Does it get funnier than this?
And how 'bout this? Photo 1: Tom Daschle is short! Ha ha ha! Isn't that funny? Photos 2through 6: The Wizard of Oz! Get it? Get it? (Actually, I don't get it. Do you get it?)
These links are from probush.com -- where you can also find the Ari Fleischer fan club page that was recently cited in the U.K.'s Guardian and The Washington Post (as TBOGG notes).
Not amused? Guess you're just a traitor.
Wednesday, March 26, 2003
Worried about how things are going in Iraq?
Well, you should know that India and Pakistan just test-fired nuclear-capable missiles, while North Korea broke off long-standing regular talks with the U.N. Command in South Korea and is threatening to test-fire a long-range ballistic missile.
There. I bet you forgot all about Iraq, didn't you?
Well, you should know that India and Pakistan just test-fired nuclear-capable missiles, while North Korea broke off long-standing regular talks with the U.N. Command in South Korea and is threatening to test-fire a long-range ballistic missile.
There. I bet you forgot all about Iraq, didn't you?
Hey, now we're threatening Canada...
The U.S. ambassador to Canada took the unusual step on Tuesday of openly criticizing Ottawa for not backing the war on Iraq and urged Prime Minister Jean Chretien to muzzle anti-U.S. sentiment in his government.
...What will have been most disconcerting for the audience was Cellucci's statement that the United States gave a higher priority to security than to the booming trade relationship between the two countries.
..."Security will trump trade, there is no doubt about that," Cellucci told reporters, saying there could be unspecified "short term" strains in the relationship given U.S. unhappiness with Canada.
--Reuters
I think these guys are just going to have to do a bumper sticker that says "First Iraq, Then Everyone Else on the Planet (Except Republicans and Tony Blair)."
The U.S. ambassador to Canada took the unusual step on Tuesday of openly criticizing Ottawa for not backing the war on Iraq and urged Prime Minister Jean Chretien to muzzle anti-U.S. sentiment in his government.
...What will have been most disconcerting for the audience was Cellucci's statement that the United States gave a higher priority to security than to the booming trade relationship between the two countries.
..."Security will trump trade, there is no doubt about that," Cellucci told reporters, saying there could be unspecified "short term" strains in the relationship given U.S. unhappiness with Canada.
--Reuters
I think these guys are just going to have to do a bumper sticker that says "First Iraq, Then Everyone Else on the Planet (Except Republicans and Tony Blair)."
All one need remember from their sorry show [the Oscars] is that there are 250,000 men and women volunteers who have offered to die for you and what you believe in. Susan Sarandon isn't one of them.
--from Lucianne Goldberg's Lucianne.com today
Yeah, Lucianne, and funny thing -- your son isn't one of them either. Sure, he's in his thirties now, but that's not really too old to fight, is it? And where was he in '91, during Gulf War I, when he was of prime fighting age? Says here he was at Goucher College, sitting on his duff reading books like a damn peacenik.
Susan Sarandon? She's 56 years old. Pretty close to your age, Lucianne. So why aren't you ducking sandstorms now?
--from Lucianne Goldberg's Lucianne.com today
Yeah, Lucianne, and funny thing -- your son isn't one of them either. Sure, he's in his thirties now, but that's not really too old to fight, is it? And where was he in '91, during Gulf War I, when he was of prime fighting age? Says here he was at Goucher College, sitting on his duff reading books like a damn peacenik.
Susan Sarandon? She's 56 years old. Pretty close to your age, Lucianne. So why aren't you ducking sandstorms now?
Royal Marines were deployed to Iraq's border with Iran yesterday in a move that will unnerve Teheran's regime, which fears encirclement by American-led forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Ministry of Defence said the Royal Marines were merely "securing their area of operations" after seizing at the Faw peninsula....
Tensions were illustrated by a succession of border incidents. A rocket struck an Iranian oil refinery depot in Abadan, just across from Basra, on Friday injuring two people while there were reports on Monday that Iranian forces had fired on British troops on the Faw peninsula....
--Daily Telegraph (U.K.)
I'm starting to worry that "Iraq" is Arabic for "Cambodia."
The Ministry of Defence said the Royal Marines were merely "securing their area of operations" after seizing at the Faw peninsula....
Tensions were illustrated by a succession of border incidents. A rocket struck an Iranian oil refinery depot in Abadan, just across from Basra, on Friday injuring two people while there were reports on Monday that Iranian forces had fired on British troops on the Faw peninsula....
--Daily Telegraph (U.K.)
I'm starting to worry that "Iraq" is Arabic for "Cambodia."
More sniping at U.S. companies:
A couple of weeks ago I mentioned a boycott list of American firms that was making the rounds in Brazil. Now my Brazilian correspondent has written to point out that the boycott list is up on the Web. Here, from the site, is a list of U.S. companies to avoid and non-American alternatives.
I boycott you, you boycott me. One more little war in George Bush’s world of war.
A couple of weeks ago I mentioned a boycott list of American firms that was making the rounds in Brazil. Now my Brazilian correspondent has written to point out that the boycott list is up on the Web. Here, from the site, is a list of U.S. companies to avoid and non-American alternatives.
I boycott you, you boycott me. One more little war in George Bush’s world of war.
Tuesday, March 25, 2003
Heh heh heh.
No more Coca-Cola or Budweiser, no Marlboro, no American whiskey or even American Express cards -- a growing number of restaurants in Germany are taking everything American off their menus to protest the war in Iraq.
Although the protests are mainly symbolic, waiters in dozens of bars and restaurants in Hamburg, Berlin, Munich, Bonn and other German cities are telling patrons, "Sorry, Coca-Cola is not available any more due to the current political situation."...
In Indonesia, Iraq war opponents have pasted signs on McDonald's and other American food outlets, trying to force them shut by "sealing them" and urging Indonesians to avoid them.
In the Swiss city of Basel, 50 students recently staged a sit-down strike in front of a McDonald's to block customers' entry, waved peace signs and urged people to eat pretzels instead of hamburgers.
Anti-American sentiment has even reached provinces in Russia, where some rural eateries put up signs telling Americans they were unwelcome, according to an Izvestia newspaper report.
A German bicycle manufacturer, Riese und Mueller GmbH, canceled all business deals with its American suppliers....
--ABC News
The article goes on to quote one German bartender who is no longer serving Budweiser. Left unexplained is how the hell anyone in Germany could stand to drink Budweiser in the first place.
No more Coca-Cola or Budweiser, no Marlboro, no American whiskey or even American Express cards -- a growing number of restaurants in Germany are taking everything American off their menus to protest the war in Iraq.
Although the protests are mainly symbolic, waiters in dozens of bars and restaurants in Hamburg, Berlin, Munich, Bonn and other German cities are telling patrons, "Sorry, Coca-Cola is not available any more due to the current political situation."...
In Indonesia, Iraq war opponents have pasted signs on McDonald's and other American food outlets, trying to force them shut by "sealing them" and urging Indonesians to avoid them.
In the Swiss city of Basel, 50 students recently staged a sit-down strike in front of a McDonald's to block customers' entry, waved peace signs and urged people to eat pretzels instead of hamburgers.
Anti-American sentiment has even reached provinces in Russia, where some rural eateries put up signs telling Americans they were unwelcome, according to an Izvestia newspaper report.
A German bicycle manufacturer, Riese und Mueller GmbH, canceled all business deals with its American suppliers....
--ABC News
The article goes on to quote one German bartender who is no longer serving Budweiser. Left unexplained is how the hell anyone in Germany could stand to drink Budweiser in the first place.
As Thomas McLaughlin tells it, the trouble began when his eighth-grade science teacher overheard him refusing to deny to another boy that he was gay. It got worse that afternoon, when his guidance counselor called his mother at work to tell her he was homosexual.
"The assistant principal called me out of seventh period, asked if my parents knew I was gay, and when I said no, she said I had till 3:40 to tell them or the school would," said Thomas, a 14-year old student at Jacksonville Junior High School in Arkansas.
"I was too upset to sit through eighth period, so I went to the guidance counselor, and she made the call. Later, the science teacher wrote me a four-page handwritten letter about the Bible's teachings on homosexuality, telling me I would be condemned to hell. I threw it out."
That was a more than a year ago.
Since then, the McLaughlin family says, the school has continued to harass Thomas because of his homosexuality. The teachers and administrators who outed Thomas last year now want to silence him, the McLaughlins say, by telling him not to discuss homosexuality in school and disciplining him for doing so. They also say that a different assistant principal called Thomas to his office this year and made him read aloud a Bible passage condemning homosexuality.
--New York Times
What??? You mean this happened even though the Christian-hating liberal thought police have silenced and intimidated all the people in America who have traditional values?
"The assistant principal called me out of seventh period, asked if my parents knew I was gay, and when I said no, she said I had till 3:40 to tell them or the school would," said Thomas, a 14-year old student at Jacksonville Junior High School in Arkansas.
"I was too upset to sit through eighth period, so I went to the guidance counselor, and she made the call. Later, the science teacher wrote me a four-page handwritten letter about the Bible's teachings on homosexuality, telling me I would be condemned to hell. I threw it out."
That was a more than a year ago.
Since then, the McLaughlin family says, the school has continued to harass Thomas because of his homosexuality. The teachers and administrators who outed Thomas last year now want to silence him, the McLaughlins say, by telling him not to discuss homosexuality in school and disciplining him for doing so. They also say that a different assistant principal called Thomas to his office this year and made him read aloud a Bible passage condemning homosexuality.
--New York Times
What??? You mean this happened even though the Christian-hating liberal thought police have silenced and intimidated all the people in America who have traditional values?
What a silly peacenik I am -- I thought civilian carnage was a bad thing. I didn't realize that I was supposed to be happy that Saddam's troops are firing on noncombatants in Basra.
Some more unintended consequences:
India on Tuesday countered the renewed call by the US for resumption of talks with Pakistan, asking why military action was resorted to against Iraq and Afghanistan instead of dialogue to resolve the crisis confronting the two countries. "If dialogue per se is more critical than combating international terrorism with all necessary means, then one can legitimately ask why both in Afghanistan and Iraq military action instead of dialogue has been resorted to," External Affairs Ministry spokesman told reporters....
--Express India
(India is responding to the massacre of 24 Hindus in Jammu and Kashmir, for which India blames Pakistan.)
India on Tuesday countered the renewed call by the US for resumption of talks with Pakistan, asking why military action was resorted to against Iraq and Afghanistan instead of dialogue to resolve the crisis confronting the two countries. "If dialogue per se is more critical than combating international terrorism with all necessary means, then one can legitimately ask why both in Afghanistan and Iraq military action instead of dialogue has been resorted to," External Affairs Ministry spokesman told reporters....
--Express India
(India is responding to the massacre of 24 Hindus in Jammu and Kashmir, for which India blames Pakistan.)
On eBay, the highest bid wins -- unless the item on sale is a laser printer from CompAtlanta and the bidder happens to be Canadian.
That's what a tax consultant discovered last week when he tried to buy a printer on eBay, but was refused by the vendor when it was discovered he lived in Vancouver.
David Ingram received notification that his winning bid of $24.50 had been canceled, along with this message: "At the present time, we do not ship to, or accept bids from, Canada, Mexico, France, Germany or any other country that does not support the United States in our efforts to rid the world of Saddam Hussein. If you are not with us, you are against us."
Ingram's .ca address sparked the notice from CompAtlanta, based in Lawrenceville, Georgia....
--Wired News
Wow -- unable to buy from one guy selling on eBay! That ought to bring those damn surrender monkeys to their knees.
That's what a tax consultant discovered last week when he tried to buy a printer on eBay, but was refused by the vendor when it was discovered he lived in Vancouver.
David Ingram received notification that his winning bid of $24.50 had been canceled, along with this message: "At the present time, we do not ship to, or accept bids from, Canada, Mexico, France, Germany or any other country that does not support the United States in our efforts to rid the world of Saddam Hussein. If you are not with us, you are against us."
Ingram's .ca address sparked the notice from CompAtlanta, based in Lawrenceville, Georgia....
--Wired News
Wow -- unable to buy from one guy selling on eBay! That ought to bring those damn surrender monkeys to their knees.
More unintended war consequences:
The Iraqi war has convinced the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership that some form of confrontation with the U.S. could come earlier than expected.
Beijing has also begun to fine-tune its domestic and security policies to counter the perceived threat of U.S. "neo-imperialism."
As more emphasis is being put on boosting national strength and cohesiveness, a big blow could be dealt to both economic and political reform....
As People's Daily commentator Huang Peizhao pointed out last Saturday, U.S. moves in the Middle East "have served the goal of seeking world-wide domination."
State Council think-tank member Tong Gang saw the conflict as the first salvo in Washington's bid to "build a new world order under U.S. domination." ...
"Now, many cadres and think-tank members think Beijing should adopt a more pro-active if not aggressive policy to thwart U.S. aggression," said a Chinese source close to the diplomatic establishment.
He added hard-line elements in the People's Liberation Army (PLA) had advocated providing weapons to North Korea to help Pyongyang defend itself against a possible U.S. missile strike at its nuclear facilities....
On the military front, the Iraqi conflict will kick start another season of accelerated modernization of weaponry....
--CNN
Lovely.
(Thanks to Susan M. for the link.)
The Iraqi war has convinced the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership that some form of confrontation with the U.S. could come earlier than expected.
Beijing has also begun to fine-tune its domestic and security policies to counter the perceived threat of U.S. "neo-imperialism."
As more emphasis is being put on boosting national strength and cohesiveness, a big blow could be dealt to both economic and political reform....
As People's Daily commentator Huang Peizhao pointed out last Saturday, U.S. moves in the Middle East "have served the goal of seeking world-wide domination."
State Council think-tank member Tong Gang saw the conflict as the first salvo in Washington's bid to "build a new world order under U.S. domination." ...
"Now, many cadres and think-tank members think Beijing should adopt a more pro-active if not aggressive policy to thwart U.S. aggression," said a Chinese source close to the diplomatic establishment.
He added hard-line elements in the People's Liberation Army (PLA) had advocated providing weapons to North Korea to help Pyongyang defend itself against a possible U.S. missile strike at its nuclear facilities....
On the military front, the Iraqi conflict will kick start another season of accelerated modernization of weaponry....
--CNN
Lovely.
(Thanks to Susan M. for the link.)
Kanan Makiya is giddy at the U.S. bombing (read the opening paragraphs of the link) but apprehensive about what the U.S. will do to Iraq after the war:
There is enough chatter out of Washington to make me apprehensive. Last Wednesday, the undersecretary of state for political affairs, Marc Grossman, managed to deliver a long briefing to foreign reporters on "Assisting Iraqis With Their Future, Planning For Democracy" without any specifics on the issue. While Grossman summarized U.S. plans and offered statistical details on economic reconstruction, dealing with weapons of mass destruction, humanitarian assistance, and the role of the United Nations in all these things, all he could say about the central political question was that the Bush administration "seek[s] an Iraq that is democratic." Unlike its experience in Afghanistan, the administration has had months, if not years, to think about what democracy in Iraq would look like. And yet when the journalists asked Grossman to elaborate on the subject, he could add almost nothing.
