It's not that Putin isn't a war criminal; he probably is. (Though we can't know so quickly in a battle where there are probably combatants hiding among civilians.)
The issue is: once you've said it, a) what does it mean; b) what are the consequences? For a), there is no way that Biden can enforce international law on Putin, short of a Russian revolution or a NATO defeat of Russia in what would certainly be a nuclear war, by which time we probably wouldn't be around to care. And for b), once you've accused someone of war crimes, you can't really negotiate with them, because then you become the devil's partner.
I mean, how do we even do the Iran deal with a "war criminal" regime? Plus, they have every incentive to go on fighting, because now their life and liberty are at stake, rather than just territorial gains inside someone else's country. So... Biden might yet again have made World War III a district possibility.
Unless Biden's not serious. Which... would not be a surprise. And it would also not be a surprise that he had risked World War III for gestural politics.
This week’s portion launches the great story of Abraham, who is told to leave everything of his life behind — except his immediate family — and to leave for “the Land that I shall show you.”
There’s something interesting in the fact that Abraham is told to leave his father’s house, as if breaking away from his father’s life — but his father, in fact, began the journey, moving from Ur to Haran (in last week’s portion). His father set a positive example — why should Abraham leave him?
Some obvious answers suggest themselves — adulthood, needing to make one’s own choices, his father not going far enough, etc.
But I think there is another answer. Abraham (known for the moment as Abram) needs to establish his own household. This is not just about making one’s own choice, but really about choosing one’s own starting point. It’s starting over.
Sometimes we start over in fundamental ways even if much that surrounds us remains the same. Sometimes the journey we have to ...
The story of Noah is familiar; the details, less so.
Noah is often seen as an ambivalent figure. He was righteous -- but only for his generation. What was his deficiency?
One answer suggests itself: knowing that the world was about to be flooded, he built an Ark for the animals and for his own family -- but did not try to save anyone else or to convince them to repent and change their ways (the prophet Jonah, later, would share that reluctance).
Abraham, later, would set himself apart by arguing with God -- with the Lord Himself! -- against the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, saying that they should be saved if there were enough righteous people to be found (there were not).
Still, Noah was good enough -- and sometimes, that really is sufficient to save the world. We don't need heroes every time -- just ordinary decency.
Hi all -- as I noted last month, I'm going to be closing down my Locals page, at least for tips and subscriptions -- I may keep the page up and the posts as well, but I'm no longer going to be accepting any kind of payment.
Look for cancelation in the very near future. Thank you for your support!
