30 September 2008

(Nighttime) View From The Top, 30 September 2008

I apologize for the delay today. Just never got the head-of-steam necessary to peruse the internet this morning, and then work came around.

I have loads of links, however, to pass along.

-- The building of a competent and (only slightly) dependent Afghan National Army continues. This time, with Italian planes! I guess it's better than nothing, but I wish that this was an indication of Italian morale rather than a shrewd business maneuver. Allez-ons, Europe!

-- A column from the UK's Guardian explains the place Malalai Kakar, one of the prominent women Afghan policemen, holds within the long tradition of fighting Afghan women. The piece is pretty fluffy and light on details, but the story of Kakar herself is one every American and, more importantly, every Afghan should hear. Furthermore, her death at the hands of the Taliban highlights the gang-like quality of her murderers. She was targeted because of her effectiveness and because of her figurehead-like quality as a female hero. Again, let me reiterate: the Taliban aren't uber-Muslims, they aren't holy warriors infuriated by the "occupation" of Jerusalem. They're a gang, eager for power and dismissive of the interest of "the people."

-- Good article from the CS Monitor's Gordon Lubold. My gut says he's right, that there is a significant chunk of the military leadership that is frustrated by bureacratic friction and lame-duck lethargy of GWB in re: Afghanistan. I have no firm evidence this is correct, mind you, but the stuff I see on forums, blog-comments, and anecdotally, suggests that there's enough of an underswell of irritation that I wouldn't be surprised if there was a plan to blitz the new POTUS with the plans and hand him the pen to sign the orders.
(Plus in the article the man, the myth, the boy-wonder John Nagl gets a citation. Someone needs to start a tally of how many mentions that dude gets in a year. My guess? Over 100.)

-- AP report of 20,000 Pakistanis fleeing the fight in FATA for Afghanistan. While I'm sure that much of the flight is based on the increase in Pakistan military action in the region, I bet there's a group of people who look across the region and see more peaceful and less onerous conditions in Afghanistan under coalition forces, and think "Why not?" See the line from this NYTimes version* the story, with the line "Many refugees who fled Afghanistan for Pakistan in the 1980s have now returned home." Maybe a thin lining of optimism on the impending storm cloud?

Furtherly, while 20,000 refugees seems a large number, this CBC report claims that Pakistani officials think the clash between Taliban&Friends and the military has displaced as many as 500,000 people. Yikes.

-- In some of my more cynical moments, I begin to imagine a near-future news story that reads something like "politicians and countries previously in support of the War in Afghanistan have begun to change their minds based upon Nothing Happening." 

As the old adage goes, "the grass is always greener on the other side, and the less prominent war is always easier to support and more morally 'obvious'." That's how I remember it, at least. So here's a bold experiment: starting with this story of the aggregate death toll in Afghanistan reaching 535 since 2001, I'll keep track of when the first prominent voice that was "for Afghanistan" switches to "retrea-- err, 'strategic redeployment' from Afghanistan". If that person is still in support of the war when 535 die, but against it when another 535 die (that means a total fo 1070 for you liberal-arts majors), he/she shall receive a Shenanigans!!1! from your fearless bloggespondent (a should-be-word I'll apply for a patent).

-- This column, "Why the US is losing in Afghanistan",  from the Asia Times is an absolute must-read. Here's a money quote:
"The US has been slow to commit the resources required and has never adequately funded the conflict. The US failed to provide substantial funds early in the war, when national building and stability operations might well have stopped to resurgence of the Taliban and growth of the insurgency, and then reacted to the growth of the threat with inadequate resources and funding of the US military, US aid and diplomacy, and Afghan force development efforts. 

The end result is a consistent failure to provide the resources to allow the US and NATO/ISAF to seize the initiative, and defeat the insurgency. It is also a legacy of underfunding that has progressively increased the length and total cost of the war in human lives, the wounded, and dollars."
RTWT.

Well put, sir. Years ago, the author, Anthony Cordesman, used to be an aide to a Senator from Arizona, one John McCain. One can only hope that, if McCain is elected, Cordesman has the ear of POTUS.

-- On a non-GWoT note, this is an asinine idea that cements, for me, the idea of why I will never voluntarily live in California.

---------------------------------
* A more opinionated note: in the aforementioned NYTimes article, there's a bit of gamesmanship from Pakistan in the article. According to John Burns, the author (who I immensely respect as a reporter, btw) reports that:
"At a briefing for reporters on Monday in Islamabad, the Pakistan capital, a Pakistani military official said the Bajaur militants had put up stiff resistance and had used equipment and reinforcements from across the border in Afghanistan."
This leads to incriminations from Pakistani military officials that the coalition forces aren't preventing the inflow of terrorists from Afghanistan in the Pak-Taliban fight.

Whoop-dee-effin-doo, Pakistan

I apologize if I can't gin up the sympathy, but the claim that America hasn't a) committed as much blood-and-treasure as Pakistan to GWoT or b) kept up her end of the deal in re: to border security in Af-Pak, is ludicrous. Really.

The fact that the FATA region has become a festering culture-dish of anti-American Islamo-thugs is irrelevant to Pakistani officials. If one guy who is sympathetic to al-Qaeda's goals moves 100 yards from Afghanistan to Pakistan, it means that coalition forces are equally culpable in the "border battle."

B.S.

Get your s*** together, Pakistan, or get ready for the pharmaceutical-grade scrutiny that comes with an engaged U.S. public. Eastern-Asia-Business as usual, this ain't. You can no longer game the U.S. government into meaningless ten-digit-level bills of financial support of the Pakistani regime.

29 September 2008

View From The Top, 29 September 2008

This'll be a short one, folks, as real world duties call at the moment. Perhaps more later today.

-- Vis-a-vis the debate last Friday: Uber Pig has a post on Blackfive about the bracelets worn by both candidates and their intended effect on the voter. It's a must read.

-- Captain's Journal has some added thoughts from Maj. Gen. Schloesser posted re: the 08-09 winter fight between Taliban and coalition forces. Love the line:
If the U.S. command has their way, it’ll be a tougher winter for the Taliban.

Amen.

-- DefenseTech has some stuff up about cyber-security with very disturbing statistics on cyber-breaches of DoD. This might be blindingly stupid of me, and I know it's unfeasible, but I wonder: how many of these breaches would be preventable by switching to Linux based operating systems? They're waaaay more secure than Windows, and it offers up much more operational flexibility.

