Musings Archive March 2003
Monday, March 31, 2003 IRAQ...THE DEMOCRACY: (Via Brothers Judd Blog) This week's poll is on whether it's likely that Iraq can be turned into a democracy after Saddam Hussein is deposed. According to Eric Davis, Iraq might actually be as successful as some European nations.
"Americans share two misperceptions of Iraqi politics and society. One is that ethnic conflict is endemic to Iraqi society. Another is that Iraqis lack a tradition of civil society, cultural tolerance, and political participation. Both perceptions are contradicted by the historical record. These faulty premises lay behind Washington's unwillingness to support the Iraqi uprising of 1991, which came close to ousting the Ba'athist regime. It would be a great tragedy if the United States were to make the same mistake in 2003."
If we could turn a nihilistic death worshiping culture like Germany's into a society of freedom lovers (well, the European version of it anyway), we can turn a nihilistic death worshiping culture like Iraq's into the same thing (well, the Arab version of it anyway).
Posted by steve @ 07:06 PM EST [Link]
~ THEY'RE LOSING AND LOSING BADLY: Glenn Reynolds has a good piece on TechCentralStation today on the horrible losses sustained by one group in the war in Iraq.
"Despite all their vaunted technology, and months of prewar planning, they've looked disorganized and unimpressive since the actual fighting started. They seem bewildered, behind the curve, and slow to respond to unanticipated developments, too smug about their superior performance in Gulf War I to take the challenges of this one seriously. It's beginning to look as if they've been sucker-punched by an old foe who's thought several moves ahead."
Who is it? Hint: He's not referring to either the coalition forces or the Iraqi military. Find the answer here.
Posted by steve @ 03:57 PM EST [Link]
~ PATHETIC: I don't read the newspaper for one weekend and I miss an exceptionally disgusting story. Canada's memorial to its September 11 victims is in a room that can't be accessed by her citizens. The incomparable Christie Blatchford tells all.
Posted by steve @ 03:31 PM EST [Link]
~ THE DIRTY JEWS DID IT OF COURSE: In what has to be one of the most sickening essays I have ever read, John Sutherland in The Guardian argues that the photos showing Rachel Corrie tearing up a paper U.S. flag was manipulated. The angel killed by an Israeli bulldozer was being smeared by the dirty yids! Don't believe me? Here's the money sentence:
"Paranoia suggested the Israeli secret service, which monitors such events. This picture also looked, to some expert eyes, doctored."
There are two photographs that Sutherland is referring to. Both are part of the Reuters archive, an organization so hostile to the U.S. and Israel that it still states that Osama bin Laden was alleged to have ordered the September 11 terrorist attacks. The one can you see here (it's the link to the pop-up), was proudly displayed on the web site of the Olympia Movement for Justice and Peace (original link). If that name doesn't mean anything to you, it's the group that Corrie herself belonged to. So proud of her are they that she's featured prominently on the top level page of the web site.
Funny thing though, they don't display either of the two Reuters photos.
Posted by steve @ 03:15 PM EST [Link]
~ WHY DOES THIS MAKE SENSE?: "Years before Saddam Hussein became an enemy to the United States, he was reportedly seen as a friend and made an honorary Detroit citizen. "
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 03:40 AM EST [Link]
~ HE'S GONE MAD...AGAIN: Former CNN reporter Peter Arnett appears on Iraqi television yesterday and tells the audience that the U.S. war plan has "failed."
"The first war plan has failed because of Iraqi resistance. Now they are trying to write another war plan," Arnett said. "Clearly, the American war planners misjudged the determination of the Iraqi forces."
How many times can this guy shill for the Iraqi government and still be employed?
Posted by steve @ 03:19 AM EST [Link]
~ FEED YOUR HEAD: A couple of interesting sources for information on the Middle East can be had at two web sites: U.S Committee for a Free Lebanon which you can find at www.freelebanon.org and Middle East Intelligence Bulletin at www.meib.org.
Posted by steve @ 01:10 AM EST [Link]
~ PACIFISTS AND THEIR REAL WAR: (Heads up courtesy of Steve Lendt) Cinderella Blogger translated a Le Monde article by Robert Redeker on pacifism. Interesting article by Redeker and insightful commentary by the blogger.
Posted by steve @ 01:05 AM EST [Link]
Sunday, March 30, 2003 IF HE DOESN'T ALREADY HAVE A NICKNAME, HE'LL GET ONE NOW: "A Royal Marine Commando who was shot in the head four times has lived to tell the tale of his lucky escape."
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 09:17 PM EST [Link]
~ ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS: The Iraqi regime sent a number of its stooges onto talk shows and press conferences to bray about its humane treatment of coalition POWs. Those were the words. The actions? The Red Cross has yet visit those POWs because the Iraqi regime won't let them.
Posted by steve @ 07:39 PM EST [Link]
~ THE NEXT TARGET FOR REGIME CHANGE: (Via Brothers Judd Blog) While the rest of the world has been entranced with the war in Iraq, Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe has been very naughty.
"Mugabe appears to be taking revenge on the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) for organising a successful two-day general strike last week - and also trying to intimidate MDC supporters planning further mass action.
"Mugabe is also trying to prevent MDC voters from voting against him in two parliamentary by-elections in the Harare townships this weekend, the MDC believes."
Posted by steve @ 04:21 PM EST [Link]
~ SUICIDE BOMBINGS AND THE WILL TO FIGHT: Let's face it. While war with Iraq has manifestly not been a "cakewalk," and it is going to continue to be very costly and difficult, America has vastly greater military strength and the ability to defeat this enemy. So if you are Saddam Hussein, the only option still available to you is to dig in and try to drive up casualties to the point that the American people will decide that it is not worth it and push for a withdrawal. This is more or less what happened in Vietnam.
Our reliance on air power over the last decade may have fostered the illusion that nearly casualty-free war is possible. In this case, it is clearly not. American casualties will become the antiwar movement's number one argument for a U.S. withdrawal.
However, if the Iraqi regime believes that the monstrous acts of suicide bombings and murdering American and British POWs will facilitate this goal, I believe they are sorely mistaken. When soldiers die in combat, people back home are more likely to ask questions about the rightness of the war and blame the government if they decide the war wasn't worth the loss. But executing unarmed POWs or launching suicide bombing attacks reinforces the public's perception that we are fighting an enemy that needs to be vanquished. Rather than criticize the government for an unjust war, they will expect the government to defeat those responsible and avenge the victims. After 9/11, I do not believe that what has happened to military personnel in Lebanon and elsewhere over the years at the hands of terrorists will be tolerated again.
Not only are Iraqis loyal to Saddam's government behaving in an evil manner - they are acting stupidly even from the perspective of their own self-interest. Which is all the more reason that Saddam is eventually going to fall.
Posted by antle @ 02:30 AM EST [Link]
~ DERBYSHIRE ON THE WAR: If you haven't seen John Derbyshire's NRO piece "10 Points on the War," I suggest you check it out. Particularly worth reading is point #1.
Posted by antle @ 02:10 AM EST [Link]
Saturday, March 29, 2003 I HATE TO GET ALL KLINGON HERE: But the Iraqi military and the regime itself have no honour. I always knew it, but the suicide bombing earlier today and the regime's response to it confirmed it yet again. Rather than consider the suicide bombing in Najaf an isolated incident, Iraqi's vice president says that they are official policy and there will be more.
I guess if your a brutal regime that considers the lives of your fellow citizens to be worthless, it's easy to see why. The coalition will be more careful dealing with people who appear to be civilians and it may prompt coalition forces to accidentally kill civilians, creating a propaganda victory for Saddam Hussein, assuming he's still alive of course. It also tells me that the use of chemical or biological weapons are now a certainty. Not only against coalition forces, but civilians as well.
Not that Taha Yassin Ramadan has any problems murdering civilians indiscriminately. He's the same savage who murdered his way through southern Iraq back in 1991 putting down the Shiite rebellion.
Perhaps I'm old fashioned. I realize that war is not a game of cricket, as Col. Saito told Col. Nicholson in The Bridge on the River Kwai. There are "rules" governing a profoundly uncivilized act like war, but only western nations seem to respect them. Maybe that's why I just don't understand the savagery of the Ba'athist dictatorship. The lack of honour on the battlefield by the Iraqi military and the regime is just something beyond what I consider human.
Posted by steve @ 07:53 PM EST [Link]
~ BUCKLEY AND DIVISIONS ON THE RIGHT: In light of all the recent internal conservative arguments over paleocons, neocons, foreign policy and the rest of it, it is interesting to read this interview with William F. Buckley, Jr. in Human Events. Buckley's latest book is a fictionalized account of some of the divisions in the early conservative movement. In this interview, he talks about the mainstream right's break with Robert Welch and the John Birch Society, Ayn Rand and the objectivists and Murray Rothbard, the libertarian economist who inspired the writers of LewRockwell.com - including Lew himself.
