|
Saturday, April 05, 2003
Bush-bashing lie #17 is... ..that we have abandoned or forgotten Afghanistan. (Mostly they're lying to themselves. It's called denial. )You might want to look at this report, with pictures, at Dean's World. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Will it be war after war after war? Mickey Kaus did a series of posts recently speculating that the "neocons" are preparing us for a state of permanent war. (He doesn't seem to have perma-links, but it's 3/31/03) He has various clues or predictions we can take as evidence that this is happening......P.S. Isn't the "make life normal" strategy the same one Lyndon Johnson pursued during Vietnam, when he tried to lessen the impact of the draft by granting lots of college deferments? Yes. And life during Vietnam was shockingly normal during those years. The difference is that here -- if the only war we're going to fight is in Iraq -- there is no need for such a strategy. Nobody thinks the Iraq war is going to last years. A huge national effort for the duration of the conflict seems eminently sustainable. It's only un-sustainable for the duration of multiple conflicts. ...Perhaps he's right. But there's a possibility he doesn't seem to have thought of. Suppose, just suppose for a moment, that the administration would prefer, if possible, to tackle the various axes of Evil, Weavil, Blixl, etc, by peaceful diplomatic means. Wouldn't the best background for such a campaign be the perception of the US as bunch of crazy gunslingers who would prefer to just knock off the dictators one after another? Colin Powell's role as the diplomatic 'good cop' will be far more effective if he has a credible 'bad cop.' He can say, "President Assad, my old friend, I would just LOVE to settle this matter, but you're going to have to give me some help. If I can't show results, Rumsfeld's mad dogs will be painting your name on a TLAM tomorrow." SO, let me make a prediction. If this view of things is correct, I predict that the manichaean conflict between Rumsfeld and Powell will never be 'won' by either side. It isn't intended to be won; both the good and bad cops are part of the performance. And, though there may be other wars from time to time, the unending war that the 'neocons' seem to be pushing for will never quite happen... We will see. USS Winston S. Churchill (DDG 81) launches a TLAM (Tomahawk Land Attack Missile). March 27. 2003. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Among other virtues, it would be the propaganda coup of the decade... I've read some pundits (sorry, I didn't keep the links) who have discussed the evil influence the oil wealth has on governments. With no need to tax their citizens, governments can ignore the wishes of the people. Indeed, they can almost dispense with them altogether. The fact is, not only is there No taxation without representation, there is No representation without taxation!One solution I've heard proposed, for Iraq, is to literally give the oil profits to the people. Every adult citizen would have an account, which would receive his or her share of oil money, to spend as they wished. To pay for itself, the government would have to vote taxes, which should impose a certain realism and sobriety on all concerned. I think this would be good for Iraq, but there would be another big plus, which I often think of when I read things like the following, quoted at The Command Post: ...Polls show that most Europeans firmly oppose the war, even in countries the White House lists among the "coalition of the willing." European news coverage of war is often highly critical, or plays down accounts of Iraqis happily greeting Americans. There is deep suspicion of U.S. motives, with many suggesting the administration is attacking Iraq only for its oil...It is easy to ignore or discount or distort abstract arguments about democracy and freedom, or the good intentions of the US. But giving Iraq's oil to its people would be something so wild, so stunning, nobody could ignore it. Imagine the reaction of the ordinary citizen in, say, Iran...or Arabia... or Venezuela. It would be Power to the people, and leftists everywhere would hate it, and be put on the defensive... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I have a suggestion ... BBC NEWS: British find 'makeshift morgue' "Hundreds of skulls and bundles of bone in strips of military uniform have been found by British soldiers at an abandoned Iraqi military base..."There's going to be a lot more of this kind of thing. The military will probably want to give them code-names, to keep the different sites organized. Maybe we could help by suggesting a few names...Cities of course are often used for this sort of thing. Perhaps: Paris, Berlin, Moscow, Berkeley, Hollywood ... Or womens' names: Barbra, Sherryl, Nancy, Jane... Or men's names: Jacques, Kofi, Tom, Peter... Perhaps you can think of more. Maybe I'll send an e-mail to my friend General Franks. He's a busy guy, and might not think of this... milspeak This is a link to a picture of some soldiers of the 402nd Civil Affairs Battalion being given a tour of the Temple of Ur. (Part of an interesting DOD Image collection)Very interesting, but I had to laugh--the caption-writer has been writing too many military documents, and says that Ur "...is the birthplace of Abram who is referenced in the bible." _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Friday, April 04, 2003
