May 30, 2008
For your amusement and edification: John Stewart
Posted by Andrew at 08:54 AM | Comments (0)
May 23, 2008
It's the start of the Memorial Day weekend
Pick a war and go memorialize it. World War 1 was pretty bad. It's worth a ponder or two.
Posted by Andrew at 05:51 PM | Comments (0)
May 01, 2008
They pulled it off...
In protest of the Iraq war, the West Coast ports were shut down. More effective than any march, this sort of direct action flexes the muscles of the union in a manner I've never seen in my lifetime.
I am tempted to call it "odd" that this has been planned forever, and yet has gotten virtually no attention. Instead I'll call it "shennanigans by the capitalists". I know, we're not supposed to think in those terms. If anyone can tell me a good reason that a major war protest would go virtually uncovered by the media that _doesn't_ mean "class warfare", please let me know!
Posted by Andrew at 12:17 PM | Comments (0)
April 23, 2008
Standing Armies
Of the many complaints issued against George III, Jefferson included that "he has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies [...]" This was a huge issue to the founders. During the "Quasi war" with France, they created an "additional army", so named to be clear that the army would be dissolved the instant it was no longer needed. Otherwise, the army would be a threat to liberty-- a drain on the public treasury, an invitation to foreign adventure, a temptation to tyranny.
Through the latter half of the 20th century, we Americans faced the existential threats of first the Axis powers, and then the Soviet Union. For 3 generations, we grew used to having a first-rate, well trained military capable of being anywhere in the world at any time. We no longer face those threats; the army lingers.
Should we cut the military in half? Perhaps gut the Army and Air force, but keep the navy? Such a thing would be unthinkable for any president to propose... Somewhere Hamilton is laughing at us.
Posted by Andrew at 07:20 AM | Comments (0)
March 04, 2008
I've got nothing to add:
Few people seem to appreciate it, but it's quite literally true that al-Qaeda's strategy is to cripple the U.S. economy by dragging us into quagmires abroad. Osama bin Laden himself has said this, and it's the only strategy that makes sense. A smallish number of people with no base of resources can't possibly defeat us unless we shoot ourselves in the foot repeatedly as Bush and McCain propose.
Posted by Andrew at 07:23 AM | Comments (0)
December 25, 2007
Peace on Earth, Good Will towards men
Posted by Andrew at 09:18 PM | Comments (0)
December 17, 2007
Has the surge worked?
Baghdad is certainly less violent than it used to be. It's also less ethnically mixed than it used to be.
Are we winning? It certainly does look like the Sunni are losing...
Posted by Andrew at 12:39 PM | Comments (0)
September 30, 2007
Sorry 'bout that...
With due respect to Amanda, I think she's falling victim to a classic bit of blindness. The right is not simply trying to drum up war against Iran, they are not simply engaged in a propaganda effort to create horror in the American mind. It's a bit worse than that...
They really do believe that Iran presents an existential threat to America. They see an "Enemy" who had the effrontery to refuse to do what we told them decades ago, and thus prove that there are limits to even American power. Naturally this terrifies the Neo Cons. Naturally they will strike out blindly and always view the Iranian regime as the font of all evil. Except when said font of all evil is actually Iraq. Or China. Or Russia. Or...
Posted by Andrew at 12:56 PM | Comments (0)
May 23, 2007
BUSH ADMITS AL-QAEDA NOT IN IRAQ BEFORE US INVASION
Is there any other fair way to read this:
the president mentioned declassified intelligence that said bin Laden discussed sending a top lieutenant in 2005 to Iraq to set up a base from which to launch attacks in the United States.
So, we invade in 2003, and two years later bin Laden sends someone into Iraq to set up a base.
To quote the President:
"There's a reason bin Laden sent one of his most experienced paramilitary leaders to Iraq," Bush said. "He believes that if al Qaeda can drive us out, they can establish Iraq as a new terrorist sanctuary."
So, we invade in 2005, and two years later Al-Q sees an opportunity. The sort of opportunity which did not exist before 2005, and thus not in (say) February 2003...
I guess what I don't understand about all this is why the Iraqi people aren't so grateful to have been liberated...
Posted by Andrew at 06:25 PM | Comments (0)
May 07, 2007
Reminder: Al Qaeda wants us in Iraq
“This bill will deprive us of the opportunity to destroy the American forces which we have caught in a historic trap,” al-Zawahri said, according to a transcript released by the monitoring group SITE. The bill is evidence of American “failure and frustration,” he added.“We ask Allah that they (U.S. troops) only get out of it after losing 200,000 to 300,000 killed, in order that we give the spillers of blood in Washington and Europe an unforgettable lesson,” he said.
Al-Q is using Iraq to bolster its numbers, using the conflict there as both training ground and as a warning against American power. They'd love us to stay in Iraq. And the President wants to oblige them. Thank the gods I voted Democratic...
Posted by Andrew at 09:36 AM | Comments (0)
February 16, 2007
Good thing the passengers didn't have any liquid with them...
Mauritanian hijacker gets in hot water - Yahoo! News
Once the penalty for being on a hijacked plane became death, the age of Terror was over. Terrorists may still blow up planes, but they will not hijack them first. It has been 6 long years and our Government-- the governments of the whole world-- haven't learned that...
Posted by Andrew at 12:30 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 02, 2007
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...
George Orwell once wrote an essay about being an occupation officer in Burma.
I perceived in this moment that when the white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom that he destroys. He becomes a sort of hollow, posing dummy, the conventionalized figure of a sahib. For it is the condition of his rule that he shall spend his life in trying to impress the "natives," and so in every crisis he has got to do what the "natives" expect of him. He wears a mask, and his face grows to fit it.
Saddam Husein famously had rape rooms, rooms into which men would be forced to watch their loved ones raped. We have kept Abu Ghraib open. We ought not be shocked to read that rape is commonplace among the soldiers stationed there...
I pray that this is a hoax. But people are people. If the bad guys are capable of being inhuman, so are we. Their inhumanity was a monstrous evil. Our is causing us to lose this war. For the sake of the Terror War, we need to leave Iraq...
Posted by Andrew at 09:54 AM | Comments (0)
January 25, 2007
There is no coherent strategy
This gets really interesting around the 2:15 mark.
"I don't think we've ever had a coherent strategy.
In fact, I would even challenge the administration today to show us the plan that the president talked about the other night. There is no plan.
