MY THOUGHTS ON THE SHUT DOWN

Everyone in the world is concerned about the madness in the United States.  How could such a situation arise. Why would anyone want to shut down the government?   I don't have any inside information, but to me a good part of it is transparent.

The American government has been bought.  There is some wiggle room, but it is diminishing.  Out of any crisis things could change for the better (or not).

Obamacare which he is proud to associate his name or the Affordable Care Act that apparently is more acceptable to American voters is only a symptom of the problem.  The Affordable Care Act is actually a step in the right direction, even if it does offend some of the wealthy or the ignorant.  It is astonishing how many lies have been accepted.   Americans don't question why most other industrial countries have cheaper and more effective health care, or where medical problems are not the most common basis for bankruptcies.  It is true that at the top there is undoubtedly greater medical expertise in the U.S., but that is not accessible to most of the population.

The level of national debt is also used as an excuse, but the concern is hypocritical.  One solution is not all that strange--raise taxes and enforce payment better.  You may be concerned that job creators will be offended.  Of course they will shift jobs to slaves and robots as much as they can, but they should not be rewarded for that.  It is also very short sighted as they depend on a consuming public that now doesn't have the money or the job security.  Being too greedy is like biting the hand that feeds you.  I don't think rich people should bear the entire burden of paying off the debt, but they have benefited the most. in terms of infrastructure, opportunities, educated workers and consumers, and surprisingly (to many of them) regulations.

The debt crisis accelerated with the George W Bush regime with their major tax cuts for the wealthy even in the face of an unnecessary, but expensive war with questionable accounting.  They botched a legitimate war, thereby prolonging it.  The de-regulations and superficial financial oversight were root causes of the disaster that Obama had to deal with while those who caused it constantly complained and wanted to use their previous remedies--lower taxes and less regulation.

The Republicans are now very self righteous (in reality defensive) that they are the ones willing to negotiate and the Democrats are not willing to compromise.  The Affordable Care Act is one example of a compromise--straight from a Republican think tank and adopted by a Republican governor, Mitt Romney himself.  It has proved itself not to be the end of the world, at least in Massachusetts. Republicans routinely tack on repealing Obamacare and abortion demands to unrelated bills to not only make their points (to their base), but slow down government.  There have been over 15 requests to negotiate budgets all rejected by House of Representatives controlled by Republicans.  They now are offering piecemeal bits of budget, to make themselves look good, but avoiding more difficult budget issues.  They don't like it when the Democrats push back.

Americans can blame themselves.  In the 2010 mid term elections the trouble began with lots of criticisms of slow recovery and how awful Obamacare is.  Obama was hemmed in with his idea of a stimulus heavily criticized by Republicans who wanted austerity (except for the military industrial complex) and lower taxes.  Progressives were disappointed that Obama didn't seem to fight harder for their agenda.  Republicans had much less trouble getting out their committed voters.  They were then able to gerrymander voting districts to maximize their resources something which is done every ten years by the winners of state elections and now improved with technology.

Tea partiers are resentful of being called racists, but there is evidence they are not immune to prejudice.  Some surveys have revealed that Obamacare is hated, but the Affordable Care Act is more acceptable.  Racists realize it is not politically correct to use obvious terms such as the N word, but have developed codes.  Many are not so coded with Muslims who are safer to denigrate.  I don't think most Republicans are any more racist than the general population, but they do take advantage of racist thinkers.  Americans are much less racist than they were a century ago, but the feelings have not yet completely died.

I have read that the Republicans are controlled by Evangelicals and Tea Party members neither of whom seem particularly open minded.  Moderate Republicans are still active.  An original cause is that party strategists at one time realized their economic policies were not enough to get power and they harnessed themselves to "social" issues.  Racists used to vote for Democrats, but when Lyndon Johnson signed some Civil Rights legislation Republicans were quick to establish their credentials as against extreme civil rights, and although trying to be politically correct use lots of code to create a bond.  They learned that abortion and gay rights are issues that overcome obvious economic concerns.  Gun rights fit in with corporate agenda.  In my opinion they all made America less of a fair and free place.

Throughout history people have realized money very often decides elections, yet there are fewer and fewer restrictions on political donations.  The recent outrage over the IRS masks the fact that even more campaign financial abuse has been accepted.  It is a complex issue  that boils down to the fact that in order to get elected a candidate is required to spend more money than in the past.  They have to spend more time fundraising.  The money comes with expectations and the big money with greater expectations.  The fundraising time takes away from actually studying the issues and making reasonable compromises with those who have different priorities.  Media benefits from increased advertising revenue and they try to fan their ratings with horse race coverage.