these problems are temporary... From an article at FOXNews about how a few Democrat leaders have begun to have qualms:..On Thursday, as the war entered week three, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., exposed how deep the rift in her party is, making an unapologetic renewal of her opposition to war.(She has a plan, you see, to disarm Iraq without force. Details not yet revealed, but it probably involves applying the immense moral prestige of the United Nations...Of course if such a thing actually happened it would leave Saddam in power. But no Democrat's gonna be bothered by such trifles. Besides, Acme Plastic Shredders is a big contributor.) Also in the headlines, the DLC (Dinosaur Leadership Council) announced that the recent meteoritic impact in the Yucatan was no cause for concern, and should not be allowed to distract attention from pressing domestic issues. Prominent pundit Joshua Oviraptor Marshall laid blame firmly on the Administration, noting that no meteors had fallen while Bill Clinton was President.Just kidding, there. Actually the article I was quoting from has a quality of bizarre understatement that puts my poor attempts at humor to shame. 80% of the country supports the war, various Democrat leaders are denouncing it and praising anti-war demonstrators, and then they express these vague litle tremors of unease, suspecting that they "...could look out of step with the American public." Gee, do you think so?, Don't worry guys, everyone in Hollywood loves you. Or this: While the liberal wing of the Democratic Party hasn't been shy about opposing the war in Iraq, others within the party have begun to question whether that stance is politically wise... They've begun to question! Amazing... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I've just started to worry about hegemony... The New York Times has contacted me and asked me to write an op-ed criticizing the administration.It's enormously flattering to be asked, but still, I'm wondering... do they really like me or did everybody else turn them down? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Posted
1:39 PM
This just killed us ... Charlene found this on a bullitin board at the SF Conservatory of Music...I'm sorry I don't have the name of the cartoonist to give proper credit. Looks like Bennet?Thursday, April 03, 2003
curses on your moustache, you Ba'athist dimwit ... Dave Trowbridge has a plausible theory for why Saddam isn't showing his face......So what if Saddam sustained facial burns that not only removed his mustache, but prevent the use of a false mustache? He'd look ridiculous in Arab eyes. Will this someday be commemorated in an update of that famous ditty about Richard III: for the lack of a mustache a kingdom was lost...? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Just teensy weensy little mistakes...purely by accident, of course... A few days ago, a firestorm erupted over alleged flaws in the U.S.'s Iraq war strategy. The theme of the criticism, which was voiced by nearly all news outlets in the U.S. and abroad, was that the Administration had underestimated the Iraqis' military capability, had failed to foresee the guerrilla tactics the Iraqis were using, and had wrongly sold the country on the idea that the war would be a breeze. This attack was based in large part on a quote from Lt. Gen. William Wallace, who allegedly said that "The enemy we're fighting is different from the one we war-gamed against," and Vice President Cheney's alleged statement that Saddam's government was "a house of cards."And now that these lies have poisoned the waters, they will linger forever. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Better switch to plan B, Nancy ... I'd like to think that members of the anti-Bush left (calling themselves the anti-war left) will be pleased to read things like this. But I keep imagining them biting their knuckles and muttering, "Dammit, Saddam, don't wimp out on us now..."NAJAF, Iraq -- Cheers, waves and handclapping from local people filled the main strip of this city Wednesday as about 100 heavily armed soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division marched through to signal the city's liberation from Saddam Hussein's regime. Staff Sgt. Albert "Shaka" Wakketsi, 31, Ghana, West Africa, of 1st Battalion, 327th Infantry Regiment, A Company, waves at Iraqi citizens of Najaf who lined the streets Wednesday. John Partipilo/The Tennessean Wednesday, April 02, 2003