I happen to know Pentagon planners were on their way to the Central Com over the weekend. They haven't even team B'ed this plan.
And my dear friend Dick Lugar talks about coherence of strategy. There is no strategy. This is a ping-pong game with American lives."
If there is no plan, why are we sending soldiers? If there is a plan, why is the Pentagon not testing it? If the president knows, why isn't he doing anything to fix it? This is very bad...
(Via Angry Bear)
Posted by Andrew at 12:05 AM | Comments (0)
January 17, 2007
A guide to Republican-speak.
So, when a CEO makes hundreds of millions when his company loses market share, that's called "just compensation for services rendered"...
When management gets stock options and year-end bonuses, that's called "
profit sharing"...
When those who sell the goods and services in the stores ask for compensation to rise with productivity, that's called "class warfare"...
How much more is a CEO making than her lowest-paid employee? 475 that's neither normal nor inevitable
Remember kids: if you're poor, whatever you're doing is wrong...
Posted by Andrew at 12:53 PM | Comments (0)
January 12, 2007
At least he still has those praying for the rapture...
On the Iraq war:
First he lost the Liberals. That was ok, because he never had them anyway.
Then he lost the Moderates (for instance, I stopped supporting the war in mid- to late- 2005). That was ok; he only needs 50%+1 to make a majority.
Of course, losing the moderates cost him his 50%+1, but that was ok, he still had his base...
Now he’s lost the National Review Online. Why? Because ultimately, only the heir to the throne of the kingdom of idiots would fight a war on 12 fronts! For those who don’t know, Bush losing support from the NRO is like Hezbollah losing support from Iran...
Gods be good people, what will it take for the American President to give up his insane quest to reshape the Middle East? Perhaps it’s necessary, but Bush is not the man who can make it happen...
Posted by Andrew at 12:13 PM | Comments (1)
Only the heir to the throne of the kingdom of idiots would fight a war on 12 fronts!
Let's see. We're at war with a multi-national corporate entity known as Al Queda. We're at war with their former Afghanistan sponsors, the Taliban. We are taking on all comers in a multi-sided civil war in Iraq. We're backing (and sending in troops to fight in support of) an Ethiopian incursion into Somalia. Who else can we piss off? What other fights ought we be looking for?
Oh. Iran. Why didn't I think of that?
While people of good faith could argue that any one of these is understandable, perhaps a good thing, maybe necessary; taken altogether these wars and skirmishes are a dangerous overstretching of our forces. Even in the WWII analogy that the Republicans are so fond of making, we didn't try to do D-Day, Italy, Greenland, Japan, and Africa all at once, without allies. We did them one at a time. Machines went into the Pacific, Men went into Europe. Once Europe was taken care of, we sent men into the Pacific. For the sake of all that is holy we didn't try to invade Italy and France at the same time!
Do I sound shrill? Am I sounding upset? Under any sane constitutional structure, such grand strategic overreach would see the Head of State tossed out on his or her ear. It wouldn't be possible to escalate in the face of overwhelming public disapproval. Our system has no gentler means of redress. Impeach President Bush. Impeach Vice President Cheney. Do it before the madness kills us all...
Posted by Andrew at 12:15 AM | Comments (0)
January 11, 2007
Ubi solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant
The Romans knew how to say things. President Bush has finally figured out that there is a civil war going on in Iraq.
He’s not using those words, but he has picked sides. His address last night put the blame clearly on the side of the Sunnis. And Iran. Why he thinks the Shia mullahs in Iran would be helping the Sunni Arabs in Iraq against the Shia government of Iraq, I don’t know. He has, however, called for a 14% increase in the number of American troops...
Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki base of support rests on a foundation of sectarian violence. Specifically, it rests on the Mahdi Army, the one which is currently clearing Baghdad of Sunnis. President Bush now has the choice to either help that effort—and be responsible for Genocide. Or America can hinder the efforts at ethnic cleansing—and cause the Iraqi government to collapse...
The Iraqi PM fears that we’ll go with the second option: it would probably cost Maliki his life. Our choices have come down to A) genocide and B) anarchy; things in Iraq are going to be bad. President Bush thinks 14% more troops will solve this dilemma. He’s wrong. It just adds more American targets to the mess we call Iraq. Perhaps that’s just the price we pay for creating the situation in the first place...
UPDATE:
In all the terror over the proposed Genocide, I forgot:
We're sending another carrier to the Gulf, putting patriot missiles into Iraq, and the new Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is a Navy guy. This is all saber rattling at Iran. Also "We will work with the governments of Turkey and Iraq to help them resolve problems along their border." We're gonna try to keep Kurdistan from declaring formal independence. Or try to get Turkey to not hate it if they do.
A 4 front war seems... ill advised...
Posted by Andrew at 11:37 AM | Comments (0)
December 25, 2006
Obvious headlines:
"Water is wet"
"The sun goes down at night"
"The Seattle Times: U.S. policy in region may aid al-Qaida, experts say"
"When the rotation of the Earth around it's star causes the axial tilt of our planet to focus the Sun's rays, the temperature tends to rise"...
I suppose there are some people who still need to be told all of these things....
Posted by Andrew at 11:54 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
December 11, 2006
Pinochet Dead
Pinochet is dead and some on the Right have mixed feelings. This is because on one hand he saved the country from communism, but on the other... you know: Death Squads. So the Right is conflicted...
Here's the thing: Communism was represents an inadequate response to the scarcity problem. In order to glue together the house of communist cards, communist leaders would embrace terrible and destructive tactics. Like death squads...
I suppose it is a time saver, to skip past the land reforms, creation of the modern industrial apparatus, and go strait to the killing people. Perhaps Pinochet, like Harry Seldon, saw the real problem and decided to condense decades of dislocation into a decade of death. I don't believe it for a second...
Moreover, no one believes it. By having a US lead coup turn into Death Squads, America could no longer claim the moral high ground in the cold war. It became literally impossible say that we were different from the communists. By over turning a democratic election, we ceded the very concept of democracy to the communists. By embracing Pinochet we prolonged the cold war, paved way for Hugo Chavez, and gave bin Laden rhetorical ammunition. Nothing good came out of it. The name of America was sullied...
An evil man died yesterday. America was complicit in that evil. We ought to find some way of performing contrition. Being uncertain as to whether his evil was justified is not a good place to start...