Why? Does the United States have any ideas on this pivotal subject? Will the administration push for those ideas in the establishment of the still-ambiguous Iraqi interim authority that Grossman mentioned in his briefing? And what is the role of the leadership of the Iraqi opposition elected in Salahuddin last month? These are the questions I am left here to argue about with American officials while the war's progress provides a more pleasant soundtrack.
Are all the soothing words being whispered in the ears of Makiya and other Iraqi dissidents just part of a big geopolitical con game? I guess we'll find out, won't we?
There is enough chatter out of Washington to make me apprehensive. Last Wednesday, the undersecretary of state for political affairs, Marc Grossman, managed to deliver a long briefing to foreign reporters on "Assisting Iraqis With Their Future, Planning For Democracy" without any specifics on the issue. While Grossman summarized U.S. plans and offered statistical details on economic reconstruction, dealing with weapons of mass destruction, humanitarian assistance, and the role of the United Nations in all these things, all he could say about the central political question was that the Bush administration "seek[s] an Iraq that is democratic." Unlike its experience in Afghanistan, the administration has had months, if not years, to think about what democracy in Iraq would look like. And yet when the journalists asked Grossman to elaborate on the subject, he could add almost nothing.
Why? Does the United States have any ideas on this pivotal subject? Will the administration push for those ideas in the establishment of the still-ambiguous Iraqi interim authority that Grossman mentioned in his briefing? And what is the role of the leadership of the Iraqi opposition elected in Salahuddin last month? These are the questions I am left here to argue about with American officials while the war's progress provides a more pleasant soundtrack.
Are all the soothing words being whispered in the ears of Makiya and other Iraqi dissidents just part of a big geopolitical con game? I guess we'll find out, won't we?
Dr. John Collins, a retired Army colonel and former chief researcher for the Library of Congress, said ... every military commander since Sun Tzu, the ancient Chinese strategist, has hated urban warfare.
"Military casualties normally soar on both sides; innocent civilians lose lives and suffer severe privation; reconstruction costs skyrocket," Collins said...
--Philadelphia Inquirer
Skyrocketing reconstruction costs? You say that like it's a bad thing:
The first contracts for rebuilding post-war Iraq have been awarded, and Vice President Dick Cheney's old employer, Halliburton Co., says it is one of the early winners....
--CNNmoney
And please note the terms of these contracts:
Confidential contract documents indicate that companies will be paid under an arrangement known as "cost plus fixed fee." Once the cost of a project is established, the contractor is entitled to recover those costs plus a fee that is a fixed percentage of those costs. That percentage is generally 8 to 10 percent, although the security precautions required under the Iraq contracts might justify a higher fee in some cases, construction industry analysts said.
--from an article on Iraqi reconstruction in Sunday's New York Times
So the higher the cost, the larger the profit (the "plus") in raw dollars.
"Military casualties normally soar on both sides; innocent civilians lose lives and suffer severe privation; reconstruction costs skyrocket," Collins said...
--Philadelphia Inquirer
Skyrocketing reconstruction costs? You say that like it's a bad thing:
The first contracts for rebuilding post-war Iraq have been awarded, and Vice President Dick Cheney's old employer, Halliburton Co., says it is one of the early winners....
--CNNmoney
And please note the terms of these contracts:
Confidential contract documents indicate that companies will be paid under an arrangement known as "cost plus fixed fee." Once the cost of a project is established, the contractor is entitled to recover those costs plus a fee that is a fixed percentage of those costs. That percentage is generally 8 to 10 percent, although the security precautions required under the Iraq contracts might justify a higher fee in some cases, construction industry analysts said.
--from an article on Iraqi reconstruction in Sunday's New York Times
So the higher the cost, the larger the profit (the "plus") in raw dollars.
If you suspect that Donald Rumsfeld sent an inadequate force into Iraq, and would have sent an even smaller force if he'd completely had his way, remember: it could have been worse:
If a few hundred men and a few dozen planes could overthrow the Taliban, what might ten thousand men and a few hundred planes do in Iraq?
--David Frum, The Right Man: The Surprise Presidency of George W. Bush, p. 195
If a few hundred men and a few dozen planes could overthrow the Taliban, what might ten thousand men and a few hundred planes do in Iraq?
--David Frum, The Right Man: The Surprise Presidency of George W. Bush, p. 195
ADD Lizzie Grubman to the list of Oscar boycotters. Grubman says she was supposed to go to the Academy Awards with her father, Allen Grubman, a prominent lawyer who reps many celebs, but decided against it. "We canceled because there's a war on," Grubman tells PAGE SIX. "The Oscars should have been canceled. There are prisoners of war and American soldiers are dying - to go out and party is disrepectful and not appropriate." Grubman says she didn't even bother to watch the show on TV.
--from the New York Post's gossip page
Or perhaps it's just that crossing state lines is a violation of Lizzie's parole.
(Thanks to Benjamin for the Post link and the punch line.)
--from the New York Post's gossip page
Or perhaps it's just that crossing state lines is a violation of Lizzie's parole.
(Thanks to Benjamin for the Post link and the punch line.)
Let me see if I understand this correctly:
In America we think Saddam Hussein is a potential Hitler; we think he was involved in the September 11 attacks; we think that if we hadn't attacked him he was planning any day to arm terrorists who would bring a nuclear, chemical, or biological 9/11 to U.S. soil; we think he was a threat to the entire civilized world -- but we're surprised that the war is going on longer than a Bruce Willis movie? We sold all our stocks yesterday because the war isn't over yet?
We really need to grow up.
I think Saddam's threat to the rest of the world has been drastically overestimated by a lot of people, starting with the president of the United States (at least in his public pronouncements) -- but this was never going to be a four-hour miniseries. If the war had ended last week with Saddam's head on a pike it would have been a shorter war than Panama, for chrissakes. (I'll admit I wished for an insta-war last week, but that was an atheist's version of a prayer for a miracle.) Even if you thought this damn thing could end in days, how could you be surprised when it didn't?
This is war. War is ugly and bloody. War creates long periods of suffering. Good people die or suffer gruesome injuries. Survivors have horrific memories and lingering hatreds. This is why we were against it, idiots.
In America we think Saddam Hussein is a potential Hitler; we think he was involved in the September 11 attacks; we think that if we hadn't attacked him he was planning any day to arm terrorists who would bring a nuclear, chemical, or biological 9/11 to U.S. soil; we think he was a threat to the entire civilized world -- but we're surprised that the war is going on longer than a Bruce Willis movie? We sold all our stocks yesterday because the war isn't over yet?
We really need to grow up.
I think Saddam's threat to the rest of the world has been drastically overestimated by a lot of people, starting with the president of the United States (at least in his public pronouncements) -- but this was never going to be a four-hour miniseries. If the war had ended last week with Saddam's head on a pike it would have been a shorter war than Panama, for chrissakes. (I'll admit I wished for an insta-war last week, but that was an atheist's version of a prayer for a miracle.) Even if you thought this damn thing could end in days, how could you be surprised when it didn't?
This is war. War is ugly and bloody. War creates long periods of suffering. Good people die or suffer gruesome injuries. Survivors have horrific memories and lingering hatreds. This is why we were against it, idiots.
Monday, March 24, 2003
Have you noticed? Class warfare is hip. Sneering at class warfare is so ten weeks ago:
The Democrats couldn't even persuade people to oppose the repeal of the estate tax, which is explicitly for the mega-upper class....Why don't more Americans want to distribute more wealth down to people like themselves?...
Income resentment is not a strong emotion in much of America.
....Many Americans admire the rich.
They don't see society as a conflict zone between the rich and poor. It's taboo to say in a democratic culture, but do you think a nation that watches Katie Couric in the morning, Tom Hanks in the evening and Michael Jordan on weekends harbors deep animosity toward the affluent?...
--right-wing pundit David Brooks in The New York Times, 1/12/03
After watching the actor Martin Sheen, star of "The West Wing," denounce an invasion of Iraq on television last December, Lori Bardsley, 38, a homemaker in Summerfield, N.C., started an online petition, Citizens Against Celebrity "Pundits" at ipetitions.com. The petition now has more than 100,000 signatures.
"That evening I was very angry and I knew I wasn't the only one in the country who would be," Ms. Bardsley said. "Many Americans have felt this for a long time."...
"Entertainers symbolize something about American life that many Americans resent," [author Neal Gabler] said. "They have so much money and they're so conspicuous about it. The idea is that all celebrities are spoiled and naïve and fundamentally not serious. They're dabblers."
Rich Lowry, the editor of National Review, a conservative journal, echoed this view.
"Subliminally it bothers people that these are famous, rich, celebrated people who America has treated extremely well," he said.
--New York Times, 3/23/03
The Democrats couldn't even persuade people to oppose the repeal of the estate tax, which is explicitly for the mega-upper class....Why don't more Americans want to distribute more wealth down to people like themselves?...
Income resentment is not a strong emotion in much of America.
....Many Americans admire the rich.
They don't see society as a conflict zone between the rich and poor. It's taboo to say in a democratic culture, but do you think a nation that watches Katie Couric in the morning, Tom Hanks in the evening and Michael Jordan on weekends harbors deep animosity toward the affluent?...
--right-wing pundit David Brooks in The New York Times, 1/12/03
After watching the actor Martin Sheen, star of "The West Wing," denounce an invasion of Iraq on television last December, Lori Bardsley, 38, a homemaker in Summerfield, N.C., started an online petition, Citizens Against Celebrity "Pundits" at ipetitions.com. The petition now has more than 100,000 signatures.
"That evening I was very angry and I knew I wasn't the only one in the country who would be," Ms. Bardsley said. "Many Americans have felt this for a long time."...
"Entertainers symbolize something about American life that many Americans resent," [author Neal Gabler] said. "They have so much money and they're so conspicuous about it. The idea is that all celebrities are spoiled and naïve and fundamentally not serious. They're dabblers."
Rich Lowry, the editor of National Review, a conservative journal, echoed this view.
"Subliminally it bothers people that these are famous, rich, celebrated people who America has treated extremely well," he said.
--New York Times, 3/23/03
Things can go wrong very fast, even and perhaps especially for an over-reaching great power. Like the German planners of 1914, today's Washington strategists are obsessed with challenges, timetables, windows of opportunity—and the eschatological urge to tear down a frustrating international order and remake it in their image. They, too, have exaggerated the threats and underestimated the risks. That is as far as the analogy goes—Imperial Germany and Republican America have little else in common. But hubris is not a shortcoming peculiar to any one constitutional form; and the inability to envisage nemesis is modern America's distinctive failing.
--Tony Judt in the current New York Review of Books
--Tony Judt in the current New York Review of Books
For the first few days it seemed as if people weren’t paying much attention to the war. Now it’s a real story -- merciless bombing, the long march, terrified-looking POWs-- but I’m still not sure it’s more than just better-than-average reality TV for much of America.
At my office late Friday, we heard thunder and, being post-9/11 New Yorkers, we joked nervously about “Shock and Awe” arriving Stateside. Later, at an Italian restaurant, I heard tables of young men making what were meant to be Lettermanesque jokes using the war as a jumping-off point. That was war in NYC on Friday -- we were riffing on it.
Over the weekend I was in upstate New York, where I’ve spent a fair amount of time recently. I didn’t see what I expected to see there -- a lot of newly mounted flags. And I didn’t see a single ribbon around a tree. Last week a caller to an MTV show on the war said her town was full of yellow ribbons. The caller was in a military town -- but during Gulf War I, yellow ribbons were everywhere.
I guess we’re all paying attention now, but are we really emotionally invested? I think a lot of us aren’t. I think this is Bush’s war and Saddam’s war and Tony Blair’s war. It’s the troops’ war and the troops’ families’ war. It’s certainly the liberal-haters’ war. I don’t think the rest of the country’s war. It’s just the most interesting thing on.
At my office late Friday, we heard thunder and, being post-9/11 New Yorkers, we joked nervously about “Shock and Awe” arriving Stateside. Later, at an Italian restaurant, I heard tables of young men making what were meant to be Lettermanesque jokes using the war as a jumping-off point. That was war in NYC on Friday -- we were riffing on it.
Over the weekend I was in upstate New York, where I’ve spent a fair amount of time recently. I didn’t see what I expected to see there -- a lot of newly mounted flags. And I didn’t see a single ribbon around a tree. Last week a caller to an MTV show on the war said her town was full of yellow ribbons. The caller was in a military town -- but during Gulf War I, yellow ribbons were everywhere.
I guess we’re all paying attention now, but are we really emotionally invested? I think a lot of us aren’t. I think this is Bush’s war and Saddam’s war and Tony Blair’s war. It’s the troops’ war and the troops’ families’ war. It’s certainly the liberal-haters’ war. I don’t think the rest of the country’s war. It’s just the most interesting thing on.
Saturday, March 22, 2003
Civilians mostly unscathed from Shock and Awe, according to The Guardian? That would be good. Many government ministers also unscathed? Maybe not so good.
But Saddam is claiming civilian casualties, as the Voice of America reports.
And there's this from the Bush administration:
President Bush met with his war council Saturday and told Americans the only way to limit the length and scope of combat in Iraq was to use decisive force.
After U.S. and British aircraft unleashed the devastating firepower of missiles and bombs the Pentagon calls "shock and awe," Bush warned the Iraqi government, "This will not be a campaign of half measures."
Three days into war, Bush also cautioned against overconfidence given the apparent success of the mission and lack of serious resistance so far.
"A campaign on harsh terrain in a vast country could be longer and more difficult than some have predicted," Bush said in his weekly radio address broadcast from Camp David where he is spending the first weekend of the war.
.."Now that conflict has come, the only way to limit its duration is to apply decisive force," he said.
Translation: We are going to kill people. There is going to be collateral damage. This is going to get ugly.
But Saddam is claiming civilian casualties, as the Voice of America reports.
And there's this from the Bush administration:
President Bush met with his war council Saturday and told Americans the only way to limit the length and scope of combat in Iraq was to use decisive force.
After U.S. and British aircraft unleashed the devastating firepower of missiles and bombs the Pentagon calls "shock and awe," Bush warned the Iraqi government, "This will not be a campaign of half measures."
Three days into war, Bush also cautioned against overconfidence given the apparent success of the mission and lack of serious resistance so far.
"A campaign on harsh terrain in a vast country could be longer and more difficult than some have predicted," Bush said in his weekly radio address broadcast from Camp David where he is spending the first weekend of the war.