28 September 2008

Hail To The Colors That Float In the Light; Obi Ezeh the Next U of M Do-Right Man

On this blog, I don't talk too much about my fanatical support for the University of Michigan. I'm a proud alumnus, and my obsession reaches really wacky levels. I partly avoid discussing the teams from Ann Arbor on this blog because I know I'll ramble on unto nausea-inducement.

Anyway, allow me a moment to highlight the fact that the Maize and Blue went out yesterday and ruined the Wisconsin Badgers' season. We were supposed to be a warm-up for the big boys of the Big Ten this year, but we've changed that perception with the biggest comeback in the Big House's history.

Since I've already bored those of you who have no idea what I'm talking about, I'll soon stop, but not before I have another fearless Snowden prediction:

In keeping with the University of Michigan's tradition of intelligent and sexy football players like Dhani Jones and Braylon Edwards, Obi Ezeh, sophomore linebacker for the University of Michigan, will one day be listed as a "Do-Right Man" by Essence Magazine. 

Don't ask why that came to me, but I had to get it in writin' (or at least web-writin').

26 September 2008

View From The Top, 26 September 2008

-- If there is a truly just justice system, the settlement from this Murtha lawsuit will get a large chunk of Murtha's hundreds of millions of dollars in pork appropriations.

-- If there was success in Iraq and no blogosphere, would anyone in the East Coast power corridor know? Probably not. The Washington Post tries to fix that with an admirable editorial praising the move toward provinicial elections in Iraq.

-- Awesome DARPA funding announcement and call for proposals. To wit:

1. They want someone to discover a mathematical model of brain.

2. They want to "harness stochastity" in nature. I didn't even know that was theoretically possible.

3. New fluid dynamics for stuff like foam and gel.

4. Solve the Riemann Hypothesis, which the announcement calls the "Holy Grail of number theory."

Read all 23 challenges. It got me giddy just thinking about the prospect of the U.S. defense forces' best minds pondering such inconceivable stuff.
(H/T: Wired's Danger Blog (please change your name to Danger Blog. It would be awesome.))

-- More trouble off the Somali coast. This time, they got tanks. What are they going to do with them? Take off the treads and outfit their 15-foot boats with a 125mm cannon? That's something I'd want to see.

Read Information Dissemination for great analysis of the Somali coast.

-- Popular Mechanics has 10 questions for the foreign policy debate tonight. Good stuff, which means it won't get asked.

On the Danger Blog (see, Wired? It just sounds better.) link, some have posted their own questions in the comment section. This one made me giggle:

How will you force my government to do a better job in Afghanistan?

Amen, brother.

I'll post some of my own questions later today.

-- Coming soon: Awesome gun. Heinlein would be proud, Army.

My Friend's In The WSJ.

If I may, everyone please go read my good friend Ashley Samelson's op-ed piece in today's Wall Street Journal. She's got a great voice, and while the column's topic is something I'm utterly unqualified to comment on (modern feminism and women in college), I'm proud of her for putting in the effort and achieving the success.

25 September 2008

View From The Top, 25 September 2008

- As Dexter Filkins describes in his world-class book, The Forever War (read it ASAP.) (Seriously.) (Will be considered authoritative and amongst the pantheon of war journalism for generations.), the reason why the Taliban managed to solidify power in Afghanistan in the 90's was because they, with their draconian civil theory, were able to end much of the gang warfare and crime plaguing the country. American neligence (from Washington, not CENTCOM) has made it possible for the crime to return.

- Agree. I don't want to sound too Thomas-Friedman-overly-grand here, but this is a chance for America to both help create a modern state in Afghanistan and for U.S. to rebuild relationships with Western Europe through the shared effort. This can't happen without significant and effective European troop involvement in Afghanistan. I know that there are Americans who see Britain, France, Germany, Spain, and Italy as dying-on-the-vine countries, where the support, even if we had it, wouldn't mean that much. I disagree. There will be a Europe worthy of ally-hood in the future and its our obligation to save the alliances while continuing to support our values.

Yeesh, that came off too big, too mushy. Read the link, ponder the implications, ignore the Snowden-fluff.

- Speaking of Thomas Friedman, here's a column of his in the IHT. I'm not much of a fan of his, but that's for a longer and separate post. But if I may ask a few questions:

1. Can someone point out anything newsworthy or fresh in this piece? Anything? Bueller?
2. Does Thomas Friedman get the difference between subsidizing greedy and poorly-run companies and "subsidizing" the Iraqis as they struggle for their own stable democracy, or is he just disingenuous?
3. Am I alone in suspecting that Friedman has been looking for an escape pod from OIF for years, and thinks that this is his chance to regain lefty cred?

Answers? 1. No, 2. Disingenuous, 3. Yes, I'm alone, and paranoid.

- To those of you I talk to in the real world, you know I called this. This almost ties in with the last question above: Big 3 auto manufacturers and their unions have all been quietly planning to ask for Uncle Sam to bail them out, but they recognized that the tide of public opinion was moving against them. Furthermore, the plea for help will be a single attempt: they get turned down once, the car companies realize that they have zero sympathy from Joe Q. Public.

With this credit-market fiasco totaling (in the end, probably) over a cool $1 trillion in government cheese, UAW and the Big 3, along with the subsidiary suppliers, are thinking that this is their big chance to get a bailout for themselves.

23 September 2008

View From The Top, 23 September 2008

-Re: the August French-Taliban firefight: it's not getting any prettier. Yon stands by the Globe and Mail's article, saying it corroborated with the report he read.

-A couple of confusing signals from France regarding their involvement in Afghanistan. "Sarkozy Wins Approbal for French Role in Afghanistan" highlights the limited nature of the agreement and the opinions of the domestic French opposition. "France to Boost Troops, Weaponry in Afghanistan" seems to focus on the increase in troop number (80 special troops) and gear (couple of choppers and drones.

My guess? This shows that France isn't far off from American views in domestic policy. We have a military establishment, along with a smallish group of civilians, who recognize the necessity of involvement in Afghanistan. We also a have an ignorant majority who judges success or failure by the number of negative above-the-fold blurbs are on the morning newspaper and chooses to view facts through their partisan eyes. Not good at all. (p.s. Quite the straw man I've constructed, hmm?)

- Here's a story from the Telegraph full of bluster and shallow on reporting, even if it is an article trying to portray the Afghani/Paki-stan conflict in a positive light. From all I can tell, they basically interview a (possibly) blowhard tribal chieftain from Pakistan, transcribe his bravado, and then fill the piece with a grab-bag of facts and asides.

