Israel has been bombing the Gaza strip for the past 3 days, killing over 300 Palestinians. The Israelis claimed that they are going after Hamas who are shelling Israel daily. But of course many of the dead are not militants but civilians. This will undoubtedly lead to more deadly violence as Israeli soldiers may go into Gaza. This remind me of the blog I wrote in summer of 06 when Israel went into Lebanon to try to destroy Hezbollah. I wrote then that if we learn anything from history is that violence will not solve this problem. A diplomatic solution must be sought. But the Bush administration has not done anything in the past 8 years and is just waiting to hand things off to Obama.

Speaking of Obama, when he went to Israel before the election, he commented that if someone is shelling his house, threatening his daughters, he would respond just like the Israelis. This comment is being used by Israel to justify their attack. I agree with Obama that if I am living in Israel, I would feel the same way as the Israelis and want to go after Hamas. But nobody is saying what he would do if he was a Palestinian and is getting bombed by the much more powerful Israel air force. Most likely he would hate Israel and would do almost anything to seek revenge. So if Obama is even handed he would say how he feels if he is a Palestinian as well as an Israeli.

So where do we go from here? If Israel wants to destroy Hamas, it would have to go in with lots of soldiers. This risks heavy casualities and attack from Hezbollah from Lebanon. I think it will be a quagmire for Israel. You know, the Palestinian territory is divided into Gaza which is run by Hamas and the West Bank which is run by Mahmoud Abbas. Abbas is much more moderate and he has condemn Hamas for attacking Israel. So Israel and the U.S. should try to build up the West Bank as quickly as possible. If the Palestinians in the West Bank actually can thrive economically, it will show the Arabs that by cooperating their lives can improve. Declare West Bank as the independent Palestinian state. Then let the Palestinians from the West Bank bring aid into Gaza. Maybe they will be considered traitors but maybe a majority in the Gaza will turn away from Hamas. It certainly is worth trying.

In April of last year after the VT killing by a deranged Korean student, I wrote that Asians were afraid that they would be stigmatized by the ethnicity of the killer. I wrote that Asians had nothing to be ashamed of since the killer is the only person responsible for the tragedy, his ethnicity has nothing to do with it. Now the newspapers are saying that the Jewish community is worried that they will be stigmatized by the Madoff Ponzi scheme. Again I say this is an act by a deranged person who abused the people who trusted him. His religion or ethnicity had nothing to do with it.

The newspapers are saying that blogs are written about Jews being cheaters or that they are greedy and so they lost money. Well, there will always be racists who say such thing. But I am confident that the majority of Americans are fair-minded and that like the VT tragedy, no group of people will become stigmatized as a result of this. The truth is Wall Street is full of people of any race or ethnicity who are willing to cheat. The SEC is totally incompetent in regulating and thus help lead to the current financial crisis. As for the victims, most of the lost money belonged to charity foundations so most of the victims were not greedy people. Paraphrasing an old Chinese saying: people tend to cheat those who are familiar to them. This is a classical case of Madoff using his familiar status among other Jewish people to take advantage of them. Shame on him and the SEC.

Obama asked evangelist Rick Warren to give the prayer at his inauguration. This has led to condemnation from both the right and the left. Gay activists complained because Warren is against gay marriages. The right is angry at Warren for accepting the invitation of a liberal. All Obama is doing is fulfilling his pledge that he will reach over to the other side. Obviously he does not agree with many things that Warren advocates but he knows that Warren has also come out for AIDS causes, the environment, and improving poverty. I would rather that he hangs out and have discussions with Warren than have any association with Blagoyevich! The Republicans had accused Obama of being the most liberal senator. But judging by his cabinet appointments and including Warren in his inauguration, it seems to me he is trying to govern from the center. I hope he continues to do this. Bush failed to deliver on "compassionate conservatism". I know that Obama is to the left of center on most issues, but I hope he will deliver on "pragmatic liberalism".

Obama probably will not get in trouble with this Blagojevich affair. But you have to wonder how clean one can be coming from a stinky political scene such as Illinois. Five out of last ten governor got indicted? That is a higher percentage than baseball players on steroid. I think Illinois will beat out Louisiana for the Super Bowl championship of corrupt politics.