Posted by Andrew at 10:48 AM | Comments (0)
November 20, 2006
Your Democratic congress in Action!
Making Light: A move to reinstate normal legal procedures
And we've not even taken office yet!
Posted by Andrew at 11:01 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 08, 2006
Too little, too late...
"Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is stepping down, sources tell CNN."
-Headline at CNN.Com
Posted by Andrew at 10:00 AM | Comments (0)
October 20, 2006
Why we need democrats in office
GOP.com | Republican National Committee :: Home
Click "watch the new ad".
The GOP (for some inexplicable reason) has decided to showcase their past half-decade of anti-terror policy failure. I guess they understand that only with Democrats in office can we be made safe...
Posted by Andrew at 08:24 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
September 27, 2006
Read Matthew Yglesias, Read him now
Well, on 7 November 2006 we will have the chance to begin taking back our nation. America can still be liberated at the ballot box. Put enough "D"s into office, and we no longer have to watch as the Senate and House vote on whether "torture is A)totally, B) mostly or C) somewhat awesome". Put enough "D"s in the house, and we can begin debate on whether or not to impeach a president who thinks torture is just groovy...
Posted by Andrew at 08:22 PM | Comments (0)
September 14, 2006
Shaking in their stockings
John Weidner asks why we on the Left think that those on the Right are terrified of terrorists. It’s quite simple, really: they think that we ought to give up some freedom, we don’t...
See, the president has asked us to allow warrantless wiretapping of American Citizens. We, um... don’t. They’d like all your records to be wide open to the government. We.... wouldn’t. They think that dealing with terrorism ought to be the number 1 priority of America. We think that—strictly on a fatalities/year bassis—that bad traffic ought to be a bit higher on the list...
All life entails some risk. We can, if we wish, do everything we can to eliminate all possible risk from our society. We could make cars go 20 miles an hour, put all passengers in ultra thick padded suites and remove the glass. We could outlaw double-bacon cheeseburgers. We could even say that bungi jumping carries too much risk and therefore ought to be outlawed. We could--- we could do many things. But we don’t...
Americans say that they’d rather run the minor risk of dying than do any of these things. Americans stand a minor risk of dying from terrorism. The ordinary means of law enforcement and our military/diplomatic abilities suffice to keep us by and large safe...
So, if Mr. Weidner wishes to convince me that he’s not terrified of the terrorists, he can repeat after me: “I [your name here] am an American, damn it. I would rather take an infinitesimal chance of dying on an airplane than wait around an airport in my socks.” Do that, John, and I’ll believe you’re man enough...
Posted by Andrew at 10:54 PM | Comments (0)
September 11, 2006
9/11 posting:
5 years and 1 day ago I, and the rest of my classmates, literally laughed at the idea that the United States would ever again be involved in a serious war. Or at least, never in our lifetimes. 5 years ago, my second thought was not nukes, oh god please not nukes. My first thought, of course, was a very hazy why would Bay Area traffic guys be talking about the Pentagon being on fire?...
That day, and in the days that followed, there built within me a rage. Osama done it. Osama must die. That rage burns within me still. In one outrageous moment, Osama slaughtered thousands of my fellow Americans. In years to come he would butcher hundreds of my fellow human beings. Their crime—our crime—was and is to live in a culture of Choice. Atheists, Buddhists, Christians, Muslims... Zoroastrians can all live here without taking up arms to defend our gods. Osama hates that...
That rage has turned again and repeatedly to disgust. Not merely at bin Laden-- that rage will never go away—but my disgust is reserved for our political leadership. 10 years ago Bill Clinton created a CIA group to find bin Laden. A couple months ago George Bush disbanded that group...
Terrorism is a tactic employed by the weak against strong democracies. As long as there are strong democracies and weak non-democratic entities, there will always be terrorism. Winning a war against this tactic is well neigh impossible. Finding bin Laden, trying him for his crimes, and executing him is entirely possible. George W. Bush, and the Republican party have shown no evidence that they want bin Laden’s head on a pike. And so I’m pissed...
Posted by Andrew at 06:06 PM | Comments (0)
July 23, 2006
Asymmetric
Eccentricity: Asymmetric Warfare
Finally! It dawned on me what asymmetric warfare is. It's what those dastardly Rebels and Colonials were doing -- hiding behind trees and killing Hessian and British troops instead of Coming Out and Forming Squares Like Real Men.The very term belongs to the whiny-assed. It is insane to complain that your enemy is doing things to you that you can't fight back against. And to use that term for someone who commits suicide is the epitome of whiny. Oh yes, kamikazes were masters of asymmetric warfare. I don't think our parents complained about their deaths -- only about the ones they caused.
3 points:
First: Asymmetric Warfare is not a whine, but rather a call to fight by different means. It is important to know whether your enemy is going to invade DC or destroy your banking infrastructure. Calling the warfare “asymmetric” tells us that the latter is more likely that the former...
Second: The American Revolutionaries for the most part formed squares and fought like “real men”. When they tried to hide behind rocks and trees, they got their assess handed to them. The minutemen are great in the popular imagination, but were terribly ineffective in an historical fight. Concentration of firepower and having depth with which to maintain a bayonet charge was important with those weapons. Getting off 1 shot and being killed by your enemies was not so much...
Third: it was our Grandparents who fought Kamikazes. Our parents drank them, not shot at them...
Posted by Andrew at 10:10 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
July 04, 2006
Why we Revolted
The conventional story, of course, is that America could not stand the burden of taxation. This is not untrue, but misses everything important. Ezra makes this same mistake...
The point we have to keep in mind is that by 1775 His Majesty’s North American Colonies were a part of a world-wide empire. This empire was run for and by the convenience of His Imperial Majesty. The only check on his power was that money was granted to him by the Parliament...
The roots of antagonism spread back to the 7 Years war. The American colonist wanted the War in order to protect themselves against the French-allied Indian Tribes—and thereby have an easier time of spreading into Indian-held Ohio. The Crown wanted the war to increase his own world-wide dominion...
The end of the war saw American blood spilled—but the objective for which they fought was denied to them. The Proclamation line of 1763 seemed to put a halt to westward expansion. And then the British crown imposed Taxes to pay for the whole thing...
This is the colonial complaint about taxation without representation. They had been asked to fight a war, then-- after being denied the spoils of said war-- pay for it. They were asked to pay for it because no one who had a voice in Parliament wanted to...
