Chess Moves

[degringolade]

 

Post-Impressionism / Jozsef Rippl-Ronai/ Parisian Interior

Soaking beans for chili this morning.  Write here for a little while and then head over to the ‘Couv to see folks.  Pretty much a normal Saturday.  Will need to do some cleaning, but not at all feeling it yet.

Went over to the “Moon of Alabama” today and had a pretty good read.  I think that the whole discussion veers toward a stellar example of my touchstone phrase that “every truth is a half truth”.

Now, let’s not think for a moment that I fully agree with the statements here.  For some reason the “moon” has a perma-hardon for how the US does it’s heavy handed diplomacy.  Now, I can’t really say that I disagree with him in his critique of the style. From my readings, the US has never been particularly adept at the diplomatic game.  

But this article’s tenor kinda made me giggle a bit.  It is one thing to say that the US and the punditry that comments upon and manipulates the myriad “narratives” out there is incorrect in the small, doesn’t mean that the bigger issue that is being discussed doesn’t have a component of truth hanging around.

I’ll let you read the articles yourself.  But I am asking you to consider the other side of this particular half truth.  Making the assumption that the “more accurate” translations are in fact closer to the literal than the “suspect” translations consider the following:

The speeches in question are setting out a political/economic policy that recognizes that the ability to cut off necessary raw materials and components serve as a legitimate move in the way the world operates. Does anyone here think for a minute that the move can or will be restricted only to an offensive or defensive schema?

Look, by simply mentioning the “move” of cutting off supplies as a move by the opponent is an admission that two sides can play that game.