Iraq Coup? Never Mind.

I can only keep asking. Does anybody really believe that it is possible to have free elections, with no US meddling with acceptable candidate list, no US occupation, and a friendly Iraqi government?
.
And does anyone really believe that the US is going to leave Iraq with no national defense capability, no air, no armor, no logistical capability?
.
It’s good to see Joe tiptoeing towards addressing these questions. But they do have to be addressed, reasonably forthrightly. I just got my copy of Foreign Affairs. Perhaps the articles on middle east peace making discuss these two questions.

I recall asking for confirmation that the Three Cabelleros were in India, Pakistan, Afghanistan (where one did a short JAG stint as part of his service) and Iraq. Meanwhile back at home the rest of the Senate was grappling with the bailout. Amazing that the Three Fiddlers were not in the Senate to do important business as elected officials. Obama needs to keep an eye on the Three Freelancers.

It’s nice to see the Three Amigos come around. That’s hopeful that now, with Bush almost out the door and it is safe to say, they have the stones to talk about ending this ill-conceived nightmare. Pardon my bitter cynicism.
.
Just a couple of quibbles. One, there’s not really a bright line, it appears, between “fan” and “fetishist.” I always thought that the media infatuation with Petraeus was pretty silly, and based upon the silent prayer that he might save them some face for their extreme miscalculation in their outright advocacy and cheerleading for Bush’s War. But whatever.
.
Also, I’m not too sure about that “a constant succession of coups and attempted coups.” From 1968 to 2003 Iraq had two presidents. One resigned and the other was taken out in an American “regime change” and not a coup. True, there were some troubles in the 1960′s. Before that, Iraq had kings. like three of them since 1850 or so. I don’t see the “constant succession of coups” though I’m less sure that there were no constant succession of attempted coups. Wikipedia doesn’t say.
.
But other than that…..

Note that the op-ed presumes a permanent presence, while not saying so in so many words.
.
The continued complete failure of our elected officials and our media to make it clear that a permanent occupation, which will be very unpopular with both Iraqis and Americans, is still the plan.

Sorry that last wasn’t a sentence. This failure to state clearly the plans for continued occupation is execrable.

Good to see Joe Lieberman, after haven been given a lifeline from BHO, is sticking with his heart and penning “advice” with the defeated republican candidate and the candidate’s long time companion.
I am hopeful that the president-elect will give it all the consideration it deserves.

I realize this is not germane to the post above, but it is interesting.

According to CNBC Madoff has been put under 24 hour detention in his Manhattan apartment to “prevent harm or flight.” My bet harm! He has screwed many wealthy people including many foreign types and perhaps a few criminal types. I am sure the Feds have gotten wind of perhaps a few threats directed his way. At this point I would call him “dead man walking.” I have a feeling the Feds will protect him until they can get all the information they need about where the money went. Then they will probably throw him to the wolves, either inside or outside the prison system.

I wonder if Vegas has yet started a betting pool on his lifespan?

Atrios had his trademark pithy take, adding to @bitterpill’s post above.
.
I like this:
“This Washington fetishization of everyone agreeing with each other is just weird. People disagree about stuff. I’d think people in politics would understand that.”

Meh. Bad link. Try this.
Eschaton

newfloridian-they probably are making sure he doesn’t “die” like Ken Lay.

Joe,
.
As a DC insider, do you have any thoughts on Ruth Marcus today?
.
“Yet I’m coming to the conclusion that what’s most crucial here is ensuring that these mistakes are not repeated. In the end, that may be more important than punishing those who acted wrongly in pursuit of what they thought was right.”
Ruth Marcus – Mark Felt and the Dilemma of Rights vs. Security – washingtonpost.com

Joe,
.
Reading your post, I was curious as to how an “attempted coup” could possibly be seen as a “glass half full”. Then I read this paragraph in the NYT:
.
Among those who had been under investigation, Mr. Bolani said, were an official who has been in the hospital awaiting surgery, a man who has already been in prison for months and a man who works in the archives department of the Interior Ministry taking care of files. Many of them, including one of the generals detained, worked in the traffic directorate.
.
The *traffic directorate* attempting a coup? Sounds like the glass was just missing a few drips…

But Joe:
-
Aren’t you worried that Obama might be labeled “unpatriotic” or “anti-military” by his rightist partisan enemies, if he were to show insufficient deference to Commanders In The Field, especially the unquestionable hero General Petraeus? Would it not be seized upon by Rush Limbaugh and Republicans in Congress, and used to paint the Democrats as “still stumbling on national security”?
_
Has something changed?

