Syria and the US negotiating?

No one, more than a few in the United States have an itch you could say, to go to war with Assad – and win Russian support in the process. Most obvious and outspoken: John Kerry.
Russia, China, Iran and most anyone, want the threat of (war now or later) removed, as does Assad, since he’s first in the firing line. This is so because Assad, [whether proven guilty of gassing] or rebels’ proven responsible for it, is intent on one result – preventing the United States from going to war with them, even if that means that Assad diminishes his own arsenal of weapons [used or unused] in the process of the deal to avoid military strikes on an already suffering country. Reassurances from leaders to Americans that no US boots will be put on the ground there, is not enough of a promise for the United States’ people either. Assad’s agreement to give up his arms is quite a responsible decision. I wonder if the US would ever agree to do something as that, if on the “receiving” end. Made clear was when the US announced several days ago to Americans that it would not work within the United Nations’ Security Council in deciding its own course of action. That kind of rogue mentality, brought down middle east leaders in recent years. With this swift progress in recent days, relating to US understanding that it cannot dictate all matters with regard to Assad, after removal of its imminent threat of war “from the table” and failure in drumming up citizen support, hope is growing for peace with each day. That is a victory for all parties. With regard to Syrian president Assad, I’m sure that he is well aware that admitting guilt even where none may exist, is in the interest of preventing bombardment. That is most likely why he has agreed to talks and agreements, not as an admission, rather a solution. If his arsenal was even never used in gassing people, he has said he will give up his arsenal in the interest of preventing bombardment. Give up weapons at the request [or demand] of another nation? I doubt the US ever would. Congratulations to Assad for seizing the opportunity early – before the situation changed for worse. And if he gassed his people, I would certainly like to know why he would do such a crazy thing – knowing full well that it could be cause for the US to destroy him. If he wanted war, he’d simply say something like,
“yeah those were authorized by me”.
Obviously he seems to say none such thing, and is interested in peace. Many who have spoken out in opposition to any war are praised – one being the Catholic Church. As it is, the displacement of people before any bombardment is grand and tragic; but, I can think of no better way for their lives to be preserved, than seeking refuge elsewhere, even if many fled to Iraq. Strange and telling don’t you think? I certainly think it is indicative of not just middle east strife, but also US threats.

Posted in Health and wellness, News and politics, Organizations, Uncategorized, US Politics, World News | Comments Off on Syria and the US negotiating?

lip service

Unlike a marriage [which is exempt from this topical blog entry], representative government is often, and has been all too often, big on promises for Americans and short on delivering them in the way the lip service has scripted them. A spouse does what a government cannot and visa- versa. But, how can we in the United States, achieve everything we dream and hope for, while waged wars all over the globe degrade our wealth? Once the dream is owned entirely by any government, the population owns the nightmare. That’s not the plunder we agreed to. So how can we preserve our treasures? How can we leave others to peace? How can we prevent millions from scattering out of fear that they’re going to be bombed? Let’s begin with answers to those questions.

Posted in Health and wellness, News and politics, Religion and reverence, Uncategorized, US Politics, World News | Comments Off on lip service

