Observations About The Third American Presidential Debate.

By Sodium

The Observations :
=================
(1)  The topic of the, " Third American Presidential Debate ",  between President Obama and Governor Romney, was supposed to be about the United States'  foreign policy. Romney tried more than once to dwell on the economy. the moderator of the debate, being a good man, was too kind to call Romney's attention to adhere firmly to the topic of the debate, foreign affairs. But, Obama responded forcefully in kind. I wish he did not;  and let the American voters reach their own conclusion about Romney's deviation from the topic.

(2)  Although two years ago, Obama, as the President of the United States, held an International Conference   on Nuclear Disarmament, attended by the majority of the countries that had/has nuclear weapons, no mention was made of such an extremely important subject for the safety of future generations of the human race. In spite of the fact that the Conference has not produced concrete resolutions, the fact that it was held, in the first place, should have a far reaching meaning, more than the eye could see, at the present time. None of all that was mentioned, let alone discussed constructively.

(3)  Iran should not develop nuclear weapons. Period. So should not any another country in the globe. Period. However, demanding from Iran to abandon its nuclear activities, while the members of the countries of the exclusive, " Nuclear Club ",  keep continuing stock-piling more nuclear arsenals, instead of  being a role model in reaching an international accord to eliminate and destroy all nuclear weapons in their arsenals, indicates, at least to the writer of this essay, mountains of hypocrisy. Certainly, both debaters, either overlooked this hard fact or ignored it. Either way, it simply does not make sense ignoring or overlooking nuclear disarmament, in such important Presidential Debate.

(4)  Sadly, both debaters were competing with one another for giving blind support to whatever Israel did, whether right or wrong. At the same time, ignoring the daily suffering of the human beings, the Palestinians whom Israel mistreats, humiliates, violates daily their human rights, through 45 years of military occupation of  Palestine. The question, " why they hate us? " becomes so foolish to ask.

(5)  The bloody conflict in Syria is so complex, military intervention will make it even bloodier. All major powers, ( U.S.A., Russia, China, France and Britain ), know that without their joint agreement to end the blood shed in Syria, through the United Nations' Security Council, the conflict will continue unabated, and the dangerous potentiality exists for the conflict in Syria  to spread out to the neighboring countries, including Israel, Turkey and Iran. Syria is not Libya. Unless the big powers act jointly, in good faith, all the efforts of Al-Akhdhar El-Ibrahimi, the United Nations' envoy to cease the hostility will fail, as all attempts of Kofi Anan, have failed before him. Ignoring this reality and substituting it with words of bellicosity, during the debate, is self defeating and will not stop the blood shed in Syria.

Conclusion :
============
The foregoing is only an outline of  a longer list of observations about the third debate. The intent in writing this essay is merely to help the readers who are interested in exploring more scrutiny, concerning the debate so that the American readers who are voters on November 6, 2012, will be more knowledgeable about both President Obama and Governor Romney and where they both stand on important issues in foreign policies, before they cast their votes. It is imperative for the voters to know as much as possible where each one of the candidates stands on these important issues, since the position of each debater, on the foregoing issues may determine the trend for war or peace, although constitutionally, only the United States Congress can decide whether the United States can go to war or not. But, never underestimate the Power of the Presidency of the United States of America.

END.               

Polygamy In Arabia Before Appearance Of Islam.

While the writer of this essay was reviewing recently the entries of the "Traffic Resources" of  the readership of this website, world wide, one particular entry had asked the following question :

Was there polygamy in Arabia before the Appearance of Islam ?

The answer to the above question is a BIG YES.

In fact, polygamy was very rampant in Arabia before the appearance of Islam. A man could marry as many wives as he could afford to support. It was even socially acceptable, if not normal , for a husband to have as many as 30 wives. Yes, you just have read it correctly : 30 wives. Unreal !  Is not it?

Something Is Worth Remembering :
===============================

One of the great achievements of Islam has been the fact that it has reformed the social order or disorder of  Arabia by providing strict instructions to its adherents to limit the number of wives a man can marry is four, with the following tough condition or requirement : If a man cannot treat all four wives equally, ( humanly an impossible task ), such a man must not marry four wives, but only one.

Since it is humanly impossible to treat all four wives in equal fairness and justice, the vast majority of the Muslim men of the Twenty First Century restrict themselves to marrying only one wife.

Recommendation :
==================

To understand more fully the answer to the question, " was there in Arabia polygamy before the appearance of Islam ? ",  it is highly recommended to read the following essay published on this website :

(12)  The Status Of Women In Islam ,dated May 20,2011.

It is number (12) of a series of 14 different topics about Islam.