Puerto Ricans and Washingtonians are asked to pay the same federal taxes everyone else in the country is—and whatever local taxes they themselves decide on (another right denied the colonial Americans). The day congress pass a series of taxes designed to make them pay for the Iraq war they will both have some grounds for secession...
Posted by Andrew at 01:12 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
June 20, 2006
Gay=insane
On the face of it, this is pretty bad.
A Pentagon document classifies homosexuality as a mental disorder, decades after mental health experts abandoned that position.
I wonder:
If being gay is a dishonorable discharge, but being insane is a medical discharge (not dishonorable) then perhaps classifying being gay as being insane is actually meant to help the gays. They won't have a dishonorable discharge on their records, nor would they have to explain to each employer that they were discharged for being gay. This move by the pentagon may seem insane, but might actually be compassionate...
Of course, real compassion would be to have the laws changed to reflect the reality that gay people are just as fully human as straight people. But that’s not going to happen with this congress and administration...
Posted by Andrew at 12:30 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
June 06, 2006
John Weidner Hates America
In reading this charming post, John Weidner shows himself to be an enemy of the American Revolution. He has forgotten that freedom does not mean physical security, but rather the ability to be secure from random abuses of governmental power. But enough of my prose for a moment, let’s look at his blatherings:
Under ideal circumstances there should probably have been no public arrests at all. The junior jihadis should have been quietly whisked off to Gitmo, so as not to alert others that they are being watched.
Does John Weidner really want to give to every politician and every future politician and every conceivable future politician the right to make secret arrests of citizens? Whatever he thinks of George Bush, does he truly believe that Bush’s successor or Bush’s successor’s successor wouldn’t use this power for purely personal ends? Can Mr. Weidner not think of any single politician in all of America who wouldn’t have him—John Weidner-- locked up for his political beliefs?
We the public know who the Government is arresting not to show the face of the evil we stand against, but rather so that we the people know that the Government is, in fact, fighting against evil and not us. What does Mr. Weidner think Liberty means if it doesn’t have at its core the right to know and decide how the government is using its vast power? And how can we citizens know and make those decisions if the government isn’t required to tell us what it’s up to? Indeed, the whole argument in favor of the Second Amendment (by people on the Right) is to keep the government too scared of us citizens to cause soviet-style disappearances.
I don’t trust anyone with the power to make citizens "disappear". The fact that Mr. Weidner does says frightening things about his belief in liberty...
Posted by Andrew at 12:38 AM | Comments (1)
June 04, 2006
Canadians avert attack.
My co-workers have been asking why Canada was attacked. To them it’s incomprehensible; Canada, the sentiment runs is not engaged in Iraq, and therefore ought to be safe. If you buy into the Bushian logic that Iraq is the War on Terror, this would make some sense. But to believe that would be to believe that This war has been going on since roughly March 2003, or perhaps September 2001. Al Qaeda has been at war for a lot longer...
As much as I hate to agree with certain right-wing elements, it seems to bear repeating: Al Qaeda hates us because we are free. They don’t hate democracy, or the statue of Liberty, or our constitution. They hate our freedom. Specifically, they hate the freedom of the 51% of us who are female. They hate the freedom of the 20% of us who are atheists. They hate the freedom of the 10% of us who are gay. They hate the freedom of those of us who are Jewish. They hate my freedom to be an outright and outspoken pagan. Separation of Church and state? They’re against it...
They hate the freedom of human beings to be human beings. To live, love, laugh, cry and be merry, however they are called to experience this life. They don’t believe that there is more than one correct way to live*. They believe in a one-size fits all shapeless garment cut to the specifications mentioned in a specific book most of Humanity doesn’t believe in. The Canadians have a system which encourages its citizens to find their happiness. The enemy hates that. And so Canada got attacked...
*’An it harm none’
Posted by Andrew at 11:06 PM | Comments (0)
May 31, 2006
Civilization
no, not the game...
Posted by Andrew at 02:33 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 27, 2006
Democratic peace in action.
(or: look dad, that was money well spent!)
Professor Rummel has a few notes from the Saddam interrogation. Take a gander at 'em before continuing reading my post.
Ready?
Being able to interrogate Saddam brings some interesting light to Jervis’ theories. In his War and Misperception, Jervis makes the case that countries might go to war even if they had all relevant information. He says that this is because sometimes (perhaps often) the domestic cost of not going to war is higher than the domestic cost of losing a war. Saddam certainly seems to have thought this to be the case...
This also proves the value of being a democracy when deciding about going to war:
A) Being that deluded about your capabilities is nearly impossible with a free press and a dedicated opposition party.
B) Leaders in a democracy almost always lose power if they lose a war. They therefore chose their wars _carefully_, so as to minimize the chance to lose office...
Democracies therefore have better information and have leaders with interests in better alignment with their countries than do non-democracies. All of this helps explain why democracies win 80% of their wars...
Posted by Andrew at 07:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 23, 2006
Giaus Marius finally wins!
CTV.ca | Basque separatists announce permanent ceasefire
These guys have only been at it for about 3000 years. Good to know they know when they’re licked. Oh, and if you didn’t get the reference, don’t worry, it’s obscure...
Posted by Andrew at 12:06 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 04, 2006
The thought that keeps me up at night
Is That Legal?: "The Idea of Doing Nothing"
How are Americans in 2006 different from Germans in 1936? It isn’t our biology, which means that Americans are perfectly capable of exterminating a whole culture or people. The only thing which prevents us from doing so is our institutions. Paper, and the respect we give to that paper, seem a slim reed on which to place our prayers. It’s the only thing humanity has ever had...
And yet that respect for paper as failed, in the past:
He had not heard of it before, and, when I told him of the West Coast Army Commander's statement that "a Jap is a Jap," he hit the table with his fist and said, "Right you are. A Jap is a Jap, a Jew is a Jew." "A German is a German," I said. "Of course," said the German proudly. "It's a matter of blood."He asked me whether I had known anybody connected with the West Coast deportation. When I said "no," he asked me what I had done about it. When I said "Nothing," he said, triumphantly, "There. You learned about all these things openly, through your government and your press. We did not learn through ours. As in your case, nothing was required of us--in our case, not even knowledge. You knew about things you thought were wrong -- you did think it was wrong, didn't you, Herr Professor?" "Yes." "So. You did nothing. So it is everywhere." When I protested that the Japanese-descended Americans had not been treated like the Jews, he said, "And if they had been -- what then? Do you not se that the idea of doing something or doing nothing is in either case the same?"