“”Yet I’m coming to the conclusion that what’s most crucial here is ensuring that these mistakes are not repeated. In the end, that may be more important than punishing those who acted wrongly in pursuit of what they thought was right.
.
Yep those are the two choices, no way can we do both. (rolls eyes)

PNNTO
.
Joe Lieberman et al are just making it too easy to label them the “three stooges”
.
Moe=McCain
Curly=Lieberman
Larry=Graham
.
But who the hell is Shemp?

Deep Thought
.

It will be interesting what we do 6 to 10 years from now when Maliki or his sucessor turns into Saddam lite.

@ James: the folks in the Bush admin are going to plead the Ruth Marcus defence: “We thought we were doing the right thing?” The next time a bank robber gets his swag he can also claim this defence, since banks are reluctant to “lend” money.

Don’t know SG, I hate to leave out the House, Boehner?

Iraq can serve as an anchor of stability in the region, a counter to Iranian hegemony and a model of democracy for the Middle East.
.
How f–king stupid are these people?
Let’s pretend Ayatollah Khamenei has been eating rotisserie chicken for the past five years. His greasy finger prints would be all over Baghdad. Training Special Groups is just the beginning of it. There are dozens of stories of Maliki cozying up to Iran.
.
And yet the Three Chumps, for some reason, continue to insist that the two predominantly Shiite powers in a sea of Sunni nations are going to end up enemies?
.
What did they do while they were over there? Play Sudoku?
.
When are we, as a nation, allowed to tell them to shut the f–k up and go play Nintendo Wii or something?

Cliff: the enduring myth is that we can drive a wedge between the Iranians and the Shias in Iraq. It is fed by a small group of Iranians of the former Imperial regime in exile here in the US. The late Shah’s son is the emperor in exile. They are in close touch with some Village dwellers.

“Iraq can serve as an anchor of stability in the region, a counter to Iranian hegemony and a model of democracy for the Middle East.”
.
Come on, folks, put on your thinking caps. Iraq is not really the focus of this op ed. Oh sure, they are pretending like that’s what they care about. Nicely done! Yay for consensus and magic ponies. Sure. I agree with Atrios’ drollery, but that’s just a mask for what’s really going on here. These three idiots care about only one of the three things mentioned in that sentence I cribbed above. Iran. It’s Iran, stupid. Iran only is what this little game of advice for the new president is all about. These a$$rockets are all obsessed with Iran: and what happens in Iraq, to them, is only important vis a vis the United States taking a more belligerent stance towards Iran over the next several years. That’s all they want here. They don’t give two $hits for the Iranians, except how they may be used as pawns. Remember and never forget, for the foreign policy neo-cons, Iraq was supposed their stepping stone into Iran. They’re just giving a quarter inch in order to take a mile.
.
I think they’re too late and the game rules have changed way too much since 2003 to get what they want. But I guess we’ll see about that. It’s gonna really #ucking ugly.

Oops, meant to say they don’t give two $hits for the Iraqis. My bad.

sevenoaks: Congratulations, you just made my head explode with the stupidity of it all.
.
So, at the behest of the son of a leader who has been out of power for thirty years (Emperor in Exile? What the hell year is this, 1803?) the B*tch Squad here travels through the Middle east and manages to conclude that Iraq and Iran will not be BFF.
.
I have a hunch that this will be the stupidest thing I encounter all day.

.
Ah. Cliff asks the overriding, most cogent question, succinctly.
.

Yow. I tend to respect anything Robert Baer puts out, and his latest article is not exactly complimentary of Obama’s nomination of Dennis Blair.

PNNTO
.
You nailed it
.
Boehner=Shemp

Field Marshall Joe Klein: “Obama, unlike Bush, intends to be a Commander in Chief who sees the big strategic picture, acts on it and does not abdicate his authority to commanders in the field.”