Because this is warfare, not police-work... I just happened on this March 24 article by Andrew Sullivan (via WylieBlog). It has a lot of good stuff to chew on......When George W. Bush looked around him in the ashes of the World Trade Center for an analysis of what had gone wrong and a comprehensive strategy to put it right, the neoconservatives were the only credible advocates who had an actual plan. They weren't a cabal. And they weren't natural Bush allies. Men like the Pentagon's Richard Perle or Douglas Feith or Paul Wolfowitz or the Washington Post's Charles Krauthammer and Bob Kagan, or the New Republic's Lawrence Kaplan or the Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol: all these had been bitter foes of Bush's father, brutal critics of his foreign policy. The Washington Post and New Republic had endorsed Al Gore for president. The Weekly Standard had backed John McCain in the primaries. The reason they rallied behind Bush in the wake of 9/11 was simply because he was the president. And the reason Bush reached out to these theorists was because history had proved them right and disaster had proved them prescient. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Laughing Saddam According to ABC news:Iraqi domestic television has showed footage of President Saddam Hussein, smiling and laughing with members of his cabinet.Weren't there people, about a month ago, criticizing President Bush because he didn't look serious and sad about the prospect of war? (And of course if he had appeared glum they would have gleefully declared that he was in trouble...) So, will they criticize Saddam for laughing as Baghdad burns? Anyway, he's dead, dead, dead, and this is just another bit of evidence to prove it... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ We fight not to enslave, but to set a country free, and to make Tuesday, April 01, 2003
Poor and Stupid...who, me? Donald Luskin has started a column at NRO that gathers together the various criticisms of Paul Krugman found on the web. He's titled it Krugman Truth Squad! Obviously a case of several great minds all stumped for a catchier title. Since he has been kind enough to mention our Truth Squad in his latest Column, we are not complaining!Donald has his own website and weblog, called The Conspiracy to Keep You Poor and Stupid. It's worth a visit. I just noticed this post on how the cost of war in Iraq is likely to be less than the cost of containment... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Art from strange sources... Charlene often goes creeping across the Internet looking for the oriental rugs that are one of her passions. She showed me this one yesterday, for sale on e-Bay:It's an Afghan War Rug, a special genre that emerged from the war against the Soviet occupation. Here's part of the seller's eBay description: This is an absolutely beautiful vegetable (natural) dyed rug,2'9"x 4', made with hand-carded and hand-spun wool. It was made in Northern Pakistan by Ersari Turkoman refugees from Northern Afghanistan. The lovely ivory field (natural wool, i.e. undyed) bears very skillfully drawn fragmentation hand grenades, BMD-2 armored personnel carriers, an RPG-7, rocket propelled grenade, M-24 HIND attack helicopters, Markarov officers' side arm, and a Hip-8 troop carrying helicopter. The weaver has drawn the helicopters' rotors to give the illusion of rotation. A portfolio of photos of the equipment pictured on this rug will accompany the piece. This fascinating historical document is unreserved and has a "Buy it Now" price of $375.00.Why am I posting this? I just thought you would like an example of how surpassing strange and wonderful the human spirit is... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Posted
10:51 AM
Sunday, March 30, 2003
Posted
7:31 PM
The reason Bush is compared to Hitler so often is simple: All the other recent monsters are heroes to major antiwar organizers. -- John Leo_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Posted
11:20 AM
the scalpel, not the bludgeon ... There's an interesting op-ed at the Command Post on the Baathist hopes of creating a new Stalingrad...The battle of Basra appears to be following a script worked out long before the war began. It certainly will be the pattern for dealing with Iraqi cities in future, though there are bound to be variations for local conditions.We should keep in mind that WE TAUGHT Saddam to do this. Withdrawing from Somalia after taking casualties, failing to destroy Saddam in '91, failing to fight when our people were taken hostage in Iran... over and over we've broadcast the message that we will be weak when things get ugly. And that has CAUSED things to get ugly with ever increasing frequency. |