Posted by antle @ 05:13 PM EST [Link]
~ ALAN CARUBA PROFILED: No, not by the FBI as part of some homeland security thing, but by Insight Magazine. You can read it here.
"Caruba relishes exposing what he sees as hoaxes perpetrated daily in the name of science. He laments the pervasive ignorance being created by an educational system that he regards as woefully inadequate and growing worse."
Coincidently enough, the Brothers Judd have also weighed in on Caruba, specifically his recently released book Warning Signs. Read their fun review here. The opening paragraph is pure money.
Posted by steve @ 03:02 PM EST [Link]
~ SCREW YOU SADDAM: Air strikes earlier this week may have not whacked the probably already dead Saddam Hussein, a coalition spokesman said Friday, but they did get his luxury yacht.
Boo yaa!
Posted by steve @ 05:22 AM EST [Link]
~ FIVE US SOLDIERS KILLED ON SUICIDE BOMBING: "A car bomb exploded Saturday at a U.S. military checkpoint in Najaf in central Iraq, a source with U.S. Central Command said."
Read on.
The entire ESR family sends its condolences to the families who suffer today.
Posted by steve @ 05:15 AM EST [Link]
~ IRAQIS SURRENDER TO CANADIAN JOURNOS: I'm surprised the Canadian journalists didn't surrender first. Read on and ignore the shame I feel about my country.
Posted by steve @ 05:03 AM EST [Link]
~ AMERICA? HERE'S A MESSAGE FROM SOME CANADIANS: WE BACK YOU: Rallies will be held across Canada this weekend to announce to our American brothers and sisters that some Canadians are in support of America.
Read on.
None of the protests are anywhere near where I live but I did write a letter to U.S. President George W. Bush announcing my support. A single letter means little but I do want you Yanks to know that some of us Canadians up here love you dearly.
Posted by steve @ 04:55 AM EST [Link]
~ IS SCOTT SPEICHER STILL ALIVE?: "Citing unspecified reports, a U.S. senator said Friday that an American pilot missing since the 1991 Gulf War may have been seen alive and in the custody of Iraqi authorities in the past month."
Read on.
God help those bastards who have kept this man from his family for over a decade. I'd have no mercy for them.
Posted by steve @ 04:45 AM EST [Link]
Friday, March 28, 2003 WHAT AMERICA IS ABOUT: Orrin Judd over at Brothers Judd Blog has a great entry about Pfc. Joseph P. Dwyer, a medic made famous by a picture showing him carrying a wounded Iraqi child to safety.
Dwyer enlisted after September 11, 2001 after he found out that his brother, a police officer, had not died when the World Trade Centre collapsed. Grateful, he joined up to make a difference.
"An almost perfect metaphor for America: we're attacked; he wants to do something; he ends up saving a child of our enemy. We fight that one day soon an Iraqi version of Pfc. Dwyer may return the favor for another oppressed people somewhere in the world," writes Orrin.
Damned right. That's why I love America.
Posted by steve @ 07:34 PM EST [Link]
~ ANOTHER ADDITION TO THE AXIS OF COOL: Cyclist Lance Armstrong today came out in support of U.S. President George W. Bush and the war in Iraq.
"What I will say, and have said many times, is that NOBODY wants a war. Not me. Not President Bush. Not Tony Blair. No one... but sometimes it may be unavoidable. I absolutely support the President and absolutely support our troops. Enough on this..."
First Wayne Gretzky, then Tiger Woods. Who's the next athlete to become a member? I also wonder what Lance's reception will be like the next time he participates in the Tour de France.
Posted by steve @ 04:41 PM EST [Link]
~ IRAQI TERRORISTS ARRESTED: Maybe that Orange level alert had some basis after all. Reuters reports that two Iraqi sleeper cells preparing to attack U.S. interests have been arrested recently.
Posted by steve @ 04:36 PM EST [Link]
~ IT'S NOT OVER YET .... A newspaper columnist named Steve Greenhut pens a bold response to Frum.
Posted by izzy @ 10:35 AM EST [Link]
~ THIS EVEN WORKS IN VERMONT
Dealing with Peaceniks
When you are confronted by an anti-war protester, here are the proper rules of etiquette:
1.) Listen politely while this person explains their views. Strike up a conversation, if necessary, and look very interested in their ideas. They will tell you how revenge is immoral, and that by attacking the people who did this to us we will only bring on more violence. They will probably use many arguments, ranging from political to religious to humanitarian.
2.) In the middle of their remarks, without any warning, punch them in the nose.
3.) When the person gets up off of the ground, they will be very angry and they may try to hit you, so be careful.
4.) Very quickly and calmly remind the person that violence only brings about more violence and remind them of their stand on this matter. Tell them if they are really committed to a non-violent approach to undeserved attacks, they will turn the other cheek and negotiate a solution. Tell them they must lead by example if they really believe what they are saying.
5.) Most of them will think for a moment and then agree that you are correct.
6.) As soon as they do that, hit them again. Only this time hit them much harder. Square in the nose.
7.) Repeat steps 2-5 until the desired results are obtained and the idiot realizes how stupid an argument he/she is making.
cb
Posted by clbloomer @ 10:15 AM EST [Link]
~ UNREPENTENT SOCIALIST
Walter Cronkite has shown again why "The Most Trusted Man in America" should not be trusted. In an appearance at Drew University, Cronkite called President Bush arrogant, and compared him to a chimpanzee. The story can be read here.
Cronkite is another celebrity who is given frequent opportunities to bash America and American ideals. His understanding of sovereignty, freedom and liberty is severely lacking. His activities in recent years, especially with the World Federalist Society indicate that he would rather see a European-style socialist welfare state in the US, run by a world government such as the United Nations.
His opinions are worthless at best, and dangerous to a free America at worst.
cb
Posted by clbloomer @ 09:24 AM EST [Link]
~ HOW DO YOU KNOW THE COALITION IS BOUND FOR VICTORY?: Slate's Jack Shafer says just wait for New York Times reporter R.W. "Johnny" Apple Jr. to declare that the coalition is losing. Sure enough, Apple is praising the effectiveness of the Iraqi military. You know, the one that's been driven back repeatedly over the past week.
Shafer lays out the four parts of the news cycle concerning wars that people like Apple and his minions continue to perpetuate.
Posted by steve @ 02:19 AM EST [Link]
Thursday, March 27, 2003 I HOPE THEY DON'T CALL THEMSELVES AMERICANS: (Via ESR contrib. Trey Wickwire) I really wish I hadn't blocked out cursing on this blog right now because I feel like unleashing a torrent. Fox News reports that a female National Guardsman was attacked by rock throwing teenagers last week in Vermont.
"The teens blocked the sergeant as she went into a store and again on the way out, yelling obscenities at her along the way, Roosevelt said. The group also threw small stones at her car as she drove away, he added.
"The sergeant said she believed the protesters had taken part in an anti-war demonstration in Montpelier that day. National Guard troops are often deployed to such events to help keep the peace."
Well, I actually know a couple of words that might make it past the language filter...
Posted by steve @ 08:26 PM EST [Link]
~ I WAS WONDERING WHEN HE'D OPEN HIS YAP: If your like me, you've just been waiting for Jesse Jackson to open his mouth about the Iraq war. Wait no longer!
While meeting with UN Sec. Gen. Koffi Annan, Jackson called for a truce in the war to get aid to Iraqi civilians.
"Perhaps there could be the Olympic Truce, where at least both sides agree to stop the shooting to allow food and medicine to get in and water can be turned back on," Jackson said.
Sure Jess, but you might want to clear with an enemy to your country who has executed soldiers who share your citizenship, have fired at its own civilians, forced its civilians to act as human shields and may be preparing to use chemical or biological weapons. As the generals say, the enemy gets a vote on any plan you come up with.
The article also notes the cravenness of the Iraqi Christian clerical community calling the war an "aggression against the Iraqi people." And people wonder why I'm an athiest. Principles are to be died for, not given up because of threats. It's funny to note that Iraqi civilians are now battling their own government while the religious community continues to mouth the words of the Ba'ath Party. I only hope that Iraq's Catholic community does what many in Germany's Catholic community did during the Second World War: mouth words of homage to the pontiff and then ignore him and help the persecuted.
Posted by steve @ 05:50 PM EST [Link]
~ IF YOU OWN A DVD PLAYER, CRITERION IS THE ONLY NAME FOR DVDS: Truly Criterion are the masters in restoring and presenting the classics on DVD. Their current featured DVD is Henry V, a movie I discussed some months back on this blog and one I can hardly wait to get my hands on.