- The ANA, United States, and Pakistani military are in talks about joint forces in the border region. I'm sure I'm not the only one to say this, but: if any agreement doesn't allow U.S. forces to intercede in FATA and western Pakistan, it's not worth the time or paper it's printed on.

22 September 2008

Obama's From Chicago!

I'm trying to keep domestic politics to a minimum, if only because I think there's already too much "standard" analysis of events, but this touches FtToS:

McCain-Palin has a new ad out called Chicago Machine. Highlights Rezko, Emil Jones, Gov. Blaggy, etc., etc. Two thoughts:

1. In looking up the video on YouTube, I discovered that there is a major league lacrosse team called the Chicago Machine. That gets some onlyinchicagololz.

2. I really don't think that I'm the cause, but I can't help observing that I was on this Obama-from-Chicago line months ago, in the first post of this blog, in fact. Scroll down to the bottom of the post. Also my first heresy over on the sidebar.
/patonback

20 September 2008

More on the August 18 French-Taliban fight

Remember that story about the 10 Frenchmen who were killed in Afghanistan last month?

Well, Canada's Globe and Mail has more on the story, and it's not good.
The French did not have enough bullets, radios and other equipment, the report said. The troops were forced to abandon a counterattack when the weapons on their vehicles ran out of ammunition only 90 minutes into a battle that stretched over two days.
Graeme Smith, the journalist, seems to have gotten a great scoop here. His story is supported by my demi-god Michael Yon. It looks like there's a few bits to point out:

1. The French were woefully supplied and utterly defeated in this fight. They lacked ammunition, they lacked protection. Smith hints at the awful possibility that the French troops were captured and executed at close range. 

2. The Taliban have armor-piercing bullets and accurate snipers now. They've had time and sanctuary to train, no doubt. It's also difficult to suggest that this was a pure Taliban attack. The Smith article mentions Hekmatyar, and suggests other thuglords from lawless Pakistan might have contributed fighters or materiel. Thanks, "ally." Keep this in mind next time you whine about your "national sovereignty" in the FATA, and save yourself the trouble of complaining.

3. Amazingly, this could have been even worse. Both Yon and Smith report that the French were saved by international troops, possibly U.S. Special Forces. Too many died, but many more should have been killed, given the ingredients of the ambush: undersupplied and surprised NATO force against well-stocked and improved Taliban.

4. We got a looooong way to go on the ANA front. Apparently, the dozen-or-so Afghan troops simply ran away on foot from the battle. This is going to take years to change.

---

I'll say it again, Europe has to decide soon: they make the effort to win the war in Afghanistan, or they get the hell out, if only for their own troops sake.

Sarkozy and the French Defense minister have responded quickly and strongly to this incident, with Sarkozy visiting troops and the defense minister exhorting Europe to increase involvement in region. Good for them. As we learn more about the August 18 attack, such a reaction seems more reasonable. No matter a political leader's posturing, none save KJ-Il would wish the troops harm. Hopefully all the talk leads to longer-termed commitments from our European allies.

19 September 2008

View From The Top, 19 September 2008

-NATO troops accidentally kill a tribal leader and government official. Karzai claims it was due to a misunderstanding. Color me skeptical. Also: note the line about more than 230 teachers and students killed by Taliban.

-For all my posts about getting more support from Europe for Afghanistan, Britain isn't listening very well. Saddening and infuriating.

- Superstar John Nagl, over at Intel Dump, posts about the success in the Triangle of Death, now called the Triangle of Love. (Must...resist...urge to make....juvenile joke.) Between this post and this interview, I think I'm detecting an almost giddy undertone to Nagl's analysis. But, as he says: "No happy dancing in the end zone."

- Given all the furor surrounding the U.S. economy, it's understandable that the state of the Iranian economy is underreported. It's vital, though, that it's effects aren't underestimated. I mean, can you just lop three zeroes off your prices and think you've solved a problem? I got Mugabe's cell number right here, Mahmoud. Ask him what he thinks of inflation.

- A tip of the cap to the Miami Herald for their classy editorial, "Gen. Petraeus: A job well done." Get on the train for Petraeus 2016, every body! It probably means something that this piece is such a rarity in today's papers, but I don't want to think about it. I'll just get angry and have to get blood pressure medication.

Tears and Heroes

The military bears our national burden with a quiet class and strength. Too many citizens are ignorant of it, to our collective disgrace.


(H/T: Intel Dump)

18 September 2008

View From The Top, 18 September 2008

-Who needs negotiation or military intervention?
“The U.S. and Western countries have to cope with new realities: that Iran is the master of nuclear enrichment technology and at the same time Iran is cooperating with the agency,” Ali-[Iranian IAEA envoy] Asghar Soltaniyeh told Press TV in a live program aired on Tuesday.
Americans: why work when you can posture? Given the lack of activity on Iran and Afghanistan, it won't matter one whit who gets elected, McCain or Obama: the Middle East will have an aggressively-posturing nuclear state run by a group of fundamentalists. The GWB administration prosecuted a war which drew criticisms they were unable to boldly answer. If you're going to fight a war, only to lose your balls to the point that you can't even make a serious effort to prevent Iran from nuclearizing, just stay home. (HT: The Corner)

- A must read in the WSJ, "Victory Is An Orphan in Iraq." The writer, Thane Rosenbaum, is absolutely killin':
When it comes to Iraq, a majority of Americans simply won't take yes for an answer.
I wholeheartedly agree, but in the end, who cares? The "informed" voter has made up his mind on this conflict, one way or another. The conservative says the war was a good idea and helped GWoT, lefty says GWB misled the public and has incompetently attempted hegemony. Yawn. The two long-term effects of this war that I'm comfortable predicting are:

1. Our troops are suffering and will suffer on levels unknown to the American public. Whether its the unrecognized heroism and success of our troops or the problems of reintegration into civilian society, we are alienating our defenders at horrifying levels.

2. Our military is having discussions that are for its long-term benefit. Witness this great musing from Shawn Brimley at Intel Dump. If we hadn't gone to Iraq, I don't know if these topics would even have arisen. In any case, military leaders have learned a lot from Iraq, and will (hopefully) be able to use that knowledge in Afghanistan and in later theaters.

- "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." True enough. But Orwell forgot that those people will also "atrophy the resources of those rough men through decades of wheedling socialism as domestic policy, to the point where those rough men will be alone and penniless on the front." He'd also say it much more clearly and sharply. 

