly unequal; on the contrary, excluding the trivial number of ludicrously wealthy, the gap between rich and poor is smaller than it has ever been.

2. It is not true that "more people than ever are facing poverty"; quite the reverse. The problem is with definition: if you define "poverty" relative to average wealth, then it becomes impossible ever to eradicate, and you are left with the ridiculous notion that a wealthy person who leaves the country decreases the number in "poverty" simply by leaving.

More food banks makes your statement seem ludicrous?

[BernardLanguillier]

I think a lot of Americans are tired of spending our son's and daughter's blood and money on every problem in the world.  Maybe the French should do it for awhile.

Absolutely. Considering that the war in Irak is the deciding event that set in motion the complex changes that resulted in what happened 2 days ago in Paris, I believe that most objective readers would agree that stopping sending troops abroad the way it has been done the past 15 years is overall a very good idea.

This doesn't remove any of the gratitude Europeans still feel thinking back about WWII.

But anyway, I don't really see how American citizens, the parents of those brave kids sent abroad to fight wars designed to increase military spendings and control oil, would have any means to prevent these wars from happening. Their voices will be ignored next time too by Washington and their lobbies and media will be made to support whatever lies they come up with next time as well.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Justinr]

God only knows where you are looking.

1. Western society is not becoming increasingly unequal; on the contrary, excluding the trivial number of ludicrously wealthy, the gap between rich and poor is smaller than it has ever been.

2. It is not true that "more people than ever are facing poverty"; quite the reverse. The problem is with definition: if you define "poverty" relative to average wealth, then it becomes impossible ever to eradicate, and you are left with the ridiculous notion that a wealthy person who leaves the country decreases the number in "poverty" simply by leaving.

3. Standards of living are not declining.

Other than that, your "analysis" is spot on.

Jeremy

Point  1.

Wealth inequality in America: It's worse than you think 

http://fortune.com/2014/10/31/inequality-wealth-income-us/

And the same is said of Europe, I'll look a reference later if you want me to.


Point 2 -

On the other hand, the growing welfare caseload cannot be blamed solely on President Obama. True, the number of people on welfare has increased by 12.5 million since he took office. But welfare also increased during the Bush administration: The proportion of households receiving SNAP (food stamps), TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families), or SSI (Supplemental Security Income for the disabled) increased 36 percent during his presidency.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/386369/welfare-state-michael-tanner


Point 2 and 3. -

Consider: 36 years ago this month, when NASA launched the Voyager 1 probe into space, 11.6 percent of Americans were officially considered poor. The other day Voyager sailed clear out of the solar system into interstellar space — the first man-made object to do so — recording its environment on an 8-track deck.

Using the same official metric — which actually undercounts the poor compared to new methods used by the Census today — the poverty rate is 15 percent.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/19/business/americas-sinking-middle-class.html?_r=0

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

You are the one advocating solutions taken out a Silvester Stallone movie here, not me. My point is just that people, not only you, should try to learn a bit about the history of the middle east to understand better what is going on. Obviously you are not interested, so I'll leave the discussion now.

Ok, fair enough. So, my solution is wrong, French president's solution is wrong ("our response will be ruthless"), etc. Your solution is to go to library, sit there for years, studying the Middle East history, reading Wikipedia, googling, etc. Until we finally, years later, think we understand better what's going on. And then what? What shall we do then? By the way, by the time it took us to studying it, the map of the Middle East would be completely different. So we get out of the library after years of studying, take a look at the new situation and say "Nope...back to the library, time to study the new situation."

So, let me repeat: after figuring out what's going on (and apparently you already have), what then? What's your solution?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

What's this crap about "poverty and lack of education"? Every single known Islamic terrorist so far has been rich or well-off and well educated. Every single young misguided soul rushing to join their fight from the West is coming from reasinably well-off and educated families, one of which is just a few miles away from my home.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Ah, yes, colonialism and imperialism. Two staples of every left criticism. But note that ISIS is not fighting the occupiers. They are gone from Iraq and never been (recently) in Syria. They are fighting their own, taking the territory from their own. And not only in the Middle East, but in Africa too, fighting their own. Beginning in Asia.

[Alan Goldhammer]

I'll weigh in with some references on this topic. First the funny one; American comedian Steve Martin wrote a hilarious take on the 72 virgins that are promised to those who commit the atrocious acts (left unsaid is what do the girls/women who do the same thing get?? I've never seen this answered):

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/01/29/seventy-two-virgins

Two good books on the failures of modern Islam to adapt:

Bernard Lewis: "What Went Wrong? Western Impact and Middle Eastern Response"
Timur Kuran: "The Long Divergence; How Islamic Law Held Back the Middle East"

Best book on the geo-political evolution of the Middle East following WW1

David Fromkin: "A Peace to End All Peace; The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East "

Best book on the follies of war:

C.V. Wedgwood: "The Thirty Years War"

Then of course there are problems outside the middle East and they are correct. Child trafficking knows no boundaries. Tribal (and I use the term broadly) enmity leads to genocidal actions on various scale (Burundi is getting ready to implode yet again). Although Francis Fukuyama wrote about the End of History back in 1989 it's clear that events since then make this claim false. As long as there is tribalism, evil doers will exist claiming their actions are sanctioned by some higher power.

