I expressed my displeasure in a post on Facebook, interrupting the news feed about who had earned what level in "Farmville" and the excitement of learning which 70's song defines so-and-so, to interject a dose of grown-up discussion. In the past, my political posts on Facebook had been largely ignored, and I expected nothing more when the discussion concerned defense issues in Poland and the Czech Republic. But to my surprise, I aroused the ire of a 20-something man on my friend list who had spent the better part of a year living in the Czech Republic as part of his college studies. He was particularly agitated about the portion of my post in which I had said, in effect, that we had abandoned our allies in Eastern Europe (a position by which I firmly stand to this day). According to this man, I knew not of which I spoke because 60% of the citizens of the CR opposed the placement of SDI on Czech soil. Furthermore, he said that the Czech administration that had negotiated the treaty with the US is hugely unpopular with the Czech people. In a crucial mistake, I dared to engage this young man, making the point to him that my opinion on the issue is based primarily on protection of American interests and not on what the man-on-the-street in Prague thinks about the issue. I also provided several well-written articles making the same point that I was making. He, however, continued to ignore my underlying point, dismissed the articles I had provided because they presented a conservative viewpoint, and last, but certainly not least, stated that Reagan had little to do with the collapse of Soviet Russia.
I have to tell you, dismissing Reagan as inconsequential to the fall of the Soviets is a sure way to get my back up. I should have ended the conversation, but I did not, providing articles from Polish newspapers in which great concern was expressed about Obama's decision. He responded by providing a BBC article that interviewed three (count 'em, three) Czechs, of which two expressed their happiness with the decision and one expressed his concern. And then came the real kicker: the young man's father sent me an open message on my Facebook wall (not a private e-mail) saying that his son is vastly more knowledgeable about the topic than I and that, in effect, I should shut up and surrender. And remember, the young man never once engaged me about the basic point I was making: that Obama surrendered SDI while getting nothing in return.
I debated how to respond, but ultimately, I decided not to respond. Instead, I removed the entire thread from my Facebook wall, and I "de-friended" both father and son. The father's message had hurt me, because he is someone I have known for many years and whom I respect. I still have no idea why he would choose to come to the defense of his adult son while adding nothing to the debate other than "he lived in the Czech Republic so he obviously knows more about the issue than you."
Subsequently, I decided to re-launch IVM (see my very first post for details), where I can post my political opinions in a place where people may easily ignore them. Odd, I know, but I really do not want to irritate all of those Facebookers who are sending hugs and hearts to each other. I have no doubt that my IVM opinions ARE being ignored (including this one), which is just fine with me.
Why the history? Because our nation's Secretary of State, Hilary Rodham Clinton, spent some time this week meeting with our friends the Russians. It seems that she went to see them in order to solicit their support for sanctions against Iran. And how did our friends the Russians respond?
Emerging from four hours of talks with Clinton, [Russian Foreign Minister Sergey] Lavrov told reporters that "threats, sanctions and threats of pressure" against Iran would be "counterproductive."Wow, now there is a surprise for you. Who could possibly have seen this coming? Oh yeah, ME. And guess what else The Washington Post article linked above had to say:
Failure to win a Russian commitment to a set of specific sanctions in advance could leave the administration vulnerable to Republican criticism that it gave the Kremlin what it wanted by overhauling missile defense plans in Europe but that it got nothing in return.Hmmmm, where have I heard this before? Oh, I remember now: I SAID IT.
Sorry for the rant, but being proven correct just feels so good.
6 comments:
My response to this is mostly out of annoyance at your presentation of this post.
I am not interested in the validity of your point or of the "20 something's" point. But you seem to have missed the fact that his point is not unrelated to yours because it builds off of it. Yes, Obama did so something which ended up going poorly for him. However, perhaps the other point, that most people didn't want the US in their country anyways is equally important here. Makes friends by keeping our distance, even with small nations, is rather important. It would quite potentially impress larger nations, the thought of us maybe just listening to what someone who is "weaker" wanted for once. And while his lack of written evidence is a discredit to his argument, if he lived there for that long do you not think he would have heard the opinion of a fairly large sampling of the population? (I know he traveled quite extensively in the country.)
And finally, just because it makes you seem petty and childish: you posted your point of view on a social networking site (which you berated your "friends" for using for the purpose for which it was created by playing games and doing other social activities) but when you actually got a response (a social action) you got defensive. Instead of keeping it light and engaging in an open debate (believe it not, sir, there are multiple points of view out there besides your own) you instead completely defeated the whole purpose of using that social networking site and of posting your views on it. You unfriended two people. Seriously, if you didn't really want to be challenged on this why wouldn't you simply choose to not post it there? And besides that, if you know the "20-something's" father as well as I do you'd know that post was made in good humor and as an attempt to defuse the situation.
But hey, it's your blog so who am I to tell you what to do, right?
It's your blog, but I'm not sure what this entry has to do with conducting diplomacy. I'm always willing to debate things like this, if the debate remains rational and open.
I still think you're connecting lines that aren't really there and distorting the facts that already are, but I'm not interested in debating with you on this or correcting your errors anymore. If you're going to "unfriend" people you've known for as long as you've known my father and I over a political disagreement, that's your decision. I'm sorry to have hit such a nerve.
-Coleman Hall Richardson
PS I'm 23.
Dear Mr. Blog Writer.
First off, “Obamapolitik” is not a real word. Second, do not use a Superman reference before you use the made up word. Your credibility as a journalist is now down the toilet. How will you ever be taken serious after that? Forget Washington Post or The New York Times. They would not touch you with a quill pen.