Obama seems safe from this episode because Blagojevich complained on tape, in colorful language, that the Obama team will not pay. But that means he must have talked to someone from the Obama team. That in itself is not wrong because you would expect Obama to have an opinion as to whom should be appointed to his vacated seat. Obama's response so far has not been very strong. He needs to be more transparent. How long does it take to question everyone that may have talked to Blagojevich? I know he says that the prosecutor does not want him to say anything yet. But it seems to me that Obama should have nip this whole thing quicker. He needs to devote his full attention to all the other problem he will face next month.

I am ambivalent about whether the automakers should get the bailout. I tend to believe that nobody should get a bailout. Look at Chrysler which got a big loan, merged with Mercedes, a foreign company, and now is asking for loan again. Didn't they learn the lesson the first time? I think the so-called concession by the UAW is cosmetic only and will not help much. I don't know enough about the plans put up by the Big 3 in front of Congress. But if the government is a bank, would it think that the automakers' plans would make them a good lending risk? I think not. I think there is a good chance that if one or two of the companies declare bankruptcy, they can start all over, with new salary scales, and be stronger in the future than if we just bail them out.

But I will say that the government has not been as fair to the automakers as to the financial industry. I don't see any concession from the salaries of people in insurance or banking before they got the bailout money. AIG had a big party right afterward. There was no business plans from the banks as to how they will spend the money. It is not clear to anybody what has been done with the money so far. So it is totally unfair that the government is so easy on Wall Street and much harder on Detroit. And I find it absurd for one Congressman after another berating the automakers for their failure to be in the black. The one institution in this country running the biggest deficit is the Federal government. While the UAW has at least made some concessions, I don't see any government unions at any level is willing to renegotiate anything. You see, if anyone is too big to fail, it is the government and that is why it is so difficult to make government better.

So I don't know what is the best. And I don't think anyone else does either. Even the best economists argue about whether government interventions are good. They still argue about whether FDR's New Deal help or hurt the depression. Some argue that only WWII got the economy back, not all the government programs. I don't know whether the bailouts will prove to be the right thing to do. I do think that Obama's idea of stimulating the economy by rebuilding roads and bridges is good. Even if it does nothing for the economy at least we will have new roads and bridges which we sorely need. To show how little anyone really understands the economy, I heard Ben Stein, a conservative economist on CNN, said that unlike people, who must balance their expenses with income, government can go deep into debt without raising taxes because it can print money. That seems like the stupidest thing I ever heard. And he is a CONSERVATIVE ECONOMIST. I mean, if that is the case then no Africa country will be starving. They can print money as well as we can. I also heard another economist said that bailout money is just us loaning money to ourselves. If that is the case, how come we have to owe money to China and Saudi Arabia? If supposedly smart money people can come up with statements like that, you wonder how we are going to recover.

It appears that the terrorist attack in India was the work of Pakistani extremists. It also appears that there was local involvement given how well the terrorists knew about the targets. It is not surprising that there are radicals inside India. There are actually more Muslims in India than in Pakistan! The Muslims are also much poorer and less educated than the average Indians. I have heard that they are worse off than the so-called Untouchables in India. So it is not surprising that a number of them would turn against their country.

I have always said that the former Soviet countries are the most likely places where terrorists will get a nuclear weapon. But the most likely country to use the bomb next time will be Pakistan, will India following in retaliation. Iran and North Korea will not use the bomb in the near future because they know by doing they will be annihilated. But if Pakistan is taken over by Islamic fundamentalist and is losing a war against India, then the use of the bomb will be a strong possibility. So it is imperative that Obama try to defuse this situation and try to change the dynamic of this region.

It is easier said than done of course. There is a lot of mistrust on both side. Given the unhappiness of the Indian people regarding the government's handle of the attack, the Indians may want to put more blame on the Pakistan government to rally nationalism. Hopefully they won't do that but if they do our government should intervene to prevent escalation of tension. Pressure should be placed on Pakistan to find the organization involved. Instead of sending money to arm Pakistan which has not help in the war against terror, we should help finance schools in both countries which will be a counterweight against religious schools which foster extremism. All this will take time and a lot of effort, but nuclear wars and terrorism will not be stopped with force alone.