For an unemployed guy it might be a questionable action, but I ordered Criterion's version of Akira Kurosawa's The Seven Samurai. It had to be done. I'm fighting the urge to get Rashomon, Inagaki's Samurai trilogy, Yojimbo...heck, even Alexander Nevsky.
Posted by steve @ 03:31 PM EST [Link]
~ DEPLETED URANIUM: PLEASE DON'T EAT IT: Ronald Bailey has a good article in yesterday's Reason about the myths surrounding depleted uranium.
"A Department of Defense-sponsored review of the scientific literature by the RAND think tank concluded that 'there are no peer reviewed published reports of detectable increases of cancer or other negative health effects from radiation exposure to inhaled or ingested natural uranium at levels far exceeding those likely in the Gulf.' One need not be a conspiracy theorist to believe that the Defense Department's analysis and reporting on the substance's health and environmental consequences might be biased. But many independent organizations and scientists find little to worry about either."
You have to believe that anything Ramsey Clark is against, you have to be for.
Posted by steve @ 03:05 PM EST [Link]
~ GLENN REYNOLDS IS IMPRESSED: I'm not. He's happy that Canada's Parliament voted unanimously to try Saddam Hussein for war crimes.
The motion urges the Canadian government to "bring to justice Saddam Hussein and all other Iraqi officials responsible for genocide and crimes against humanity and war crimes - including through the formation of an international criminal tribunal."
Here's the part that makes me wary: international criminal tribunal. Under who's auspices? I can only imagine what could happen if the UN runs the show.
Posted by steve @ 02:58 PM EST [Link]
~ PUT YOUR PRINCIPLES WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS: The denizens of Free Republic have launched a petition for Michael Moore to go on a hunger strike against the war in Iraq.
"Moore recently said, 'The majority of Americans do not want to see our young boys killed, and the majority of people didn't vote for the man sitting in the White House, and I'll keep saying that until he's out of there.' If the 300 lb. Moore is honest about his outrage against the President and America's liberation of the Iraqi people, he should prove the point by his deeds not his words. No more hot air, Mr. Moore. It's time to put up or shut up. In order to determine the sincerity of Moore's support for America's enemies, we request that he go on a hunger strike immediately."
Sounds fair to me. You can sign it here.
Posted by steve @ 02:40 PM EST [Link]
~ TEAR DOWN THAT FLAG ... that's the title (I hope!) of a column I am writing about the United Nations Flag that is currently flying in front of Amherst (Mass) Town Hall. If any of you want to offer one of your "Ten Things I hate about the UN," I am all ears.
Posted by izzy @ 01:32 PM EST [Link]
~ WHAT'S WITH THIS NUT?
Scott Ritter, the former Marine, UN weapons inspector and current propaganda mouthpiece for Saddam Hussein, says that the US will lose the war with Iraq.
"The United States is going to leave Iraq with its tail between its legs, defeated. It is a war we can not win," he told private radio TSF in an interview broadcast here [Lisbon] Tuesday evening. And why won't we win? "We do not have the military means to take over Baghdad and for this reason I believe the defeat of the United States in this war is inevitable," he said.
I just wonder whose payroll he is on. You can read the story in a South African paper.
Posted by clbloomer @ 01:23 PM EST [Link]
~ AMERICAN LEADERSHIP: Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), one of the good guys in Congress, has a guest column in NRO talking about the storied history of American leadership, which is always derided by critics as unilateralism. He also makes the point that this is not the first time America and Great Britain have stood together to confront challenges others were unwilling or unable to.
Posted by antle @ 10:58 AM EST [Link]
~ MORE BALKO: This time Radley weighs in on the Iraq war on the FOX website. His views sound similar to someone else's I know...
Posted by antle @ 10:41 AM EST [Link]
~ OLD LIBERALISM, R.I.P: Steven Hayward writes that old New Deal liberalism died with Daniel Patrick Moynihan. He may well be right. The old liberalism was wrong-headed about government, but it was pro-American, patriotic, rooted in traditional values, optimistic and capable of uniting a nation. The liberalism that has replaced it is a much uglier creed.
Posted by antle @ 09:39 AM EST [Link]
~ THE NEW PROHIBITIONISTS: Radley Balko has a great Tech Central Station piece on neo-prohibitionists seeking to tax and regulate alcohol based on dubious claims. Many of the old prohibitionists were motivated by their pro-temperance morality; the new prohibitionists seek to impose a therapeutic nanny state.
They can have my beer when they pry it from my cold, dead hands.
Posted by antle @ 09:03 AM EST [Link]
~ WHAT IF WE WERE ON RED ALERT?: The American Enterprise's Eli Lehrer explores this question in NRO. I think this chilling sentence is the key: "While DHS won't word it this way, Red Alert has clear implications: Major terrorist attacks have already taken place or top homeland-security planners consider them unavoidable."
Posted by antle @ 08:48 AM EST [Link]
~ EVEN THE UN KNOWS ITS IRRELEVANT: Although he couldn't resist lecturing the U.S. and Britain, Kofi Annan had to explicitly concede the U.N.'s failure to deal with Iraq, while implicitly conceding its waning relevance.
Although predicting the world body's demise may be premature, that result has gone from being beyond the pale just a couple of years ago to a real possibility now. Will the last one out please turn off the lights?
Posted by antle @ 08:32 AM EST [Link]
~ 1000 STICKS INSERTED INTO NORTHERN IRAQ: The northern front is one step closer to being opened after 1 000 members of the 173rd Airborne Brigade parachuted early this morning into northern Iraq to take an airfield.
Posted by steve @ 04:48 AM EST [Link]
~ TIGER SUPPORTS TROOPS: Joining Wayne Gretzky in the Axis of Cool, Tiger Woods issued a statement yesterday lending his support to America's soldiers in Iraq and the actions of U.S. President George W. Bush.
"Obviously, no one likes war. Our Congress and President tried hard to avoid the use of force, but ultimately decided it was the best course of action. I like the assertiveness shown by President Bush and think we owe it to our political and military leaders, along with our brave soldiers to be as supportive as possible during these difficult and trying times."
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:44 AM EST [Link]
~ WHY THE UN IS IRRELEVANT: "A resolution presented Wednesday to the top U.N. human rights body does not include a condemnation of Cuba's record, a rare move that immediately drew protests from rights campaigners."
This after Cuba spent the last week arresting dozens of dissidents.
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 04:41 AM EST [Link]
~ SELF-PROMO ALERT: I have a piece on how the international Iraq war debate demonstrates the continued relevance of the nation-state on VDARE.com. I thought I'd point it out because even if people don't feel like arguing over the point of my article, my co-bloggers are usually up for arguing about the site that ran it!
Posted by antle @ 12:35 AM EST [Link]
Wednesday, March 26, 2003 MICHAEL MOORE IS A BIG FAT IDIOT: Or so Lee R. Shelton IV - boy, what kind of pretentious person has a roman numeral in their name - says in Toogood Reports.
Posted by antle @ 10:12 PM EST [Link]
~ THE SALAM PAX STORY...CONTINUED: HotWired does a story today about the "Dear Raed" web log, written by someone who uses the pseudonym Salam Pax. You've probably seen him referenced on other web sites like Instapundit and in news stories from CNN and MSNBC.
The story covers a little imbroglio over the massive amount of traffic he's receiving and how it affects another service that hosts his photos. Near the end, and this should interest you, are links to other people who wonder whether Salam Pax is real or a CIA propaganda tool.
I'm undecided. I know people like Glenn Reynolds over at Instapundit (and one lass who says she got snail mail from him) believe Salam Pax is real and blogging out of Iraq but I'm still not sure.
Posted by steve @ 07:50 PM EST [Link]
~ WHAT'S AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL REALLY WORRIED ABOUT?: (Via The Corner) Interesting press release from Amnesty International today entitled "Iraq: Fear of war crimes by both sides".
They open their parade of war crimes by condemning the coalition attack on Iraq's main television station. They then slam the Iraqi government over alleged shelling of civilians in Basra and reports of Iraqi soldiers dressing as civilians.
One of these things is not like the other. Can you guess? If you said attacking the television station, you were right!
Indiscriminate attacks on civilians and dressing regular army in civilian clothes are war crimes, whereas bombing a government owned television station (it is not "civilian" as AI states) is not.
Quiz question number 2: In their list of alleged war crimes, what did AI forget to mention? If you said parading POWs on television and allegedly executing captured American soldiers in front of civilians, your right again!
Another thing to note, if you read the press release, the attack on the television statement takes up several paragraphs. Iraqi war crimes? Two paragraphs composed of three sentences.