-

Field Marshall Klein’s thinks that failing to adopt the preferences of leftist loons like Klein is “abdicating … authority to commanders in the field.” More sage declarations from a military genius on the military brilliance of the thoroughly unqualified, terrorist fraternizing, community organizer ….

Apologies, Cliff. But Chalabi is no match cf to the Iranian-Americans. ( I think Chalabi has/had his own dubious links with Iran). They operate quietly, move in “sophisticated (ahem) circles” feed stuff into the Washington system. You can always find a recently returned Iranian-American , back from his homeland with lurid tales of how strong the opposition is to the Ayatollahs. There is this mob ready to rise up against the government in Iran. They will always find buyers for their bazaar talk.

OK, Robert Baer can deposit a few things on the ground that I won’t kow-tow. But I still think his latest article is worthy of consideration.

On another note, I think JK is OK on this thread. At least Gen. Pet. is officially not so much on the worship list. Speaking of puppy dogs, whatever became of Ollie North?

sevenoaks: I wasn’t disputing the point you were making. The stupidity isn’t on your part, it’s on the part of our elected officials.

I find Joe calling someone else a Petraeus fetishist a little rich…but okay. There is a third option…the glass is broken. We have no control over what happens in Iraq’s future. I’d be far more worried that there will be an entity called ‘the United States of America’ in the future than whether Iraq will or won’t be hostile to that entity at this point.

No problem, Cliff. I guessed that your anger was directed at the Senate Trio who think that can carry out their sleight of hand on Iran-Iraq with brio. I’m on a roll today!

Cincy @ 31 – that’s what I’m saying. I’ve got a cranky two and a half year old here that won’t take her nap, and keeps me from posting as coherently as I could – but the point I was trying to make above is that this is totally different game now. After what Bush and the neo-cons have done, the US has a say in the course of events in Iraq only as long as it has an overwhelming occupation force. Nothing we do there can happen without the military force to back it up. Not a thing. When – not if – when our draw down begins, the real craziness starts.

OT:
Here is a Politico article on Congressional Republicans slamming Bush for bailing out the Big Three. I recommend it, because it’s full of Republicans saying the stupidest sentences ever hear on Earth:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16753.html
.
My favorite example is this:
“Using TARP funds to bail out failing companies is incredibly risky and poor public policy, and was not the designated intention of the program when Congress approved it,” said Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas), a leading voice for House conservatives. “I fear that a devastating precedent has been set that the federal government will now be pressured to bail out every failing company in America — something that taxpayers and future generations cannot afford.”
.
My guess is that Mr. Hensarling has been funneling gallons of cocaine into his nostrils for the past three months, as opposed to paying attention to what’s actually been going on.

“the remarkable consensus that exists among Iraq’s democratically elected leaders about building a long-term partnership with the United States”
`
Yeah, right, if by partnership, that means the US propping up puppets or outright dictators for decades, maintaining Nigerian-like strangleholds on oil profits, and finding worthy buyers for our arms’ exports. A great partnership.
`
And the headline I just saw about 30,000 additional troops in Afghan makes me weep. Obama is apparently that stupid, all democrats seemingly do have to prove their manhood once elected, our fo-po won’t really change. Thus the Kissinger-Cheney joint orgasm over Hill at state. And saddest of all, some on the left buy it. If Bush were selling Afghan, they’d be against it, but Obama is so it must make sense. Same hegemony, different painting in the White House.

Donut, I said it before and I’ll say it again: Empires don’t volunteer to stop being empires…reality imposes itself and forces change. For a lot of people who’ve spent their entire lives in the most powerful empire on earth, in which the idea of the fundamental indestructibility of the US is as much a part of the fabric of everyday life as the sun and the moon, it’s impossible to let go of the idea of American military dominance. I keep hearing people talking about what should be done in Iraq and Afghanistan…there’s nothing to be done, save getting out. We no longer control events outside our borders, we’ll be lucky if we can control events within our own.

[...] looking for Far Left hacks to spin history and give cut-n-runner Obama credit for the victory in [...]

For all of the displaced and refugee Iraquis, anxiously awaiting good news to return to their homes, this won’t be encouraging. Their glass remains pretty much fully empty.