America has, in the past, done horrible things to our own citizens. We must be ever vigilant against doing so in the future...
Posted by Andrew at 01:01 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 23, 2006
Priorities and politics
The questions of politics, as in economics, concern us with dealing with limitless wants and limited resources. Classically, we want infinite amounts of both Guns and butter. And also classically, our main political parties spend their time arguing over which is more important. The only way to get both (another aircraft carrier and more Pell grants) is to expand the economy...
On a slightly different note, it’s fair to say that most Americans would like, in the abstract, to topple each and every evil regime in the world. That’s what we, as Americans, want. We don’t seem to be willing to give up much butter to get it, though...
Right now, we’re engaged in a debate over the ugly, terrifying Iranian regime. Ought we go into Iran and grant freedom to the Iranians by smashing their theocratic rulers? Adding urgency to this discussion is the terrifying fact that Iran both wants and is capable of building nuclear weapons...
Were this a video game, we could simply go into “editor” mode, give ourselves another million troops, and tromp on in. In real life, however, we are limited to the resources we have on hand. The biggest limitation, in fact, is that we simply don’t have enough soldiers to take and hold Iran...
It isn’t that we can’t take the country. Iran would fall as quickly as Iraq did. What would be difficult is the occupation. See, there are “force multipliers” that can be employed in warfare. Helicopters, tanks, bullet-proof vests, night vision goggles; all these things make a soldier more effective than he would be without them. But occupation is a different beast. It requires soldiers on the ground, mixing with the people, figuring out their problems, and solving them. There are some force multipliers available to police, but not enough. And nothing we have for occupation duty is as effective as the arsenal we have for the invasion...
To solve that problem, we need sheer numbers. Numbers we don’t have. Our army is stretched to the breaking point. Indeed, we have so few soldiers that we are willing to take the worst scorers, the ones most unfit. This is having negative consequences...
Right now, we have major commitments on the Korean peninsula, in the former Yugoslavia, in Afghanistan and Iraq. Perhaps it is ironic that our current commitments so closely resemble the fault-lines of the cold war, and yet each commitment represents one we have freely chosen. To abandon any of them would lead to bloodbath. Until we can solve the manpower problem, we simply cannot afford to invade Iran...
Posted by Andrew at 12:00 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
January 19, 2006
We must be winning
Osama is offering a truce...
The thing is, this is a war of competing ideologies. We believe in the individual’s own right to choose. They believe that right to be sharply curtailed by the will of God. Now, if they wish to unilaterally disarm, by all means. I would be more than happy if this were settled the same way we settled the Cold War...
Even if we did that, however, bin Laden and his lieutenants are still responsible for mass murder. We simply can’t give the hunt for them until they have been caught, convicted and executed...
Posted by Andrew at 10:41 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
December 21, 2005
Reconstruction photos
I have a friend in one of the war zones. I pray for my friend every damned day. I won't tell you name, rank, or even what country they are in. Indeed, I am trying to disguise even gender. I am told that they are being shot at every damned day...
Some days, though, some days my friend gets to shoot--- photos! And some of them have been sent to me. I am passing them on to you. Enjoy...
Part of me feels some intense guilt, I must admit. My friend is off in a warzone; a zone I am in favor of being a warzone. And yet—I am here. Blogging...
Posted by Andrew at 10:10 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
December 14, 2005
Nation Building
So, in September 2001 America begins fighting in Afghanistan. Taking the war there was a good and proper move. This fight would necessarily see the destruction of the then-current Afghan regime, and the commitment of a sizable number of US forces to occupy the country afterwards...
We pretty much immediately began discussing an invasion of Iraq, the discussing culminating in the invasion of that country in March of 2003. Our invasion was predicated on the notion that we would destroy the then-current Iraqi regime. Our forces succeeded brilliantly...
In June/July 2004, Rumsfeld just started thinking about what it would take to do some nation building. John Weidner would like to give Rummy credit for only being 3 and a half years late. Me? I think such gross incompetence is cause for dismissal...
Posted by Andrew at 12:48 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
October 08, 2005
Military combat Robots used in Nevada
Robots race across Mojave for $2M prize
The unmanned vehicles must use their computer brains and sensing devices to follow a programmed route and avoid hitting obstacles that may doom their chances.
In the most liberal sense of the word “used”...
This is a really neat idea, and is exactly the sort of thing the military ought to go about doing things. Aparently the biggest problem is not the hardware (though the off-the-shelf sensor technology being employed isn’t all that great), but rather the software-- This is much less a test of military Robots as it is of Military AI...
What I hope they’re doing, as a condition of entry, is making each contestant open source their algorithms as a precondition of entry. That way each year’s new teams get to build upon the entire body of previous work, rather than simply upon their own work from the year before...
Posted by Andrew at 05:01 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
September 27, 2005
This means war!
Bestseller in Mideast: Fulla "Barbie" With a Prayer Mat
Say what you will about Barbie, she’s an all-American babe. She and her friends come in every shade and hue that human skin comes in, she has every job a human being can possibly think of-- she’s an astronaut house mom for goodness sake! She is not defined by her job or her man (Ken, rather is defined by her), but rather by the aspirations of the little girl playing with her. Those hopes and dreams are-- or can be-- as endless as the American dream itself...
And now we have this... thing. This “Barbie for parents who want their child to have no future”. About the only thing of the American doll they kept were her outlandish proportions. Pfhaw. The fact that crushing the dreams of little girls is seen by Fundamentalists Muslims as a good thing is terrifying. Crush Fulla, win the war...
Posted by Andrew at 11:19 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
September 11, 2005
Remember the World Trade Center
It has been 1461 days since over thirty-five hundred Americans lost their lives one fine Tuesday morning. In those fourteen hundred sixty one days, the man who masterminded that attack has since gone on to mastermind at least a pair of other attacks-- and he still walks free...
I still mourn the World Trade Center. Not a week goes by when I don’t think about it. And every time I do, I get just a little bit upset that Osama bin Laden is a free man...