.."Now that conflict has come, the only way to limit its duration is to apply decisive force," he said.
Translation: We are going to kill people. There is going to be collateral damage. This is going to get ugly.
Friday, March 21, 2003
First we bomb the crap out of a major city in order to kill one guy (and a couple of his friends and relatives) ... then we let the guy we're trying to kill escape unharmed?
American officials have told ABCNEWS that even with today's bombing, secret talks have continued behind the scenes about a Saddam Hussein surrender and exile to, among other places, the country of Mauritania in west Africa.
Secretary of State Colin Powell hinted at the possibility of ongoing talks, saying: "There are a number of channels open to Baghdad. There are a number of individuals in countries around the world who have been conveying the message to the Iraqi regime that it is now inevitable that there will be a change."
Oh, and here's the best part -- guess the nationality of the person doing the shuttle diplomacy to try to make this happen:
One of the back channels goes through France, according to American officials aware of the negotiations.
Since December, ABCNEWS has learned, an emissary from the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been in the middle of the secret offer of exile. American officials say the French go-between, Pierre Delval, an expert on counterfeiting, has repeatedly traveled to Baghdad to persuade Saddam to accept exile in Mauritania.
(Source.)
American officials have told ABCNEWS that even with today's bombing, secret talks have continued behind the scenes about a Saddam Hussein surrender and exile to, among other places, the country of Mauritania in west Africa.
Secretary of State Colin Powell hinted at the possibility of ongoing talks, saying: "There are a number of channels open to Baghdad. There are a number of individuals in countries around the world who have been conveying the message to the Iraqi regime that it is now inevitable that there will be a change."
Oh, and here's the best part -- guess the nationality of the person doing the shuttle diplomacy to try to make this happen:
One of the back channels goes through France, according to American officials aware of the negotiations.
Since December, ABCNEWS has learned, an emissary from the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been in the middle of the secret offer of exile. American officials say the French go-between, Pierre Delval, an expert on counterfeiting, has repeatedly traveled to Baghdad to persuade Saddam to accept exile in Mauritania.
(Source.)
I swear they do this just to piss us off:
Q ...have you heard [the president] talk about this other responsibility which may weigh on him heavily today, and that is for the death of innocents, for Iraqi moms and dads and children who may, despite our best efforts, be killed?
MR. FLEISCHER: ... I think the President worries about it from two points of view -- one, in terms of the present mission. This is why the President and the Department of Defense work so carefully, and we have such a modern military that is capable of engaging in precision strikes, so that the targets are indeed the military targets. As always in war, there is risk, there will be innocents who are lost. And the President deeply regrets that Saddam Hussein has put innocents in a place where their lives will be lost.
The other portion of what the President remembers when he thinks about the innocents are the 3,000 innocents who lost their lives on September 11th in the United States....
--Today's White House press briefing
Saddam = Osama. Again and again and again.
(Thanks to Susan M. for pointing this out.)
Q ...have you heard [the president] talk about this other responsibility which may weigh on him heavily today, and that is for the death of innocents, for Iraqi moms and dads and children who may, despite our best efforts, be killed?
MR. FLEISCHER: ... I think the President worries about it from two points of view -- one, in terms of the present mission. This is why the President and the Department of Defense work so carefully, and we have such a modern military that is capable of engaging in precision strikes, so that the targets are indeed the military targets. As always in war, there is risk, there will be innocents who are lost. And the President deeply regrets that Saddam Hussein has put innocents in a place where their lives will be lost.
The other portion of what the President remembers when he thinks about the innocents are the 3,000 innocents who lost their lives on September 11th in the United States....
--Today's White House press briefing
Saddam = Osama. Again and again and again.
(Thanks to Susan M. for pointing this out.)
A lot of you have already seen this via Atrios, but for those who didn't...
Minutes before the speech [Wednesday night], an internal television monitor at the White House showed the President pumping his fist.
"Feels good," he said.
--Philadelphia Inquirer
Unbelievable. Just unbelievable.
Minutes before the speech [Wednesday night], an internal television monitor at the White House showed the President pumping his fist.
"Feels good," he said.
--Philadelphia Inquirer
Unbelievable. Just unbelievable.
After we finish bombing Iraq, Colin Powell's State Department has a plan to help win the hearts and minds of the populace in 22 Arab nations.
It plans to start publishing a lifestyle magazine for Arabs in the 18- to 35-year-old bracket that will showcase America - minus its politics and religion.
"Basically, it's a magazine that will reflect American lifestyle and culture," said Raphael Calis, project manager for the International Information Program at the State Department.
The name of the magazine is not yet finalized, but Janet Ottenberg and Richard Creighton - principals of Washington D.C.-based custom publisher The Magazine Group, which is handling the edit and design - said that the working title is simply "Hi."
"The idea came to us from our Arab staff," said Creighton. "The name's tested well; we should know for sure in the next two weeks."
--New York Post
"Hi." I guess "Convert or Die" didn't do very well in the focus groups.
It plans to start publishing a lifestyle magazine for Arabs in the 18- to 35-year-old bracket that will showcase America - minus its politics and religion.
"Basically, it's a magazine that will reflect American lifestyle and culture," said Raphael Calis, project manager for the International Information Program at the State Department.
The name of the magazine is not yet finalized, but Janet Ottenberg and Richard Creighton - principals of Washington D.C.-based custom publisher The Magazine Group, which is handling the edit and design - said that the working title is simply "Hi."
"The idea came to us from our Arab staff," said Creighton. "The name's tested well; we should know for sure in the next two weeks."
--New York Post
"Hi." I guess "Convert or Die" didn't do very well in the focus groups.
Is it possible that the beginning of the war hasn't really been a cakewalk? The Daily Kos collects some news reports that poke holes in the conventional wisdom.
And please note: The violent demonstrations in Muslim nations I listed below took place before "shock and awe" began. And now it's begun.
The Arab street will erupt. ...This is often predicted but rarely happens.
--Fred Barnes, "The Peacenik Top 10: A Look at the Ten Most Popular Objections to War and Some Common-Sense Responses to Them," Weekly Standard, 3/6/03
Four people were shot dead and dozens more were injured Friday as police clashed with demonstrators trying to storm the U.S. Embassy in Yemen, witnesses told CNN, on a second day of worldwide protests against the war in Iraq....
Meanwhile in Cairo, Egypt, Muslims hurled rocks and furniture at riot police from the roof of the historic al-Azhar mosque after Friday prayers....
In Amman, Jordan, police used tear gas against more than 10,000 people demonstrating against the war in a rally led by the Muslim Brotherhood.
Thousands of Palestinians also demonstrated across the West Bank and Gaza in support of Iraq, waving Iraqi flags, holding pictures of Saddam Hussein and Yasser Arafat and calling on the Iraqi president to "burn Tel Aviv." ...
In Srinagar, the summer capital of India's northern state of Jammu and Kashmir, protesters shouted anti-U.S. slogans and pelted stones at passing cars. Police were forced to use batons and tear gas to disperse crowds.
Thousands of Muslims in eastern Malaysia burned American and British flags and effigies of the two countries' leaders.
In Bangladesh, thousands marched through the streets of Dhaka, shouting slogans like: "Bush is a war criminal."
In Indonesia, the world's largest Muslim nation, demonstrators threw eggs and vegetables at the British Embassy in the capital, Jakarta....
--CNN today
--Fred Barnes, "The Peacenik Top 10: A Look at the Ten Most Popular Objections to War and Some Common-Sense Responses to Them," Weekly Standard, 3/6/03
Four people were shot dead and dozens more were injured Friday as police clashed with demonstrators trying to storm the U.S. Embassy in Yemen, witnesses told CNN, on a second day of worldwide protests against the war in Iraq....
Meanwhile in Cairo, Egypt, Muslims hurled rocks and furniture at riot police from the roof of the historic al-Azhar mosque after Friday prayers....
In Amman, Jordan, police used tear gas against more than 10,000 people demonstrating against the war in a rally led by the Muslim Brotherhood.
Thousands of Palestinians also demonstrated across the West Bank and Gaza in support of Iraq, waving Iraqi flags, holding pictures of Saddam Hussein and Yasser Arafat and calling on the Iraqi president to "burn Tel Aviv." ...
In Srinagar, the summer capital of India's northern state of Jammu and Kashmir, protesters shouted anti-U.S. slogans and pelted stones at passing cars. Police were forced to use batons and tear gas to disperse crowds.
Thousands of Muslims in eastern Malaysia burned American and British flags and effigies of the two countries' leaders.
In Bangladesh, thousands marched through the streets of Dhaka, shouting slogans like: "Bush is a war criminal."
In Indonesia, the world's largest Muslim nation, demonstrators threw eggs and vegetables at the British Embassy in the capital, Jakarta....
--CNN today
We're using napalm.
Hey, don't worry -- we're not using it in civilian areas, so it's OK. We just fried some Iraqi soldiers at Safwan Hill with it. And besides, we never signed on to the convention that restricts its use.
Marine Cobra helicopter gunships firing Hellfire missiles swept in low from the south. Then the marine howitzers, with a range of 30 kilometres, opened a sustained barrage over the next eight hours. They were supported by US Navy aircraft which dropped 40,000 pounds of explosives and napalm, a US officer told the Herald.
A legal expert at the International Committee of the Red Cross in Geneva said the use of napalm or fuel air bombs was not illegal "per se" because the US was not a signatory to the 1980 weapons convention which prohibits and restricts certain weapons. "But the US has to apply the basic principles of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and take all precautions to protect civilians. In the case of napalm and fuel air bombs, these are special precautions because these are area weapons, not specific weapons," said Dominique Loye, the committee's adviser on weapons and IHL.
--Sydney Morning Herald; link from BuzzFlash
Hey, don't worry -- we're not using it in civilian areas, so it's OK. We just fried some Iraqi soldiers at Safwan Hill with it. And besides, we never signed on to the convention that restricts its use.
Marine Cobra helicopter gunships firing Hellfire missiles swept in low from the south. Then the marine howitzers, with a range of 30 kilometres, opened a sustained barrage over the next eight hours. They were supported by US Navy aircraft which dropped 40,000 pounds of explosives and napalm, a US officer told the Herald.
A legal expert at the International Committee of the Red Cross in Geneva said the use of napalm or fuel air bombs was not illegal "per se" because the US was not a signatory to the 1980 weapons convention which prohibits and restricts certain weapons. "But the US has to apply the basic principles of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and take all precautions to protect civilians. In the case of napalm and fuel air bombs, these are special precautions because these are area weapons, not specific weapons," said Dominique Loye, the committee's adviser on weapons and IHL.
--Sydney Morning Herald; link from BuzzFlash
Cursor links to a good LA Weekly article (by John R. McArthur of Harper's) about propaganda in the run-up to war. The point of the article is that governments lie to you when they want war -- but what's I find interesting is the nature of the propaganda McArthur describes. Nearly all of it has been about scary things, rather than the suffering of flesh-and-blood human beings as a result of scary things. Yes, we heard one (factually accurate) paragraph about torture in Iraq in the State of the Union address, and we've heard "he gassed his own people" over and over. But the bulk of the propaganda has been about aluminum tubes, airborne drones, and warheads that can be fitted with chemical weapons. We heard a lot more about "weapons of mass destruction" than we did about actual destruction (in, say, Halabja). The current Bushies never got us to the tie-a-yellow-ribbon level of fervor for war we reached in January '91. Were they just too cold-blooded and impersonal to manage this?
Last night at one point I switched to MTV. I'm always amused by MTV's attempts at earnestness in times like these -- you know, éminence grise Kurt Loder attempting to rearrange his features in a look of concern for our youth, even though his facial muscles probably contain more botulinum toxin than can be found in Saddam Hussein's bioweapons stockpiles.
What I saw on MTV was a series of interviews of young people in and around Grand Central Station. They were asked about the war -- and they weren't rah-rah or outraged. They mostly didn't give a damn one way or the other.
I don't know how typical these kids are. But if they're at all representative of America, or at least of their generation, then George W. Bush has really accomplished something: on a psychological level, he has partially privatized this war. What I mean is that by failing to rally us around a principle, or around a compelling rationale, he's made the war something many people might not even care about if they don't have a direct stake in it. (On MTV, the interview segment was followed by two young callers from military towns who were, understandably, very focused on the war.)
So maybe there are people directly or indirectly involved; people like me who aren't involved but have strong opinions pro or con -- and then everyone else, for many of whom this war is as meaningless as the price of pork-belly futures is to people who go to a check-cashing store to cash their paychecks. Maybe young people have figured out that we just do this every few years, and when it's over there's still evil and slaughter and brutality in the world, much of it in places the U.S. will never invade.
***********
Here's Digby, from Wednesday night:
The war show is, so far, very disappointing. When Bernie and Peter were hiding under their beds back in '91 at the Baghdad Hilton, and a handsome gas masked Bibi spoke calmly from Tel Aviv in his mellifluous American accent, it was new and exciting. The Patriot missiles were faster than a speeding scud and could pluck that baby right out of the sky. Cool fireworks. (Of course, we later found out they couldn't hit water if they were pushed over the side of a boat.)
Still, it all was new and so post-pac man. I'm not seeing it now, no matter how they rhapsodise about the technology. I wonder if people are still watching. Especially since there's nothing to watch. We just turned on "Curb Your Enthusiasm."
He was being somewhat sarcastic -- he went on to point out that, oh, by the way, innocent people will be soon be dying in Baghdad. But I think he captured some of the sense of ennui that's out there as we pursue Bush War IV.
What I saw on MTV was a series of interviews of young people in and around Grand Central Station. They were asked about the war -- and they weren't rah-rah or outraged. They mostly didn't give a damn one way or the other.
I don't know how typical these kids are. But if they're at all representative of America, or at least of their generation, then George W. Bush has really accomplished something: on a psychological level, he has partially privatized this war. What I mean is that by failing to rally us around a principle, or around a compelling rationale, he's made the war something many people might not even care about if they don't have a direct stake in it. (On MTV, the interview segment was followed by two young callers from military towns who were, understandably, very focused on the war.)
So maybe there are people directly or indirectly involved; people like me who aren't involved but have strong opinions pro or con -- and then everyone else, for many of whom this war is as meaningless as the price of pork-belly futures is to people who go to a check-cashing store to cash their paychecks. Maybe young people have figured out that we just do this every few years, and when it's over there's still evil and slaughter and brutality in the world, much of it in places the U.S. will never invade.
***********
Here's Digby, from Wednesday night:
The war show is, so far, very disappointing. When Bernie and Peter were hiding under their beds back in '91 at the Baghdad Hilton, and a handsome gas masked Bibi spoke calmly from Tel Aviv in his mellifluous American accent, it was new and exciting. The Patriot missiles were faster than a speeding scud and could pluck that baby right out of the sky. Cool fireworks. (Of course, we later found out they couldn't hit water if they were pushed over the side of a boat.)