The displaced were just on my mind for some reason. Let me not neglect the widows, the orphans, those driven to insanity by the whole ordeal. We have not taken Sadam out of Iraq. He still lingers. Have we learned a lesson? Probably not.

Stupid me, I also forgot to mention the dead, past, present and future. The financial cost can’t exceed all of that misery.

But Joe, thanks for the positive spin. I just can’t seem to get into it.

I recall that Russia’s experience in Afghanistan was undermined not only by the effectiveness of the Taliban and the other warlords but by the internal decline of its own economic strength. Given our own borrow to spend mode perhaps we have sown the seeds of our own decline in Afghanistan.

bitterpill, yeah, maybe. The irony is that one of Reagan’s legacies is that he took down the Soviets, partly by supporting their opposition in Afghanistan. The stench of the Bush legacy overpowers even that of Reagan. But then again, they just run together.

[...] looking for Far Left hacks to spin history and give cut-n-runner Obama credit for the victory in [...]

Profundity, I did look at your blog. No comments there. I don’t wonder why.

.
That old “cut-and-run” absurdity is sooo 2005. Nothing original about that, and plus, appears to have stole Joe’s “Three Amigos” without credit. Those rightwing lunatics are hurtin’ for new ideas. Apparently doesn’t understand what “conservative” actually means, let alone “profundity.” Heh.
.

So I did indeed rip the plastic off the current Foreign Affairs.
.
Richard Haass (CFR president) and Martin Indyk (Director of Israeli funded Saban Center at Brookings) indeed say that the US should be able to get down to a residual force of half the pre-surge levels, which is, indeed, about 50-60 thousand soldiers.
.
I go on about this at greater length elsewhere.
.
But this added bonus really got me:

Preventive military action against Iran by either the United States or Israel is an unattractive option, given its risks and costs. But it needs to be examined carefully as a last-ditch alternative to the dangers of living with an Iranian bomb. To increase Israel’s tolerance for extended diplomatic engagement, the U.S. government should bolster Israel’s deterrent capabilities by providing an enhanced anti-ballistic-missile defense capability and a nuclear guarantee.

.
.
Insane, indeed, James. the nonexistent Iranian nuclear weapons are to be deterred by a nonfunctioning missile defense system, developed by the US. You can really imagine the Iraqi people voting for leaders who would support the US extending its nuclear umbrella to Israel, and giving the Israelis US anti-missile technology.
.
Does anybody write about this in the general media? Does it find its way onto the teevee? Are people aware that these are the plans?
.
Joe? Joe?
.
Bueller?

I am a believer. Let’s put some missles in eastern europe as a hedge. To hell with Russia. By the way Russian warships are visiting throughout the Americas, including Cuba recently. By god, let’s not put up with that. The war on terror? Oh. Let me think. Are the Russians terrorists? Are they Islamists? I think some of them are. This foreign policy thing is just so confusing. What can you do, what can you do? (that is a line from a woody allen movie, or mayby groucho, I don’t remember). I will go consult my bible and pray over this.

Obama, unlike Bush, intends to be a Commander in Chief who sees the big strategic picture, acts on it and does not abdicate his authority to commanders in the field.
-
Bush only does that when it fits his grandiose desire to invade and occupy places. Remember, he overrode the advice of the Joint Chiefs when they told him to dial back on the Iraq occupation.

“”The Chris Matthews Show” – Panel: Joe Klein, Katty Kay, John Heileman, Helene Cooper.”
.
Hope you bring a sneeze/spittle guard Joe.

Obama, unlike Bush, intends to be a Commander in Chief
.
Obama intends to be a President. At least I hope he will end this fetishization of the president as Chief Field Marshal.

Did yall hear that the NRA is STILL doing robocalls against Obama.

the nonexistent Iranian nuclear weapons are to be deterred by a nonfunctioning missile defense system, developed by the US. You can really imagine the Iraqi people voting for leaders who would support the US extending its nuclear umbrella to Israel, and giving the Israelis US anti-missile technology.
–
jayackroyd, It’s also frustrating that we’re supposed to ignore the elephant in the room: Israel is a nuclear power. It’s capable of providing its own deterrence guarantee. This also puts Iran’s nuclear ambitions in a slightly different light. Even if they did produce a nuclear bomb – and we shouldn’t forget the NIE which said their nuclear program has stalled – it wouldn’t make them the dominant military power in the region. But there’s this image of horrible, evil Iran trying to become the only nuclear power in the region so they can wipe Israel off the map. I’m not defending Iran or denying their hostility towards Israel. It’s just that Iran is trying to match Israel’s strength, not become massively more powerful than Israel in the region.
–
BTW, I would never dream of claiming to know what, if anything, happens when a cockroach dies.