Posted by steve @ 07:30 PM EST [Link]
~ IT'S JUST BLOOD IN THE WATER: U.S. Marines have discovered a September 11 memorial in Nasiriya. A mural depicted a plane crashing into a building complex resembling the World Trade Centre.
"The plane's logo and coloring resembled that of Iraqi Airlines, said Getty Images News Service executive Brian Felber, based in New York."
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 07:14 PM EST [Link]
~ "AND ANY TIME YOU GOT AUSTRALIAN SCHOOLCHILDREN AND CANADIAN ARCHITECTS AGAINST YOU, YOUR TIME IS UP!:" Remarkably clueless antiwar letter (scroll down to "Architects Against War") from a "Joseph Baker, FRAIC, PPOAQ" (is that suppose to impress us?) of Montreal, which I happen to find in the pages of the March 2003 edition of Canadian Architect magazine. I believe Mr. Baker's letter speaks for itself:
Architects Against War.
Like many others, I have watched with increasing dread and helplessness the drive to war against Iraq and its people. The devastation and horrific loss of life predicted by the World Health Organization (WHO), Oxfam and other NGOs stand in stark contrast to the equanimity with which political leaders and our national media regard the preparations for military action.
Nightly we are regaled with images of colossal aircraft carriers, their payload of jets taking off and landing with precision, house to house battle rehearsals. These images will soon be replaced with those of shattered homes, broken bodies and terrified children. The WHO places the number of Iraqi civilians that would be wounded at 100,000 and a further 400,000 hit by disease after the bombing of water and sewage facilities and the disruption of food supplies. Fleeing the cities for the open countryside, 3.6 million will need emergency shelter. This is the true face of war, UN-approved or not.
Architects and educators in architecture cannot regard this picture with detachment. We adhere to a discipline dedicated to the creation of liveable cities, the building of friendly communities, of decent housing, of healthy and safe environments in which children may grow and learn. Many of us have no doubt written to our MPs, joined the March for Peace in our hometown, urged the adoption of anti-war resolutions on our city councils. Such a resolution passed by the City of Vancouver was drafted by Lawyers Against the War. Associations of physicians, of nurses, of writers--impelled by the principles of their calling--have made public their opposition to the U.S. and British administrations' drive to war. No less bound by the very nature of their creative role, Canadian architects, architectural faculty and students must find voice to express their own dissent with the terrible threat to Iraqi cities and their inhabitants. We have a national organization, the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada. It could be the platform from which the voice of Architects Against War is heard.
Joseph Baker, FRAIC, PPOAQ
Montreal
baviz@cam.org
Posted by Barton @ 03:31 PM EST [Link]
~ THE CHILDREN'S CRUSADE: Instapundit and the Weekly James have already covered it, but this Reuters video of a peace riot in Sydney staged by Australian schoolchildren and organized by the "Books Not Bombs" organization is simply grotesque. Yes, they do burn a American flag, and yes, they do stamp on its torn-up remnants, and yes, there's a lot of cheering. No wonder they carried placards saying, "We are ready to fight, world peace is our right."
Posted by Barton @ 02:50 PM EST [Link]
~ AT THE NEW YORK PRESS, WE GO OUT OF THE WAY TO HATE EVERYBODY: The recently revamped New York Press (the best little alternative newspaper out there) has published its first annual "50 Most Loathsome New Yorkers" list. You have to be one of those self-absorbed New York City media types to be familiar with a lot of the names, but in looking over the list, at least the New York Press guys prove themselves to be equal-opportunity haters with no sacred cows to protect.
Speaking of hatred, former New York Press owner, Russ "Mugger" Smith, has posted up his review (scroll down to "Card-Carrying Man") of Eric Alterman's polemic against the "myth" of liberal domination of the news media, "What Liberal Media? The Truth About Bias and the News." It's a wonderful, poisonously funny hatchet job of a review with Smith speaking in Alterman's persona:
I am Eric Alterman: Unfortunately, you’re not.
Although an honorary gay person of color and progressive champion of the people, I’m an affluent white, heterosexual journalist with degrees from Cornell, Yale and Stanford. I write for The Nation, run a weblog ("Altercation") for MSNBC.com, and have contributed articles to Worth, Rolling Stone, the New York Times, Elle, Mother Jones, and the World Policy Journal.
In 1992 I wrote the book "Sound and Fury: The Making of the Punditocracy," and then became a pundit.
I’m friends with Bruce (Springsteen to you) and my book about him, "It Ain’t No Sin to Be Glad You’re Alive," won the 1999 Stephen Crane Literary Award. On my Web site I educate my followers with backstage tidbits of Bruce-lore and jot down the list of songs he performs at concerts.
But enough about me.
Wait! In my rage over the unelected president’s illegal invasion of Iraq, I momentarily forgot the purpose of this message. You probably already know about my new book, "What Liberal Media?" especially if you log onto "Altercation" daily, where I’m compelled to promote it and give the itinerary of my book tour. Still, just in case you’re a literary challenged person who watches Fox News, it’s my duty to enlighten you... And so forth. It's great stuff.
Posted by Barton @ 02:26 PM EST [Link]
~ YOU MEAN THEY DON'T ALL STARVE TO DEATH ON THE STREETS?- Headline I just submitted to Opinion Journal's "Best of the Web Today" for its "You Don't Say" category of news headlines which state the mind-bogglingly obvious:
"Most families better off after quitting welfare, says StatsCan."
Posted by Barton @ 01:56 PM EST [Link]
~ CAKEWALK? WHAT CAKEWALK?- From David Frum's Diary today:
“Cakewalk”
Some of the anxious are saying that they’re entitled to fret because the war isn’t the “cakewalk” they claim President Bush promised them. Well, I never heard President Bush promise a cakewalk. He made no promises that the war would be easy – and when he spoke about the war in private, he always stressed that digging Saddam out of power would be a bloody business...
From the transcript of President Bush's televised address to the nation right after the "decapitation strike" was launched at the Iraqi leadership last Wednesday:
The enemies you confront will come to know your skill and bravery. The people you liberate will witness the honorable and decent spirit of the American military. In this conflict, America faces an enemy who has no regard for conventions of war or rules of morality. Saddam Hussein has placed Iraqi troops and equipment in civilian areas, attempting to use innocent men, women and children as shields for his own military -- a final atrocity against his people.
I want Americans and all the world to know that coalition forces will make every effort to spare innocent civilians from harm. A campaign on the harsh terrain of a nation as large as California could be longer and more difficult than some predict. And helping Iraqis achieve a united, stable and free country will require our sustained commitment.
Now, you might argue that every U.S. president has to warn against overinflated expectations among the American people given their trust in the absolute superiority of the American military, but I dare Bush's critics to find any instance when he promised that any potential invasion of Iraq would be extremely easy. As we can see in the above remarks, Bush and his speechwriters even predicted what kind of tactics the Iraqi forces would use to try to delay the American advance: the placement of "Iraqi troops and equipment in civilian areas, attempting to use innocent men, women and children as shields for his own military." Of course, that prediction has come true in spades and it has indeed delayed the American invasion, so don't say Bush didn't warn you all about this in advance...
Posted by Barton @ 01:45 PM EST [Link]
~ MORE FRUM FALLOUT: David Keene takes up for Robert Novak in a piece that appears today in FrontPage Magazine and originally appeared in The Hill. I think Novak has on occasion said some pretty dumb things about Israel, but to call him a paleo renders the term as meaningless as many paleos have rendered "neocon." These terms are quickly losing any relevance as actual ideological descriptions and being reduced to insults.
The interesting writer J.P. Zmirak offers his own insights into Frum on LewRockwell.com. I don't think he gives Frum enough credit, but I think the piece overall is a good critique of conservative writers who confuse empty Republican partisanship and posturing with serious conservative thought. And as a campus conservative columnist during my student days - who succeeded another controversial conservative columnist - the bit about Frum and Zmirak's conservative noismaking in Yale's campus papers was intriguing.
I think the overall point that Frum was trying to make in his National Review cover story was basically sound: There some people on the right who have become so alienated as a result of their marginal political views that they no longer feel any love or patriotism toward America as it actually exists (and maybe as it ever existed outside their own imaginations). I also find it a little ironic that a faction that consistently rails against other less "true" conservatives with which they substantially agree is wailing so loudly about being the victims of an ideological purge. But I do think Frum painted those who disagree with him on the right with a bit of a broad brush. And wherever possible, he sidestepped serious debate of their ideas in favor of oversimplified cariactures. Rather than engaging or refuting any of their points, he simply restated them as if they were self-evidently scandalous, frequently digging for the most controversial things he could find in print by the writers he was criticizing.