Still, it all was new and so post-pac man. I'm not seeing it now, no matter how they rhapsodise about the technology. I wonder if people are still watching. Especially since there's nothing to watch. We just turned on "Curb Your Enthusiasm."
He was being somewhat sarcastic -- he went on to point out that, oh, by the way, innocent people will be soon be dying in Baghdad. But I think he captured some of the sense of ennui that's out there as we pursue Bush War IV.
Thursday, March 20, 2003
I didn’t hear anyone talking about the war at the office today. One reason may be the war’s muted start, but another reason, I think, is that we’ve been through this so many times before. We’ve had one or the other George Bush as president for a little more than six years, and this is already our fourth war. And they’re all the same, aren’t they? They’re all quick routs that seem to change absolutely nothing in our lives. Even the last war, the one that avenged 9/11 and actually did a fair amount of harm to some of the perpetrators, didn’t make us feel safer from terrorism. Four wars, three antichrists -- and so far all three of those antichrists are still alive: Noriega, Saddam, and Osama.
It’s almost certain that George W. will be president for six more years. Do we have four more of these damn things to look forward to?
It’s almost certain that George W. will be president for six more years. Do we have four more of these damn things to look forward to?
Environmental experts warned this week that war in Iraq will cause "massive and possibly irreversible" damage to the Persian Gulf region and significantly add to global warming. The environmental leaders said the ensuing damage to Iraq's ecosystem and food and water supplies may eclipse the destruction during the 1991 Persian Gulf War.
"I think it will be comprehensive damage, and I don't think it will be localized to the area of Iraq, regardless of how precise and surgical our bombing campaign will be," said Ross Mirkarimi, a San Francisco-based environmental analyst who made two trips to Iraq shortly after U.S.-led forces drove the Iraqis from Kuwait.
--Washington Post
Oh, and putting out burning oil fields is not particularly easy:
Most of the teams [that fought oil fires in Kuwait after the first Gulf War] used seawater pumped through Kuwait’s empty oil pipelines to battle the fires....
It took Kuwait more than two years and $50 billion to restore its oil output to prewar levels. If Iraq sabotaged its oil fields, any cleanup could take far longer and cost much more.
Iraq’s fields and pipelines are badly run down after 12 years of U.N. economic sanctions. Its fields are also much farther from the sea than those in Kuwait, meaning a ready source of water might not be so easily available.
Destruction could be especially bad if Iraqis set off explosives underground, deep within the well shafts themselves. If that happened, firefighters would have to drill a new “relief well” and pump a mixture of sand, gel and mud into each damaged shaft to try to plug it up and stop the blowout.
“It’s a long, arduous process,” Badick said. Whereas he and his crews put out as many as five fires a day in Kuwait, cleaning up after a single underground explosion can take two months.
--NBC News
"I think it will be comprehensive damage, and I don't think it will be localized to the area of Iraq, regardless of how precise and surgical our bombing campaign will be," said Ross Mirkarimi, a San Francisco-based environmental analyst who made two trips to Iraq shortly after U.S.-led forces drove the Iraqis from Kuwait.
--Washington Post
Oh, and putting out burning oil fields is not particularly easy:
Most of the teams [that fought oil fires in Kuwait after the first Gulf War] used seawater pumped through Kuwait’s empty oil pipelines to battle the fires....
It took Kuwait more than two years and $50 billion to restore its oil output to prewar levels. If Iraq sabotaged its oil fields, any cleanup could take far longer and cost much more.
Iraq’s fields and pipelines are badly run down after 12 years of U.N. economic sanctions. Its fields are also much farther from the sea than those in Kuwait, meaning a ready source of water might not be so easily available.
Destruction could be especially bad if Iraqis set off explosives underground, deep within the well shafts themselves. If that happened, firefighters would have to drill a new “relief well” and pump a mixture of sand, gel and mud into each damaged shaft to try to plug it up and stop the blowout.
“It’s a long, arduous process,” Badick said. Whereas he and his crews put out as many as five fires a day in Kuwait, cleaning up after a single underground explosion can take two months.
--NBC News
When I heard President George Bush deliver his ultimatum to Saddam Hussein on Monday, I could not help but puzzle over one crucial omission: the word "democracy." Why, I kept on asking myself, did he choose not to use it?
Please don't snicker. That's Kanan Makiya, the Iraqi dissident, writing in his new war diary at The New Republic Online.
Makiya felt betrayed by the U.S. a month ago; Bush administration officials have now made him many promises and he’s guardedly optimistic. His optimism seems premised on the notion that administration officials are men of their word.
I have to remember to read Makiya's diary. I suspect it will be a diary of disillusionment with the Bush administration.
Please don't snicker. That's Kanan Makiya, the Iraqi dissident, writing in his new war diary at The New Republic Online.
Makiya felt betrayed by the U.S. a month ago; Bush administration officials have now made him many promises and he’s guardedly optimistic. His optimism seems premised on the notion that administration officials are men of their word.
I have to remember to read Makiya's diary. I suspect it will be a diary of disillusionment with the Bush administration.
Uh-oh ... last night, the only picture in the "War with Iraq" box on the Yahoo title screen was of President Bush. Now there are pictures of Bush and Saddam. DISLOYALTY! DISLOYALTY! OBJECTIVELY PRO-SADDAM!
Top White House anti-terror boss resigns
The top National Security Council official in the war on terror resigned this week for what a NSC spokesman said were personal reasons, but intelligence sources say the move reflects concern that the looming war with Iraq is hurting the fight against terrorism.
Rand Beers would not comment for this article, but he and several sources close to him are emphatic that the resignation was not a protest against an invasion of Iraq. But the same sources, and other current and former intelligence officials, described a broad consensus in the anti-terrorism and intelligence community that an invasion of Iraq would divert critical resources from the war on terror.
Beers has served as the NSC's senior director for counter-terrorism only since August. The White House said Wednesday that he officially remains on the job and has yet to set a departure date.
"Hardly a surprise," said one former intelligence official. "We have sacrificed a war on terror for a war with Iraq. I don't blame Randy at all. This just reflects the widespread thought that the war on terror is being set aside for the war with Iraq at the expense of our military and intel resources and the relationships with our allies."...
The article goes on to quote James Bamford, author of two books about the National Security agency, The Puzzle Palace and Body of Secrets:
"This is a very intriguing decision (by Beers). There is a predominant belief in the intelligence community that an invasion of Iraq will cause more terrorism than it will prevent. There is also a tremendous amount of embarrassment by intelligence professionals that there have been so many lies out of the administration -- by the president, (Vice President Dick) Cheney and (Secretary of State Colin) Powell -- over Iraq."
And there's this:
"If it was your job to prevent terror attacks, would you be happy about an action that many see as unnecessary, that is almost guaranteed to cause more terror in the short-term?" said one official. "I know I'm not (happy)."
The top National Security Council official in the war on terror resigned this week for what a NSC spokesman said were personal reasons, but intelligence sources say the move reflects concern that the looming war with Iraq is hurting the fight against terrorism.
Rand Beers would not comment for this article, but he and several sources close to him are emphatic that the resignation was not a protest against an invasion of Iraq. But the same sources, and other current and former intelligence officials, described a broad consensus in the anti-terrorism and intelligence community that an invasion of Iraq would divert critical resources from the war on terror.
Beers has served as the NSC's senior director for counter-terrorism only since August. The White House said Wednesday that he officially remains on the job and has yet to set a departure date.
"Hardly a surprise," said one former intelligence official. "We have sacrificed a war on terror for a war with Iraq. I don't blame Randy at all. This just reflects the widespread thought that the war on terror is being set aside for the war with Iraq at the expense of our military and intel resources and the relationships with our allies."...
The article goes on to quote James Bamford, author of two books about the National Security agency, The Puzzle Palace and Body of Secrets:
"This is a very intriguing decision (by Beers). There is a predominant belief in the intelligence community that an invasion of Iraq will cause more terrorism than it will prevent. There is also a tremendous amount of embarrassment by intelligence professionals that there have been so many lies out of the administration -- by the president, (Vice President Dick) Cheney and (Secretary of State Colin) Powell -- over Iraq."
And there's this:
"If it was your job to prevent terror attacks, would you be happy about an action that many see as unnecessary, that is almost guaranteed to cause more terror in the short-term?" said one official. "I know I'm not (happy)."
“When I take action,” he said, “I’m not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt.”
--President George W. Bush in September 2001, quoted by Howard Fineman in Newsweek
--President George W. Bush in September 2001, quoted by Howard Fineman in Newsweek
Wednesday, March 19, 2003
Now that this war is actually going to happen, I want the U.S. to win in a rout.
I don’t care if I look foolish for having predicted dire consequences. I want minimal casualties -- and minimal glory. On the radio this morning, someone said this war might look the Panama invasion. That’s not insubstantial enough. I want Grenada.
I want unharmed Iraqi civilians to cheer unharmed American troops almost immediately. I want this war to be so brief, so painless and bloodless, that it’s a dim memory by Memorial Day.
If that happens, this war will never really become part of our national myth. That’s good, because war has sex appeal for far too many people.
And if it happens, war will have been a prologue -- and nation-building will be the main act. I don’t believe the aftermath of this war will in any way live up to its promise, as articulated by Bush and his subordinates -- but as long as that aftermath, Iraq as America’s 51st state, is inevitable, it would be good to get to it now.
I hope we have as little as possible of Warlord Bush, so we can soon see the real Bush again, the one who’s never done anything successfully in his adult life.
And then I hope we do to him what we did to his father.
I don’t care if I look foolish for having predicted dire consequences. I want minimal casualties -- and minimal glory. On the radio this morning, someone said this war might look the Panama invasion. That’s not insubstantial enough. I want Grenada.
I want unharmed Iraqi civilians to cheer unharmed American troops almost immediately. I want this war to be so brief, so painless and bloodless, that it’s a dim memory by Memorial Day.
If that happens, this war will never really become part of our national myth. That’s good, because war has sex appeal for far too many people.
And if it happens, war will have been a prologue -- and nation-building will be the main act. I don’t believe the aftermath of this war will in any way live up to its promise, as articulated by Bush and his subordinates -- but as long as that aftermath, Iraq as America’s 51st state, is inevitable, it would be good to get to it now.
I hope we have as little as possible of Warlord Bush, so we can soon see the real Bush again, the one who’s never done anything successfully in his adult life.
And then I hope we do to him what we did to his father.
Here's more ham-fisted, humorless conservative "wit." (And it's got the InstaPundit Seal of Approval!)
Here's the president's three-paragraph letter, from whitehouse.gov.
He invokes the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243), then goes on to say,
acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
In other words, Iraq = 9/11. More and more, I suspect that belief in that fairy tale is the principal reason Bush has been craving war.
I keep going back to something in Peggy Noonan's January 27 column:
Four months ago a friend who had recently met with the president on other business reported to me that in conversation the president had said that he has been having some trouble sleeping, and that when he awakes in the morning the first thing he often thinks is: I wonder if this is the day Saddam will do it.
"Do what exactly?" I asked my friend. He told me he understood the president to be saying that he wonders if this will be the day Saddam launches a terror attack here, on American soil.
When I wrote about the column in January, I speculated that Bush might have this fear because people have been whispering "Saddam = Osama" in his ear. Well, maybe. But now I wonder if this is a case of a fervent Christian expressing his belief that there are many important forces in life for which there's little or no earthly empirical evidence. If that's what's going on, the lack of empirical evidence linking Saddam and al-Qaeda may mean as little to Bush as the lack of empirical evidence that Christ rose from the dead on the third day.
And of course, there are no shades of gray in Bush's world. Evil = evil.
He invokes the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243), then goes on to say,
acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
In other words, Iraq = 9/11. More and more, I suspect that belief in that fairy tale is the principal reason Bush has been craving war.
I keep going back to something in Peggy Noonan's January 27 column:
Four months ago a friend who had recently met with the president on other business reported to me that in conversation the president had said that he has been having some trouble sleeping, and that when he awakes in the morning the first thing he often thinks is: I wonder if this is the day Saddam will do it.
"Do what exactly?" I asked my friend. He told me he understood the president to be saying that he wonders if this will be the day Saddam launches a terror attack here, on American soil.
When I wrote about the column in January, I speculated that Bush might have this fear because people have been whispering "Saddam = Osama" in his ear. Well, maybe. But now I wonder if this is a case of a fervent Christian expressing his belief that there are many important forces in life for which there's little or no earthly empirical evidence. If that's what's going on, the lack of empirical evidence linking Saddam and al-Qaeda may mean as little to Bush as the lack of empirical evidence that Christ rose from the dead on the third day.
And of course, there are no shades of gray in Bush's world. Evil = evil.
Bush met with his war council and the White House sent Congress formal notification of justification for war. The three-paragraph document says diplomacy has failed to protect America's security, and it links Saddam's regime with the al-Qaida network, implicated in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
--Washington Post
Unbelievable -- the SOBs can't produce three paragraphs of copy without throwing in the Saddam/al-Qaeda fairy tale.
--Washington Post
Unbelievable -- the SOBs can't produce three paragraphs of copy without throwing in the Saddam/al-Qaeda fairy tale.
Radio airplay for the Dixie Chicks declined 20% just after one of the Chicks made anti-Bush remarks, but apparently the backlash is abating, although the Chicks have been dropped from the playlists of a number of stations owned by Clear Channel, which has sponsored many flag-waving rallies across the country.
And meanwhile, for the people at the gossip column of Rupert Murdoch's New York Post, the Dixie Chicks are just the tip of the boycott iceberg; the Posties, of course, are acting in the proud tradition of the gossip columnists who helped drive Charlie Chaplin out of America.
I'm sorry if I seem fixated on the Dixie Chicks. I'm not a fan of their music. The point is that Natalie Maines wasn't disclosing military secrets to Saddam's forces -- she doesn't like Bush, and that's not treason.
There are now a good number of entertainers who support Bush and the war. I don't want those people boycotted. I'm not a fan of Charlie Daniels, who regularly uses his Web site to denounce people like me and just about everything we stand for, but if I had tickets to see Bob Dylan and I learned that Charlie Daniels would show up to play fiddle, as he did for Bob thirty years ago, I would still go, gladly. I used to find Dennis Miller funny, and I may find him funny again, even though I'm tired of his current neocon schtick. Boycotting him seems pointless. I believe in boycotting people whose message runs consistently to hate -- people who wish all gay people dead or who regularly describe this or that ethnic group as less than human. But this is different.
And meanwhile, for the people at the gossip column of Rupert Murdoch's New York Post, the Dixie Chicks are just the tip of the boycott iceberg; the Posties, of course, are acting in the proud tradition of the gossip columnists who helped drive Charlie Chaplin out of America.