Max Boot, in that Commentary post, finishes with:
This isn’t just an issue of concern for Brits. It should be a real issue of concern for Americans, too. If the UK doesn’t have the resources to help us, then, Heaven help us, “unilateralism” may become a reality–not just a partisan slur.
Sadly true.

- The U.S. does a little kabuki apologizing to Pakistan for striking within her borders. This is a messy situation, obvs, but I have little sympathy with the Pakistani government. Reason 1 is the superb piece by Dexter Filkins in the New York Times Magazine. RTWT toot sweet, if only for the art-quality photos. Reason 2 comes from "Kip" at abu muqawama:
Pakistan will continue to complain that the US is violating its sovereignty. Either Pakistan is a sovereign state capable of preventing santuary, or it isn't. You can't claim the rights of sovereignty simultaneous to claiming you can't control the area from which attacks are being launched against another sovereign state. And certainly you can't have your military and intelligence agencies participate in attacks against another sovereign state and claim immunity.
Damn straight. BTW, I'd like send my best wishes with Kip as he goes on to fight the good fight. I'll pour one out for ya, Kip, and good luck on the 'outside-inside'.

17 September 2008

"We have no right to lose the conflict."

When I think about the conflict in Afghanistan, and in my darker moods, I resent Europe. They do little to defend themselves, their wonderful men and women in uniform are shackled with ridiculous rule-of-engagment policies, etc.

Reports like this do a lot to bring some sunshine to my day.

French Defence Minister Herve Morin said Sept. 17 that years of under-investment in defense by European countries was to blame for a critical shortage of international forces in Afghanistan.


Amen, brother, amen.

"Most European countries have decided to leave their defense up to NATO," he said when asked whether he agreed with Australia's view that some nations in the continent were not pulling their weight in the escalating Afghan conflict.


If we can bring a dedicated and unified European fighting force to bear on the Taliban and sundry thuglords, there's a new distant bright light on the horizon to encourage us through the darkness. The men we are fighting are enemies of the entire West, not just the United States.


View From The Top, 17 September 2008

- Attack on U.S. embassy in Yemen. I doubt that there was a sizeable contingent of Americans still there, as most non-essentials had already been ordered evacuated.

- U.S. sells THAAD to United Arab Emirates, in a move that 1.) will help ease pressure on our own defense structures in the Middle East, 2.) protect Arab allies from Persian nutjob mullahs, 3.) be a step towards our general Extreme Makeover: Middle East Edition. *Note: not this Thad. He stays.*

- Possible for drones to refuel each other in air? Tests shall be done. The robots gain another step towards freedom... I love the line in the article about how the FAA says its job is to "stop aircraft touching in flight."

- Why no 9/11 video from al-Qaeda? Because basement-nerds love America, that's why. I love that our government is analyzing its citizens more-effective efforts. Hackers are the new minutemen.


16 September 2008

Why We Can't Win in Afghanistan?

Up in Canadia, Tony Smith has written an op-ed for the Vancouver Sun titled "Why we can't win in Afghanistan." If I may, I'd like to highlight this piece. It is one of the most poorly written and poorly organized opinion articles I've ever read. Ever. Some blurbs:

Smith opens up by explaining to the rubes-n-hicks-in-the-sticks who used to rule Afghanistan.
Afghanistan was ruled by the Taliban for 11 years until 9/11.
Having thusly demonstrated his regional expertise, Mr. Smith apparently feels comfortable enough to make enormous generalizations and leaps in logic.

He spends the first third of his column explaining that Afghanistan is inextricably tied in with Pakistan, what with them both being Pashtun. While there are Pashtos in Afghanistan, it's hardly a monoethnic state. Smith then has the obligatory "America's at fault too!" throwaway line:
The Pashtun are Muslim, but were not fanatics until the Russians entered Afghanistan. The Americans decided to fund the Pashtun, to fight the Russians. The money was bought into N.W. Pakistan with the help of Pakistan's secret service. The Americans' partners were the Saudis.
This is an imprecise summary. The Americans (along with the UK, China, and others) gave money to the Afghans fighting the USSR through the Pakistani ISI. The Saudis gave money to the "Afghan Arabs" who joined the fight against the Soviets as unwanted outsiders:
Freelance cameraman Peter Jouvenal recalls: "There was no love lost between the Afghans and the Arabs. One Afghan told me, ‘Whenever we had a problem with one of them we just shot them. They thought they were kings.'"*
That's where OBL and al-Qaeda, and the Taliban, came from, not from coalition donations. Let it be shouted from the rooftops of campuses across this blessed land: The United States did not fund Osama bin Laden.

Back to the Smith piece.

He continues to avoid discussing his own column's supposed subject: the impossiblity of victory in Afghanistan. I'll summarize the argument he lays out as accurately as I can:

1. Taliban receives money from Saudi Arabia through underground channels.
2. Taliban receives money from opium sales which have been around a long time.
3. Taliban soldiers are paid more than ANA soldiers.
4. Therefore, the Taliban is still in power.

Q.E.D.? (Said in this voice.)

The Taliban, when it enjoys its rare public support, isn't supported because of its Wahabbism. Afghans who see that the coalition forces aren't protecting them will support the Taliban. Afghans who need food every day but are unemployed will support the Taliban. Opium farmers angry over lost revenue will support the Taliban.

There are dozens, if not hundreds, of copies of this kind of journalism. Why pick this one to cut up? Because it highlights the worst elements of idiocy: a misplace confidence in a small collection of facts, an overbearing name-dropping, and a crystal case of someone using facts to fit a theory (in this case, "the U.S. is doing it wrong") rather than theorizing with facts.

Also, the byline was smirk-worthy.
Tony Smith lives in Langley.
It's not our Langley, but it wouldn't suprise me if some of our own Langley residents had similarly poorly-reasoned views.

15 September 2008

Some Perspective

I saw in that L.A. times story that the 3 aid workers who were killed yesterday brought the yearly total to "two dozen", nearly twice the total of last year.

Over on the Times of London site, reading about Nicky Mason, I saw on the side a link to slideshow of teens murdered in London in 2008. There were 26 pictures in the show.

I know that the two statistics are barely comparable, but I think it still highlights a message that's worthy of repetition: relative to the amount of bloodshed and death we face in our everyday lives, the loss of life in GWoT-related activity is astoundingly low. It's a credit to our military, state, and nongovernmental organizations that the amount of casualties is so low.