sometimes divorce was justified… but, consider the new covenant

Important paragraph added on 10/18/2013.
Is a battle of the sexes still possible after nuptials are exchanged?
It happens. There are vengeful and hostile people who would burn their own marriage just as easily as they would create a public scandal with a virtual stranger at the center of it.
Does this mean that all public discourse of a brother’s or sister’s sin within a marriage is a smoke screen to allow one to revel in a fit of ones own revenge – in denial of one’s own share in the immorality of the matter? Are all women out to blame their men? Are all men out to slay unrighteous women?
No, no and no, but women today engage in all the same sins that men do, while other women and other men do refrain at many given moments. That’s my personal determination, but, I understand that not all people are on a “mission to burn” members of the opposite sex, through embarrassment and mudslinging, as we too often find commonplace and acceptable in public shaming… in the United States as one example.
So, specifically, how does one deal with the sins of one’s spouse best? What additional sins might he or she be discounting in his or her own self-examination? Many sins, as they are less recognizable to the population, are more severe or equally severe offenses to our Lord, than those we often talk of.
These denials are sinful in themselves.
Through personal wars, media frenzies, and “shit-storms”, we can effectively chastise a person into turning toward sin as remedy, when we carelessly marginalize people (in acts perpetrated and motivated by envy for example).
Some people allow their spouse’s sins to proliferate as a means of being “free” to sin themselves; a “pass go and collect” type of mentality that harms. By the way, unmarried people and married people are equally susceptible to the lures of sin. Not being married is not a sin, and being married is not necessarily virtuous.
Are we to celebrate sin at certain times, and not at others?
Worst, in my opinion, is a spouse’s giving no credit or praise for the spouse’s progress [even eradication or improvements] against a lifelong battle vs. the fallen angel’s work against us all, which actively divided them once. Give praise for every victory!
Timing is critical in providing praise and encouragement. Punishment after the loved one’s defeat (even if not complete) of a sin, while in repentance, is a violation of the spouse’s victory. That is a cruel, unloving act!
It is the devil at work in such a case, where he cleverly tempts you [the spouse] to punish and undermine your bond and promises to one another – having married, for better or for worse… don’t forget.
Remember: one’s best efforts to help the partner with sin may not occur overnight. Before shaming or embarrassing your partner publicly, be mindful of your own sin. Dialogue; and reject the illusion that you can immediately control your spouse’s behaviors. As much as we might want to, we cannot “control” other people with the expectations of a 24/7 “McDonald’s” “how may I help you” service timetable. “McDonald’s” after all, has a far easier task of accomplishing immediate pleasing effects, than a marriage. You can be instrumental in positive changes in your marriage, but “people are not machines” [I quote a phrase from Pastor Joseph Prince] (applied in a different context). Don’t forget that God heals sinners according to His method, using you as an instrument if you reject sin, but also with the help of religious leaders. Sin in one family might not be present in another family. And so no one, but you, can reject it. It is each couple’s responsibility to themselves, and later, others.
Be fair to your partner, and seek help together as a pair, in private AND among friends. Isolating your spouse or friend is not God’s desire for you; rather it is the devil’s desire. He [God] made us to live in community’s that should strengthen our ability to love and to forgive. Divorce is an option in many cases, but it breaks the New Covenant we have with God.
We are designed to be sociable. We must be humble enough to recognize where and how sin attacks, in many shapes and forms, through man’s and woman’s weaknesses. Neither sex is exempt. So leave the “gender battle” between the sexes behind! Encourage healthy approaches and togetherness. Allow your partner to point out your sins, and leave the delicate egos behind. After all, no one will be more courageous to criticize you, than your spouse; and, secondly your child or children. That’s how it should be. You married him or her, didn’t you?
Don’t make the mistake of assuming that your marriage is beyond repair. But first, own up to your own sins, and be merciful to the person you committed your life to. Reject the temptation to publicize your spouse’s sins in mass media – doing so might give birth to false testimony and exaggerations that you SHOULD later feel guilty about. Only through love, will your partner turn away from sin. And your capacity to forgive him or her, will find rewards as you together conquest against sin.
Sin “loves” to get between you and your partner, and make you believe that the sinner is evil and enslaved forever. But this is just not true. The sinner needs to choose righteousness WITH you, and be permitted to recognize and see your best efforts to correct your sins exhibited also. You must be credible to help your spouse. You must see that blame is shared. Maybe you’re not spending enough time with your spouse? Maybe there’s deceit and secrecy. Maybe the guys or gals at work are getting more attention than you are giving your spouse and children (if there are children) at home? When both do NOT reject the sins together, BOTH will be in bondage, and, BOTH will question each person’s respective love for each other.
I don’t believe that a married couple can disown one person’s sin in the relationship, while permitting those of the other to grow. This would be a stimulus for eventual divorce. Enduring relationships “see” causes for a person’s weakness, reasons the sin is there, explanations for why the weakness in the first place. Often times we marry someone for help with this area of our life. Don’t rush to abandon the person you married. The best at it are able to share recognition of the sin, in order to overcome the sin together and grow even stronger as one.
Love is patient. Love is kind.
Forgive the sinner, as generously as you would want to be forgiven.
And go to church! So, that you can build up your relationship on firm ground, as a couple, knowing that sin can and will come about in another circumstance “tomorrow”, but only if you allow it to.
Church going should not end with the wedding ceremony. It is all too needed, long after it, until we die.
And it is never too late to reconcile for yours.
I’ve added this paragraph and edits above, on 10/18/2013. I was unaware until now, that only the Old Testament approved of divorce granting. With the new covenant with Christ [which does not permit divorce], we must do all what we can to preserve marriage and to keep it a holy institution, never deprived of love and mutual respect. For this reason, I’ve also edited the title of this post. Now I know that divorces occur in our day, and that the children of God are forgiven for many of our sins. But, we must use all our wills to honor our new covenant and we must seek forgiveness for all of our breaches, whether we are living a single or a married life.