In order to get topic number (12), just keep clicking at the bottom of the newer essays ,the label which says "Older Post".

Happy Reading.............
       

President Obama Deserves Second Term.

Dear Readers,

I have followed President Obama's actions, and in-actions as well, since he has been elected President in 2008 presidential election, with a large margin against his Republican opponent, Senator John MaCain.

Although I have some disagreement with some of  Obama's actions and in-actions as well, I have tried to see the WHOLE FOR-EST of issues he has to deal with, instead of concentrating my sight on a tree or two or three. Yes, Obama has failed in delivering on some issues, or perhaps his hands were tied, and thus, he could not do much about them.

Therefore, my vote in the presidential election on November 6,2012 will be cast, once again, for President Obama. Reasons :

(1)  Obama has inherited from Bush-Cheney Administration  huge problems and extremely unfavorable circumstances in all fronts-internally and internationally.

(2)  To be specific,he has  inherited two wars : One in Iraq and the second one in Afghanistan. He withdrew the American military forces from Iraq. I wish he has done the same in Afghanistan, since Afghanistan is well known in recorded history to have been the grave yard for conquerors and empires. It seems to me that the pressure from certain power groups in the United States was so immense on him he just could not repeat what he had done in Iraq : military forces withdrawal from Afghanistan as well.

(3)  Obama has inherited horrible economic and financial  conditions America has not encountered since The Great Depression of 1930's : economic meltdown, bankrupt financial institutions and automobile manufacturers and accelerating unemployment and expensive heath care system most Americans could not afford, especially in an  environment of rising unemployment.

I can go on giving more reasons why I intend to vote again for Obama,but lest I burden the readers with more reasons,I would like to stress the fact that Obama has done splendidly, as one examines all of the above problems he has to deal with. He has improved the health care system for the majority of Americans,not as much as one might like,but good enough for a start. Yes,there is more to be desired in this particular issue.

As to the big problem of rate of unemployment, his administration has succeeded in decreasing it from 16 percent to 7.8 percent. Just to appreciate such an achievement, one has to remember that just two years ago the rate of unemployment was around 16 to 18 percent. Even some reports put the figure at 20 percent. Obama's and his team have done an admirable job, by any standard, on the unemployment issue.

In the international arena, President Obama initiated an International Conference on Nuclear Disarmament about two years ago. In my view, this is one of the most encouraging attempt to get rid of all nuclear weapons, world wide. Although the conference did not come up with concrete resolutions,the fact it was held and attended by most countries that has nuclear weapons is by itself encouraging. It seems to me that such a conference has a far reaching objective than the eye can see. It is only the beginning, if humankind  cares to save itself from total and mutual destruction by the nuclear arsenals it has in stores in thousands upon thousands of tons. I tip my hat, in due respect, to President Obama for making the initiative.

Final words : To those readers of this website,who have no idea who I am and what I stand for, I submit the following information, not because I must do so,but because I would like to help out as much as I can :

~  I am an INDEPENDENT AMERICAN VOTER, leaning slightly to the left. I have never been a member of the Democratic Party, nor the Republican Party. I vote according to what my conscience dictates. During my adult life, I voted for moderate Republicans nominees as much as I voted for Democratic Party;s nominees. In short, I cherish my INDEPENDENCE, and have no intent to change. Period.

As to voting to a third party, I did vote for Ralph Nader in the Presidential election of 2000. He received only 4 percent of the total votes. I will not vote to third party again, unless the third party is credible enough to have a fair chance of defeating the nominees of  the two major parties, meaning the nominee of the Republican Party and the nominee of the Democratic Party, as well.

Yes, I will adhere to the lesser evil idea, rather than throwing my vote away for a third party candidate who has no chance of winning whatsoever.

All the above outline is not to influence any voter. Not at all.

Please consider this essay as an attempt  to make it clear to the readers of this website where I stand on various issues, as they may read future essays that may touch some of the issues mentioned in this article.

Sincerely,
Sodium    

   

 
      

Chris Hedges Is At It Again With Another Excellent Column.

I must admit that I have been fascinated by the writings of  Chris Hedges. Therefore, I have always looked forward to read what he writes, whether in the books he writes or the columns he posts every Monday on Truthdig's website.

I have just finished reading his latest column, entitled :

" What Is Happening to Muslims Will Happen to the Rest of Us ", dated October 1, 2012.

In the above column of his, Heddges  is adhering firmly to the moral high ground, in connection to violation of the U.S. Constitution and justice system and one of the most cherished American ideals : innocent until proven guilty by a legitimate Court of Law.

I highly recommend to the readers of this website to take their time and read Chris Hedges' column specified as quoted above, at the following website :

www.truthdig.com

Happy reading...........