The wealthy have bought their way.  Much of their high income is taxed at 15%, inheritance taxes have been lowered and they are able to hide money offshore.  How can they get away with it?

Why tolerate gerrymandering?  Why tolerate increased voter restrictions?  Why tolerate campaign finance abuse?

How can they get out of this mess? Both sides are accusing each other of causing a major disaster. The Speaker of the House decides which bills are put to a vote and Republicans avoid offering anything that they are not sure will go their way.  A big fear now is that with gerrymandered districts, a Republican has more to fear from their base than they do from a Democratic opponent.

The voters can alleviate the situation in 2014 if they choose to do so.   Some solutions require a long term effort.

The non voting protestor

When you look at the numbers they don't seem right.  Barack Obama got elected ok winning both the popular vote and the electoral college tally.  However, his hands are effectively tied by some hardball opposition who are able to take advantage of some quirks of American politics.

In American politics they work on a two year cycle with two political parties that make all decisions. Both parties seem to be in perpetual campaign mode.  The electorate gets most pumped up for the presidential elections held every four years realizing that the president holds significant power with the commander in chief status, the veto and the bully pulpit.  The American Constitution is set up as a delicate balance of power that can be manipulated.

The Senate is intended to be distorted.  During the Constitution negotiations small states were fearful of having big states (particularly big northern anti slave states) dictate policies to them and thus the smallest states have the same power as the biggest states.  In the United States it turns out that smaller states very often are critical in policy procedures and must be catered to.  Further complicating are procedures that allow a minority party to block efforts of the majority.  The minority Republicans are able to stop some issues coming to a vote.  They must confirm high level nominations for executive power.  They have used this power and then are able to boast that the majority policies don't work.  In reality it is very difficult to make significant policy changes.  The Senate is supposed to be the chamber of sober thought and that is ensured by longer terms (6 years) and staggering so that there is only a turnover of 1/3 each election.   In Canada little Prince Edward Island holds 4 seats regardless of population and Quebec fearing assimilation by anglophones campaigns for a minimal percentage of seats.

The House of Representatives is supposed to represent popular sentiment and are elected every two years.  Ironically the current House is controlled by the party that received fewer votes.  How is that possible in a chamber that supposedly reflects the wishes of the majority.  Every ten years Americans hold a census and unlike in Canada, the necessary adjustments to electoral boundaries are decided by the party in power for that particular state.  Although 2012 resulted in a major decision by the voters, it turns out that the 2010 election was more decisive including at the state level.

Going back to the previous 2008 election Americans decided for the first time to give a chance for a black presidential candidate.  The voters also gave majority status for the Democrats in both the Senate and the House of Representatives.  As any new party in power the winners embarked on their agenda and encountered some success.  But it wasn't too long before the minority was able exert major obstacles to the supposed governing power.  The Senate power structure was undetermined while one seat was subject to court procedures before being decided and another was turned around after the death of a Senator.

When 2010 came around the Republicans were able to rouse their supporters in sufficient numbers to not only control the House of Representatives, but gain some leverage in the Senate.  More importantly they gained some very big leverage in state governments.  At the state level they were in a position to change boundaries for the House of Representatives and in many cases adjust voting rules to favour their party..

How did this happen?  In other blogs I have written about the disproportionate power of money, but it must also be acknowledged that big business special interest money is focused.  They do not need to get everyone on their side, not even 50%, but just those areas that have leverage.  From their positions of power they helped draw electoral boundary lines that allowed fewer Republican votes to result in a very resistant House of Representatives.

Again  how did supposed Democrat leaning people let this happen?  They were the big losers.  Some of them were upset that Obama didn't push harder for their agenda.  Others thought things were under control and still others didn't pay attention.

The Democrats were hurt almost irreparably by the 2010 election results.  Most of what they really want to accomplish is stymied and anything they accomplish is whittled down and delayed.  This can drag on through the next election and beyond.  Big money certainly has an agenda that is not in sync with most voters.

Obama and anyone else in his position has to contend with the opposition who use whatever rules they can and he has to deal with big money, including his own big money without which his power is jeopardized.  The huge government bureaucracy has its own agenda that is somewhat hidden.  The president knows and lives with many factors unknown to the general public.  It is easy to judge someone, but hard to factor in the circumstances.

