Hit the nail on the head
There are plenty of reasons, both principled and practical, why the Teaneck Township Council has no business going anywhere near the Mandate for Peace initiative, regardless of how strongly certain residents may feel about the issue. But perhaps the best expression of the complete impropriety of this latest attempt to embroil municipal government in a national and international issue came from former Mayor Frank Hall during last night's stormy Council meeting (as reported by the Record today):
With all due respect to that august body, the Council ought to stick to street renaming ordinances and railroad noise complaints until otherwise instructed."I don't remember anyone's election platform being to appoint a defense secretary for Teaneck," Hall said. "None of you has the right to represent me in international matters as a council."
posted by Teaneck Blog @ 9:07 AM
17 Comments:
How stupid can people be? For the residents that want their kids home from Iraq...duh, your kids knew that they may be going to war when they joined the service...this is what they get paid to do...stop whinning...I bet the same folks that are bitching about the war are also the ones that voted for Bush...
totally agree...leave the council to street renaming and what ever else they do here in TOWN...but leave them out of NATIONAL POLITICS!
How about a Council sponsored resolution throwing the manager out on her rear?
You know, even if you don't agree with the premise that the council should be passing resolutions on matters of national, foreign, and defense policy, there is something offensively callous (and callow) in saying "duh...your kids knew that they may be going to war when they joined service...this is what they get paid to do...stop whinning (sic)..."
There are at least three separate issues here:
1. Should the council be taking stands on national and international matters that do not affect its own defined duties and the services it's mandated to provide? Probably not, especially since doing so is likely to uspet many of our neighbors (who are just as sincere as the resolution's proponents) without convincingly having any likelihood of bringing about or speeding up the changes called for. (There are, however, gray areas such as the Patriot Act, which arguably has an impact our public library operations and which was criticized by our own Library Advisory Board.)
The answer to this question ought to be enough to put the issue of a council resolution to rest. But just for the sake of discussion...
2. Did the last election confer the kind of "mandate" described in the "Mandate for Peace" web site? I believe the last election was a repudiation of the administration and its current policy, and I do think there is a mandate for some sort of change. (I'm sure Rep. Rothman, Sen. Menendez and Sen. Lautenberg do too.) But the kind and pace of change were certainly not spelled out by the voters. The reason why I personaly am so angry and outraged at this administration is because it has put us in a situation where there are no right choices. It is, quite simply, an unholy mess, and about the only thing that rings true to me is what then-Secretary of State Colin Powell reportedly told Bush: "You break it, you own it."
Which brings us to this rather arrogant and self-absorbed bit of ostentatious moral posturing that was reported in the Record:
3. "This is no longer an issue of jurisdiction. This is an issue of humans caring about other humans, and getting up and saying this death and destruction has to end." So is it now the Conveyed Truth that the only way for caring humans to care about other humans is to urge the post-haste vacating of the unholy mess we created? I would think that really caring about other humans would involve some serious consideration of the people who will be left behind in this mess: both the victims to whom we have some responsibility and victimizers who may have found themselves an urban Afghanistan, right in the center of the world's most unstable region.
But, as long as we can smugly say we're caring people, who cares really? Let the ethnic cleasing redouble!
"This is no longer an issue of jurisdiction. This is an issue of humans caring about other humans, and getting up and saying this death and destruction has to end."
Jeff I have to disagree with your assessment of this quote. I think it's pointing out why it is appropriate to discuss and debate this issue at even a town level. It's not filled with all the hubris that you attribute to it.
Mr. S, I have to disagree with your assessment of what the quote was about. It was not pointing out why it was appropriate to discuss and debate the issue -- isn't that what they were doing? It was arguing for why it was appropriate for the council to adopt a resolution calling for a specific course of action, based on the dubious assertion that the election mandated it. The implication, I think, is that if one is a caring human, one would have to agree with it. I think caring humans can and will and do have different thoughts on how to end our involvment with the least amount of death and destruction. One thing for sure is it won't end once we leave, and it will probably come back to haunt us years from now.
That said, I admit I haven't seen a copy of the resolution, though I don't believe the council should pass it no matter what its says. And I say that as a human who cares about other humans as much as the person who tried to set up that little moral divide.