Before anyone condemns Islam in general, how many terrorists have come out of the most populous Islamic nation in the world (and does anyone know what that nation is without going to Google or Wikipedia)?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... left unsaid is what do the girls/women who do the same thing get??...

I'd venture to say they certainly hope they don't get virgins.

[Rajan Parrikar]

A commentary on the idiocy of the 'liberals' by a friend -

http://arunsmusings.blogspot.com/2015/11/grumpy.html

[landscapephoto]

Ok, fair enough. So, my solution is wrong, French president's solution is wrong ("our response will be ruthless"), etc. Your solution is to go to library, sit there for years, studying the Middle East history, reading Wikipedia, googling, etc. Until we finally, years later, think we understand better what's going on. And then what? What shall we do then? By the way, by the time it took us to studying it, the map of the Middle East would be completely different. So we get out of the library after years of studying, take a look at the new situation and say "Nope...back to the library, time to study the new situation."

So, let me repeat: after figuring out what's going on (and apparently you already have), what then? What's your solution?

As I already wrote, my solution to the problem at hand will be to simply leave the thread. There is no further need to misrepresent what I have written, I bow to your towering genius.

[PeterAit]

I'd venture to say they certainly hope they don't get virgins.

I read once that the Koran was mistranslated and it actually says that martyrs will get 72 grapes.

[wmchauncey]

There is no further need to misrepresent what I have written

A visit to a Proctologist might be call for.

A commentary on the idiocy of the 'liberals' by a friend

Rajan...your friend managed to begrudge both liberals and conservatives in one fell swoop...first smile of the day.

[landscapephoto]

A visit to a Proctologist might be call for.

How tasteful.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... my solution to the problem at hand will be to simply leave the thread...

How typical... vocal in whining and arm-chair philosophizing, quiet when it comes to doing something.

[landscapephoto]

How typical... vocal in whining and arm-chair philosophizing, quiet when it comes to doing something.

You are not doing anything either. You are just moving electrons in a photo forum.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

You are not doing anything either. You are just moving electrons in a photo forum.

[Jeremy Roussak]

Point  1.

Wealth inequality in America: It's worse than you think 

http://fortune.com/2014/10/31/inequality-wealth-income-us/

And the same is said of Europe, I'll look a reference later if you want me to.


Point 2 -

On the other hand, the growing welfare caseload cannot be blamed solely on President Obama. True, the number of people on welfare has increased by 12.5 million since he took office. But welfare also increased during the Bush administration: The proportion of households receiving SNAP (food stamps), TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families), or SSI (Supplemental Security Income for the disabled) increased 36 percent during his presidency.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/386369/welfare-state-michael-tanner


Point 2 and 3. -

Consider: 36 years ago this month, when NASA launched the Voyager 1 probe into space, 11.6 percent of Americans were officially considered poor. The other day Voyager sailed clear out of the solar system into interstellar space — the first man-made object to do so — recording its environment on an 8-track deck.

Using the same official metric — which actually undercounts the poor compared to new methods used by the Census today — the poverty rate is 15 percent.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/19/business/americas-sinking-middle-class.html?_r=0

All utterly meaningless unless you define "poverty", or "officially considered poor".

Jeremy

[Jeremy Roussak]

God only knows where you are looking.

1. Western society is not becoming increasingly unequal; on the contrary, excluding the trivial number of ludicrously wealthy, the gap between rich and poor is smaller than it has ever been.

2. It is not true that "more people than ever are facing poverty"; quite the reverse. The problem is with definition: if you define "poverty" relative to average wealth, then it becomes impossible ever to eradicate, and you are left with the ridiculous notion that a wealthy person who leaves the country decreases the number in "poverty" simply by leaving.

More food banks makes your statement seem ludicrous?

Not at all. They have no impact whatever on the statement.

Jeremy

[amolitor]

There is no disagreement that the middle class is being hollowed out. This is I think literally the first time I have seen this incredible claim.

This disagreements are ask regarding the causes, and fall asking the typical ideological lines.

[Telecaster]

Here's the best thing I've read over the past few days on the subject of Middle East-based terrorism and where its funding comes from…and why. Warning: article contains calm, reasoned, informed analysis. Chest-thumping xenophobes need not bother reading.

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a39727/paris-attacks-middle-eastern-oligarchies/

-Dave-