Progress only happens with actual deeds.   Compromise has become unacceptable to some and they have tools that can prevent or at least diminish efforts to go forward.  They feel their way is the only way and even considering the preferences of the majority is strongly resisted.  It could be that hate is their fuel and if so I would like to think that love could help counteract that.

Obama knows he cannot exercise power without support.  The big money they can get is very necessary to get voter support so he finds himself watering down his ideals.  The opposition is bulldog determined to make him look bad.  They know how to leverage power.

Although fiscal conservatism and social conservatism have much in common it is far from a perfect fit.  The Republicans are very clever at aligning the two factions, but in the end it may be their undoing.

The problem is to get the power.  A compromise is one way of edging closer to what you really want. Partly it shows you are willing to work with others, but also a compromise gives a demonstration of the goodness of your idea.  Refusing to compromise has its advantages as well.  Republicans have to satisfy the voting members of their own party who are concerned about their ideology.  Some hope that by refusing to help Obama the voters will blame him for the resulting problems.

When faced with two choices as most Americans are every two years you can get upset that you don't fully agree with either choice and walk away.  It does make a statement, but it doesn't move anything concrete.  It is true you are often forced to choose the lesser of two evils, but from a distance it seems like there is a significant difference.  Do you want to surrender your options or widen your options. That is the real choice.  A rational voter is the great enemy of emotional manipulation.

Liberals can be very negative on Obama for not fulfilling their agenda.  They need to realize their agenda will most likely be discarded if Obama's team gets beaten.   How the Republicans are able to obstruct anything remotely progressive is frightening, but part of it is due to apathy.  Their opposition supporters understand the importance of voting.

JAVIER BARDEM A GIFT FROM SPAIN

Spanish ranks among the most common global languages.  It stands to reason they might have cultural elements that spread to the rest of us.  For example, Don Quixote, Picasso, tortillas, flamenco, paella,   Another example is Javier Bardem.

The first time I watched Javier was in "No Country for Old Men"  He played a cold blooded murderer with an unusual way of executing his victims.  Before seeing the movie I watched him at the Academy Awards where he had been nominated (and won) Best Actor in a Supporting role. Instead of a glamorous spouse or girl friend he went with his mother.  A big contrast to the image the movie gave him.

Born in 1969 in the Canary Islands to a show business family.  Starting at age 5 he started appearing in tv series.  His first movie was in  1990.  He developed a strong reputation in Spain before attracting wider attention..

"Love in the Time of Cholera", my second Bardem movie displayed a comic touch in a romantic role.  Set in Colombia and written by a famous Latin author it was screened for an American audience.  I enjoyed it.

"Vicky Cristina Barcelona" was another vehicle for Javier in the American market.  Directed by the venerable Woody Allen and starring Rebecca Hall and  Scarlett Johanson with Javier creating a love triangle that expanded beyond.  Real life wife, Penelope Cruz won the Academy Award for best supporting actress..  A strange movie in many ways, allowing Javier to demonstrate his comic talents.

"Eat, Pray Love" with Julia Roberts.  He represented the Love part helping to conclude the movie.  He made a late appearance, but took over when he did.

At about this point I was so enjoying Javier's English performances that the next step was to check out his Spanish performances.  He looked so comfortable in a variety of English speaking roles, but most of us are at our best in our own environment.

"The Sea Within" demonstrated a versatility I wasn't expecting.   An excellent movie from conception to execution.  About a real Spaniard who was paralyzed and campaigned to legalize euthanasia.,   Despite my description Javier displayed a comic touch and surprisingly romantic. Directed by a favorite director Alejandro Amenabar.  My favorite of all Javier's movies.  Read more at:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2013/10/paralyzed-men-in-4-foreign-movies.html

"Before Night Falls" was brutal, and fairly explicit.  Here he played an historical Cuban gay and dealt with discrimination and AIDS   He received an Oscar nomination  which was rare for foreign language performance.

He received yet another Oscar nomination for "Biutiful" another brutal story highlighting his dramatic skills.  Difficult to watch all the suffering.

With "The Dancer Upstairs" another movie set in South American (unnamed, but seemed to be modeled on politics of Peru) he played a married man attracted to a woman who turned out to be a revolutionary;  a youthful talented Italian actress Laura Morante who happened to be in her mid 40's.   Most of the actors were Spanish actors, but English was the main language.  He played a gentle character during a radical underground troubles.  John Malkovitch directed.