Jeff, I think your assessment is right on target.
As a point of information, the Mandate for Peace placed on the agenda by Councilmember Parker can be found on the Teaneck Peace and Justice Coalition website. (It is not easy to find and is linked only to the word "FORM")
It is not the same as the one listed on the Mandate for Peace website refereneced in the post and also featured prominently on the Teaneck Peace and Justice Coalition site.
The theory that keeping our troops in Iraq will keep things from getting worse is hard to accept as things continue to get worse. Is there any evidence that if we had simply abandoned Iraq 12 or 18 months ago it would be any worse than it is today?
It brings to mind a theory that was not uncommon in regards to South Africa in the 80’s. The white government could not abandon apartheid and give the black population equal voting rights. It would be a blood bath. Whites that did not flee would be slaughtered and it wouldn’t stop there. The mixed population would be wiped out as well.
Not to leave out Vietnam, we had the domino theory. If we abandoned Vietnam to the commies, it would create a domino effect and we would eventually lose all of South East Asia. The theory I heard included the eventuak fall of Australia.
Even if we were to accept the premise that the blood bath we have created is not as bad as the blood bath that would ensue, we need to keep in mind that the President still has near unilateral powers with respect to this war. Even if some good could come from a continued US presence, what in Bush’s track record would convince us that his administration could manage it successfully?
Given the political realities in this country, I can’t imagine anything that would be better for the people of Iraq than for the United States to withdraw as quickly as possible.
Those who disagree with my view can rest assured that President Bush doesn’t share it. They can look forward to his January policy speech and find out what new way will be found to say, “Stay the course.”
Jeff-
the statment may of been callus but it is true.
These people enlisted on their own to serve this ocuntry...they new that this was going to be a possibilty..so can we stop whinning about it?
the council should get its own shit together before it dabbles in national politics...until they can do that they should keep their traps shut and their pens capped!
I think it would be irresponsible to just shrug and say "oops! my bad..." and pull out.
Unfortunately, stay the course now means after screwing things up - do your best to try to make it right, even if it means allocating precious resources to do so.
blogreader said:
I think it would be irresponsible to just shrug and say "oops! my bad..." and pull out.
It was equally irresponsible to invade under false pretenses and it would be equally irresponsible to ask more of our troops to die in a war that most experts believe is already lost.
All of this is immaterial to the Teaneck Town Council who are not in a position to make decisions about troop deployment.
swurgle posted-
It was equally irresponsible to invade under false pretenses and it would be equally irresponsible to ask more of our troops to die in a war that most experts believe is already lost.
That is their job swurgle..that is what they are paid to do...they knew the risk when they enlisted.
IF the troops are so unhappy then they should open their traps and say so...otherwise what I am hearing is that a majority of US troops are proud of what they ahve done and want to dinish the job.
swurgle posted-
All of this is immaterial to the Teaneck Town Council who are not in a position to make decisions about troop deployment.
exactly..they should stick to their job ..street renaming and whatever other worthless things that they do!
It was equally irresponsible to invade under false pretenses and it would be equally irresponsible to ask more of our troops to die in a war that most experts believe is already lost.
Unfortunately, you can't change the past.
Done is done.
So now we need to make it right - somehow....
And yes, this is not what we elected Town Council to do.
We elected them to run our town.
Peace and Justice
1st brigade patrol Votee Park
10pm - 2am th fri sat
2nd brigade patrol Cedar Lane
4pm -9 pm tu, wed thur
KEEP PEACE IN THE STREETS OF TEANECK.....GANG PATROL ASK OUR POLICE THEY WILL TELL YOU HOW BAD IT IS...PEACE AND JUSTICE HERE FIRST...
Dont the Teaneck kids wandering the streets at all hours of the night have parents?
Dont these adults wonder where their kids are, what they are doing?
Oops silly me...if they dont care what they are doing in school why should they care what they are doing wandering the streets at all hours of the night?!
TEANECK NEEDS A CURFEW FOR THOSE CHILDREN UNDER 18....NO NEED FOR THEM TO BE OUT ON A SCHOOL NIGHT AFTER 10PM....!!!!!!!!!
Post a Comment
<< Home