Posted in Health and wellness, Religion and reverence, Uncategorized | Comments Off on sometimes divorce was justified… but, consider the new covenant

Why dialogue? Because it should work.

Having dismissed claims of using weapons against his own people, it seems that the president of Syria might have welcomed an intervention that does not target him or his regime. But would this work while the gun is pointed at him? [Update 2014: Fortunately, once the gun was removed from his head, he welcomed foreigners into his country. Looks like it became a win-win situation].

Posted in Health and wellness, News and politics, Organizations, Uncategorized, US Politics, World News | Comments Off on Why dialogue? Because it should work.

The results of United Nations’ fact finding should not be dismissed. Why not? Because otherwise our military cannot properly clarify if Assad could be an ally.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

please UN

United Nations – please do something to protect those who are dying in Syria, and Egypt. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on please UN

making matters tough

If the United Nations does not announce its expert findings, Syria may have no military threats from the US lifted. If innocence is proven, the US may still not lift the threat. This is a real problem. And if the US does not cede power to the United Nations’ security council, then we could see a real conflict emerge.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on making matters tough

Chemical cache

I’m sure it will take time to complete, but a United Nation’s confiscation of chemical weapons in the Syrian territory sounds like a peaceable solution. Who used the weapons thus far, does not seem to have been announced by independent media. The UN in its research, has an option to not release that information even once they know it. Since propositions of war are so pronounced, the investigation should serve the purpose of determining the blame. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Chemical cache

why the label “terrorist” loses meaning

Definition of terrorism: “a system of government by terror; intimidation.”
Just why do men, women, and children win the trust of armed militants?
Sometimes states have failed to meet the needs of their people.
Territory can be one such contentious issue between enemies.
Or, a nation or tribe has been at great disadvantage and even plundered by wealthier tribes or nation(s).
Precarious balances for life preservation, dependent on food and water, are fought for by armed forces against other armed forces.
Why do so many women [even], generally seen as a life affirming gender, globally support armed groups labeled by the government(s) as terrorists? The short answer, among other reasons, is that some of these groups promise them security, resources, schools and power. Group allegiance is common enough today, that smaller groups have the backing sometimes of governments that were legitimately voted in by the people.
It can be likened to the US supporting a criminal organization, with the intent to root out its political enemies. State sponsored terror can be quite a powerful organization.
Trust in militant groups, is won from people who see armed solutions to their situations.
There are many groups today who see US incursions in their land, a case for justified rebellion and retaliation. One such is “Al Qaida” who also claims moral dominance over the United States. So why do lesser extremist militias receive the same label that “Al Qaida” does? This is the propaganda.
As for the US armed forces, it did terrorize in this decade, groups of people it does not govern… except for, through military intimidation. Depending on who you’re asking, and in what region of the world he live, the label “terrorist” gets thrown about liberally as militaries and non- military groups alike, aim to kill.
“Black Water” was one such group that fought alongside US military in a war in Iraq.
Regional wars in the Middle East between terrorists, can pose risks still for the United States government, which some view terrorist… understood. Restraint by the US, is now, rightfully being considered and given the time necessary for results of prudence.
History has proven that it is more difficult for the US, to (not) intervene. Though it may be hard to act with restraint, seemingly counter to intuition, the lasting effects of restraint can prove to be better for everyone.
I do not want to suggest that I am issuing a decree. I am not omniscient about these world events. It does seem however, the best solution after UN inspectors have left Syria today, would be for the leaders of nations to be mindful of international laws this time, and for the US government to live by them.

Posted in Health and wellness, News and politics, Organizations, Uncategorized, US Politics, World News | Comments Off on why the label “terrorist” loses meaning

good development!

The US and British governments have announced that they will allow the UN inspectors the time and space required to complete their investigation into who used chemical warfare in Syria.
This is sensible and good news. We hope the investigation is conclusive and correct.
The downside is that after such investigation, there is no exact telling yet, just with whom terrorists will position themselves. And because of that, exactly against whom will the allied states consider striking? Or, refrain from doing so.

Posted in Health and wellness, News and politics, Organizations, Uncategorized, US Politics, World News | Comments Off on good development!