Having done all this watching I decided to add "Skyfall".  I was an early James Bond fan, but got bored with the formula.  This most recent Bond movie was enjoyable from a lot of good acting (Daniel Craig, Judy Dench and of course Javier), music (especially Adele) and action.   Some commentators said Javier was the greatest Bond villain.  I thought he was fairly unique and enjoyable, not sure if I would make the same claim.  

Movie watchers tend to fantasize about their favorites and I admit I was pleased Javied married another of my favorites, Penelope Cruz and they now have two children.  Actors appear to want to be good at both comedy and tragedy.  Javier Bardem actually is.

CONTAGIOUS by Jonah Berger

One common excuse (or brush off)  heard thousands of times by me while trying to sell an ad is that word of mouth works the best.  Agree, but I like to add often word of mouth needs some help getting started.

Here in "Contagious" is some help that can be applied by marketing, advertising and selling staff.   Author Jonah Berger uses lots of research and stories to make his points about how word of mouth can work for just about any product, service or cause.  Although social media now plays a very significant role, it is not yet as critical as actual physical contact (including voice).  He identifies six elements that are important to the process but admits that it is not necessary to have all six at any one time.

Word of mouth has the advantage of being more credible and also more targeted.  Unfortunately it is not as easy to measure as traditional media or the newer digital media.

The questions and comments below are intended to point the way to his six STEPPS.  There are a lot of ideas and examples to expand the initial element.

Does the intended message have relevance to most people?  People share things that make them look good.  They want to be the first to spread some inside information.  Social currency

Often you are able to set your message in such a way that thoughts already in someone's mind will trigger a link and reinforce the message. Mars chocolate bar sales increased during the Mars space probe. Triggers

Does you message have an emotional reaction?  The key element is arousal.  Two examples are anger and amusement.   Emotion.

Is the message recipient to think they are the first or will they gain comfort from being part of a crowd?   A busy restaurant attracts more customers than an empty one.  Public

Can your message be put into action?  Is it of use?  Practical

Can you relate stories that relate to your brand?  Stories

Your message doesn't have to hit all elements, but if you expect it to gain momentum it should have at least two.  As a salesman I developed stories (usually from my customers' experiences) and always looked for a snappy phrase to get my prospect's attention and create a positive association.  Reading this book will help generate lots of ideas for you for selling, advertising or marketing products, services or causes.

To find out more about what Jonah has to say click on http://jonahberger.com

HAMILTON'S FIFTH SUPERCRAWL

My story is not meant to be comprehensive as it is only one of over 100,000 versions.  As the Supercrawl has evolved it has built on its own success and grown each year.  It is now drawing people not only from Hamilton, but Toronto and Buffalo and parts in between and beyond.

This year there were four main stages plus lots of vendors, galleries, buskers, causes.  New restaurants have opened and older restaurants have renovated.  More than a dozen food trucks added to the variety of food available.  All this meant no one could see, hear, or eat everything and choices had to be made.

This first photo is of Lester Coloma adding a few touches to his mural.  He has done a number of murals around Ontario and beyond.  I thought this one could easily be the logo for the Supercrawl.  I have shown a number of his murals in previous blogs.

Friday night  on my way home to get rested for the next day, saw a French Canadian group  and decided to stay and watch  Les Trois Accords, from Drummondville.  I had already forgone an early bedtime and decided  to check their website when I did get home. Language can open doors.  Their music did have a lot of melody, but I understand the words were too clever for a unilingual audience. Fortunately they were able to draw a few francophones as well as some appreciative anglophones.

Saturday morning on our weekly trip to the Farmer's Market and the library we watched as the street was set up and we could appreciate it would be bigger than ever.  More areas were cordoned off for more vendors and entertainment.

At the booth for the Hemophiliac Society I bought a Polish sausage which was the best value of the day and for a good cause.

Add caption

One of the first shows I saw on Saturday was Hachey Mouthpeace with the Brass Ensemble of the Hamilton Philharmonic Orchestra.  I was unprepared for the noises coming from Hachey which amounted to a percussion section.   You always think of classical musicians as being pretty serious, but this was very much a fun blend for everyone.



