Missteps on Syria?

I have seen articles recently referring to Obama's missteps on Syria as if this was the prevailing conventional wisdom. It is certainly not my opinion. I thought consulting Congress sent a message of weakness, but it had a chain reaction of positive results, almost certainly not intended.

The tactical significance of suspending strikes in exchange for disarmament can and has been debated thoroughly with little consensus. But in the long run, if it works it will be a great victory for humanity. And if the Russians are as serious as they appear, it might very well work.

This has not gone unnoticed in Tehran, where these events demonstrate that Obama is both sincere and powerful. Meanwhile, the bite of sanctions against the massive financial interests of the Revolutionary Guard leave them subdued amidst an opportunity for warming relations with the west.

These are missteps the same way buying a winning lottery ticket is at the time a waste of money.

Net Neutrality

On abstract terms, both sides in the debate over net neutrality seem to have merit. We want to encourage innovative ways for providers (both ISPs and websites) to deliver services to consumers. An obvious example is a guaranteed level of service for VoIP, which is currently impossible. On the other hand, we want to encourage innovation of totally new ways to use the internet that would disrupt established business models. That would be impossible if companies and their business partners could charge higher fees for competitors' services.

But it finally came home to me while shopping for a new ISP.

I don't buy cable TV on principle, because the price is exorbitant. They have probably the highest profit margins of any industry, depending how it's measured, because they have a near monopoly on content delivery. But I love my Netflix. I can sign up for generic internet and pay a small fee for content. It's the beginning of the end for the cable companies' monopolistic charges.

But all that changes if the guys that own the wires (the cable company and the phone company) suddenly get to charge more for Netflix. Maybe it will show up in your utility bill as a streaming surcharge, or maybe they will demand payment from Netflix and it will show up in your Netflix bill. Either way, the power goes right back to the two companies that own the infrastructure.

That's the real point behind net neutrality. If the ISPs can't control what bits you download, then they can't extort the content providers (and thus the consumers).

Let's have a little discussion about cruise missiles

Iran, Libya, Syria, Iraq, North Korea.

Which of these countries gave up their weapons of mass destruction programs?

Which governments were overthrown with western intervention?

The answer to both questions is Iraq and Libya.

The lesson is loud and clear. WMDs are a perfect deterrent against a hostile America.

Obama claims that we will be seen as stronger by getting congressional approval before striking Syria. In reality an approving vote makes no difference to anybody, and the debate looks to the world like a bunch of old philosophers wringing their hands in the face of a laughing bully.

So why would Obama take this unprecedented step after rushing our forces into place, and so soon after David Cameron's strike plans were defeated in the UK parliament?

The only explanation I find plausible is he really does not want to order the strikes. He saw Cameron's humiliation as a way out. He is gambling there are enough anti-war-at-all-costs Democrats and gullible anti-Obama-at-all-costs Republicans to defeat him.

He's may be right, but it certainly doesn't make us look strong.