Rose83 – great points and we need to keep reiterating that should Iran develop one or more nukes and should they use it against Israel, they’ll also kill thousands or tens of thousands of Muslims at the same time. At the least, they would irradiate thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands, if not possibly millions of Muslims. No way they could avoid doing untold damage to fellow Muslims, given both the geographical and climatological features of the region.
.
The whole construct that Iran must not get nukes or they will destroy the world is just effin’ stupid all the way around.
.
Yet our elite traditional media allows the likes of McCain, Lieberman and Graham to peddle this tripe. Sad, if it wasn’t so scary, it’d be more sad.

Thanks, Rose. Yes. this is all bull. And the Serious People keeping dumping it out.
.
On the cockroach, okay, uncertain there. What about a worker ant, which is more like a neuron than an individual? How about the bacterium? Is there no soulless living creature? I think you’re waffling too much here.
.
Seriously, the question of whether there is “truth” beyond what we can objectively observe is hard to make any sense of. Even if I were to not spend time noting how all the different versions of metaphysical “truth” involve phenomena or claims that are obviously false, you’d still be in the difficult position of describing something that is true, but not observable.
.
Goedel offers you some help here. We know that there are true statements that can’t be proven in a logical system. But it doesn’t seem to be enough help, not enough to get you to justify really absurdly difficult claims, like immortal humans, but not immortal rabbits. Or like the existence of consciousness without anything material to hold it.
.
This last is a non-trivial point. To the degree that the soul attached to consciousness, there has been a lot of useful work done on the nature of consciousness. It really does look like a physical manifestation of nervous system function. (Not brain. Lotsa neurons cluster at the brain, but seeing, hearing, feeling and knowing you are you involves the entire body’s neural apparatus.)

jayackroyd Says:
” .. I just got my copy of Foreign Affairs. ..”

Cough cough psst! cough gag gag …

” .. Iraq’s democratically elected leaders ..”
Like those Republicans who love their ignorance, it is a puzzle at times whether JK tries too hard to ‘sound’ obtuse.
Can a country under occupation hold elections – under the gun – that produce “democratically elected leaders”? Isn’t such indulgence reserved for “sovereign states” of which Iraq is not one?

“.. coups and attempted coups that will produce something less than a democracy in the not-too-distant future. .. “
OK.
Spot quiz: What is a “democracy” and can you name five?
[Warning: If asked to describe "a man" resist the temptation to look at Rush Limburger and say "A man is short, bold-headed, angry and shifty - who wears glasses and is often loaded with illegal prescription drugs that would land him in jail if black .. "]

=====off topic, maybe.
—–Read on if you wont blow a mental fuse
This was seen somewhere on a blog .. my apologies for not saving the link.
KarenT 02:12:23pm 12/20/2008
“So let’s see, if we had a black democratic Presidential candidate who’s teenage daughter got pregnant out of wedlock, who’s son went into the Army to straighten out a life of drug addiction, who’s wife was a former member of an organization that wanted to (violently) secede from the U.S., who’s future mother of his daughter’s husband to be was a drug dealer, who’s clothes for his family during the campaign were purchased by the DNC…I wonder what the Rush, Sean, O’Reilly, Fix News crowd would be saying? “
It is too painful to think of it ..

stuartzechman Says:
“.. and used to paint the Democrats as “still stumbling on national security”? “
The way I remember it is that their hero Henry Kissinger tried his hand at peace in Vietnam. Result: No peace but a rout. And he tried his hand at peace (with Israel as the imperial power) in the middle east. Result: More Wars and no peace.
And since then, many Republican administrations have had a go at peace in the Middle East.
What have they got to show for their prowess?

Nothing.
Still, Kissinger was in the spotlight recently dishing out his stale “wisdom” at BHO.