I'm sorry if I seem fixated on the Dixie Chicks. I'm not a fan of their music. The point is that Natalie Maines wasn't disclosing military secrets to Saddam's forces -- she doesn't like Bush, and that's not treason.
There are now a good number of entertainers who support Bush and the war. I don't want those people boycotted. I'm not a fan of Charlie Daniels, who regularly uses his Web site to denounce people like me and just about everything we stand for, but if I had tickets to see Bob Dylan and I learned that Charlie Daniels would show up to play fiddle, as he did for Bob thirty years ago, I would still go, gladly. I used to find Dennis Miller funny, and I may find him funny again, even though I'm tired of his current neocon schtick. Boycotting him seems pointless. I believe in boycotting people whose message runs consistently to hate -- people who wish all gay people dead or who regularly describe this or that ethnic group as less than human. But this is different.
"At last -- a conservative alternative to Ben & Jerry's": Star Spangled Ice Cream!
Flavors include I Hate the French Vanilla, Nutty Environmentalist, and Iraqi Road. More flavors listed here.
I have two words for these people: Billy Beer.
Oh, and remind me again: Which Ben & Jerry's flavors have overtly political names? Because I can't think of any.
(Thanks again to Dreamweasel for the link.)
Flavors include I Hate the French Vanilla, Nutty Environmentalist, and Iraqi Road. More flavors listed here.
I have two words for these people: Billy Beer.
Oh, and remind me again: Which Ben & Jerry's flavors have overtly political names? Because I can't think of any.
(Thanks again to Dreamweasel for the link.)
This is supposed to reassure you:
In a lengthy interview with the Voice last week, a high-ranking Defense Department political official did concede that preparation for Iraq after a war is seriously lacking. "The planning should have started much sooner," the official said. "That's hard to deny." But, the official added by way of spin, that's really nothing to be concerned about, because compared to Afghanistan, Iraq is really much easier to handle, and won't require a protracted military presence, in keeping with Donald Rumsfeld's view that the military should not be a tool for "nation building."
"It's not like there's a bunch of roving warlords and ethnic or religious differences on the same scale as Afghanistan," the official contended.
That's from a good story by Jason Vest in this week's Village Voice about the U.S. government's inadequate postwar plans. I'm sure the lack of religious differences in Iraq will be news to the ruling Sunnis, southern Shi'ites, and non-Arab Kurds in the north.
Citing an Army War College paper on reconstruction, Vest writes:
While the administration has often tried to describe a post-Saddam Iraq as something akin to post-war Germany and Japan, the paper notes that an entire army staff was dedicated to planning for post-war occupation two years before the end of World War II. In the case of Iraq, similar foresight has not been exercised.
Ah, but back then the U.S. government was run by adults.
In a lengthy interview with the Voice last week, a high-ranking Defense Department political official did concede that preparation for Iraq after a war is seriously lacking. "The planning should have started much sooner," the official said. "That's hard to deny." But, the official added by way of spin, that's really nothing to be concerned about, because compared to Afghanistan, Iraq is really much easier to handle, and won't require a protracted military presence, in keeping with Donald Rumsfeld's view that the military should not be a tool for "nation building."
"It's not like there's a bunch of roving warlords and ethnic or religious differences on the same scale as Afghanistan," the official contended.
That's from a good story by Jason Vest in this week's Village Voice about the U.S. government's inadequate postwar plans. I'm sure the lack of religious differences in Iraq will be news to the ruling Sunnis, southern Shi'ites, and non-Arab Kurds in the north.
Citing an Army War College paper on reconstruction, Vest writes:
While the administration has often tried to describe a post-Saddam Iraq as something akin to post-war Germany and Japan, the paper notes that an entire army staff was dedicated to planning for post-war occupation two years before the end of World War II. In the case of Iraq, similar foresight has not been exercised.
Ah, but back then the U.S. government was run by adults.
Electronic bugging devices have been found at offices used by French and German delegations at a European Union building in Brussels, officials have confirmed.
Devices were also discovered at offices used by other delegations, said EU spokesman Dominique-Georges Marro....
The discovery of the telephone tapping systems was first reported on Wednesday by France's Le Figaro newspaper, which blamed the US.
But Mr Marro said it was "impossible at this stage" to determine who had planted the devices....
--BBC
I'm starting to suspect that you're allowed to violate the coat-and-tie dress code at the Bush White House if you show up wearing one of these T-shirts.
Devices were also discovered at offices used by other delegations, said EU spokesman Dominique-Georges Marro....
The discovery of the telephone tapping systems was first reported on Wednesday by France's Le Figaro newspaper, which blamed the US.
But Mr Marro said it was "impossible at this stage" to determine who had planted the devices....
--BBC
I'm starting to suspect that you're allowed to violate the coat-and-tie dress code at the Bush White House if you show up wearing one of these T-shirts.
Tuesday, March 18, 2003
Most worrying of all is the fact that the Democrats have scheduled the South Carolina primary immediately after Iowa and New Hampshire. At least 40 percent of South Carolina's Democratic primary voters are black. All the ingredients are therefore there for an early Sharpton break-out....
--Andrew Sullivan, Sunday Times (London), 2/24/03
Latest presidential preference poll of South Carolina Democrats (Zogby poll, 3/4 - 3/6):
Lieberman 12%
Gephardt 10%
Edwards 6%
Kerry 5%
Sharpton 4%
Undecided 46%
(Results courtesy Daily Kos.)
What? Could it possibly be that blacks aren't pod people mindlessly programmed to follow the dictates of their own pigmentation? Could it possibly be that blacks are pretty much like whites, and therefore a lot of them haven't made up their minds about their favorite candidate for '04?
--Andrew Sullivan, Sunday Times (London), 2/24/03
Latest presidential preference poll of South Carolina Democrats (Zogby poll, 3/4 - 3/6):
Lieberman 12%
Gephardt 10%
Edwards 6%
Kerry 5%
Sharpton 4%
Undecided 46%
(Results courtesy Daily Kos.)
What? Could it possibly be that blacks aren't pod people mindlessly programmed to follow the dictates of their own pigmentation? Could it possibly be that blacks are pretty much like whites, and therefore a lot of them haven't made up their minds about their favorite candidate for '04?
These people may be pulling our leg -- but it doesn't look that way....
Give the Statue of Liberty back to the French!
Located in New York Harbor, the Statue of Liberty was a gift of international friendship from the people of France to the people of the United States and is one of the most universal symbols of political freedom and democracy...
Now it is time to give it back!
They can have their damn Statue!
(Thanks -- if that's the right word -- to Phil F. for the link.)
Give the Statue of Liberty back to the French!
Located in New York Harbor, the Statue of Liberty was a gift of international friendship from the people of France to the people of the United States and is one of the most universal symbols of political freedom and democracy...
Now it is time to give it back!
They can have their damn Statue!
(Thanks -- if that's the right word -- to Phil F. for the link.)
From President Bush's speech last night:
...some permanent members of the Security Council have publicly announced they will veto any resolution that compels the disarmament of Iraq. These governments share our assessment of the danger, but not our resolve to meet it. Many nations, however, do have the resolve and fortitude to act against this threat to peace....
From AP today:
"We now have a coalition of the willing that includes some 30 nations who publicly said they could be included in such a listing," Powell said, "and there are 15 other nations, for one reason or another, who do not wish to be publicly named but will be supporting the coalition." ...
The State Department released the list of 30 countries, one of which, Japan, was identified as only a post-conflict member of the coalition.
Spokesman Richard Boucher said some of them "may put troops on the ground," while others would take on other roles, such as assisting in a defense against the use of chemical or biological weapons or permitting allied combat planes to fly over their territory....
No Arab country was listed by the State Department. But Boucher declined to say none supported the United States against Iraq....
Turkey was included on the list, and Powell said even as the Turkish parliament debates a U.S. proposal to use Turkish territory for an invasion of northern Iraq he was confident of Turkish cooperation in one form or another....
I guess it all depends on what the definition of "resolve and fortitude" is.
(Oh, here's the dream team: "part of the coalition" -- Afghanistan, Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Colombia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Hungary, Italy and Japan, which isisted as "post-conflict"; "others" -- South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, the Philippines, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom and Uzbekistan.)
...some permanent members of the Security Council have publicly announced they will veto any resolution that compels the disarmament of Iraq. These governments share our assessment of the danger, but not our resolve to meet it. Many nations, however, do have the resolve and fortitude to act against this threat to peace....
From AP today:
"We now have a coalition of the willing that includes some 30 nations who publicly said they could be included in such a listing," Powell said, "and there are 15 other nations, for one reason or another, who do not wish to be publicly named but will be supporting the coalition." ...
The State Department released the list of 30 countries, one of which, Japan, was identified as only a post-conflict member of the coalition.
Spokesman Richard Boucher said some of them "may put troops on the ground," while others would take on other roles, such as assisting in a defense against the use of chemical or biological weapons or permitting allied combat planes to fly over their territory....
No Arab country was listed by the State Department. But Boucher declined to say none supported the United States against Iraq....
Turkey was included on the list, and Powell said even as the Turkish parliament debates a U.S. proposal to use Turkish territory for an invasion of northern Iraq he was confident of Turkish cooperation in one form or another....
I guess it all depends on what the definition of "resolve and fortitude" is.
(Oh, here's the dream team: "part of the coalition" -- Afghanistan, Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Colombia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Hungary, Italy and Japan, which isisted as "post-conflict"; "others" -- South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, the Philippines, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom and Uzbekistan.)
NOT IN OUR NAME (local edition)
The city [of New York] says Amadou Diallo "caused or contributed" to his own death by refusing to obey police commands, assuming "a combat position" and brandishing what appeared to be a gun.
In legal papers filed in response to an $81 million negligence suit brought by Diallo's parents, the city maintains there was "a legal basis" for police to use deadly force in the 1999 Bronx shooting of the unarmed African immigrant.
The wording of the document was criticized yesterday by lawyer Anthony Gair, who is representing Diallo's parents.
"This is very offensive to the family," Gair said. "One would think that at this late date [the city] would finally publicly say: 'Yes, we were responsible. Yes, we had inadequately trained officers on the street.'"...
--Daily News
I know this is just the city staking out a contrary position in an adversarial proceeding. I know this is how civil suits work. Still, it's offensive. It opens racial wounds that have been healing.
The city [of New York] says Amadou Diallo "caused or contributed" to his own death by refusing to obey police commands, assuming "a combat position" and brandishing what appeared to be a gun.
In legal papers filed in response to an $81 million negligence suit brought by Diallo's parents, the city maintains there was "a legal basis" for police to use deadly force in the 1999 Bronx shooting of the unarmed African immigrant.
The wording of the document was criticized yesterday by lawyer Anthony Gair, who is representing Diallo's parents.
"This is very offensive to the family," Gair said. "One would think that at this late date [the city] would finally publicly say: 'Yes, we were responsible. Yes, we had inadequately trained officers on the street.'"...
--Daily News
I know this is just the city staking out a contrary position in an adversarial proceeding. I know this is how civil suits work. Still, it's offensive. It opens racial wounds that have been healing.
President Bush flashed on the giant screen between the second and third periods of the New Jersey Devils game with the Philadelphia Flyers. He had a captive audience.
Most fans sat in their seats in the Continental Arena and listened. And cheered - five times.
The loudest eruption came when Bush announced that Saddam Hussein had 48 hours to leave Iraq.
When the President was done, chants of "U-S-A, U-S-A, U-S-A" echoed through the building.
--New York Daily News
If Jacques Chirac, Vladimir Putin, Gerhard Schröder, Kofi Annan, Nelson Mandela, Jean Chrétien, the Pope, and two-thirds of the world's population are on one side in a geopolitical crisis and a bunch of hockey fans juiced on cheap draft beer are on the other side, well, the hockey fans must be right, right? Every real American knows that.
Most fans sat in their seats in the Continental Arena and listened. And cheered - five times.
The loudest eruption came when Bush announced that Saddam Hussein had 48 hours to leave Iraq.
When the President was done, chants of "U-S-A, U-S-A, U-S-A" echoed through the building.
--New York Daily News
If Jacques Chirac, Vladimir Putin, Gerhard Schröder, Kofi Annan, Nelson Mandela, Jean Chrétien, the Pope, and two-thirds of the world's population are on one side in a geopolitical crisis and a bunch of hockey fans juiced on cheap draft beer are on the other side, well, the hockey fans must be right, right? Every real American knows that.
Here's an interesting result from this quickie Gallup poll. Although the public is rallying around Bush and approving the war ultimatum, most Americans still aren't convinced that it's actually the right thing to do:
For months, President Bush has been trying to persuade the American public that a war against Saddam Hussein might be necessary to disarm Iraq and prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction. The poll suggests that 44% of Americans have been convinced by the president's arguments, and thus support his decision. Another 21% of Americans are unsure if war is the right thing, but support Bush anyway because he is the president. Thirty percent take an opposing point of view....
Which comes closer to your view [ROTATED: you support going to war because you think it is the best thing for the U.S. to do (or) you are not sure if going to war is the best thing to do, but you support Bush's decision because he is president]?
COMBINED RESULTS
2003 Mar 17
% Approve 66
(Right thing to do) (44) (Not sure if right thing, but supporting president) (21) (Unsure) (1)
Disapprove 30
No opinion 4
Chances are someone who's told you that "all politicians are liars" now thinks a war must be a good idea because, well, "we have to trust the president."
For months, President Bush has been trying to persuade the American public that a war against Saddam Hussein might be necessary to disarm Iraq and prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction. The poll suggests that 44% of Americans have been convinced by the president's arguments, and thus support his decision. Another 21% of Americans are unsure if war is the right thing, but support Bush anyway because he is the president. Thirty percent take an opposing point of view....
Which comes closer to your view [ROTATED: you support going to war because you think it is the best thing for the U.S. to do (or) you are not sure if going to war is the best thing to do, but you support Bush's decision because he is president]?
COMBINED RESULTS
2003 Mar 17
% Approve 66
(Right thing to do) (44) (Not sure if right thing, but supporting president) (21) (Unsure) (1)
Disapprove 30
No opinion 4
Chances are someone who's told you that "all politicians are liars" now thinks a war must be a good idea because, well, "we have to trust the president."
If you haven't read it or heard it, here's the full text of the speech with which Robin Cook resigned from the British government.
Some excerpts:
Only a year ago, we and the United States were part of a coalition against terrorism that was wider and more diverse than I would ever have imagined possible. History will be astonished at the diplomatic miscalculations that led so quickly to the disintegration of that powerful coalition....
For four years as Foreign Secretary I was partly responsible for the western strategy of containment. Over the past decade that strategy destroyed more weapons than in the Gulf war, dismantled Iraq's nuclear weapons programme and halted Saddam's medium and long-range missiles programmes. Iraq's military strength is now less than half its size than at the time of the last Gulf war.