Posted by Andrew at 04:47 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 22, 2005
Copy, paste, done
slacktivist: You can copy off mine
Copy, paste, done
BAGHDAD (AP) — With a midnight deadline only hours away, Iraq's political leaders met Monday in search of a compromise over a new constitution. Some lawmakers said differences remained over the role of Islam and women's rights, but others reported progress. ...The initial Aug. 15 deadline was pushed back a week after no agreement was reached. Iraqi officials have insisted they would meet this second deadline and present a final document to the National Assembly ... OK, first of all, Don't Panic. You've still got a few hours left. I've written term papers in less time. You folks can still get your constitution written by midnight. And here's the good news: You're allowed to cheat. You don't even have to attribute or footnote or anything. Trust me, I'm an American and this is what we did. We cribbed off of the Iroquis nations for our first draft, the Articles of Confederation. Admittedly, that draft wasn't a keeper, but it got us through an initial rough patch and gave us time to regroup and write the Constitution we're still using to this day -- 216 years later. This is a pretty good Constitution. Feel free to use it. The whole thing is online, so you can just copy and paste. Control-A, Control-C, Control-V and you're done.
Posted by Andrew at 12:57 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 13, 2005
Iraqi Constitution
The problem in Iraq-- the biggest problem, at least-- is religion. Despite the fact that they all have the same holy book, the same 5 pillars, etc. There are about 2.5 main strains of Islam in Iraq right now, and each of them holds that the others are not quite right...
The challenge for the Iraqi constitutional convention is to not let religion even onto the table. Anything that is on the table is a bone to be fought over. By taking religion out of the discussion, by making the nation officially agnostic apathetic to the existence of god, or any specific message therein, they remove one gigantic reason for discord...
In fact, official apathy about the existence of god is so important that we ought to have included it into our own constitution...
Update:
Apparently, we did include this in our own constitution. Click here for details. I grant that it’s a bit obscure-- a lot of right wingers seemed to have missed this point...
Posted by Andrew at 06:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 10, 2005
Things are not going well in Iraq
Unless these people were elected by a plurality of the population of Baghdad, and the guns and whatnot are just symbols of the electoral will, this is not a good thing
Armed men entered Baghdad's municipal building during a blinding dust storm on Monday, deposed the city's mayor and installed a member of Iraq's most powerful Shiite militia.
The next question is: why was this not front page headline on any of the major news sites as of this writing?
(Via Brad DeLong)
Posted by Andrew at 02:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 07, 2005
Mom wants to know why her Son is dead
Soldier's mother protests near Bush ranch - The Boston Globe
Cindy Sheehan told reporters: ''I want to ask the president, 'Why did you kill my son? What did my son die for?' "Sheehan, 48, did not get to see Bush, but did talk for about 45 minutes with national security adviser Steve Hadley and deputy White House chief of staff Joe Hagin, who went out to hear her concerns.
Appreciative of their attention, yet undaunted, Sheehan said she planned to continue her roadside vigil, except for a few breaks, until she gets to talk to Bush.
If the answer to that question isn’t obvious, Bush ought to be impeached. As it happens, there is a reason, it is even a good one. But if the president is doing such a poor job of explaining it, well, fuck...
Posted by Andrew at 02:57 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 01, 2005
Oh dear.
What this will mean for the War effort, too soon to tell. But if someone over there gets greedy, this could be bloody...
Posted by Andrew at 04:42 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 27, 2005
Worth the cost?
Let's us pretend that Iraq adopts a constitution not unlike that of Iran: candidates eligibility determined by election officials, Women regulated to second class status, religion being constitutionally fundamental law, etc. If this comes to pass, would the war have been worth it?
It is true that Saddam is a monster, and allowing his evil to dominate a State was an abomination. Yet if our worst fears of an Iranian-based Iraqi constitution come to pass, might we merely be setting the stage for another Saddam-like figure to arise? If that does come to pass, I have to wonder why our men and women are dying over there...
Posted by Andrew at 12:09 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
April 11, 2005
Politics and economics share the
Politics and economics share the common conception that we live in a universe in which unlimited wants must be satisfied with limited goods. The more I reflect on this, the more I begin to doubt that there can ever be true, lasting peace in the mid-east, as long as there is a State of Israel...
I do not say that I hope this is the case. I wish to make that clear. But I more and more begin to believe that the above is a simple statement of hard, bitter, truth. In a nutshell, there are two groups of people, each with a logical and consistent (and just about equally valid) claim to the same piece of land. Unless someone happens to have a spare Jerusalem tucked into their pocket, this seems to be an eternal source of conflict...
There is one other source of solution, though it is equally terrible. As I see it, as long as there are two sides (or more) with competing claims to legitimate ownership of the same territory, there will be conflict. If one of those sides were to disappear. No good. There must be another way...
Posted by Andrew at 09:33 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
April 08, 2005
Gay in the Army?
Doesn't matter if they know Arabic, doesn't matter if they're the real-life manifestation of Rambo, doesn't matter if they shoot lasers from their eyes and make things explode through mental effort, if they prefer dudes to chicks the Army doesn't want them.
As far as I am concerned, if a man can do all of the above, and is flamingly gay, and wants to join the military, it is the duty of the military to keep that man as happy as possible. Take one for the team. Protect our assets, that sort of thing. You get my drift...
Mr. Kleins post is more serious...
Posted by Andrew at 04:02 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 28, 2005
Gitmo
The problem with being at war with an adjective, rather than a people, is that it is possible to never claim that the war is over. Indeed, Terrorism has been around forever, and probably will be around forever. In the strictest sense, a War on Terror cannot be won. What we are really trying to do is cause a certain subset of Fundamentalist Islamic thought to no longer exist. The fact that this subset uses Terror as its chief weapon does not define it, or cause it to be more of a problem than if they were trying to invade Texas, it merely defines our response to it...
One of those responses has been to take thousands of Prisoners and hold them indefinitely. This is of questionable legality at best-- even the bush administration admits that it is only the unique nature of our hold on Guanatamo Bay which makes the whole thing doable. Even putting aside that question, however, leaves a more basic one: how long are we going to hold the people weve incarcerated there?
We have claimed for ourselves the right to indefinitely hold anyone, as long as we hold them there. This doesnt strike me as in keeping with the best practices of what it means to be an American. Holding people forever is wrong, and sends the wrong messages about American respect for rule of law. Being caught on a battlefield is not a crime-- and the Afghan campaign is long over. If we suspect that they are terrorists, we need to try them fairly. If they are guilty, they will be convicted. If they are innocent, we must let them go...