Seriously, the question of whether there is “truth” beyond what we can objectively observe is hard to make any sense of.
–
Exactly.
–
Even if I were to not spend time noting how all the different versions of metaphysical “truth” involve phenomena or claims that are obviously false, you’d still be in the difficult position of describing something that is true, but not observable.
–
And you’re in the position of claiming that what we can observe and describe definitively encompasses the complexities of life, consciousness – and most importantly – death. (BTW, your argument depends on the idea that if consciousness exists outside of a physical form after death, it would also exist outside of a physical form during life. That’s a big and unsupported assumption. It also seems to imply that humans have the most complex consciousness in existence. Another big and unsupported assumption.)
–
What I find interesting about our discussions on faith/atheism is that they show how important it is to completely separate religion and state. Integrating religion into government – like in the marriage equality debate – will inevitably lead to unnecessary disagreements that are impossible to resolve. We seem to largely agree on politics; We share basically similar goals, etc. But – and I hope I don’t offend you here! – I think your views on atheism and faith are completely ridiculous. I get the impression – and again, no offense is taken here – that you feel my views on the subject are also ridiculous. That gap appears unbridgeable. Fortunately, it’s not that important. Societies can function well even when no kind of religious consensus can be reached. But if religious debates begin to dominate politics, that will cause serious problems. And we don’t even disagree that much on religion! You’re an atheist and I’m a waffler.
–
In a weird way maybe what we’re really debating is the separation of church and state. You’re essentially saying that atheism can be proved correct, with the obvious implication that one day we will be able to reach some kind of long-term atheist consensus. I’m saying that’s not possible, and we need to structure society and government accordingly.

You’re essentially saying that atheism can be proved correct, with the obvious implication that one day we will be able to reach some kind of long-term atheist consensus.
.
The way I would put this is that it has become increasingly clear that observable phenomena can be explained through natural causes. There is no way to prove that just because we’ve yet to find a phenomenon that could not be explained by natural cause that therefore there are no such phenomena. Eventually most people will conclude that invoking the non-natural only happens for unobservable phenomena, and decide to stick with materialism. I believe we’re well on our way to that general understanding; one of the reasons people get mad at Dawkins and Hitchens is that they don’t like being confronted with the details of what they claim to believe. They recognize that the trinity is an absurd construction, and don’t have all the surrounding mysteries that the members of the Council of Nicea had. When the only place where mysterious causes are invoked are those directly related to religion, religion will lose its power.
.
A physics professor opened his course with a lecture that noted that it is impossible to say that the Sun will rise tomorrow, that the laws of physics will be the same tomorrow as they are today. And yet, we will take those as operating assumptions.
.
most importantly – death. (BTW, your argument depends on the idea that if consciousness exists outside of a physical form after death, it would also exist outside of a physical form during life. That’s a big and unsupported assumption. It also seems to imply that humans have the most complex consciousness in existence. Another big and unsupported assumption.)
.
Another central point of disagreement is the importance of death.
.
My argument has not been clear if you have think I’ve made such assumptions. My position is pretty simple. Cockroaches, cats, cows and people all die entirely when they die, and there is no way to justify the idea that people are somehow intrinsically different from every other species in this respect. Moreover, evidence mounts that in pretty much all respects people differ from other species in degree only. As Ernst Mayr has said, human consciousness arose from animal consciousness.
.
The other thing that has gotten increasingly clear is human insignificance. The span of time for the existence of the species is tiny, and it does not seem likely that people are going to be a particularly long-lived species. To the guy who first wrote down the creation myth in genesis that assigns people, ahem, MEN, dominion over all other species, he was writing about the entire universe as he knew it.
.
The plausibility of special human status diminishes with each passing year.
.
On being able to remain civil about these things, I think the incivility arises in situations where people are forced to face inconsistencies in their viewpoints, or, worse, ignorance of the viewpoint they claim to espouse. When a “Christian” cites Leviticus to justify his homophobia, he doesn’t appreciate you reading other passages along the way. The guy who says gay marriage will lead to polygamy doesn’t appreciate your saying “You mean like Abraham”?
.
The other way this gets acrimonious, I think unavoidably so, is when an atheist starts comparing one belief set, accepted as true, with another belief set as grounded in reality and at least as widely held. Many Christians do not see the equivalence between the 70 heavenly houris and whatever their conception of heaven happens to be. They not only find it irksome to have that pointed out, but also, unasked, deride the belief in the houris.
.
But I know you’re of good will, and I know that these are not important issues, as you say, as long as they remain outside the legal system. And, yes, that is ultimately what we are talking about.
.
I don’t object to the choice of Rick Warren nearly as much as I object to having a Christian invocation as part of the inauguration process. It seems to me, anyway, to violate the Establishment cause–today, in this much more religiously diverse society than the Founders lived in.