Now, it might also say something about the state of London too. 26 teenagers murdered in a year? Sad, disturbing, and pathetic.

News From Afghanistan

- In his latest dispatch, Death in the Corn, Michael Yon writes:
This war is just beginning. Great war is in the air. The feeling is as conspicuous and distinct as the smell of rain, or that morning every year when the first chill of winter tickles the senses. The corn will soon be harvested. The fields will become brown and fallow. The snows will come and blow across barren lands, and next Spring the war will be worse than ever before.

Chilling stuff from a man who's as familiar as anyone can be with GWoT's current exercises.

RTWT. (Read The Whole Thing) Really, I can't say it enough: anyone who is interested in what is the latest progress in Afghanistan needs to have this man's site bookmarked and, if possible, make a donation to his endeavors.

- Suicide terrorist attacks U.N. convoy, killing Afghan doctors on their way to provide polio vaccinations. For those who don't know (as I didn't several months ago), polio is a serious health issue in much of eastern Afghanistan.

- A veteran of the heroic turbine-to-Kajaki mission, Lance Corporal Nicky Mason, was killed in action defending the dam against Taliban fighters. A martial-arts enthusiast, he also served two duties in Iraq. My thoughts and greatest gratitude towards him and his family.

- American helicopter fired upon in the Afghan-Paki border region, possibly by Pakistani troops. Hard to tell, but my guess is that it's difficult to identify whether a man in South Waziristan is a Taliban-supporter, a Pakistani officer, or just a tribal leader, or any combination of the three.

- Spanish diplomat Francesc Vendrell warns of the possibility of a "very hot winter for all of [NATO]", and claims that Afghanistan is in its worst position since fall 2001.

12 September 2008

Damn You, Gerard Baker

I spend an hour writing an over-worded and too-fluffy post about the gap between Americans and Europeans, and you have to go out and write a superb column for the The Times that summarizes my bloviating in a few short paragraphs.

Everyone, read the piece.

11 September 2008

I Sing The Body Eccentric

This is probably a frivolous exercise, but I think I need to do it nevertheless: I'd like to write up some lines explaining small parts of the heartland psyche. I suppose my target audience is coastal types and international readers, but welcome all. I make no claim that I am writing a comprehensive, or even extensive, expose of Fly-Overville, but I will do my best to be an honest cataloguer.

My bona fides aren't the best for this task, but better than most: born in Dallas, TX to upper-middle class family. Moved to Colorado Springs, CO, attended evangelical Christian high school. Went to college in the Midwest, but a school with snob cred in the Beltway and the Upper West Side. I worked in D.C. at the epicenter of a national election, I've knocked on doors for Assemblyperson campaigns and local Congressional races. I've been to plays on Broadway, I've gone to the woods armed with little besides firearms and alcohol (I offer cautious recommendations of both activities).

Upon reflection, its a schizoid list. I joke with people that I both scorn and love both "blue" and "red" states. I know the joy of a post-concert coffee-shop debate amongst friends. I know the thrill of getting up before sunrise to go work on a ranch or hike with friends. I enjoy chips-and-salsa-fueled Super Bowl/Wrestlemania "watch parties". I
"Swim with the swimmers, wrestle with wrestlers, march in line with the firemen, and pause, listen, and count."
*Whitmanmania!*

Right. Here's a few observations, with more to come over the weeks:

1.) Size matters.

I've brought up this idea several times when I get into discussions with people unfamiliar with the heartland. America is a big country. Very big. My homestate, Colorado, has a total area of 270,000 sq. km. The entire United Kingdom is 242,ooo sq. km. New Mexico is roughly the same size as Poland. Even our middle-of-the-road states, like Oklahoma, are comparable in size to places like Syria and Belarus.

America is not unique: geography, and more specifically distance, plays a role in shaping opinions and experiences. A common fallacy amongst foreigners is that, since the majority of business, politics, and culture come from New York, Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles, many Americans are directly connected or influenced by those cities. Not true.

What drives anti-coast or anti-progressive emotion in the "unwashed" areas is the suspicion, and one I share I might add, that coastal elites and international observers scorn these lands without ever travelling them. Not only do they look down upon them(us), but they don't have any interest in visiting to test their assumptions. If someone spends some time in the Midwest and then still leaves with a bad taste in his mouth, that's a fair response. Different strokes and all that. What rankles Midwesterners, however, is when a columnist who hasn't been west of Philadelphia in a decade pronounces that the reactionary instincts of the heartland voters embarrasses him amongst his international friends. Geographically, it's the same as a Dane commenting on Italian politics without actually visiting Rome.

It's actually worse than that. In each European country, there is a separate and distinct world of media. If I want to learn about current events in Italy, I can watch/read transcripts of Rai Uno or Corriere della Sera. Each of these media ventures will have the budget and manpower of a national press. If I want to learn about Colorado, I'm stuck with localized broadcasts to Denver or Colorado Springs and a few regional newspapers. Furthermore, the New York and Washington D.C. view of America is peddled daily across television sets throughout the U.S.. So while a suburban housewife from St. Louis might be aware of what Peggy Noonan (DC) and Keith Olbermann (NY) believe, there is little-to-no chance that the tv-heads know what the housewife as well.

2.) Heartlanders aren't (too) stupid.

This one is hard for some to grok. About a week ago, in the middle of the initial Palin tizzy at the GOP convention, CNN analyst John King turned to the other pundits and said (paraphrase) "This might seem like an obvious thing to say, but it's worth noting that although Sarah Palin might be new to us in the media, evangelical families in places like West Virginia have the internet too. They've known about her for a while, and for McCain to choose her was exciting to these people."

People in West Virginia indeed have the internet. People in Montana have cable television. They see the sneering, they hear the quips about Midwest misogyny and rampant racism. These facts can be grasped by the coastal elites, but this next part is harder: heartlanders oftentimes ignore the coast.

Mencken's definition of Puritanism was "the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy." Substitute "may disagree" for "may be happy", and the coastal-Left is just as Puritanical. To them it is a shameful idea that there might be 100 million people in this country who openly disagree with the coasts. Those in the middle are much more sanguine about the situation. A man from Ohio might know that Roger Ebert thinks he's shallow or homophobic for voting for George W. Bush, but that man couldn't give two rips about what Roger Ebert thinks about anything political, just what he thought of the new Batman movie.