The least thing in the world we can afford is for large amounts of our prisoners to start dieing of old age. The consequences of that would be catastrophic...
Posted by Andrew at 01:58 PM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
March 08, 2005
Awha Fuck
China disclosed the first details of a new law on secession yesterday that authorizes an attack on Taiwan if it formally declares independence, as the Bush administration said the measure will raise tensions and increase the risk of war.
Posted by Andrew at 11:16 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
March 03, 2005
The Holocaust
Today in my European History (1900-1945) class, we did our lecture on the Holocaust. Strange as it sounds (and as it seems to me) I had never seen the pictures from that ugly bit of history. I found myself having to force myself to watch; to sear into my brain the lesson: never again. Under other circumstances, I might have snickered that a professor who laughs at the concept of "god" would use the term "evil". But what else can you call the mind of modern man, the pinnacle of then-current human science turned to the murder of humanity?
The thought that keeps me up at night, the one that haunts me in Three AM darkness is the realization that the NAZIs were human. The men and women who were complicit-- who knew and did nothing-- were otherwise good and decent people. The Hitler Youth, aside from being fervent supporters of the Final Solution, were decent, moral children: paragons of child-like virtue! Never again! Yes. But how?
Because if anyone, anywhere, under the right conditions can become a Nazi-- can turn on the neighbors of long time friends-- what keeps the friends of my neighbors from rounding me up? Gods! (and this is the part I find most creepy) what keeps me out of the mob which rounds up my friends neighbors?
The only answer which I can come up with is to simply never let things get to that point. Constitutional protections for human rights and civic freedoms are the A#1 thing we can do. We must also as individuals make the commitment to human rights and civic freedoms. This means listening toassholes speak. It means actively seeking out ways to let them have their say. And it also means demolishing them.
One last thing-- if we erase from our society the pernicious idea that humanity can be divided into separate "races", well never again see evil of the NAZI kind.
Posted by Andrew at 09:17 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
January 22, 2005
Promising
ABC News: Group Ready to Accept Mideast Cease-Fire
The armed groups want Israel to stop arrest raids and targeted killings of wanted Palestinians in exchange for a truce. In the past, Israel refused to promise the militants amnesty, despite requests by Egyptian mediators who have said they could not seal a truce deal without such Israeli guarantees.
Of course, the way these things tend to go, by the time you read this, the deal will be off...
I used to be an optimist...
Posted by Andrew at 01:00 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
November 17, 2004
When nuclear nations withdraw troops...
India pulls 1,000 troops from Kashmir - (United Press International)
Its almost always a good thing. When that nation has been going head to head over the region it is now withdrawing troops from with another nuclear nation, it is ever better. I wish India all the luck in the world...
though, if India and Pakistan make each other glow, it might reduce the worlds future need for fossil fuels. So, you know, down side...
Posted by Andrew at 08:13 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 10, 2004
Ding dong Arafats gone!
BBC NEWS | Middle East | Veteran leader Yasser Arafat dies
I thought wed have to drop a house on the bastard first. I wonder who will get his ruby slippers?
Posted by Andrew at 08:59 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
November 06, 2004
And so it begins.
U.S. Warplanes Target Fallujah (washingtonpost.com)
Remember: this is the battle that weve been ready to fight for weeks. But Bush wanted to wait until after the election. Scumbag plays domestic political games with soldiers lives. And gets rewarded for it...
Good luck, guys. Make the islamo-fascists pay...
Posted by Andrew at 01:58 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
October 29, 2004
Whoops!
Reporter saw insurgents loot Qaqaa arms depot
Posted by Andrew at 09:53 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
October 27, 2004
Headlines that make me smile...
Posted by Andrew at 07:53 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
October 25, 2004
Sing it, Brother...
will work for freedom: Some 300 Tons
And welcome to my Blogroll...
Posted by Andrew at 02:13 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
October 22, 2004
Why Id vote for an untrained monkey before George W. Bush:
MSNBC - Avoiding attacking suspected terrorist mastermind
For those of you playing along at home, heres a little time-line.
1) Zarqawi shows up in Northern Iraq with a group of Islamic Terrorists (Ansar al-Islam). Northern Iraq, BTW, was not in Saddams grasp. The US military was enforcing a no-fly-zone to keep the Kurdish people from being massacred again.
2) President Bushs Cabinet makes the case that Saddam is bad, in part because he allows Zarqawi to base in Iraq.
3) America goes to war with Iraq.
4) America wins war in Iraq
5) America begins Occupation of Iraq
6) Zarqawi starts killing Americans in Iraq
7) Zarqawi formally teams up with al-Qaida.
Oops. Did I forget part 1.5 where Bush rejects plans to kill Zarquawi? Why would Bush do such a thing?
the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam.
Bush cant be trusted to wage a war against terror...
Posted by Andrew at 12:19 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
October 21, 2004
First the Knee, then the neck...
Top News Article | Reuters.com
Of course, like all evil geniuses, Castro is going to soon replace is human body with an evil-robot body.
Posted by Andrew at 12:17 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
October 20, 2004
Doing the Math
Set us set 1F as equal to the force projection of 1 WWI American infantryman (Doughboys, as they were known). I choose this as it is basically the last time the infantryman was (almost) the whole at the sharp end of the stick. Tanks were just coming on-line at the end of the war. Airplanes were used mainly as a source of reconnaissance, not war-fighting, even communication was done either face to face, or over easily-broken wire (radio sets hadnt become small yet). Chemical warfare was in its infancy, and artillery was probably in its golden-age. I would be remiss if I didnt mention machine guns (which were too heavy to be carried by each soldier) and barbed wire...
But all in all, the doughboys were as basic as a soldier can get in an industrialized society. As far as I understand things, Saddam was reduced to something very much like them when we invaded the second time (sans the chemical weapons). What we had was-- amazing...
Our troops are the best equipped, trained, and quite possibly lead troops in the world. We have bombs capable of hitting any target anywhere, within a few feet. Hell, we can choose any playload on those bombs, from pure kinetic energy to a city-busting nuclear weapon. We have airplanes capable of flying from Florida to Bosnia, dropping a bomb, and having its pilot in Disneyland latter that day. We have communications devices which allow anyone to talk to anyone anywhere at any time. We have guns that can shoot around corners. It would probably take 1 aircraft carrier and 1 division of army troops to demolish the armies of _all_ the combatant nations of WWI...