Poking around, trying to find out when this invocation thing started, because a lot of this God stuff is quite recent, I found a note that John Quincy Adams wasn’t sworn in on a bible, but a law book. Franklin Pierce is the only president to have affirmed rather than sworn, although there was talk Hoover, being a Quaker would also affirm.

The plausibility of special human status diminishes with each passing year.
–
Well I’m a vegetarian so I’ve found that view implausible for pretty much all my life.
–
The way I would put this is that it has become increasingly clear that observable phenomena can be explained through natural causes. There is no way to prove that just because we’ve yet to find a phenomenon that could not be explained by natural cause that therefore there are no such phenomena.
–
We’re obviously not even discussing the same subject. The issue isn’t explaining observable phenomena, it’s whether it’s possible there are non-observable phenomena including – and this was my point about the importance of death – after death (ie. if consciousness has a physical form during life only to take a non-physical form after death).
–
Eventually most people will conclude that invoking the non-natural only happens for unobservable phenomena, and decide to stick with materialism.
–
So… you’re essentially saying that eventually faith in atheism will be widespread. They will see that religion depends on the existence of non-observable phenomena (I basically agree with that), and “decide” that such phenomena don’t exist, thereby embracing atheism. That sounds like a faith-based religious consensus!

Rose—
.
ROFL.
.
This is a weird amalgam of agreement and disagreement.
.
These two phrases: non-observable phenomena and only to take a non-physical form are meaningless to me. I dropped the super- prefix, because it was clear that was viewed as pejorative in some way. But i just don’t get how something can be, and not be.
.
Worse.
.
I’ve read Western Zen stuff that tries to deal with this be/not be thing. I enjoy it, but think that ultimately its also empty. I love the koan of the one finger zen, but, in the end, it doesn’t seem anything more than clever.

I mostly think that the online, text exchange venue is better for discussions like this than f2f discussions, because the interface gives you more time to think, and not say something stupid.
.
In this case, though, i think a real time f2f thing would be more productive. Lemme know if you’re gonna be in NYC, or, if you want to do this in public, a Thursday at 9pm when you can spend an hour on the phone, with people listening, and asking questions about these topics.

But i just don’t get how something can be, and not be.
–
Me too, although I’m not sure our inability to comprehend such a paradox says anything about its validity. But isn’t it actually simpler than that? Isn’t it just an extension of the classic “if a tree falls in an empty forest does it make a sound” debate? If there is a real phenomenon that we cannot observe, well I’d argue that it’s real in spite of the fact we can’t observe it.
–
In this case, though, i think a real time f2f thing would be more productive. Lemme know if you’re gonna be in NYC, or, if you want to do this in public, a Thursday at 9pm when you can spend an hour on the phone, with people listening, and asking questions about these topics.
–
I’d love to be in NYC over the holidays, but alas I have no plans to visit in the near future. I used to go there for business, but now I’m no longer in that business so I don’t have an excuse to visit anymore. I’ll have to go to grad school there… Anyway I’ve probably spent as much time thinking about religion over the past few days in our discussions as I have during the rest of my life, and I’m not tempted by the prospect of publicizing my ignorance! I come from a family with several argumentative religious fanatics – They wouldn’t be offended by my characterization. At least I hope not.. – and my coping mechanisms have involved never thinking or talking about religion. So you have succeeded where my family has failed!
–
Now I should sign off and stop avoiding my online Christmas shopping duties… BTW, have you read “The Forever War?” Is it as good as people say it is?

Joe Haldeman’s The Forever War?
.
Yes, it is very good. But I read SF, always have. My favorite authors are Gene Wolfe and Neal Stephenson. I happen to think Wolfe is one of our greatest living fiction writers.