A lot of heartlanders have made peace with the idea that they rarely share the same worldviews as their cultural and political leaders. As long as the leaders respect the heartland's own choices, that's okay. But when the scorn begins to grow, and the antipathy starts emerging from behind the glossy commercial non-partisan veneer, it begins to grate on heartlanders. Even amongst teens (scroll down to the link to the MTV blogs.

Mandatory Reading On This Day

Every year, on September 11th, I go back and read James Lileks' Bleat posts from the day before, the day of, and the days following the terrorist attacks. I do it, I guess, because it allows me a moment to remember. The word "remember", in its core meaning, is about "being mindful once again." That's what I try and do for a small moment every year: be mindful of what horrors we saw, of the heroism of our brothers and sisters, of the anger I felt that swelled to fill my entire chest and felt like bursting from my skin. In those terrible days, I didn't matter. We mattered.

Lileks' posts help me in that remembrance. They mirror my own emotions from that time, only written with a style and voice that, in the way Lileks' always does, effs the ineffable.

---

And if I may, I 'd also like to recommend this column from a 9/11 widow, Debra Burlingame.

A brief quote, but please read it all:
Misremembering is as dangerous as forgetting. If we must know one thing, it is that the Sept. 11 attacks were neither a natural disaster, nor the unfortunate result of human error. 9/11 wasn't the catastrophic equivalent of a 3,000-car pileup.
Amen and amen.

10 September 2008

Joe Biden's Hubris

"The press is exaggerating how white women are all of a sudden for Sarah Palin," Biden said. "We still have more women voting for Barack Obama than for John McCain...Part of the problem is in white suburbia, as well as...among ethnic groups, among, particularly Jews and Catholics, there is a lack of ease about Barack. They don't know him. One of my major jobs is to go out and talk about what I know -- they know me -- talk about who I am, why I support Barack."

-- Joe Biden, to Chicago fundraisers, 9 September 2008.

I love ya, Joe. The second I heard you were the v.p. nominee, I turned to my roommate and told him as much. You say silly stuff from time to time, and your hair plugs and touched-up smile are corny, but you have a quality all your own. I haven't met you, but you strike me as one of the most genuine men in politics. You are, however, genuinely deluded if you think that the people who don't know Sen. Obama will know who you are.

Think of a Venn Diagram with two big circles: one labeled "Those Who Don't Know Barack Obama", the other "Those Who Know Joe Biden". Those circles aren't just nontangential, they are on separate chalkboards in separate classrooms at separate universities. Hell, you could probably draw another circle just inside the "Don't Know Barack" one labelled "Those Who Don't Know Anything About The State Of Delaware, Including It's Location On a Labelled Map."

International Love For Obama, Pt. 4

Okay, this is getting fun.

Jonathan Freeland writes a column that is beyond hysterical in its support for Obama. (H/T: Mark Steyn at the Corner)

A word of advice, Mr. Freedland: if you are going to write about American politics, do more research than perusing DailyKos. Furthermore, to be taken seriously as a political voice re: US elections, you simply cannot refer to Andrew Sullivan as a conservative.

I really hope Sullivan isn't held out as an example of the traditional "conservative" wing of American political thought to the rest of the world. That would be an outrage.


09 September 2008

International Love For Senator Obama, Pt. 3

As I posted the last one, this came across my GoogleReader:
Gordon Brown has broken with British convention and made clear that he favours Barack Obama as the next US President.

In a departure from the usual self-denying ordinance of Prime Ministers past, Brown has written an article for The Monitor magazine in which he praises Obama's plans to get the US out of the housing slump.

Keep it going, Europe. It won't end the way you think it should.

International Love For Senator Obama, Pt. 2

I posted that stuff in the last post, not to just rehash old analysis, but to lay the groundwork for this.

-Why all the press effort to show Obama enjoys global support? Couple reasons, in my opinion.

1.) The press are panicked. Over the past week Obama has seen himself fall to second place, seen the adulation he usually receives move over to Gov. Palin, and seen a problem with his finances arise. Regardless of past performance, things aren't looking good for the junior senator from Illinois. The journalists and people of Europe, who had previously assumed the presidency was "in the bag" for Senator Obama, are worried. They think that if they show that Obama has international support, it will help him in the election. I can see why they might think this would work, but it is slobber-knockingly ignorant of the American electorate. A majority of Americans think the US is a pretty damn neat place, exceptionally so. To put it succinctly, plenty of us think "there's a reason why our ancestors left you."

2.) Europe is just angry at the US. I wouldn't even say that I blame them. We are a gigantic reminder that there is a successful Western nation that disagrees on so many modern issues with most of western Europe: death penalty, healthcare, climate, &c. I'd be upset, too. When you add this to the pain they've just felt at the change in polls, and the natural reaction is to lash out. Again, understandable but dumb.

3.) (added after posting) Europe is starting to lay the groundwork for their post-election whining. You can just see it underneath their stories, but many Euro-Left arguments are: "Obama is SO clearly the better candidate, it's SO blindingly obvious, that if he doesn't win, it will be because the rednecks and racists came out to crush the black man." I'm calling b.s. on that one right now, but it will still happen. Here's a fearless prediction: within one week of a hypothetical McCain victory on November 4th, there will be at least one article that has a headline with "In McCain Victory, Questions of Race and Reconciliation Remain."

---

I've become more internationalist since the 2004 election, partly because I've evolved my political views, partly because I've traveled extensively. I'm much more sympathetic to many of the quibbles Europeans have with America and her citizens. When I see the rise of Sarah Palin, however, and see the stubborn resolution of Joe Six-Pack begin to rise in opposition to global opinion, I'm smitten. Who says that a suburban family has to care what some New Zealander thinks of the U.S.?

There's a charm for this American in the idea that a man from Raleigh, who enjoys Bud Light, Kid Rock, and the Tar Heel basketball team, can infuriate a European, who drinks Burgundy and has been to every Harold Pinter play, by the way he votes. Furthermore, that European will openly scorn that man's life, calling him "white trash" and unendearing to the rest of the world. That American will probably shrug his shoulders, turn the TV from CNN to ESPN, and walk out to his family on the porch with a platter of freshly grilled burgers and hot dogs.

That's America. That's my country.

International Love For Senator Obama, Pt. 1

In the past few days, the international press has released a number of stories and columns that, implicitly or explicitly, are pro-Obama. That's understandable, as their readerships are enormously supportive of the Illinois Senator:
US Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama may be struggling to nudge ahead of his Republican rival in polls at home, but people across the world want him in the White House, a BBC poll said.