But the article has definitely made a lot of the conservative sites more interesting to read. I can hardly wait to see how they respond in the next issue of The American Conservative!
Posted by antle @ 08:37 AM EST [Link]
~ NO MORE "DAYS OF SADDAM'S LIVES"?: "Just before dawn Wednesday, Saddam Hussein's command and control capabilities were destroyed with an airstrike on Iraq's state-run television station, U.S. Central Command said."
Read on.
Posted by steve @ 01:58 AM EST [Link]
~ WHERE LIBERAL TALK RADIO SUCCEEDS: ESR friend Lawrence Henry has a very perceptive piece in The American Prowler that points out many conservatives are missing the mark on liberal talk radio. It is true that liberals have flopped in commercial radio markets and any liberal who tries to ape Rush Limbaugh's style - that is, to be the much-ballyhooed "Limbaugh of the left" will likely fail.
But, as Larry notes, liberals have succeeded in the taxpayer-funded world of public broadcasting. The left-leaning commentary that appears on NPR does attract an audience. It provides liberal views with a forum more in tune with the format its target audience prefers than those which thrive on commercial radio. So it is not the case that there are no liberal voices on the radio - it is really more that NPR is saturating the market.
Also running in yesterday's Prowler, by the way, was a book review by someone else who might be familiar to ESR readers.
Posted by antle @ 12:09 AM EST [Link]
Tuesday, March 25, 2003 HUSSEIN BUNKERS IMPOSSIBLE TO DESTROY, SAYS YUGOSLAV: Lt. Col. Resad Fazlic (Ret.) told Reuters that the bunkers that were built for Saddam Hussein are all but impossible to destroy.
"'I believe that if Saddam does not leave, and I think he has nowhere to go, they will find him in one of these facilities -- if he does not find a way out by then,' retired Lt. Col. Resad Fazlic told Reuters in an interview on Tuesday. 'These bunkers can resist a direct hit of a 20 kiloton- strong bomb or atomic bomb impact and keep those inside independent of the outside world for six months," said Fazlic, who oversaw the building of the bunkers in the late 1970s.'"
Posted by steve @ 11:14 PM EST [Link]
~ REGIME CHANGE NEEDED IN CANADA AS WELL: U.S. Ambassador to Canada Paul Cellucci said today that America is disappointed that Canada did not support the war in Iraq, stating that while the U.S. would be ready to answer any threat to her northern neighbour, Canada wasn't behind her old friend.
"It's disappointing to us and a lot of people in Washington are upset that Canada is not fully supporting us here," he said.
Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien responded by saying it was all a big misunderstanding (or misunderestimation if you will), Canada really is behind the U.S...well, sort of.
"I don't want Saddam Hussein to win. We always said that Saddam Hussein was doing a lot of things that we were not in agreement with. We oppose this intervention but now that it is on, we hope that it will be short with a minimum of victims." said Chretien.
Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham then told reporters that he's spoken to "many" of his American peers and a lot of them said that "understand and respect" Canada's decision. Bill, in case you hadn't heard, Democrats don't control the White House or either side of Congress. Just who were you talking to? The State Department? That would make sense then.
I can only pray for the day that the Liberal Party is thrown out on its rear and these jackasses have to find what resembles real work for a living. Then we can embark on the 20 year program to rid Canada of its Trudeau inspired idiocy.
Posted by steve @ 08:35 PM EST [Link]
~ GRETZ SUPPORTS DUBYA: I'm a little late to this story -- I've been concentrating on a book I want to finish for review -- but Canadian hockey great Wayne Gretzky announced his support for George W. Bush yesterday.
"All I can say is the president of the United States is a great leader, I happen to think he's a wonderful man and if he believes what he's doing is right I back him 100 per cent," said Gretzky, in Calgary for a news conference for Ronald McDonald Children's Charities.
"If the president decides to go to war he must know more than we know, or we hear about. He must have good reason to go and we have to back that."
I was never a big Gretzky fan growing up -- I preferred my hockey players a little more gritier -- but full props to The Great One on this one.
Posted by steve @ 08:11 PM EST [Link]
~ U.S. MARINES GIVEN "JOYOUS" WELCOME: CanWest reporter Matthew Fisher reports somewhere near Baghdad (he can't give his exact location though it was from the south that they approached) that Iraqi civilians have been given the U.S. Marines a "joyous" reception as they move towards the city.
"All along the road, for many kilometres, Iraqi civilians and soldiers waved, blew kisses and gave the thumbs up to passing marine vehicles. Many of the Iraqi soldiers have thrown away their combat boots and parts of their uniform, either to show they are no longer combatants or to exhibit their displeasure with leader Saddam Hussein."
Posted by steve @ 08:01 PM EST [Link]
~
COOLEST PICTURE OF THE DAY: An amazing picture taken by Reuters of a dolphin employed by the Americans to hunt mines near Umm Qasr.
The caption for the photo states in part: "K-Dog, a Bottle Nose Dolphin belonging to Commander Task Unit leaps out of the water in front of Sergeant Andrew Garrett while training near the USS Gunston Hall in the Gulf, March 18."
The article goes on to say that the dolphins will be given restaurant quality food and vitamins and are being treated very well by the military. Further, the dolphins have been trained not to swim up to a mine, but rather to place a marker a short distance away.
Posted by steve @ 07:46 PM EST [Link]
~ AH, THE UNIVERSITIES...STILL OUR CENTRES OF LEARNING: Think that no peaceniks are actively yearning for an American defeat? Think again. Absolutely outrageous conversation today with an antiwar friend of mine at the Best University In Canada as we were discussing the current crisis:
FRIEND: You know, it's getting to the point where I think that Iraq is the lesser of two evils.
ME (thinking I had misheard): What's that you say?
FRIEND: I said, Iraq is the lesser of two evils.
ME (babbling in astonishment): You mean you want the Americans to be defeated? You want Saddam to win? You want the Republican Guard to win?
FRIEND (with no hesitation): Yes.
ME (seething; trying to restrain myself from shouting, while a thousand counter-arguments race through my mind. Finally, I decide if he's that far gone, it's hopeless, so I say): Well, if that's what you think, then I'm afraid I can't even talk with you about this. Your position is a moral disgrace.
I was also told by this friend of mine that Bush had asked for absolutely no money for Iraqi reconstruction after the war in his $74.7 billion budget supplemental. I had no reply to this since I didn't know the details, so I checked it out. Gee, I wonder what the heck this is:
The bulk of the request, $62.6 billion, will support U.S. troops both in Iraq and other operations related to the broader war on terrorism.
The request also provides $4.2 billion for domestic security and about $7.8 billion for aid to Israel, Afghanistan and other United States allies and money to increase security for American diplomats abroad.
The rest of the money will go to humanitarian aid and reconstruction in a "free Iraq," the president said.
"This nation and our coalition partners are committed to making sure the Iraqi citizens who have suffered under a brutal tyrant have the food and medicine needed as soon as possible," Bush said of the Iraqi people. (snip)
In the chunk of change assigned to the Pentagon, $30.3 billion goes to "coercive diplomacy," $13.1 billion is for military conflict, $12 billion for stability and transition and $7.2 billion for reconstitution, according to an official breakdown given to reporters by defense officials. (snip)
Some money will go toward making sure a stable post-Saddam structure is put in place. That structure will be dictated by internal resistance and the level of support the coalition receives from the Iraqi population. The $12 billion also includes $489.3 million for oil field and facility repair and firefighting.
The $7.2 billion will go mainly to depot maintenance, spare parts, and, in some respects, replacement of materials expended during the conflict.
Before that conversation, I had another conversation with a guy who insisted that Bush was going to lose the 2004 election because the American economy had been, quote, "shrinking" for the last three years. He said that Bush was going to lose no matter how well the war went. I asked him to name any one of the Democratic presidential candidates. He shrugged and said that while he couldn't name one, it didn't matter, Bush was a goner anyway. To this, I replied, "So, you mean Al Sharpton has a chance of beating Bush?" He guffawed and admitted that that was an unlikely possibility.
I also learned today that you shouldn't trust literary studies professors when they try to give you a potted history of the Cold War, given that some of them don't seem to know the circumstances of the Greek Civil War, when Communist partisans tried to take over the country, nor do they seem aware that a lot of the funding for anti-nuclear and peace movements during the 1980s (such as the World Peace Council) came from the coffers of Soviet intelligence. When I noted this in class, I got the distinct impression everyone thought I had just spewed out a conspiracy theory that was about as creditable as declaring that aliens controlled the White House.