At the CasiNO booth  we signed a petition and pinned on buttons. The merchants that support Supercrawl feel a downtown casino would threaten their livelihoods.  Having lived in the North End for over 30 years I have been very pleased how the street has gradually improved and is now attracting people looking for art, for music, for restaurants and more.  Hamilton, especially the downtown and north end, after years of neglect is coming into its own.  A casino would have to compete against other casinos in more touristy towns and would want to eliminate the competition provided by Flamboro Downs.  I have a vested interest in the track, but anyone can appreciate that Flamboro Downs already contributes a lot of revenue directly to Hamilton plus a lot of jobs in agriculture. Putting them out of business like the Ontario government has done to tracks in Sarnia and Windsor in exchange for a casino is a foolish gamble with essentially no new benefits.

I listen to Mary Ito  Saturday and Sunday mornings on Fresh Air before I get out of bed.  Lots of things follow from that.  This Saturday she mentioned she would be at the Supercrawl introducing some music from Said the Whale.

A little later I did make it over to get my photo of Mary with Bruce Croxen and stayed to watch Said the Whale.  They attracted a big crowd and played to the audience.  I was fortunate to win a T shirt thrown into the crowd.

Time to eat and we made it to Culantro, the new Peruvian restaurant that I had heard about from my daughter Heather and read a number of favorable reviews.  It was just far enough off James Street that not too many out-of-towners had discovered it.  Nonetheless it soon packed up.  We had a fairly quick meal, bearing in mind that their menu needs time to properly prepare.  We learned that the cook/owner is a neighbour who lives on the same street about two blocks away from us.  We also met an old friend from the Farmers Market who has relocated, just in time to stock up on both his tea and soap.

With over 100,000 visitors keeping things under control can be difficult.  The police were in various formats.  On foot, on bicycles and on horse back.  For the most part they were part of the crowd, helping people find what they were looking for, but were reassuring.  No problems to report.





The next big attraction for us was Orange Circus that we had seen last year.  Word had gotten out, but we arrived an hour ahead of time and got a fairly good spot to stand and there discovered a co-worker of Sharon's from St Catharines who had brought his wife, brother and sister in law.  Then we met our neighbour from two doors away. Orange Circus had expanded from last year adding in trampolines, a bagpiper and various actors with their trademark fire background.  The fire came sudden and really added something to the show.

After that show we decided to wait in line for Mex-i-Can, a favorite after many visits.  Like most of the other restaurants on James Street they really packed them in.  I would like to have visited more restaurants, but my stomach can only handle so much and the lineups were long at all of them including several food trucks.

We decided to watch the headliner, Passion Pit the group that helped attract the big crowd and the last act of Supercrawl.  Pretty difficult to get very close.  They filled up the street for about two blocks, plus a side street, plus some on rooftops.  Their fans were very happy.


Hopefully next year the organizers will build on their well earned success.  To really enjoy it you have to plan ahead and then be prepared to be spontaneous.   There is more than big name acts. Although some acts are well established and attracted their own fans, there were lots of lesser known acts on stage to reach a new audience. There are also buskers that are often very enjoyable such as cellist Geoff Ball and harpist Rachel Nolan pictured below.

This year a hidden traffic problem was a bridge being replaced on Bay Street that runs parallel to James.  After the bridge is completed for next year it might open up some more possibilities, at least for traffic flow.  This year the Supercrawl expanded by putting a stage at Pier 8 which is on Hamilton Harbour in a beautiful setting.  Unfortunately I didn't make it because it was too far away and I had to choose between events.  There is a big gap between Barton Street and Pier 8.  The organizers did offer a shuttle bus.  In that gap are a few interesting restaurants including the Harbour Diner that had been featured on television, but the area is mostly residential.  Inevitably visitors will have to choose what they most want to see.

A wonderful tiring weekend.  Proud to be part of it.  Do you want to add in your own version?  Next year it will be better than ever.  Hope to see more of you there!

HAMILTON (Ontario) WAS NOT MY FIRST CHOICE

Thinking back a few years it is really quite remarkable that I live in and love Hamilton, Ontario.

My vague awareness of Hamilton while growing up was negative.  I grew up in Oshawa which in some ways is similar.  While Hamilton was known as Steel Town, Oshawa was pretty much a General Motors town.  Although I was not too conscious of it both were towns had a heavy union influence. Both were on Lake Ontario on opposite sides of Toronto which both cities love and hate.