All 22 countries covered in the poll would prefer to see Senator Obama elected US president ahead of Republican John McCain.

In 17 of the 22 nations, people expect relations between the US and the rest of the world to improve if Senator Obama wins...

...The margin in favour of Senator Obama ranged from 9 per cent in India to 82 per cent in Kenya, while an average of 49 per cent across the 22 countries preferred Senator Obama compared with 12 per cent preferring Senator McCain. Some four in 10 did not take a view.

Again, these positions are understandable: President Bush is not a popular figure, and Senator Obama is the nominee of the opposition. This is not complex political calculus. I think the passion for Senator Obama, however, outstrips the usual international support for Democrats.

Why? He embodies many of the European Left values and, more importantly, resembles most closely the their ideal US president. Examples? Examples:

- None of the major countries of Europe have ever had a leading politician from the ethnic minority. (possibly all the countries of Europe, but I'm not sure on this one) Contrary to popular European and American opinion, Europe has a greater problem with race and how it treats its minorities. I'm aware that is a generalization, but I stand by it. Even in the most backward and racist areas of America, the Deep South and blue-collar Midwestern uniontowns, the US doesn't have fans making monkey noises at black athletes.

- Senator Obama, by way of his childhood, represents a more "global perspective". I personally find this line of reasoning to be pure hokum, but it's undeniably a forceful idea. Growing up in Indonesia, an African father, a non-white ethnicity, these attributes say to the Euro-Left "this man doesn't subscribe to the same naive American exceptionalism we've seen for the past 8 years". Go figure.

- He speaks in lofty terms about ambitious dreams in a sonorous "black" cadence, reminiscent of past civil-rights heroes. This point is similar in root cause to the previous point: both are born from the anti-Bush seed. To the Euro-Left, their impression of President Bush is an inarticulate hick that has an outdated and barbaric worldview which he imposes upon the rest of the world. Senator Obama is an intelligent and eloquent rhetorician who appears to have a humble and internationalist belief system. That's all they need. To quote an Obama supporter, they're signed, sealed, and delivered to his camp.

05 September 2008

I Don't Care For Roland Martin

The television industry has a lot of fat in it, a lot of people and practices that could be shown the door. Evidence: Roland Martin. As far as I can see, CNN keeps the guy employed in order to include the non-D.C. "black voice" around. Not a bad idea, if they had only managed to find a guy who had a perspective slightly larger than the South Side of Chicago and the urban black community.

This is a guy who felt the problem with Rev. Jeremiah Wright's "God Damn America" sermon wasn't that it was the delusional conspiratorial ramblings of a militant apologist for dictators, rather it lacked context. Possibly because he is a long-term friend of Rev. Wright? It's safe to say that anytime CNN airs a significant story on any issue relating to the black community, Roland Martin will be close behind, explaining the "context" of the "black perspective." Again, not a bad idea in theory, but the execution is condescending and insulting. I don't need him to come on TV and warn the GOP that "community organizers" are important, dammit, and Palin and Rudy are meanie-heads for making fun of them. I don't need to have Roland Martin explain away some idiotic remarks from a few people who happen to be black. I don't need him to relentlessly hype positive stories about the black community. Black Americans aren't a foreign race in need of a translator.

Furthermore, Martin likes to position himself as the ultimate truth-seeker, a man uninhibited by biases or relationships. Several times on TV and in print he has railed against the "hijacking" of Christianity by right-wingers and demanded a solution, something that (surprise) meshes exactly with his own views. He also has managed to exploit the MSM double-standard on religion for his own promotion. It's been long observed that the media is only comfortable with religion when discussed by minorities. A Democrat stumps in a black church? He/she's reaching out to a community in need of representation. Republican talks in a church? Here comes theocracy! For the past year or so, I have yet to see a discussion of Christianity that didn't include Roland Martin in a significant role.

I don't want to call for Martin's dismissal. He has every right to make his positions known (much like I'm doing now). This is America after all. But one look at his personal website shows Martin is simply another self-promoting media "star" that is, as Texans say, "all hat and no cattle." That doesn't make him any better or any worse than Geraldo Rivera, Bill O'Reilly, or Lou Dobbs (okay, he's better than Lou Dobbs, but that's not exactly a high hurdle), but I'm irritated that I'm supposed to treat him any differently than those guys. They're all asses.

04 September 2008

Palin Speech: Straight Money


I'd take her and put her in my piggy bank any day.

Funny thing: I actually didn't see the speech. I was held late at work, and listened while driving home. Nothing I can really add on substance, at least nothing that hasn't already been said. Some style stuff, though: she really is a PTA president when you listen to her voice. She talks with a slow non-professional cadence that reminds me of school assemblies and introductions to summer camp. Some other thoughts/predictions/cautions:

- There will be an overreaction from those on the Right. It'll happen. It shouldn't, but it'll happen. It's been close to a year, now, of conservatives and GOP'ers being bashed over the head with how uncool they are, and how cool Democrats are. This speech last night was a release valve for that frustration.

- Best be careful, MSMers, best be careful. There might be a lot of those in the media who are slightly miffed at the Palin Surprise, but there aren't a lot people outside that clique that feel the same. You risk a lot with the current practice. This election could turn into a populist conflagration in the blink of an an eye, and you'll find yourself fighting against the sans-cullotes you need to keep ratings.

I'd say that no more people were familiar with Biden pre-announcement than were familiar with Palin, and the contrast in treatment will grate. I'm talkin' to you Campbell Brown. I know, you think you're being aggressive and probing. You probably think that there's much we need to learn about this woman, and that means tough questioning. You're probably right. But there's a bunch of people I talk to out in Reals-ville that are asking: "Why didn't you ever grill the Obama camp the same way?" They'd be right as well.

- Obama was smart this morning, just trying to move past Palin back to McCain. He tries to address her, it will only backfire. If I were Obama's staff, I'd be telling him: hit 'em on the economy, hit 'em on Afghanistan, hit 'em on health care. Ignore her, and attack the joint ticket for having no answers to the problems. Of course, this would be a much more effective point for Obama if he had better answers than "tax the rich", "invade Pakistan", and "universal health care", respectively. He should have caved on the oil-drilling issue months ago.

-The next sixty days are gonna be election pr0n for nerds like me. My pot of coffee, bag of razors, and Firefox Refresh button stand at the ready.

03 September 2008

You are not "flat busted" in my book, Mrs. Palin.