Ironically, it is only because Iraq's military forces are so weak that we can even contemplate its invasion. Some advocates of conflict claim that Saddam's forces are so weak, so demoralized and so badly equipped that the war will be over in a few days. We cannot base our military strategy on the assumption that Saddam is weak and at the same time justify pre-emptive action on the claim that he is a threat.
Iraq probably has no weapons of mass destruction in the commonly understood sense of the term—namely a credible device capable of being delivered against a strategic city target. It probably still has biological toxins and battlefield chemical munitions, but it has had them since the 1980s when US companies sold Saddam anthrax agents and the then British Government approved chemical and munitions factories. Why is it now so urgent that we should take military action to disarm a military capacity that has been there for 20 years, and which we helped to create? Why is it necessary to resort to war this week, while Saddam's ambition to complete his weapons programme is blocked by the presence of UN inspectors? ...
Some excerpts:
Only a year ago, we and the United States were part of a coalition against terrorism that was wider and more diverse than I would ever have imagined possible. History will be astonished at the diplomatic miscalculations that led so quickly to the disintegration of that powerful coalition....
For four years as Foreign Secretary I was partly responsible for the western strategy of containment. Over the past decade that strategy destroyed more weapons than in the Gulf war, dismantled Iraq's nuclear weapons programme and halted Saddam's medium and long-range missiles programmes. Iraq's military strength is now less than half its size than at the time of the last Gulf war.
Ironically, it is only because Iraq's military forces are so weak that we can even contemplate its invasion. Some advocates of conflict claim that Saddam's forces are so weak, so demoralized and so badly equipped that the war will be over in a few days. We cannot base our military strategy on the assumption that Saddam is weak and at the same time justify pre-emptive action on the claim that he is a threat.
Iraq probably has no weapons of mass destruction in the commonly understood sense of the term—namely a credible device capable of being delivered against a strategic city target. It probably still has biological toxins and battlefield chemical munitions, but it has had them since the 1980s when US companies sold Saddam anthrax agents and the then British Government approved chemical and munitions factories. Why is it now so urgent that we should take military action to disarm a military capacity that has been there for 20 years, and which we helped to create? Why is it necessary to resort to war this week, while Saddam's ambition to complete his weapons programme is blocked by the presence of UN inspectors? ...
A total of 510 randomly selected adults were interviewed Monday night after Bush's speech....
Nearly two in three -- 64 percent -- said they approve of the way Bush is handling the confrontation with Saddam Hussein, up from 55 percent in an ABC News survey conducted last week.
Overall support for a war with Iraq also surged from 59 percent two weeks ago to 71 percent today. And the poll found equally broad support for beginning the war immediately after Bush's 48-hour deadline expires on Wednesday....
--Washington Post
Americans like to say they think all politicians are liars, but most don't really believe that -- a president who wraps himself in manliness and the flag is always believed.
(Bill Clinton never seemed to grasp that, even when he used military power. He never equated differing opinions with evil; he never suggested that agreeing with him put you on the side of good, on the side of God. I voted for Al Gore and I'd do it again, but I'm not sure he would have been able to grasp that, either.)
Nearly two in three -- 64 percent -- said they approve of the way Bush is handling the confrontation with Saddam Hussein, up from 55 percent in an ABC News survey conducted last week.
Overall support for a war with Iraq also surged from 59 percent two weeks ago to 71 percent today. And the poll found equally broad support for beginning the war immediately after Bush's 48-hour deadline expires on Wednesday....
--Washington Post
Americans like to say they think all politicians are liars, but most don't really believe that -- a president who wraps himself in manliness and the flag is always believed.
(Bill Clinton never seemed to grasp that, even when he used military power. He never equated differing opinions with evil; he never suggested that agreeing with him put you on the side of good, on the side of God. I voted for Al Gore and I'd do it again, but I'm not sure he would have been able to grasp that, either.)
Monday, March 17, 2003
Did we really all rush home to hear it? Were we that naive? Did we not realize that all we would hear was “he has attacked his neighbors” and “twelve years of defiance” and “the world’s most dangerous weapons” all over again?
Actually, it was “the most lethal weapons ever devised” this time; “world’s most dangerous weapons” was from the State of the Union address. I had a pointless stray thought about that line: do you think Bush’s speechwriters are deliberately trying to remind us of The World Scariest Police Chases and other staples of late-1990s reality TV, or do you think this White House hires writers whose minds have been colonized by the Fox network?
Oh, well, war this week. It’s been inevitable from the day the Bushies raised the possibility. Now, at least, we more or less know when it's going to start.
Actually, it was “the most lethal weapons ever devised” this time; “world’s most dangerous weapons” was from the State of the Union address. I had a pointless stray thought about that line: do you think Bush’s speechwriters are deliberately trying to remind us of The World Scariest Police Chases and other staples of late-1990s reality TV, or do you think this White House hires writers whose minds have been colonized by the Fox network?
Oh, well, war this week. It’s been inevitable from the day the Bushies raised the possibility. Now, at least, we more or less know when it's going to start.
G. Beato gets snarky about Dixie Chicks denouncers here.
America is a hands-on place: we're not content to let our troops do all the work. We want to get involved, make sacrifices, achieve tangible results. Hating France is not merely an intellectual exercise; we're also renaming our food. Forsaking the Dixie Chicks means we have to spend that much more time listening to Shania Twain.
America is a hands-on place: we're not content to let our troops do all the work. We want to get involved, make sacrifices, achieve tangible results. Hating France is not merely an intellectual exercise; we're also renaming our food. Forsaking the Dixie Chicks means we have to spend that much more time listening to Shania Twain.
Drudge is linking this story:
Automotive supply chain Pep Boys fired a Tucson store manager because his military Reserve duties took him away from work, according to a federal lawsuit filed here.
It may not be an isolated case. Several other reservists fired from Pep Boys in Tucson and Pennsylvania have contacted a military advocacy group with similar complaints....
In the Tucson case, Erik Balodis, then a store manager at the 7227 E. 22nd St. Pep Boys, was fired after being called to a U.S. Naval Reserve exercise in June 2002. Balodis, a father of two young children, was unable to find work for five months....
Under the federal Uniformed Services Employment and Re-employment Rights Act and Arizona state law, an employer may not terminate an employee who is called to active duty....
You know what folks? The Dixie Chicks don't hate America. Barbra Streisand doesn't hate America. Pep Boys, if what's being alleged here is true, hates America.
There's a detail in the story that I find shocking. I really want to believe this is a typo:
The suit cites a letter sent to the Naval Reserve by Pep Boys, dated Sept. 11, 2001, requesting Balodis "be exempted from any impending call to active duty as a result of the tragic and senseless acts of terrorism. ... While I recognize Mr. Balodis' commitment to protect and serve the nation, I must also make you aware that he holds a critical position in the Corporate Structure of Pep Boys."
Is this accurate? Did Pep Boys actually have the gall to send a letter on September 11, 2001, demanding exemption from the requirement to protect the job of a reservist?
If Ben & Jerry's had done something like that, you'd never hear the end of it.
I'm opposed to the war, but I am not opposed to the people who might have to fight it. This is wrong.
(A footnote: The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act became law in October 1994. Yes, this happened when we had a Democratic president, House, and Senate.)
Automotive supply chain Pep Boys fired a Tucson store manager because his military Reserve duties took him away from work, according to a federal lawsuit filed here.
It may not be an isolated case. Several other reservists fired from Pep Boys in Tucson and Pennsylvania have contacted a military advocacy group with similar complaints....
In the Tucson case, Erik Balodis, then a store manager at the 7227 E. 22nd St. Pep Boys, was fired after being called to a U.S. Naval Reserve exercise in June 2002. Balodis, a father of two young children, was unable to find work for five months....
Under the federal Uniformed Services Employment and Re-employment Rights Act and Arizona state law, an employer may not terminate an employee who is called to active duty....
You know what folks? The Dixie Chicks don't hate America. Barbra Streisand doesn't hate America. Pep Boys, if what's being alleged here is true, hates America.
There's a detail in the story that I find shocking. I really want to believe this is a typo:
The suit cites a letter sent to the Naval Reserve by Pep Boys, dated Sept. 11, 2001, requesting Balodis "be exempted from any impending call to active duty as a result of the tragic and senseless acts of terrorism. ... While I recognize Mr. Balodis' commitment to protect and serve the nation, I must also make you aware that he holds a critical position in the Corporate Structure of Pep Boys."
Is this accurate? Did Pep Boys actually have the gall to send a letter on September 11, 2001, demanding exemption from the requirement to protect the job of a reservist?
If Ben & Jerry's had done something like that, you'd never hear the end of it.
I'm opposed to the war, but I am not opposed to the people who might have to fight it. This is wrong.
(A footnote: The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act became law in October 1994. Yes, this happened when we had a Democratic president, House, and Senate.)
Brawl erupts after song played at rodeo
Talk of war with Iraq has sparked an atmosphere of tension and anxiety. And it may be to blame for a brawl that broke out at the rodeo Thursday night.
With some 15,000 to 20,000 folks at the rodeo drinking beer and having fun, things can get a little out of hand at times. It happened when a tape of Lee Greenwood's song Proud To Be An American was playing. Some rodeo fans were standing and others were sitting down. Felix Fanaselle and his buddies chose to remain seated.
"This guy behind us starts yelling at us (because) we're not standing up," said Fanaselle. "He starts cussing at us, telling us to go back to Iraq."
The 16-year-old said the man seated behind him started spitting at him and spilling his beer on him and his friends.
"By the end of the song, he pulled my ear. I got up. He pushed me. I pushed him," said Felix. "He punched me in my face. I got him off me." ...
Fasanelle has a lawyer now, though. I like this:
Fanaselle's lawyer says you don't have to stand for a country and western song.
"I guess next time, he'll think maybe we need to stand for the Okie From Muscogee," said attorney Clayton Rawlings.
(Link from Ted Barlow, who saw the rodeo and actually had an OK time.)
Talk of war with Iraq has sparked an atmosphere of tension and anxiety. And it may be to blame for a brawl that broke out at the rodeo Thursday night.
With some 15,000 to 20,000 folks at the rodeo drinking beer and having fun, things can get a little out of hand at times. It happened when a tape of Lee Greenwood's song Proud To Be An American was playing. Some rodeo fans were standing and others were sitting down. Felix Fanaselle and his buddies chose to remain seated.
"This guy behind us starts yelling at us (because) we're not standing up," said Fanaselle. "He starts cussing at us, telling us to go back to Iraq."
The 16-year-old said the man seated behind him started spitting at him and spilling his beer on him and his friends.
"By the end of the song, he pulled my ear. I got up. He pushed me. I pushed him," said Felix. "He punched me in my face. I got him off me." ...
Fasanelle has a lawyer now, though. I like this:
Fanaselle's lawyer says you don't have to stand for a country and western song.
"I guess next time, he'll think maybe we need to stand for the Okie From Muscogee," said attorney Clayton Rawlings.
(Link from Ted Barlow, who saw the rodeo and actually had an OK time.)
"Apology from Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks."
No, it's not real. But it's brilliant.
(It's from The Specious Report. Thanks to Dreamweasel for the link.)
No, it's not real. But it's brilliant.
(It's from The Specious Report. Thanks to Dreamweasel for the link.)
Hey ... remember these guys -- the Afghanis?
During his recent [fund-raising] trip to Tokyo, [Hamid] Karzai was promised $51 million [by world leaders] for the ["New Beginnings"] program, which aims to provide commanders with micro-credits to transition to new livelihoods in exchange for their weapons.
But Afghan officials say that the funds pledged in Tokyo are three times short of what it would take to make such a plan a reality.
Aside from demobilization, the formation of the Afghan National Army is also proving to be a challenge.
Only 3,000 of the promised 70,000 soldiers have so far been trained by the U.S. and coalition forces.
Defense Minister Marshall Fahim told NBC that many soldiers have not been paid for months as the Afghan government doesn’t have the budget for it and the donations have not provided for it.
At the same time, there are reportedly fresh flows of money to fund operations of al-Qaida and Taliban groups as well as the forces of renegade warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar....
Karzai told reporters last week it will take between $15 and $20 billion over five years rather than the $4.5 billion pledged by international donors more than a year ago in Tokyo....
But with the costs of an Iraqi war and post-war recovery program expected to cost billions of dollars — mostly out of the U.S. Treasury — it will be doubly hard for Karzai to persuade the United States and the rest of the international community to cough up another $15 billion for to help Afghanistan get back on its feet.
--NBC News
But, of course, this is in no way a harbinger of what's to come in Iraq, right?
During his recent [fund-raising] trip to Tokyo, [Hamid] Karzai was promised $51 million [by world leaders] for the ["New Beginnings"] program, which aims to provide commanders with micro-credits to transition to new livelihoods in exchange for their weapons.
But Afghan officials say that the funds pledged in Tokyo are three times short of what it would take to make such a plan a reality.
Aside from demobilization, the formation of the Afghan National Army is also proving to be a challenge.
Only 3,000 of the promised 70,000 soldiers have so far been trained by the U.S. and coalition forces.
Defense Minister Marshall Fahim told NBC that many soldiers have not been paid for months as the Afghan government doesn’t have the budget for it and the donations have not provided for it.
At the same time, there are reportedly fresh flows of money to fund operations of al-Qaida and Taliban groups as well as the forces of renegade warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar....
Karzai told reporters last week it will take between $15 and $20 billion over five years rather than the $4.5 billion pledged by international donors more than a year ago in Tokyo....
But with the costs of an Iraqi war and post-war recovery program expected to cost billions of dollars — mostly out of the U.S. Treasury — it will be doubly hard for Karzai to persuade the United States and the rest of the international community to cough up another $15 billion for to help Afghanistan get back on its feet.
--NBC News
But, of course, this is in no way a harbinger of what's to come in Iraq, right?
It should have been obvious that something like this would happen eventually:
Anger against France leads to vandalism towards local woman
For Francoise Thomas, the anger against France for its continuing opposition to military action against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein hadn't hit home until she read about it on one of her doors.
When Thomas took out the garbage Saturday morning, she saw red letters spray-painted on the garage door of her townhouse.
"Scum go back to France," it read....
I hope this is the worst we see. And I'm happy to see that her neighbors are on her side.
(Thanks to Atrios for the link.)
Anger against France leads to vandalism towards local woman
For Francoise Thomas, the anger against France for its continuing opposition to military action against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein hadn't hit home until she read about it on one of her doors.
When Thomas took out the garbage Saturday morning, she saw red letters spray-painted on the garage door of her townhouse.
"Scum go back to France," it read....
I hope this is the worst we see. And I'm happy to see that her neighbors are on her side.