Posted by Barton @ 06:23 PM EST [Link]
~ HEY GUYS, REMEMBER THIS?: I'd just like to remind our Canadian readers out there, that the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada is presently holding a leadership race. You know, just in case you care...
Posted by Barton @ 05:44 PM EST [Link]
~ WE LOVE SADDAM! WE LOVE...SUCKER!: Civilians in Basra are reportedly battling the Iraqi army today.
"Juliet Bremner, a correspondent with the British network ITV with troops outside the city, said the commanders told her they had seen groups of 40 to 50 citizens at various locations on the streets and that British forces had taken out an Iraqi mortar that had been firing on the apparent protesters."
I hope Iraqi civilians are thrifty with their lives...I want them to live to see the day Saddam's body is dragged through the streets.
[Update - 7:39pm] Fox News has a better report on the uprising, one confirmed by a Shiite group based out of Iran.
Posted by steve @ 03:06 PM EST [Link]
~ WANT TO MAKE MY BLOOD BOIL??
This week's ESR piece by Peter Schwartz contains a great deal of truth about the nature of the so-called "anti-war" movement.
The "anti-war" rallies are generated not by any love for Iraq, but by a hatred for America -- or, more fundamentally, for the principle America represents. The protestors oppose the individualism that lies at America's foundation. They despise the idea of a capitalist system, in which the individual is sovereign, free to live his own life and pursue his own values, irrespective of the wishes of "the public." And they therefore despise the derivative idea that, as a free nation, America has the sovereign right to defend its self-interest, irrespective of the wishes of the international community.
David Horowitz, in his email newsletter The War Room reveals the same truths. Horowitz gets specific:
The Nature of the Threat: It would be unwise not to take the threat posed by this organized attack on American policy and American security seriously. The misnamed "anti-war" movement is led and organized by leftist vanguards who proclaim their solidarity with terrorist states, including North Korea and Cuba, and terrorist organizations in the Middle East (2). One banner raised by activists in San Francisco read: "We Support Our Troops When They Shoot Their Officers." A photo of this banner is proudly portrayed on a leftist website that has played a key role in organizing the demonstrations (and is funded in part by a foundation headed by PBS commentator Bill Moyers).
The banner referenced by Horowitz can be seen here.
I will refrain from using the language I used when I first saw this picture. But as a retired Navy officer, I found it absolutely disgusting (to put it mildly). I'm considering making a sign the same size that reads "I support our cops when they shoot anti-war protesters".
And to think that I fought in war to defend their right to be insensitive and stupid.
cb
Posted by clbloomer @ 10:44 AM EST [Link]
Monday, March 24, 2003 SUFFERING FROM THE "VIETNAM SYNDROME:" No, not the American military and with the exception of the peaceniks, not the American people either (found via Instapundit), but the press? It's looks like they've come down with an acute case. And the cure? Well, a healthy dose of Donald Rumsfeld has never hurt anybody before. The U.S. Defense Department has finally posted up the transcript of the great briefing Secretary Rumsfeld and General Myers gave on March 21st, a few hours after the "shock and awe" air campaign had begun. First of all, Rumsfeld decides to personally shoot down any comparisons with Dresden:
Rumsfeld: Before we do, let me make one comment. Just before coming down, after the air campaign began in earnest about on 1:00 [p.m.], I saw some of the images on television and I heard various commentators expansively comparing what's taking place in Iraq today to some of the more famous bombing campaigns of World War II. There is no comparison. The weapons that are being used today have a degree of precision that no one ever dreamt of in a prior conflict -- they didn't exist. And it's not a handful of weapons; it's the overwhelming majority of the weapons that have that precision. The targeting capabilities and the care that goes into targeting to see that the precise targets are struck and that other targets are not struck is as impressive as anything anyone could see. The care that goes into it, the humanity that goes into it, to see that military targets are destroyed, to be sure, but that it's done in a way, and in a manner, and in a direction and with a weapon that is appropriate to that very particularized target. And I think that the comparison is unfortunate and inaccurate. And I think that will be found to be the case when ground truth is achieved.
But it's the following exchange that got all the attention. Remember, it's been barely half a hour since the real war began and already the first symptoms of the "Vietnam Syndrome" are beginning to manifest themselves:
Q: You mentioned earlier the allusions to bombing campaigns in World War II and that they were an inappropriate historical analogy.
Rumsfeld: Those were dumb bombs and they were spread across large areas.
Q: Can I finish my point?
Rumsfeld: These are very precise weapons.
Q: All right. But one thing that characterized those campaigns and the bombing of Haifa -- of Hanoi was that the public, their spirit did not diminish; they hunkered down, they pretty much resisted the bombing. What makes you so certain that in this case, even though it's precise, that "shock and awe" won't just force the Iraqis to hunker down and wait it out like the Brits, the Germans, the Vietnamese, and the Japanese in World War II, and in Vietnam?
Rumsfeld: Well, for one thing, the people here are a repressed people. And anyone there, I think, while it has to be a terribly unpleasant circumstance, will have an opportunity to see the precision with which we're going about this task, and that the targets are military targets, and that we -- this is not an attack on the Iraqi people, it's not an attack on the country of Iraq. It's an attack on that regime that has refused to disarm peacefully.
Myers: Could I just add to that? The secretary is absolutely right. This is about their military capability. And we have the capability, in a reasonably precise way, to go after those military targets that are going to diminish their capability over time. And so we think that, combined with what -- the other things you see going on -- I think I mentioned in my remarks the folks that have entered in southern Iraq, we have folks in western Iraq, we have folks in the north, their sights are set on other objectives; they're not going to stay where they are. So this is a combined issue -- we're not counting on just the air piece.
Mark Wickens also has a post up on another great Rumsfeld exchange this weekend, this time with CNN's Wolf Blitzer.
Posted by Barton @ 11:31 PM EST [Link]
~ WE INTERRUPT THIS PROGRAM FOR A MESSAGE FROM OUR SPONSOR...MALE CHAUVINIST AFTERSHAVE!: Well, it looks like my fellow bloggers have the doom-and-gloom war front covered, so I'd like to lighten the mood a bit by pointing you to this little gem of an article from today's National Post about the bad products hall of fame in Ithaca, New York. Do you have a craving for To-Fitness Tofu Pasta? Cucumber Antiperspirant? Chocolate-covered Ritz crackers? Well, they got it all there, along with 80 000 other consumer bombs. This shouldn't be too surprising because according to the article, out of the 25 000 new consumer products released in North America each year, there's an astounding 95% failure rate (yes, 95%). My favourite disaster is Heublein's infamous "Wine & Dine Dinner," a foodstuff which was obviously developed by well-paid marketing whizzes unfamiliar with the KISS Principle (as in "Keep it simple, stupid"):
Back in the mid-1970s, Heublein Inc. introduced this upscale product, consisting of an entree along with a small bottle of wine creatively displayed in a cutout box. The pre-packaged vino was actually salty, spicy cooking wine. Consumers were supposed to mix the wine with the food during the cooking process. Most people did not read the directions; they simply assumed the wine should be taken straight (even though a pictograph on the bottleneck indicated otherwise). After one ghastly gulp of the plonk, Wine & Dine was toast.
Posted by Barton @ 09:22 PM EST [Link]
~ UDAY...SADDAM'S PERFECT SON: Sports Illustrated carries a story in their March 24 issue available online about Uday Hussein, accused of murdering and torturing Iraqi athletes that fail to meet his standards.
"THE BUTCHER'S BOY, as he is sometimes called, is reputed to be the most brutal member of Iraq's notorious ruling family. As an infant he reportedly played with disarmed grenades. By 10 he was accompanying his father to the torture chamber at Qasr-al-Nihayyah (the Palace of the End, where many political enemies, including deposed King Faisal II, were killed) to watch Saddam deal with dissidents. By 16 he bragged of committing his first murder, telling classmates he had killed a teacher who had upbraided him in front of a girlfriend."
Posted by steve @ 06:39 PM EST [Link]
~ LONGBOW PILOTS CAPTURED: CNN has reported that the two pilots from the Longbow helicopter discovered in an Iraqi field this morning south of Baghdad were captured and displayed on Iraqi TV. They looked to be in good health, perhaps the Iraqis learned from the storm of criticism they provoked from the day before.
Be strong lads...you'll be home soon.
[Update - 6:36pm] - An A-10 pilot nicknamed "J.R." out of northern Kuwait just told Gary Tuchman of CNN that America's pilots will "get back at Iraq" for any mistreatment of U.S. POWs. I wouldn't get those pilots mad.
Posted by steve @ 06:32 PM EST [Link]
~ ADD DAVID FRUM TO THE LIST: Frum is the latest in a string of mainstream conservative pundits who have essentially stated that "coalitions of the willing" are preferable to working through the U.N. He does so in an op-ed piece urging Great Britain to take this approach rather than be further absorbed by the European Union.