By high school I had become a football fan, particularly the Canadian Football League.  Hamilton had a franchise, but for some reason I rooted for Montreal and of course hated the Ti-Cats.  My father was a truck driver who liked to take his children on his trips one of which was to Hamilton.  I remember going over the Skyway Bridge sitting high in the truck cab with the height making me dizzy and uncomfortable.  We took the first exit and drove along an industrial road with all the steel factories blowing a lot of smoke and dropped off my dad's load and turned around to go back home.

My last two years of high school were in Haliburton, a tourist area with lots of lakes and woods.  I hitch-hiked a lot and I remember being picked up by one fellow on my home stretch.  He thought I lived in "God's country."  He then went on to describe where he lived which was Hamilton.  The actual description I now think must have been inside a factory, but it left a strong negative impression.

Anything I read in papers about Hamilton seemed to have a reference to factories, unions, crime or pollution.  Although not sure of getting into a university I never considered McMaster.  As a student at nearby University of Guelph one fellow in my residence said that he thought Hamilton was the Mafia headquarters for Canada.

Job hunting is serious business and I spent a lot of time at it in two separate chunks lasting six months.  On one occasion I heard about a job that fascinated me in social work.  I applied to every agency in Ontario, but left Hamilton to the desperate end.  On another occasion I decided I wanted to work in newspaper circulation and again left Hamilton to the very last.

Despite all of these negative experiences Hamilton was my destiny. I was offered a job in Toronto, but at the last minute they had an opening in Hamilton and wanting to avoid a long recruiting process and realizing I didn't have any Toronto connections offered it to me.  I did have a sister in nearby Burlington and she with her husband were agreeable to helping me get settled.  That led to other things and I found myself settling down.  You can read about one of the "other things at http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2012/08/how-i-met-my-wife.html

Were my fears justified?  While there certainly were factories that churned out pollution, there were other things to compensate.  As years have gone by manufacturing greatly diminished.  Where I live has improved both on the Harbourfront and on my walking downtown.  There are few towns where you can easily walk to the harbour which  now has a very pleasant park and also downtown.

My kids got into activities that got me involved.  Sports, music, schools.  Both my kids left town for university, but my daughter came back and is a very big Hamilton booster.  My son ended up quite the traveler (now living in New Zealand), but follows events in Hamilton.

There are always things to complain about, but Hamilton has many features that make me glad I stuck around.   Bits of nature are nearby such as Cootes Paradise, Bayfront Park and over 180 waterfalls.  A little bit of history at Dundurn Castle, Whitehern and Battlefield Park.  I enjoy Hamilton Public Library, art crawl, Farmer's Market, view from the Mountain, loads of restaurants (Gate of India, Acclamation, Wild Orchid), Gore Park fountain, Gage Park.  Most of the time I drive back home by the York St exit which has Hamilton Harbour on one side and Cootes Paradise on the other and has trees lined along York Blvd til you get past Dundurn Castle where in the summer months is a model waterfalls.   After all is said and done the people have been good to me.

Syria, what a mess!

There are no good choices at this point.  No one should be condemned for however they vote or even for their motivation.  There are undoubtedly many who want to be associated with the majority without delving into the issues.  I do not understand all the issues and admit that it is more complex than can be dealt with in a short blog.

Part of the problem goes back to my biggest pet peeve which is short term thinking.

One primary problem is that America (and most of the rest of the world) feel most comfortable dealing with whoever is in power.  At some stage we are complicit in maintaining the status quo.  We can be self righteous about being superior and conscious that everything is not fair under a particular jurisdiction, but our tendency is to protect our own short term interest and do business with just about anyone.

China and Russia are in the equation and have decided that their best interest lies in supporting the Syrian government.  Russia sells weaponry to Syria.  China needs to keep all energy options open. Both are authoritarian and fear the idea of a successful revolution.  Oversimplified perhaps, but trying to overcome their UN security council veto could lead to further tension.

Iran is a player as it is allied with Syria.  Finally Iran has elected someone who is more open to solving the nuclear dilemma.  With few allies and a load of rhetoric, Iran has to be concerned to maintain its alliances.  At the same time some Westerners feel that striking against Syria is weakening Iran and perhaps forcing them to be more compliant.

In the Middle East an always underlying concern is Israel.  One really pertinent connection is the Golan Heights where Israel has conquered land they now feel is a buffer.  Israel has bombed Syria to cut nuclear development.  Part of the Syrian opposition comes from Islamists who see an opportunity to overthrow a government that is relatively tolerant of Christians and Jews and install a more fundamentalist  regime.  They are not looking for a two state solution, but many would work towards destroying Israel.