(Thanks to Atrios for the link.)
Rush Limbaugh says, in words and a picture, that the Dixie Chicks are now "Saddam's Angels." Blacklist? What blacklist?
Bush Has Audacious Plan to Rebuild Iraq Within Year
The Bush administration's audacious plan to rebuild Iraq envisions a sweeping overhaul of Iraqi society within a year of a war's end, but leaves much of the work to private U.S. companies, Monday's Wall Street Journal reported.
The Bush plan, as detailed in more than 100 pages of confidential contract documents, would sideline United Nations development agencies and other multilateral organizations that have long directed reconstruction efforts in places such as Afghanistan and Kosovo. The plan also would leave big nongovernmental organizations largely in the lurch: With more than $1.5 billion in Iraq work being offered to private U.S. companies under the plan, just $50 million is so far earmarked for a small number of groups such as CARE and Save the Children.
--Dow Jones Business News, via Yahoo News
It's almost as if he's doing this just to piss us off, isn't it? It's as if he looked at the list of what his critics want -- long-term thinking, significant UN involvement, significant NGO involvement, avoidance of the appearance that the war is being fought to create business opportunities for his pals -- and said, "Whatever it is they want, I'm against it."
The Bush administration's audacious plan to rebuild Iraq envisions a sweeping overhaul of Iraqi society within a year of a war's end, but leaves much of the work to private U.S. companies, Monday's Wall Street Journal reported.
The Bush plan, as detailed in more than 100 pages of confidential contract documents, would sideline United Nations development agencies and other multilateral organizations that have long directed reconstruction efforts in places such as Afghanistan and Kosovo. The plan also would leave big nongovernmental organizations largely in the lurch: With more than $1.5 billion in Iraq work being offered to private U.S. companies under the plan, just $50 million is so far earmarked for a small number of groups such as CARE and Save the Children.
--Dow Jones Business News, via Yahoo News
It's almost as if he's doing this just to piss us off, isn't it? It's as if he looked at the list of what his critics want -- long-term thinking, significant UN involvement, significant NGO involvement, avoidance of the appearance that the war is being fought to create business opportunities for his pals -- and said, "Whatever it is they want, I'm against it."
Earlier this morning I heard an antiwar protester on the radio say that he’s afraid “nobody’s listening.” I assume he meant that no one with the power to stop this war is listening, which is true. But when the war starts this week, that qualification will no longer apply: no one -- certainly no one in America -- will be paying attention to what we’re saying. We'll have nothing but pro-war, rally-round-the-flag news coverage, and most Americans -- even most people who now have anxieties about war -- will find that appropriate.
The very things we’ve said could happen if there’s a war rather than continued containment and deterrence -- a chem or bio attack on U.S. troops that may also catch Iraqi civilians in its net, a widening of the war to Israel, destruction of oil fields -- will be described not as reasons war was a bad idea but as proof that Saddam was evil and war was necessary. Increased al-Qaeda terrorism or an escalation of saber-rattling by a back-burnered North Korea will be seen as a sign that the world is a dangerous place and it’s a good thing we’re getting rid of one evildoer, at least, before he can threaten Main Street. In the course of the war, no one will notice any chem or bio weapons that slip out of Iraq to augment arsenals elsewhere in the world. And the American press will consider any discussion of civilian casualties caused by U.S. bombing of Iraq, or destruction of infrastructure there, unpatriotic and a turnoff to American audiences.
After the war, of course, the American press will turn its attention elsewhere very quickly; if conditions in Iraq deteriorate in a year or two, most Americans simply won’t notice. Any destabilization elsewhere in the Arab/Muslim world will be regarded as confirmation of the Bush administration’s worldview, not of ours.
What I’m saying is that, in this debate we’ve been having, there aren’t just two possible outcomes -- the facts vindicate us or the facts vindicate the pro-war side. There’s a third possibility, one that seems much more likely to me: that perceptions will seem to vindicate the pro-war side, at least in the eyes of the vast majority of Americans, while reality, more or less unnoticed, tends to vindicate us.
The very things we’ve said could happen if there’s a war rather than continued containment and deterrence -- a chem or bio attack on U.S. troops that may also catch Iraqi civilians in its net, a widening of the war to Israel, destruction of oil fields -- will be described not as reasons war was a bad idea but as proof that Saddam was evil and war was necessary. Increased al-Qaeda terrorism or an escalation of saber-rattling by a back-burnered North Korea will be seen as a sign that the world is a dangerous place and it’s a good thing we’re getting rid of one evildoer, at least, before he can threaten Main Street. In the course of the war, no one will notice any chem or bio weapons that slip out of Iraq to augment arsenals elsewhere in the world. And the American press will consider any discussion of civilian casualties caused by U.S. bombing of Iraq, or destruction of infrastructure there, unpatriotic and a turnoff to American audiences.
After the war, of course, the American press will turn its attention elsewhere very quickly; if conditions in Iraq deteriorate in a year or two, most Americans simply won’t notice. Any destabilization elsewhere in the Arab/Muslim world will be regarded as confirmation of the Bush administration’s worldview, not of ours.
What I’m saying is that, in this debate we’ve been having, there aren’t just two possible outcomes -- the facts vindicate us or the facts vindicate the pro-war side. There’s a third possibility, one that seems much more likely to me: that perceptions will seem to vindicate the pro-war side, at least in the eyes of the vast majority of Americans, while reality, more or less unnoticed, tends to vindicate us.
Sunday, March 16, 2003
Haven't your ambassadors informed you? Europe is no longer Europe. It is a province of Islam, as Spain and Portugal were at the time of the Moors. It hosts almost 16 million Muslim immigrants and teems with mullahs, imams, mosques, burqas, chadors.
--aging racist Oriana Fallaci, from The Wall Street Journal's OpinionJournal.com, 3/13/03
In San Diego, skateboarders and homeless people said the three walked miles and miles each day, the women always silently behind the man and covered in robes and veils. Once, when Mr. Mitchell [alleged kidnapper of Elizabeth Smart] got in an argument with four people on bicycles, he was heard hollering, "Jesus Christ is Lord!"
"We asked him if he was Muslim, and he'd say, `No, I'm not Muslim, I'm God, above Muslims,' " said Mike Cortez, a skateboarder.
--New York Times, 3/16/03
Hate to break this to you, Oriana, but there are dangerous, misogynistic religious fanatics who don't have olive skin and don't read the Koran, and some of them even put women in veils.
--aging racist Oriana Fallaci, from The Wall Street Journal's OpinionJournal.com, 3/13/03
In San Diego, skateboarders and homeless people said the three walked miles and miles each day, the women always silently behind the man and covered in robes and veils. Once, when Mr. Mitchell [alleged kidnapper of Elizabeth Smart] got in an argument with four people on bicycles, he was heard hollering, "Jesus Christ is Lord!"
"We asked him if he was Muslim, and he'd say, `No, I'm not Muslim, I'm God, above Muslims,' " said Mike Cortez, a skateboarder.
--New York Times, 3/16/03
Hate to break this to you, Oriana, but there are dangerous, misogynistic religious fanatics who don't have olive skin and don't read the Koran, and some of them even put women in veils.
The article on rape at the Air Force Academy in Sunday's New York Times was fine, infuriating work -- read it and you'll realize that true justice in this situation, as in the Catholic Church's pedophile scandal, would demand nothing less that the building of a supermax prison in the lowest circle of hell for an awful lot of perpetrators and enablers, far more than will ever really be punished. I have one criticism of the Times article, however: Why the reluctance to explain "LCWB," the designation for the all-male Academy class of 1979 that brings such cheer to Academy misogynists? As explained here, "LCWB" stands for "last class with balls." Why couldn't the Times say that? The Times published the Starr Report, didn't it?
Ken Pollack, also of the Brookings Institution, thinks such a “rolling start” would be perilous. Better, he thinks, to amass an imposing force, which will increase the chances that Iraq capitulates without a fight, and allow General Franks to respond to any contingencies or counter-attacks.
--Economist, January 30, 2003
The American-led coalition that is preparing to topple Saddam Hussein's government is planning for a complex invasion of Iraq to begin even as allied troops are still arriving in the region, senior commanders say....
But there are military experts — including experienced commanders — who are worried by this plan, which has come to be called a "rolling start" to the impending war.
--New York Times, March 16, 2003
One more way in which the war isn't going the way the best-known liberal hawk hoped it would.
--Economist, January 30, 2003
The American-led coalition that is preparing to topple Saddam Hussein's government is planning for a complex invasion of Iraq to begin even as allied troops are still arriving in the region, senior commanders say....
But there are military experts — including experienced commanders — who are worried by this plan, which has come to be called a "rolling start" to the impending war.
--New York Times, March 16, 2003
One more way in which the war isn't going the way the best-known liberal hawk hoped it would.
Anger on Iraq Seen as New Qaeda Recruiting Tool
On three continents, Al Qaeda and other terror organizations have intensified their efforts to recruit young Muslim men, tapping into rising anger about the American campaign for war in Iraq, according to intelligence and law enforcement officials.
There it is, war fans. You happy now?
Among the countries where the recruiting is going really well? Britain, Spain, and Italy.
On three continents, Al Qaeda and other terror organizations have intensified their efforts to recruit young Muslim men, tapping into rising anger about the American campaign for war in Iraq, according to intelligence and law enforcement officials.
There it is, war fans. You happy now?
Among the countries where the recruiting is going really well? Britain, Spain, and Italy.
Saturday, March 15, 2003
Europe is no longer Europe. It is a province of Islam, as Spain and Portugal were at the time of the Moors. It hosts almost 16 million Muslim immigrants and teems with mullahs, imams, mosques, burqas, chadors. It lodges thousands of Islamic terrorists whom governments don't know how to identify and control. People are afraid, and in waving the flag of pacifism--pacifism synonymous with anti-Americanism--they feel protected....Mr. Blair too leads a country which is invaded by the Moors. A country that hides that resentment.
"Invaded by the Moors"??
That's Oriani Fallaci; the words can be found at OpinionJournal.com, the Web version of the allegedly respectable Wall Street Journal editorial page. Do I have to say the obvious -- that this is essentially what American bigots said about the immigrant generation of my great-grandparents -- my Italian great-grandparents, Oriana? That they couldn't be assimilated by "civilized" America? That the Italians were anarchists and the Jews were communists and they posed a danger to the Republic? And here I am, Oriana -- an American, an Italian-American. Here a lot of us are.
And the quote above is merely the lite version of Fallaci's message these days -- for a stronger dose, read this January New York Observer interview of Fallaci (by George Gurley, who also interviewed Ann Coulter for the paper and thus apparently has its bigot beat):
"It is a tyranny, a dictatorship -- the only religion on earth that has never committed a work of self-criticism .... It is immovable. It becomes worse and worse .... It is 1,400 years and these people never review themselves, and now they want to come impose it on me, on us?..."
There's yet more of this in her current book, The Rage and the Pride. I haven't read it -- if you want to, be my guest.
(By the way, I wonder what Fallaci would say in response tothis article from last Sunday's New York Times Magazine about a young Jordanian whose two dreams are jihad against the West and being a programmer at Microsoft. No, it's obvious -- she'd think it proves her point. She'd dismiss the fact that the young man's father thinks his son could get a job if he'd just shave the beard that makes him look too religious. Could the urge to jihad just be generational -- and if it varies from generation to generation, doesn't that demonstrate that it's not immutable?)
"Invaded by the Moors"??
That's Oriani Fallaci; the words can be found at OpinionJournal.com, the Web version of the allegedly respectable Wall Street Journal editorial page. Do I have to say the obvious -- that this is essentially what American bigots said about the immigrant generation of my great-grandparents -- my Italian great-grandparents, Oriana? That they couldn't be assimilated by "civilized" America? That the Italians were anarchists and the Jews were communists and they posed a danger to the Republic? And here I am, Oriana -- an American, an Italian-American. Here a lot of us are.
And the quote above is merely the lite version of Fallaci's message these days -- for a stronger dose, read this January New York Observer interview of Fallaci (by George Gurley, who also interviewed Ann Coulter for the paper and thus apparently has its bigot beat):
"It is a tyranny, a dictatorship -- the only religion on earth that has never committed a work of self-criticism .... It is immovable. It becomes worse and worse .... It is 1,400 years and these people never review themselves, and now they want to come impose it on me, on us?..."
There's yet more of this in her current book, The Rage and the Pride. I haven't read it -- if you want to, be my guest.
(By the way, I wonder what Fallaci would say in response tothis article from last Sunday's New York Times Magazine about a young Jordanian whose two dreams are jihad against the West and being a programmer at Microsoft. No, it's obvious -- she'd think it proves her point. She'd dismiss the fact that the young man's father thinks his son could get a job if he'd just shave the beard that makes him look too religious. Could the urge to jihad just be generational -- and if it varies from generation to generation, doesn't that demonstrate that it's not immutable?)
Friday, March 14, 2003
Know who showed up on The O'Reilly Factor a couple of nights ago bashing the French? David Bossie. Yup, that David Bossie -- the guy who worked with Floyd Brown when Brown produced the Willie Horton ad in 1988; the guy who put Gennifer Flowers in an anti-Clinton ad in 1992; the guy who worked for Congressman Dan Burton when Burton was calling Clinton a "scumbag" until the two of them released tapes of Webster Hubbell that were blatantly doctored and Bossie got fired. Bossie's operating under the Citizens United banner again, and CU is jumping on the French-bashing bandwagon.
You've got to put a wooden stake into some of these guys to get rid of them.
You've got to put a wooden stake into some of these guys to get rid of them.
Free Republic's Dixie Chicks boycott coordination thread.
Their career is over. This is not going to go away.
Their career is over. This is not going to go away.
Here's a shopping list.
It's courtesy of the grown-ups at FrogWeenies.com.
These are tough times ... and when the going gets tough, the tough make anti-French pee-pee jokes in PhotoShop.
These people really are les nincompoops.
(Thanks to Andrea for the link to the list.)
It's courtesy of the grown-ups at FrogWeenies.com.
These are tough times ... and when the going gets tough, the tough make anti-French pee-pee jokes in PhotoShop.
These people really are les nincompoops.
(Thanks to Andrea for the link to the list.)
Why hasn't every able-bodied member of the NRA volunteered to fight Saddam?
Gun fans love to quote the second part of the Second Amendment -- "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" -- but regularly gloss over the first part: The full text of the amendment is, of course, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
Curiously, this text, though it's revered by gun fans, doesn't seem to imbue them with the sense that they have an obligation to defend the security of this nation. And this war is about defending the security of this nation, isn't it? After all, the President has said so over and over again, most recently at his March 7 press conference ("But in the name of peace and the security of our people, if [Saddam] won't do so voluntarily, we will disarm him....").