Not bad to see someone criticizing the relevance of two supranational organizations that conservatives should at the very least be highly suspicious of.
Posted by antle @ 08:45 AM EST [Link]
~ IT'S JUST SITTING THERE: Iraqi TV is showing footage of an AH-64D Apache Longbow chopper sitting in a field about 50 km south of Baghdad. No sign of the crew and no apparent damage to the frame. It appears that the chopper did see some action as at least four Hellfire missiles are missing.
I may be wrong but I was under the impression that Apache helicopters have a self-destruct feature so that the classified electronic systems aren't captured.
[UPDATE: 4:19am] - Military expert currently on CNN is wondering why the Longbow hasn't been bombed to ensure the technology isn't captured by the enemy...and then advises the Iraqis that standing by the Apache may not be the wisest thing.
Posted by steve @ 04:15 AM EST [Link]
~ I THINK HE SHOULD HIRE DAVID FRUM: Because I'm watching Saddam Hussein's speech on Iraqi TV right now and I'm struck by how lame it really is. He's essentially repeated the same ten sentences but phrased them differently. Apparently, judging by his comments, the Iraqi forces have convincingly thrown back the "Zionist and imperialist" aggressors and have moved so fast that they are sitting just outside of Washington, D.C.
"We will be victorious against our enemies."
Time to get on that Saddam...time's running out to make it reality.
Posted by steve @ 03:22 AM EST [Link]
~ SELF-PROMO ALERT: My review of Back to the Drawing Board: The Future of the Pro-Life Movement appears in The American Prowler today. Also, note that this is the first edition of the Prowler merged with the website of its parent, The American Spectator.
Posted by antle @ 01:21 AM EST [Link]
~ THE HEAVIEST FIGHTING OF THE WAR: James Lileks has a great piece on the weekend's war reporting -- especially the noxious stupidity of the BBC.
"Well, that’s it. War’s lost. It’s amazing how fast things change; in Afghanistan, it took three weeks before someone whispered 'Quagmire' and all was forsaken; this time it took but five days before an intrepid reporter stood up at a briefing and asked the military spokesman whether the specter of Vietnam loomed again over the swaggering, clay-footed giant of American power. Right now on TV some reporter is interviewing some bulky pink ex-general about BLACK SUNDAY, noting that everything was going magnificently on Friday, and now we’re meeting - are you ready for this? - resistance."
Posted by steve @ 12:45 AM EST [Link]
~ BUSH 41 INTERVIEW: Newsweek has an interesting interview with George H.W. Bush on his son, the French and the war in Iraq in their March 31 issue. Read an excerpt here.
Posted by steve @ 12:17 AM EST [Link]
Sunday, March 23, 2003 SADDAM'S SENSE OF STYLE: Fun article from the National Post detailing what you would have been liable to find if Saddam Hussein had ever invited you into one of his fifty or so palaces, many of them built from the profits of illegal oil sales (hint: "storeys of screaming kitsch" and lots and lots of lavishly furnished underground bunkers). My favourite little decorating factoid? Apparently, the Great Dictator has a soft spot in his heart for the colour pink, which means Saddam has more than his fair share of cheap pink plastic fly swatters and (even more ghoulish) lots of "boxes of hot pink facial tissue." Well, they do say that Hitler liked animals and little children...
Posted by Barton @ 11:35 PM EST [Link]
~ MY RESPECT FOR AARON BROWN IS GROWING: Right now CNN's Aaron Brown is truly hammering Al-Jazeera Washington bureau chief Hafez al-Mirazi for showing a 6.5 minute tape of American POWs and the bodies of Marines killed today in southern Iraq.
Al-Mirazi attempted to defend showing the footage, grisly enough that Brown didn't even want to describe it, but came across looking like a fool.
Is this a new CNN?
Posted by steve @ 10:41 PM EST [Link]
~ IT'S NOT TRUE BECAUSE HANS BLIX DIDN'T FIND IT: The Pentagon has confirmed that coalition forces have found a massive chemical weapons plant about 90 miles south of Baghdad. You know, the type of facility Iraq didn't have any of.
"The chemical plant is described as a '100-acre complex,' surrounded by an electrical fence. The plant was also apparently camouflaged to avoid aerial photos being taken.
"It is not yet known what chemicals were being produced at the plant."
Posted by steve @ 09:08 PM EST [Link]
~ HOW COULD A MAN DO THAT?: Earlier this week I wrote that soldiers tend to fight for hearth and home, not their political leaders. They fight to defend their wives and children. It is with that thought in mind that I have to wonder about reports that Iraqi soldiers are herding women and children into the war zone to act as human shields. How could a man do that? How could they fundamentally fail at their most sacred mission as soldiers, to defend the innocents of their own nation? What kind of man does that?
Posted by steve @ 09:02 PM EST [Link]
~ THANKS FRIENDS: The U.S. has formally protested to the Russian government about the sale of military equipment to Iraq.
"On Friday, the official said, when U.S. intelligence discovered that employees of one of the Russian companies in question -- Aviaconversiaya -- were still in Baghdad helping Iraq use what's described as 'highly sophisticated' electronic jamming equipment which can interfere with global positioning equipment used by ground forces and aircraft."
I can almost guaruntee you'll see similar protests to the French and Chinese governments.
Posted by steve @ 06:46 PM EST [Link]
~ THE RIGHT IS WHERE THE REAL DEBATES ARE: Of course, blogger and ESR contributor Paul Cella points out in a piece for Tech Central Station, among many other observations, that the real debates are all taking place on the right anyway.
Case in point: "Part of the problem here is the profound intellectual poverty of the Left. The whole debate about this massive, this ancient, this hugely complex threat to Western civilization, this clash of civilizations, is, for all intents and purposes, being hashed out on the Right. The best arguments against war come from the Right; the best arguments for it come from the Right. The Left chicanes and heckles, enfeebles and distracts; it says almost nothing of value, except when it adopts polemical postures hammered out in earnest by those it regards as monstrous."
I think Paul is on to something here.
Posted by antle @ 05:27 PM EST [Link]
~ NAME OF SOLDIER WHO KILLED HIS OWN: Sgt. Asan Akbar. Name of the dead: Cpt. Christopher Seifert, 27. Seifert was married.
Posted by steve @ 05:23 PM EST [Link]
~ PALEOS VS. NEOCONS: Another debate where there is a great deal of irrationality and disdain for the truth on both sides is the latest spat between paleoconservatives and neoconservatives. I myself am neither - I like to think of myself as an old-school fusionist Frank Meyer conservative. I agree with the paleos on some issues and the neocons on others, and on others still my views are too nuanced to fit into either category. I read and enjoy National Review both on-line and on dead tree, Chronicles, The Weekly Standard, The American Conservative and many other journals associated with one or the other side.
I agree with paleoconservative writer Lawrence Auster that Frum's article "was mostly justified." Some paleos, particularly paleolibertarians, have allowed their anti-statism to morph into anti-Americanism. I also think many people - though not everone - on the anti-war right have been as hapless as the anti-war left in terms of coming up with a realistic model for an alternative in dealing with terrorism. The United States cannot suddenly become Switzerland.
But I think Frum, who is one of my favorite writers, does at times cariacture his opponents' positions and lump too many people together under the "paleo" banner without distiction. In his otherwise excellent book Dead Right, the weakest chapter was on the paleos, who he then lumped together as "nationalists."
A real internal conservative debate that focuses on ideas is overdue on many questions: immigration, balancing individualism and community, post-Cold War foreign policy, the proper uses of the military, the centrality of constitutionalism and a whole host of other issues. Unfortunately, up to this point debates between paleos and neocons have been centered on professional ambitions and jealousies. Paleos are angry that they have had trouble getting published in neocon journals and jobs at neocon institutes (or that they've been fired from such journals and instititutes). The neocons are angry that the paleos have set up their own rival journals (especially on the web) and instititutes that are starting to effectively compete with theirs for influence and audience. Too much of this intrudes on these kinds of debates. Which unfortunately makes them a whole lot less worthwhile than they could be.
Posted by antle @ 05:00 PM EST [Link]
~ SURPRISES OF THE DAY: 1. The Iraqi Army violates the Geneva Convention.
2. Meanwhile, CNN reports that "Iran believes a missile that landed inside its border last week came from Iraq and not the United States."
Can we call Saddam's regime "evil" now or would that just be too "simple-minded" of me? (Via NRO's The Corner)
Posted by Barton @ 03:37 PM EST [Link]
~ GEORGE W. BUSH: A "ROOT CAUSE" OF ANTI-SEMITISM: The always-interesting, if not always right Steve Sailer is someone else (see below) who doesn't quite march in lockstep with the Beltway Right. That's OK. What isn't OK is this little piece of sophistry in which Sailer explains that one of the main reasons for rising anti-Semitism today is, guess what, the Beltway Right! Noting the weakness and outright intellectual fraudulence of some of the arguments on the pro-war side, Sailer goes on to write that:
But, this kind of irrationality and disdain for the truth on the part of some on the pro-war side just fosters irrationality on the other side. And that has ugly consequences. When so many of the reasons given by pro-war forces are bogus, it leads to searches for the secret, "real" reason -- like, oh, the Elders of Zion must be jerking the puppet strings. Anti-Semitism has been latent in every society known to history, and sometimes it doesn't take much to bring it out. I fear that the Administration has done much to worsen anti-Semitism around the world. [Editor's Note: scroll down to the entry entitled "I want to apologize to Rod Dreher."]
Note the causal sequence that Sailer constructs here: the bogusness of some pro-war arguments "fosters" irrationality on the antiwar side. One of the main root causes for some of the antiwar side's explicit expressions of antisemitism is our "irrationality and disdain for the truth." Anti-Semitism, while not excusable, is certainly understandable under the circumstances given that "Anti-Semitism has been latent in every society known to history," especially no doubt in Arab societies in particular. Quite frankly, this is chop-logic at its worst.
Granted that both the antiwar and pro-war sides have used at times arguments that are weak and irrational, then I could just as easily reverse Sailer's premises and conclusions. The "irrationality and disdain for the truth" that Sailer attacks is not just the singular property of the pro-war people. If bad argumentation leads to expressions of ugly sentiment, then surely I could say, using Sailer's logic, that the idiocy of some of the peaceniks is the "root cause" for any anti-Arab racism out there. Say I was driven so insane with rage at the drivel being spewed out by the antiwar side and other apologists for Islamofacism (and there is a lot of it), that I went out and stabbed two Muslim boys I just saw on the street, should I then explain to the police that "Ramsey Clark made me do it." And note Sailer's odd kind of sociological determinism, when he writes that "Anti-Semitism has been latent in every society known to history" as if we can't ultimately blame all these racists if they suffer from their own ignorance and bigotry. In the end, Sailer cannot seem to bring himself to do something very simple: just blame the anti-Semite for his or her anti-Semitism. After all, Sailer seems to be arguing, if anti-Semitism is a kind of gasoline which is everywhere in society and always will be, we must do our best as to not set a match to it, but if we do, then we can have only ourselves to blame. How is this not just another variation on the criminal's plea to the judge before sentencing that he "had a bad childhood," or that "Society is to blame for my murderous ways?" Sailer might be an intelligent man, but his dislike for the Neoconservative Right is blinding him to his own "irrationality and disdain for the truth."
Posted by Barton @ 03:25 PM EST [Link]
~ YOU CAN ALMOST SMELL THE BITTERNESS: Peter Brimelow up at VDARE has a halfway-interesting response to David Frum's recent National Review piece slagging the paleoconservative Right. Unfortunately, you have to get past this remarkably stupid opening paragraph to get to the interesting bits:
One of many blessings of being liberated from my book on the teacher union is that I get to surf the web more, particularly in response to repeated requests that VDARE.COM establish some sort of weblog. Recently, I actually had enough time to waste a few minutes looking at National Review Online’s The Corner. The girlyboys seem to spend a lot of time congratulating each other there – and, of course, making frequent fawning references to William F. Buckley. The curious overall impression is of a band of baboons combing through each other’s fur for fleas, while gibbering and casting nervous glances at the dozing alpha male.
Truly childish name-calling aside, is Brimelow so historically ignorant as to not know that one traditional tactic of anti-Semites through the ages is to animalize the figure of the Jew, in particular stressing their supposed resemblence both in thought and looks to simians, like say, baboons? I'm not accusing Brimelow of anti-Semitism here, but when you're specifically responding to an article by David Frum and you're the editor of a website which obsessively calls the National Review, the "Goldberg Review" as if Goldberg was playing Richelieu to Buckley's Louis XIII (a concept that boggles the mind to no end), you'd think you would have a bit more, um, tact.
Posted by Barton @ 02:35 PM EST [Link]
Saturday, March 22, 2003 DON'T DO IT, HITCH!: Kathy Shaidle points us to a Washington Times article about Christopher Hitchens' break with the Left and possible move to the Neoconservative Right. For the sake of Hitchens' future career as a public intellectual, I hope to god that he does not do such a foolish thing. One David Horowitz is more than enough. Or here's another possible role if Hitchens wants to sign up for the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy:
Here comes Christopher Hitchens again, blasting religion in general and the Catholic Church in particular in Slate. He's irritated by their antiwar stance and heaps tons of vitriol upon them, reminding me of why I think Christopher Hitchens has a terminal case of Intellectually Arrogant Brit Disease. I find that some English folk of fairly humble origin, or even of the Guardian-reading middle classes, tend to be terribly socially insecure and often try to convince themselves that their university degree and their career achievements make them just as good as anybody, even an aristo (who these people always hate). Then some smug, rich, good-looking know-it-all from Cambridge puts them in their place, but good, and they find out that the Old European side of Britain will only let a person rise so far on merit. This is when they go through their militant Socialist phase, which may last a lifetime but often doesn't; in Hitchens' case, he's still not finished with it. Their militant Socialist phase is often accompanied with a healthy helping of reverse snobbery and an unconvincing working-class accent, along with a conviction that they are somehow culturally and intellectually superior, which makes up for their sometimes conscious and sometimes sublimated knowledge that they are socially inferior.
I just read a collection of Hitchens' pieces from the early '90s. He's a lot of fun to read, all right, but he seems like a real prick as a human being, and his articles are always based on hectoring, ad hominem accusations, innuendo, comparing apples with oranges, making up historical "facts", manipulating statistics, and just generally being arrogant toward everyone. We don't want this guy on our team. I vote we throw him over the side after the war's over and his utility has expired. The Nation and his old pals on the British hard left won't take him back, and he'll be forced to cravenly adopt the politics of his hated social superiors, always happy to co-opt authentic working-class voices. Five years from now he'll be writing for the Telegraph and voting Tory--and not liberal Thatcherite Tory, either, more like Auberon Waugh Tory. Can you say "Paul Johnson", everyone?
Yep, I prefer the Hitchens we have right now, neither of the Left or Right, but as the title of his recent (and highly recommended) book says, an unclassifiable "Contrarian." The type of guy who'll vote for Bush, say how much he admires Margaret Thatcher, support the "War on Terrorism," and still say that Henry Kissinger is a bloody war-criminal based on little or no evidence, all the while still dressing like some sort of homeless flasher (just look at the cover of "Letters to a Young Contrarian" to see what I mean). As the above post and Norman Podhoretz' comments in the article reveal, it's not like everyone on the Right is prepared to forgive Hitchens for his previous thought-crimes. Anyway, since when was it ever in Hitchens' personal interest to go all predicable on us now?
Posted by Barton @ 07:57 PM EST [Link]
~ GIVE THEM ENOUGH ROPE...: If you have not seen Evan Coyne Maloney's short satirical documentaries on two recent peace rallies in New York and San Francisco, then I suggest you do so now. All Maloney does is ask the prostestors some straightforward questions and then he lets all the resulting illogic, incoherence, and spluttering rage speak for itself. Which cities' peaceniks are more nutty, I'll let you decide for yourself (though I'd pick New York). And then there's his interview with famous San Francisco madman Frank Chiu, which takes things to a whole new level of insanity. The most striking part for me is this question from Maloney's FAQ:
1. There are many articulate and intelligent people who oppose war against Iraq. Why didn't you show any of them?
There are undoubtedly principled people who can eloquently present an intelligent case against the war. I know a few such people myself. I just didn't happen to run into them at the protest.
Posted by Barton @ 07:04 PM EST [Link]
~ OUR PRAYERS ARE WITH YOU: "Six British crewmembers and one American were killed Saturday when two British Navy Sea King search and rescue helicopters collided in mid-air over the Persian Gulf, UK Central Command in Qatar said."
Your families won't care much but lads you are in the hall of heroes now. If there is a heaven, we shall greet and thank you for your sacrifice. Fior go bas.
Posted by steve @ 03:42 AM EST [Link]
~ HELLO, GLOBAL WARMING FIENDS?: "Since the late 1970s, the amount of solar radiation the sun emits, during times of quiet sunspot activity, has increased by nearly .05 percent per decade, according to a NASA funded study.
"'This trend is important because, if sustained over many decades, it could cause significant climate