Israel is fearful of what its neighbors intend.  Palestinians are resentful and many are desperate. Israel has more powerful friends in the United States that protect it with money, weapons, political decisions including a UN veto.  There are many who want a two state solution, but others who feel more secure by occupying Palestine.  Still others on both sides have given up on the two state solution. Alleviating fear requires courage, patience and understanding.

Refugees have fled to Turkey, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon and others.  In such numbers they create logistical problems and potentially are an unknown political force.

Recently became aware of another factor which you can read in more depth at http://billmoyers.com/2013/09/06/drought-helped-spark-syrias-civil-war-is-it-the-first-of-many-climate-wars-to-come/  I am struck at the number of people who belittle climate change, but their points strike me as being politically/economically linked.  Climate scientists for the most part seem very reluctant to draw links from climate change to weather problems such as hurricanes, tornadoes, floods and droughts, but the links seem stronger almost daily.  I recall that the Arab Spring started with a protest of one man in Tunisia who was affected by food prices.  Food prices were affected by drought.  This is only one factor, but really unemployed youth and food prices have been critical.

Should the United States use a military strike against Syria and if so how can they contain it?  The risks are very high that the best they can achieve a rebel victory or less likely a chastened Assad. They will inevitably fan anti-American hatred.   Who knows how Russia, China, Iran might react. Mideast turmoil seems inevitable.  If not resolved the same question might be asked--can a regime do whatever it wants to suppress its own people?  Will any nation feel they can do what they want even against American threats?

What alternatives are available?  America needs international support.  The United Nations is frozen by veto's allowed to only five countries.  The Arab League has its own factions.  Turkey is a Muslim country that is negatively impacted by Syrian refugees and occasional stray bombs.  They have concerns over Kurds, another complicating issue itself.  Can United States afford to be the world's policeman without at least some economic support.

The Americans have been hurt and embarrassed by the efforts of the George W Bush government to deceive them with false information (some of which was deliberate) regarding the Iraq invasion.  I think they were stunned that the Iraqi people resisted and then learned that they had opened a hornet's nest.  At the same time a new President finds himself dealing with a polarized electorate.  A part of the electorate seems to feel that Obama is a Muslim or sympathetic to radical Muslims.  Seems ridiculous, but not something that can be ignored.  For some this seems an opportunity to make him look bad while on the other side some think this is an opportunity with respect to dealing with the sequester problem as well as the debt ceiling.  Some support as they feel the need to support a president, others to send a message about chemical warfare.  Others feel that we need to commit to democracy.

The rest of the world has its own perspective.  They are split in that they mostly seem to think that the Syrian government is guilty of using chemical weapons against their own people, but are skeptical of any course of action.  They fear potential spread of violence, even world war.

Are there alternatives?  I can't see a risk free short term alternative and either striking or not striking sends a powerful message with horrific consequences very likely.

The United Nations was created to deal with these types of problems, but many see a single country veto as insurmountable obstacle.  At the time it was thought to be an inducement to get participation of the winning Allies.  Since then many changes have occurred and newly empowered nations such as India, Brazil and others are left out.  My solution would be to negotiate a new deal such as a veto of one of the selected countries (or even two or three) can be overcome by 2/3 votes of General Assembly members representing 2/3 of the world's population.  China is a delicate issue as they might feel ganged up with a too low a population requirement as they represent approximately 25% of the world population.  This would also empower India.  We don't want them to have an effective veto based on population, but to gain their co-operation we don't want them to feel too threatened. This will only happen when the original veto holders see it in their best interest to accept world opinion.

The International Criminal Court is another  possible solution.  One of its weaknesses is that United States will not join as they feel they will be ganged upon.  Other countries resist to protect themselves.  Perhaps the UN veto and the International Criminal Court membership issues can be negotiated together. Perhaps that is naive, but other forces are making it a little more possible.

One of those forces is climate change.  It affects everyone, although not evenly.  The biggest problem is  distrust of science and economic short term self interest.  We in North America and Europe need to realize food prices even in remote parts of the world can have global effects.  We need to realize that floods, droughts, hurricanes although natural are being aggravated by our actions on an international scale.  War is one of the consequences.  To provide our own security in our backyard we need to be concerned about forces in areas we haven't given much thought to.

Did I cover all the issues?  Definitely not, but I hope that more people take a long term view so we can minimize future damage and get on the course to a more logical future for all mankind.  Syria is a mess, but it didn't happen overnight.