So, NRA members, please head down to the local recruiting center and volunteer to fight Saddam. You do revere the Second Amendment, don't you?
Gun fans love to quote the second part of the Second Amendment -- "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" -- but regularly gloss over the first part: The full text of the amendment is, of course, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
Curiously, this text, though it's revered by gun fans, doesn't seem to imbue them with the sense that they have an obligation to defend the security of this nation. And this war is about defending the security of this nation, isn't it? After all, the President has said so over and over again, most recently at his March 7 press conference ("But in the name of peace and the security of our people, if [Saddam] won't do so voluntarily, we will disarm him....").
So, NRA members, please head down to the local recruiting center and volunteer to fight Saddam. You do revere the Second Amendment, don't you?
Why do we have to turn to a blogger/cartoonist (Barry at Alas, a Blog) for a detailed analysis of precisely what's banned by the abortion bill just passed by the Senate (potentially a lot of pre-viability abortions, Barry says), while The New York Times contents itself with this geez-I-dunno paragraph?
Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, said the description of the procedure used in the measure was vague and "could be construed to impact virtually any abortion." Officials at the Center for Reproductive Rights made a similar argument, saying the measure could prohibit the "safest and most common" procedures.
Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, said the description of the procedure used in the measure was vague and "could be construed to impact virtually any abortion." Officials at the Center for Reproductive Rights made a similar argument, saying the measure could prohibit the "safest and most common" procedures.
Well, I saw this coming:
San Antonio DJ Pulls The Plug On The Dixie Chicks
A popular country music group has some San Antonians turning off their radios. A KJ 97 DJ pulled the plug on the trio's songs after lead singer Natalie Maines made a negative comment about President Bush.
The trio is on tour overseas, but they're causing quite a stir back here at home.
"Natalie Maines before a concert audience in London, England said, and I quote, ‘Just so you know, we're ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas,’" said Keith Montgomery with KJ 97.
The comments prompted Montgomery to pull the Chicks music off the air Thursday
"I would say the reaction is 99 percent in favor of what I have done," said Montgomery....
Over at Lucianne.com, they're calling the band "the Blix Chix." One Lucianne.com poster says, "Who do the DC's think back Bush? The people who listen to country music." Wonder how they'd feel knowing that, according to his daughter Rosanne, Johnny Cash "opposes this war more passionately than just about anyone I know."
San Antonio DJ Pulls The Plug On The Dixie Chicks
A popular country music group has some San Antonians turning off their radios. A KJ 97 DJ pulled the plug on the trio's songs after lead singer Natalie Maines made a negative comment about President Bush.
The trio is on tour overseas, but they're causing quite a stir back here at home.
"Natalie Maines before a concert audience in London, England said, and I quote, ‘Just so you know, we're ashamed the President of the United States is from Texas,’" said Keith Montgomery with KJ 97.
The comments prompted Montgomery to pull the Chicks music off the air Thursday
"I would say the reaction is 99 percent in favor of what I have done," said Montgomery....
Over at Lucianne.com, they're calling the band "the Blix Chix." One Lucianne.com poster says, "Who do the DC's think back Bush? The people who listen to country music." Wonder how they'd feel knowing that, according to his daughter Rosanne, Johnny Cash "opposes this war more passionately than just about anyone I know."
The Bias Against Guns by John Lott:
#9 at Amazon
#405,455 at Barnes & Noble
Did the right-wing foundations forget to do one bulk buy?
#9 at Amazon
#405,455 at Barnes & Noble
Did the right-wing foundations forget to do one bulk buy?
HOW (SOME) AMERICANS THINK
A college professor I know was talking last night about a student she had in the 1980s. The student had been to France and had found the French unfriendly to Americans. Here's how the student put it: "They're so unpatriotic!"
This reminds me of something that happened when my wife and I were in Germany a few years ago. Many of the menus we saw at restaurants there were bilingual or multilingual, but at one restaurant in the Bavarian Alps the menu was (understandably) in German only. As we struggled with the menu and I sneaked furtive looks at my pocket German-English dictionary and German phrasebook, we heard an American-accented voice voice from another table: "Do you have a regular menu?"
A college professor I know was talking last night about a student she had in the 1980s. The student had been to France and had found the French unfriendly to Americans. Here's how the student put it: "They're so unpatriotic!"
This reminds me of something that happened when my wife and I were in Germany a few years ago. Many of the menus we saw at restaurants there were bilingual or multilingual, but at one restaurant in the Bavarian Alps the menu was (understandably) in German only. As we struggled with the menu and I sneaked furtive looks at my pocket German-English dictionary and German phrasebook, we heard an American-accented voice voice from another table: "Do you have a regular menu?"
OK, I'll be unserious and ask this question:
Now that right-thinking, freedom-fry-eating Americans have concluded that the Pope is a scummy appeasenik, do you think maybe Sinead O'Connor could have her career back?
Now that right-thinking, freedom-fry-eating Americans have concluded that the Pope is a scummy appeasenik, do you think maybe Sinead O'Connor could have her career back?
Thursday, March 13, 2003
From ABC News:
U.S. officials fear that once President Bush signals the U.S. is headed to war, Saddam Hussein will strike pre-emptively, administration sources told ABCNEWS.
But if the United States takes action to stop an Iraqi first strike, especially if they try to seize and protect the oil fields, U.S. officials admit they may end up starting the war itself....
Specific new evidence indicates that Iraqi activity in the Western desert shows the strong likelihood Scud missiles are hidden there...
Detailed new intelligence from the southern Iraqi oil fields shows that many of the 700 wells have now been wired with explosives....
Near the border with Kuwait, where 135,000 U.S. troops are now stationed, recent surveillance indicates Iraqi artillery batteries have been moved dangerously close....
The United States is now considering moving against all three of these targets before any war begins in an effort to prevent Saddam from acting first, sources told ABCNEWS.
So we may attack preemptively to stop Saddam from attacking preemptively in response to our decision to go to war preemptively.
This is becoming rather Strangelovian.
Oh, and we're afraid if we attack preemptively, we may start the war early. Excuse me: may? If we attack, isn't that, essentially, the start of the war?
U.S. officials fear that once President Bush signals the U.S. is headed to war, Saddam Hussein will strike pre-emptively, administration sources told ABCNEWS.
But if the United States takes action to stop an Iraqi first strike, especially if they try to seize and protect the oil fields, U.S. officials admit they may end up starting the war itself....
Specific new evidence indicates that Iraqi activity in the Western desert shows the strong likelihood Scud missiles are hidden there...
Detailed new intelligence from the southern Iraqi oil fields shows that many of the 700 wells have now been wired with explosives....
Near the border with Kuwait, where 135,000 U.S. troops are now stationed, recent surveillance indicates Iraqi artillery batteries have been moved dangerously close....
The United States is now considering moving against all three of these targets before any war begins in an effort to prevent Saddam from acting first, sources told ABCNEWS.
So we may attack preemptively to stop Saddam from attacking preemptively in response to our decision to go to war preemptively.
This is becoming rather Strangelovian.
Oh, and we're afraid if we attack preemptively, we may start the war early. Excuse me: may? If we attack, isn't that, essentially, the start of the war?
Earlier I mentioned that TBOGG has a link to a site advertising a "Golf and Prayer Walk." The site is for something called the "Presidential Prayer Team." Here's some copy from the elsewhere on the PPT site:
Pray for the President and his advisors as they consider which course of action to take regarding Iraq. Pray that God's hand will continue to move in the timing of any decision to be made.
"Timing"? Hey, maybe the delays we in the anti-war movement are causing are part of God's plan! Maybe God wants the war to be delayed -- or even prevented. Maybe we're instruments of God. Maybe you don't have to be a rich Texas Republican to be an instrument of God.
Ever consider that possibility, smart guys?
Pray for the President and his advisors as they consider which course of action to take regarding Iraq. Pray that God's hand will continue to move in the timing of any decision to be made.
"Timing"? Hey, maybe the delays we in the anti-war movement are causing are part of God's plan! Maybe God wants the war to be delayed -- or even prevented. Maybe we're instruments of God. Maybe you don't have to be a rich Texas Republican to be an instrument of God.
Ever consider that possibility, smart guys?
Below I have a post about Representative Ginny Brown-Waite (R - Fla.), who wants to spend your tax money to dig up the corpses of U.S. soldiers buried in France. I now see that MWO was already on this story, and has more information. Go here and scroll down -- but, on the way, be sure to read the story of a Washington Post reporter who let himself be a press agent for the White House -- and admits it.
This could get ugly....
One of the Dixie Chicks is clarifying remarks she made about President George W. Bush during a concert in London earlier this week.
Reporting on a Chicks' concert, the Web site for the United Kingdom paper The Guardian said singer Natalie Maines told the crowd, "Just so you know, we're ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas."
The singer's barb got the audience cheering, the Guardian said....
"I feel the president is ignoring the opinions of many in the U.S. and alienating the rest of the world," Maines said in the statement. "My comments were made in frustration and one of the privileges of being an American is you are free to voice your own point of view." ...
Hey, they're women -- and they play their own instruments! We shoulda known they were commies!
Seriously, wasn't k. d. lang basically driven out of country music for saying she didn't eat meat? It makes me wonder what the hell they're going to do to the Chicks.
One of the Dixie Chicks is clarifying remarks she made about President George W. Bush during a concert in London earlier this week.
Reporting on a Chicks' concert, the Web site for the United Kingdom paper The Guardian said singer Natalie Maines told the crowd, "Just so you know, we're ashamed the president of the United States is from Texas."
The singer's barb got the audience cheering, the Guardian said....
"I feel the president is ignoring the opinions of many in the U.S. and alienating the rest of the world," Maines said in the statement. "My comments were made in frustration and one of the privileges of being an American is you are free to voice your own point of view." ...
Hey, they're women -- and they play their own instruments! We shoulda known they were commies!
Seriously, wasn't k. d. lang basically driven out of country music for saying she didn't eat meat? It makes me wonder what the hell they're going to do to the Chicks.
More unseriousness, beamingly posted by Andrew Sullivan on his letters page:
We are headed back to a state of nature with nukes. Where, I ask myself, has this situation been thoroughly thought through? Why, in The Road Warrior and other Mel movies. Forget the Bush Doctrine: The United States must cultivate the virtues of Mad Max! I would submit to you that a world that admires the statesmanship of Arafat, the steely determination of Saddam, and the sociopath's flare of Kim Jong Il is ripe for a righteous throat slitter like Max. He did not call meetings or wait for approval. He would just act and let others slip stream behind him, and they did.
Is it just me, or does the use of the phrase "thoroughly thought through" in this letter make your jaw drop, too?
We are headed back to a state of nature with nukes. Where, I ask myself, has this situation been thoroughly thought through? Why, in The Road Warrior and other Mel movies. Forget the Bush Doctrine: The United States must cultivate the virtues of Mad Max! I would submit to you that a world that admires the statesmanship of Arafat, the steely determination of Saddam, and the sociopath's flare of Kim Jong Il is ripe for a righteous throat slitter like Max. He did not call meetings or wait for approval. He would just act and let others slip stream behind him, and they did.
Is it just me, or does the use of the phrase "thoroughly thought through" in this letter make your jaw drop, too?
They're falling all over themselves trying to out-moron one another....
WASHINGTON - In another swipe at the French, a Florida congresswoman has proposed that the government pay for families who might want to bring home from France the remains of Americans who fought and died in the world wars.
"I, along with many other Americans, do not feel that the French government appreciates the sacrifices men and women in uniform have made to defend the freedom that the French enjoy today," Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite said in introducing legislation providing financial help for the reburial of veterans from the two world wars...
--AP
This won't surprise you:
President Bush campaigned for Brown-Waite at a rally days before the election, and appeared in ads for her....
"It was very much a party-line vote," [political scientist Susan] MacManus said. "The president's endorsement probably put Ginny Brown-Waite over the top...."
What was it that Peggy Noonan said to the Democrats last week? Ah, yes, here it is...
You have grown profoundly unserious.
The pot calling the refrigerator black.
WASHINGTON - In another swipe at the French, a Florida congresswoman has proposed that the government pay for families who might want to bring home from France the remains of Americans who fought and died in the world wars.
"I, along with many other Americans, do not feel that the French government appreciates the sacrifices men and women in uniform have made to defend the freedom that the French enjoy today," Rep. Ginny Brown-Waite said in introducing legislation providing financial help for the reburial of veterans from the two world wars...
--AP
This won't surprise you:
President Bush campaigned for Brown-Waite at a rally days before the election, and appeared in ads for her....
"It was very much a party-line vote," [political scientist Susan] MacManus said. "The president's endorsement probably put Ginny Brown-Waite over the top...."
What was it that Peggy Noonan said to the Democrats last week? Ah, yes, here it is...
You have grown profoundly unserious.
The pot calling the refrigerator black.
Nice one, from TBOGG. Not for the kiddies, but spot-on nonetheless.
(Lots of good stuff if you keep scrolling, too -- "Golf and Prayer Walk"?? -- although T and I part ways on Everclear.)
(Lots of good stuff if you keep scrolling, too -- "Golf and Prayer Walk"?? -- although T and I part ways on Everclear.)
YIKES!
It is time for a truly ethical foreign policy, based on true moral superiority. Of course, a half-century of war in Europe, followed by a half-century of peace in Europe, have entirely drained Britain’s own capacity for this sort of project. The responsibility rests with our imperial offspring, the United States. But she can take the earlier empire, which she once so rudely resiled from, as her guide.
The British empire, said Queen Victoria, existed ‘to protect the poor natives and advance civilisation’. On one level this was a practical project — the irrigation of Egypt and the Indus, the laying of railways and founding of schools. But at a deeper level the empire was a moral project. Lurid tales of imperial savagery — the dumdum bullet and the Maxim gun, and the fate of the Indian mutineers, lashed to the muzzles of fieldpieces and blown to bits to the beat of drums — rather understandably obscure the fact that the empire was essentially a humanitarian undertaking.
--Daniel Kruger in The Spectator
It is time for a truly ethical foreign policy, based on true moral superiority. Of course, a half-century of war in Europe, followed by a half-century of peace in Europe, have entirely drained Britain’s own capacity for this sort of project. The responsibility rests with our imperial offspring, the United States. But she can take the earlier empire, which she once so rudely resiled from, as her guide.
The British empire, said Queen Victoria, existed ‘to protect the poor natives and advance civilisation’. On one level this was a practical project — the irrigation of Egypt and the Indus, the laying of railways and founding of schools. But at a deeper level the empire was a moral project. Lurid tales of imperial savagery — the dumdum bullet and the Maxim gun, and the fate of the Indian mutineers, lashed to the muzzles of fieldpieces and blown to bits to the beat of drums — rather understandably obscure the fact that the empire was essentially a humanitarian undertaking.
--Daniel Kruger in The Spectator
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)