Just now, Fox News had a headline (or are they called 'footlines' now, since they're at the bottom of the screen?) that said "McCain Camp Claims Sexist Treatment of Palin By Media" or something of that nature. Here's the picture they had on the screen at that moment.

Want a bonus? This picture was supplied to the Associated Press by her own parents. They sound like the most marvelous people, the Heaths, a couple who caribou hunt and are totally unfamiliar with the modern media cycle.

*Sigh*, I love my country.

02 September 2008

Quick Observations from First Hour of GOP Conventions

- Robert Duvall, who did the voiceover of the initial video, is the kind of man and kind of actor who gives Republicans a good name. A modern Spencer Tracy, that man.

- I think Bill Bennett is stretching when he thinks there might be a "Western ticket" focus. Living in the West, I can tell you that there isn't too much of a Western mentality anymore (regrettably so). A lot of people out here don't think in that way. Washington state and Colorado Springs are worlds apart. In fact, it almost seems like an East Coast trope to categorize the West in such a way.

- Bill O'Reilly asked Karl Rove what a "doofus" was. I was astounded. I had no idea that someone could have no idea what "doofus" meant. Is that just a southern/Texan thing? Really, if it is, I'll be amazed.

- The lady with the hat festooned in "I Support Unwed Mothers" buttons-- Ma'am, you scare me.

- Sen. Norm Coleman from Minnesota has one of the oddest accents in America. I would have guessed New England, but it seems that he's from Brooklyn. Wow. The thing just sounds like a mixed hodge-podge of sterotypical Northerner patoises.

- Howie Wolfson, who was on O'Reilly, had a good point. He said that the intensity surrounding Sarah Palin comes from a surprised MSM. They were expecting, and probably prematurely preparing for, a Romney or Pawlenty. It's clear that they've been caught off guard, and are now desperately scrambling for data. It seems that they have no discrimination when it comes to analysis or data mining.

- It's a smart move, what the GOP is doing at their convention. Tonight they've scheduled Liebermann to talk. They've also shown pictures of Rev. King and JFK. The 'national unity' idea will sell.

I might talk about this more later, but my last point has a bleed over effect. Amongst evangelicals, there has been a growing feeling of irritation with the Republican party. There are quite a few evangelicals who are uncomfortable with a direct tie between GOP and their houses of worship. So McCain, the un-Republican, combined with Gov. Palin, the pin-up of the parishes, might be enough to unexpectedly retain the evangelical vote.

More later...

Bobby Jindal -- Best Man For The Job At Hand

For all the people (myself included) who liked the idea of Gov. Jindal of Louisiana joining McCain on the ticket, we should be chastened. I doubt anyone else could look as "on top" and in control of the difficult situation in the Gulf Coast as that man. He will only serve to rebuild the Republican brand in years to come, and is just building a resume for a future presidency run.

'There aren't even any crackheads in Alaska.'

So, that Diddy video, and some thoughts:

- Is he riding a bicycle in a really small circle while filming this??

- He opens by calling this video a "Diddy-Obama blog". Someone should tell Mr. Combs that he's vlogging, not blogging. It's sucking the hipness out of him.

- When he says "Alaska? Alaska. Alaska? Alaska. C'mon man" it sounds exactly Allen Iverson's "Practice" speech. Identical.

- I looove it when Diddy says "If you think we're going to let you win this election...". L-o-v-e it. Apparently, the Rock The Vote members have the final say on presidential politics.

- "This pick [Palin] is not respectful to our lives, to diverse lives..." Just so you know, white people. Disrespectful. Thus says the black Rodney Dangerfield.

- The shout out to McCain's "war hero" bit. I don't think Diddy would know a war from a backstage diva-fight. I think he thinks it makes him look gracious to say that, but it just makes him sound ignorant (unlike the rest of this video, right?).

- "Alaska, muthafucka? Where's the reality in Alaska? There aren't even any crackheads in Alaska. No black people. There's no...crime?" No comment.

On the seriouses, I think this video can prove the point conservatives have been making for years, which is that the "voter registration" efforts like Rock the Vote are simply Democrat operations. Diddy clearly has no interest in registering McCain voters.

Also, let me now take a moment to say that I don't think Diddy speaks for anyone else, above all the black community (as much as there can be a singular group). Black people hate this man as much as white people.

Links, Links, I Could Link All Week

-- Jeffrey Goldberg (Personal motto: "No, you wanted the other 'J. Goldberg' pundit. *Sigh*") has a great little post here re: Palin-palooza and real political issues. Keep preachin' Mr. Goldberg.

-- From the Daily Telegraph:
Israr Ullah Zehri, who represents Baluchistan province, told a stunned parliament that northwestern tribesman had done nothing wrong in first shooting the women and then dumping them in a ditch.

"These are centuries-old traditions, and I will continue to defend them," he said.

But we're the blood-thirsty monsters, apparently.

-- Dexter Filkins, a passionate reporter for the NY Times, and one of the best I might add, even if I occasionally disagree with him, checks back with Iraq.
"On Monday, following a parade on a freshly paved street, American commanders formally returned responsibility for keeping order in Anbar Province, once the heartland of the Sunni insurgency, to the Iraqi Army and police force. The ceremony capped one of the starkest turnabouts in the country since the war began five and a half years ago."
Read the whole thing, and keep in mind that Filkins isn't a GOP toadie, either.

-- Reppin' the Rocky Mountains, I have to link to the prescient and meant-for-bigger-things, Adam Brickley and his blog Draft Sarah Palin For VP. You want amazing? He's been on the Palin wagon (Palin snowsled perhaps?) since 2007. He also has a link to a video of industrial-grade celebretardedness from Diddy. More on this video later.

01 September 2008

Woman On Fire

She's typically very good, but Ann Althouse has been on her game the last few days since the Palin announcement. Just passin' her along for the reading...

Where Oz Meets High School

Another day, another Iranian minor executed.

Lest I be considered glib for writing about a travesty in a abrupt manner, allow me to add: I don't see anything missing from the summary. Anyone who draws equivalence between the United States ignores this side of Iranian governance. There's a perversion of morality here, an echo of a barbaric period in world history. Convicting 15-year-olds of crimes that result in the death penalty has been left behind by the West, and that was probably close to 300 years ago.

Also, peep this line from the news article:
"Under Iran’s laws, however, the legal responsibility age for boys is 15, while girls are punishable from the age of 9."

Apparently prepubsecent girls can be intentionally malicious in ways that 8th grade boys can't even understand.