As far as the sources you use, well, don’t worry about little things such as facts. Or personal experiences. You sir, think with the gut, and don’t let things like facts and data stand in your way. Now, while you will never be able to be a journalist, I do think you have a place among such people as Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. Who knows, maybe that will be a way for you to be in The New York Times, however, it will only be satire cartoons. Since no credible news source would allow such articles like the one you have wrote. But as I said, who really uses facts anyway?
And third, I know the “20 something” and his farther quite well. Both of who are some of the most inelegant, open minded and really just nice people. If you feel the need to attack someone like you did, what does that say about you? You are more entitled to have any point of view that you desire. But next time you express it, don’t make it personal. Are you so easily threatened by other view points to where if someone does not think like you, you can not associate with them? Is your intellectual foundation really that unstable? Yes, he may just be a “20 something”, but you sir, you are acting like “a child or something”.
Just in case any of you happen to check back in, I would like to respond to your comments. Due to the length of my responses, I will have to break them up into multiple comments because of the limitations imposed by Blogger.
Kelsey: you had a lot to say, and much that I could comment about. My original point, restated in my blog post, was that Obama gave away something while getting nothing in return. I also said that Obama had "abandoned" our Eastern European allies by going back on an agreement made by the Bush Administration with the Czech Republic and Poland. It was the secondary point to which Coleman (I will use his real name since he identified himself in his comment) took issue. He and I went back and forth for quite a while. I was doing nothing to change his mind, and he was doing nothing to change mine. We could have gone along that way forever, and I would not have cared a single bit if we had. I would certainly not have deleted the posts, and I would not have removed him from my friend list. Actually, Coleman had NOTHING to do with why I did what I did. I did it entirely because of what Coleman's father did. I was so completely taken aback by the fact that he would post a public message on my wall in which he would slap my hands with a ruler and tell me to stop being mean to his boy. I do not agree with your statement that his post was made in good humor and as an attempt to defuse the situation. I was completely at a loss as to how to respond. I was angered and hurt. He had made no attempt to enter the debate in a substantive way. To be honest, I was embarassed for Coleman that his father would respond in a way that completely discounted the fact that Coleman is an adult who can speak for himself. I started and deleted a half dozen different responses, but none of them could convey how I felt. I decided instead to delete the entire thread (I suppose I could have just deleted the father's message, but I did not). And in a childish move, I removed both from my friend list. I should not have done it, but I did.
I do not know you, and I would not expect you to know this, but I admire both Coleman and his father, as well as the rest of their extended family, a great deal. Coleman's father has been a good friend for many years. We have served together on church committees, and he is an excellent leader and a good Christian man. On an even more personal level, Coleman's father has been a mentor and friend to my daughter at a time when my daughter has had a tough time due to the break up of my marriage to her mother. My daughter considers Coleman's father to be a second father to her, and I cannot think of another person upon whom I would rather her bestow the honor. I hope this information will help you understand why the entire incident has hurt me so much.
Regarding my poking fun of the social side of a social networking site, I was really making fun of myself. I use Facebook for social interaction and game playing too. But when it comes to "status updates", I doubt that I do much of anything that is of any interest to anyone else. I am just an old fart. But I do read, a LOT, and I have been interested almost my entire life in politics and policy issues. So I found that I was posting links to opinion pieces and news articles quite often as my "status." The posts were almost always ignored except by my friend Chris, who likes to go back and forth with me. Go back and look: you will see that Chris and I never agree, yet I always leave his posts on my wall. I would not have deleted Coleman's posts simply because he disagreed with me. Coleman chose to jump in on that particular issue, which was fine with me. The entire incident got me to thinking about the way I was posting, and I decided it would be better to keep the comments on a blog and then just post links to the blog, where people can ignore them more easily. Honestly, this whole thing is little more than a writing exercise for me. I think things, and I vent my feelings by writing them down. I am surprised that anyone would want to read them.
About the substantive issue of whether "making friends" with other countries is important, my feeling is that in making foreign policy decisions, our primary goal should always, always, always be advancing our own interests as a nation. If we make other countries happy in the process, then all the better. But if we don't, then so be it. Foreign policy is not about being voted "Miss Congeniality."
Coleman, based upon what I have seen of your opinions, I doubt that you and I are going to find much common ground on matters of policy. If you want to debate me, I am willing to engage. Like you, I would want want any debate to be rational and open. And you did not "hit a nerve", your father did. "Unfriending" someone on Facebook does not cause that person to cease to be your friend. You are a good person, you are smart, and funny, and talented. I respect you, even if I don't agree with you about policy.
Devon, I would like to respond to you, but it would be difficult to do so without making ad hominem (a real word, by the way; you can look it up) statements about you. After all, you made them about me.
"Obamapolitik" is indeed a made up word. Congratulations. If you had given it any thought, you would have understood that it is a play on the word "realpolitik" (you may look that one up as well). Your obscure Superman reference escapes me, but perhaps if you spent less time reading comics or watching superhero movies and more time reading literature and nonfiction, the quality of your expository writing would improve. As for my credibility as a journalist, I had no idea that I had any such credibility to flush down anyone's toilet. I am a commercial transactions lawyer, not a journalist.
On my blog, I express my opinion, and I provide links to opinion and news articles written by others. I provide the links because the linked articles are interesting to me and have provided information upon which I have based my opinions. But it is still just a blog, just a place for me to express myself.
As for comparing me to Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, you should know that I neither listen to Limbaugh nor watch Beck. I have not linked to anything written or said by either of them on my blog. Most of my source material is from the publications I read regularly: The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The Washington Post, National Review, etc.
Finally, Devon, as you may have read above, I hold both Coleman and his father in very high esteem. In fact, I hold them in such high esteem that I would never refer to them as "inelegant". Perhaps, Devon, you should spend a bit of time proofreading your comments before posting them, especially when they concern Coleman and his "farther".
Post a Comment