This is because of something called a force multiplier. All the advantages that a modern solider has over his Great-granddad multiply the amount of power a single soldier has. So, if 1F is a doughboy, a modern soldier is (say) 000F. Probably more...
This is the heart of the transformed military Rumsfeld was so keen to create pre-9/11. Its not a bad idea: re-envision the military to factor in as many modern force multipliers as possible. It is many of these concepts that lead to our stunning victories in Iraq and Afghanistan...
The problem is that once the war ended and the occupation began, our force multipliers decrease dramatically. Efficiently slaughtering insurgents is a step _backwards_ for our us. So, what does multiply force in an occupation?
Communications, for one. Money helps (it usually does...) speaking the language of the people were occupying, probably other factors Im not thinking of. Our soldiers today are probably 10F at occupation duty...
The problem is that we went in quite literally Without an Occupation plan, which is the source of many of our problems today. So we went in with a combat force which had few numbers but lots of combat capability. Unfortunately as soon as the shooting stopped (or at least slowed down a lot), we were left without enough boots on the ground. And our policies made it unlikely that we were going to get enough allies to commit enough troops to do the job properly...
Posted by Andrew at 09:25 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
October 15, 2004
Ungood
"They are holding us against our will," McClenny said. "We are now prisoners."McClenny told her mother her unit tried to deliver fuel to another base in Iraq Wednesday, but was sent back because the fuel had been contaminated with water. The platoon returned to its base, where it was told to take the fuel to another base, McClenny told her mother.
The platoon is normally escorted by armed Humvees and helicopters, but did not have that support Wednesday, McClenny told her mother.
The convoy trucks the platoon was driving had experienced problems in the past and were not being properly maintained, Hill said her daughter told her.
- Platoon defies orders in Iraq - The Clarion-Ledger
"Everyone has heard stories from officers at the front of how soldiers would readily risk their lives if it were necessary, but who would rebel when they saw themselves neglected. For example, a company was capable of going without food for many days when they saw the supplies could not get through because of a force majeur, but mutinied when one meal was skipped through neglect and bureaucracy etc."
-Antonio Gramsci
Posted by Andrew at 04:03 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
October 10, 2004
Doing what works
slacktivist: The man who planted trees
But what strikes me about Bob's work -- like the work of so many people throughout the long decades of the Cold War -- is the enduring patience and determination. Bob learned the languages. He helped to strengthen the civil society. He was planting trees, trees with roots deep and strong enough to break through concrete.Contrast that approach with the blundering impatience of the Bay of Pigs. Contrast the difference in outcomes. One worked. The other didn't. And yet the latter has become the model we're now told to embrace lest we be accused of being "objectively pro-Saddam" enemies of freedom.
Posted by Andrew at 07:42 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
What kind of messages will these doubts send to our politicians at home?
For Marines, a Frustrating Fight (washingtonpost.com)
The grunts on the ground dont think things are going well...
(bug-me-not required)
Posted by Andrew at 10:22 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
October 07, 2004
This is how I have the crazy idea that perhaps things in Iraq are going poorly...
A Thin Blue Line - Why Iraqi cops are struggling. By Bing West and Owen West
Posted by Andrew at 11:24 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
October 01, 2004
Only way out is through
There is an old fable of the man riding a tiger. I forget what message my parents were trying to teach me with it, but that image has always stuck with me. Here is a man on the back of a man-eating nasty creature which will destroy him the instant he wavers. Was it a mistake to get on board? Sure! But once there, letting go would be a bigger mistake. Iraq is kinda like that man on a tiger...
Perhaps a better analogy is to medieval battlefield medicine. Back in the day, they used Arrows instead of guns. Arrow heads were barbed for maximum carnage. If you tried to pull the arrowhead out of the hole it made going in, the barb would catch on tissue and bone, causing more damage. Instead, what would happen is a doctor would have to push the arrow through the body, completing the arrows journey, and only then pulling the barbed head outthe other side...
Which is the main problem with This article, and indeed with most analysis of Mr. Kerrys Iraq dilemma. It assumes what we can go back in time and Never have gone into Iraq in the first place-- That if we acknowledge that we shouldnt have been there in the first place, that we can easily pack up and leave in the second place. Mr. Kerry is smarter than this, he seems to understand that weve taken on this obligation of our own free will (no matter how drunk we were at the time), and that we are thus honor bound to see it through to the end. Pulling out now is the nice, simple answer. It would also be the disastrous one...
Posted by Andrew at 09:13 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
September 17, 2004
This is starting to make sense...
Fafblog! the whole worlds only source for Fafblog.
As Gregg Easterbrook has noted, the invasion of Iraq "is having the unintended consequence of drawing terrorists and killers to that country, where our army can fight them on our terms." Indeed, the world's finite supply of terrorists is now concentrated in one country where it can be disposed of with relative ease.
Posted by Andrew at 11:21 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 29, 2004
Its official.
Just got the word yesterday. On Wednesday 15 September 2004, Retired General Tommy Franks will be signing copies of his autobiography American Soldier at the Barnes and Noble at Arden Faire Sacramento. If anyone is interested in meeting up with me there, drop a comment. If enough people plan on being there, perhaps we could turn it into an excuse for a blogger bash...
By the Way: as far as I know, Gen. Franks will be doing a signing-only event. You can either bring your own copy or have him sign one you buy there. The book is worth reading, though he leaves some gaps I wouldnt have minded him filling...
Posted by Andrew at 12:40 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 22, 2004
Sign these guys up for combat pay!
Army Develops MRPs (Meals Ready to Pee On)
Wait...
Posted by Andrew at 01:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
June 29, 2004
Sovereignty
So, Iraq is roughly as Sovereign as California. Perhaps they'd like to be officialy enrolled as "texas east"?
Posted by Andrew at 11:00 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
June 28, 2004
WTF?
:: Xinhuanet - English: Sovereignty formally transferred to Iraqi interim gov't ::
The coalition authorities formally transferred power to the Iraqi interim government on Monday, two days ahead of the scheduled June 30 in a bid to thwart escalating guerrilla attacks.
I would have been just as happy to occupy them for the next 10 years. What is our official legal standing in Iraq now?
Posted by Andrew at 01:11 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack