A Japanese man has enlisted hundreds of people in a campaign to allow marriages between humans and cartoon characters, saying he feels more at ease in the "two-dimensional world".I wish him the best of luck. Between this and the Second-Life-crazy piano teacher, Japan will one day consist only of digital personas wandering the pages of social sites and chatrooms.
31 October 2008
Rising Sun News O' The Day
Again, to repeat: Japan is craaazy:
29 October 2008
View From The Top, 29 October 2008
-- Good luck to you guys at the CS Monitor. I think it's the best idea, even though it might still not be enough to save the paper.
-- Ambinder has a post about European misgivings with President Obama (I'm just going to save myself the typing of 'Future' or 'President-to-be'). This is something that more Americans need to realize, that while Europe might prefer Obama over McCain by very wide margins, it does not necessarily equate into support of Obama and his policies. The support is currently more from an anti-Bush fervor, and they project their ideal policies onto the opponent. The comments on the Ambinder post are typical Obama-supporter piddle: "Policies aren't important, Ambinder! Europeans like Obama's entire persona more than McCain's! Specifics are missing the point!" They'll learn.
-- Tying in with that, Slate has a "How We're Voting" article worth perusing. If you ignore the sanctimonious "we'll finally have an intelligent leader with Obama *sips chablis*" reasons, there are a couple of good responses. Shmuel Rosner's answer in particular, caught my eye.
Folks, this might be the most mature and even-headed political statement of the season. Bask in its common sense, revel in the perspective:
Loves it.
-- David Carr at the New York Times has a wonderfully provincial inside-look at newspapers. It's a valiant attempt to honestly analyze the bewildered-mutterings-of-an-old-man comments from newspaper execs. I especially enjoyed this line:
-- Now, on to international glimpses: An Iraqi court takes a big step forward in the transition to a stable Iraqi ally as they convict an Iraqi man for the murder of American troops.
-- Here's another step forward, too, as Iraqis take control of its 13th province. Only 5 more provinces are outside their purvey. No one predicted this kind of rip-roaring success, no one.
I know I'm paranoid, but I can't help but feel that there's more danger than meets the eye, that there are thousands of Iran-backed insurgents biding their time, waiting to rain hell down upon pure Iraqi forces when we're focused more on AfPak. But I'm a worrier.
-- My Buddy SecDef Gates gave a speech on deterrence at the Carnegie Endowment for Int'l Peace with lots of gooey nuggets in the speech for international-affairs nerds. I, for one, had no idea how quickly we were reducing some of our nuclear capabilities. We'll achieve the goals of the Moscow Treaty two years early? We'll soon be down to one-fourth of our Cold-War nuclear capabilities? Wow.
Of course, the points that more people will note are in the reeeally somber analysis of our nuclear stockpile, how it is old and in desperate need of updates. Every other nuclear power is updating their weaponry, including England and France, yet we are entrapped in a 80's-style fear of nuclear technology. Gates suggested that if we don't update and authorize more funding for replacement warheads, we'll have no way to analyze our stockpile but by renewing nuclear testing. Or, as Nathan Hodge put it:
My grouchy prognostication? President Obama, who on the campaign trail consistently held out his anti-proliferation legislation as a primary example of his foreign-policy cred, will foolishly believe that through his rhetoric and rising Democratic majority he can set an example of still drawing down all nuclear weaponry. The U.S. will continue to hemorrhage scientists and researchers, our capabilities will be even more rusty and petit, and we'll wake up in 10 years and find ourselves 15 years behind China in nukes.
In case you needed your day ruined, you're welcome.
-- On a cheerier note, Baby Face Kwame's going to spend 4 months in jail! Corrupt-Detroit-Politics-Fever!!! Catch it!!!
-- Ambinder has a post about European misgivings with President Obama (I'm just going to save myself the typing of 'Future' or 'President-to-be'). This is something that more Americans need to realize, that while Europe might prefer Obama over McCain by very wide margins, it does not necessarily equate into support of Obama and his policies. The support is currently more from an anti-Bush fervor, and they project their ideal policies onto the opponent. The comments on the Ambinder post are typical Obama-supporter piddle: "Policies aren't important, Ambinder! Europeans like Obama's entire persona more than McCain's! Specifics are missing the point!" They'll learn.
-- Tying in with that, Slate has a "How We're Voting" article worth perusing. If you ignore the sanctimonious "we'll finally have an intelligent leader with Obama *sips chablis*" reasons, there are a couple of good responses. Shmuel Rosner's answer in particular, caught my eye.
Folks, this might be the most mature and even-headed political statement of the season. Bask in its common sense, revel in the perspective:
I would vote if I could, but I can't. I'm an Israeli, not an American. But whom would I vote for? I can't answer that. Being a foreign observer doesn't only mean that I can't cast a vote; it also means that my priorities are different. All I see is the Israeli interest from an Israeli standpoint. I'm not just a one-issue voter, I'm a one-issue voter with no way of understanding—really understanding—how I'd feel if I had the opportunity to be an American voter.Wow, an foreign observer who realizes how hard it is to fully understand the intricacies of politics in another country. A man who's humble enough to say "I'm unqualified to comment." A rare moment of journalistic courage.
On issues related to foreign policy, especially matters concerning the Middle East, it's easier for me to identify with John McCain. I live in a tough neighborhood, and McCain seems to be the candidate most comfortable with the idea that countries in areas like that sometimes need to use force. However, I also see the advantages of Obama, especially the chance for America to recover its image. (Just don't expect too much.) (my emphasis --S.) I see how friendly countries like Israel can benefit from a United States that is more acceptable to the broader world.
Loves it.
-- David Carr at the New York Times has a wonderfully provincial inside-look at newspapers. It's a valiant attempt to honestly analyze the bewildered-mutterings-of-an-old-man comments from newspaper execs. I especially enjoyed this line:
Clearly, the sky is falling. The question now is how many people will be left to cover it.Let me clarify, David. Your sky is falling. There's still plenty of news reporting happening. It might not come in a 750-word block on page A14 of some newsprint, but people will still want to know what's happening.
-- Now, on to international glimpses: An Iraqi court takes a big step forward in the transition to a stable Iraqi ally as they convict an Iraqi man for the murder of American troops.
-- Here's another step forward, too, as Iraqis take control of its 13th province. Only 5 more provinces are outside their purvey. No one predicted this kind of rip-roaring success, no one.
I know I'm paranoid, but I can't help but feel that there's more danger than meets the eye, that there are thousands of Iran-backed insurgents biding their time, waiting to rain hell down upon pure Iraqi forces when we're focused more on AfPak. But I'm a worrier.
-- My Buddy SecDef Gates gave a speech on deterrence at the Carnegie Endowment for Int'l Peace with lots of gooey nuggets in the speech for international-affairs nerds. I, for one, had no idea how quickly we were reducing some of our nuclear capabilities. We'll achieve the goals of the Moscow Treaty two years early? We'll soon be down to one-fourth of our Cold-War nuclear capabilities? Wow.
Of course, the points that more people will note are in the reeeally somber analysis of our nuclear stockpile, how it is old and in desperate need of updates. Every other nuclear power is updating their weaponry, including England and France, yet we are entrapped in a 80's-style fear of nuclear technology. Gates suggested that if we don't update and authorize more funding for replacement warheads, we'll have no way to analyze our stockpile but by renewing nuclear testing. Or, as Nathan Hodge put it:
In other words, fund this thing, mothertruckers, or we start testing./mushroomcloudlolz
My grouchy prognostication? President Obama, who on the campaign trail consistently held out his anti-proliferation legislation as a primary example of his foreign-policy cred, will foolishly believe that through his rhetoric and rising Democratic majority he can set an example of still drawing down all nuclear weaponry. The U.S. will continue to hemorrhage scientists and researchers, our capabilities will be even more rusty and petit, and we'll wake up in 10 years and find ourselves 15 years behind China in nukes.
In case you needed your day ruined, you're welcome.
-- On a cheerier note, Baby Face Kwame's going to spend 4 months in jail! Corrupt-Detroit-Politics-Fever!!! Catch it!!!
28 October 2008
He'd left me an autograph: "Let me collect dust."
I swear to Alfred P. Sloan, I'm going to wander the streets, keying every Chevrolet in sight. This is going to be war. I'll never buy a General Motors car if this happens*:
If we were to read on in the Times article, we'd see that even more good news is on the way:
*not hard for me. The last year a GM car was made that I wanted, I was -14 years old.
WASHINGTON — The Bush administration is examining a range of options for providing emergency financial help to spur a merger between General Motors and Chrysler, according to government officials.As you know, I called this a ways back. Nothing special though, since we as Americans have this bizarre fixation with automobile manufacturing, where we think its representative of the well-being of Average Joe, it's easy to predict which industries will get government cheese. News flash: America isn't a car-making superpower anymore. We've moved on, to products in nanotechnology and software design. This process used to be called "keeping up with the times."
People familiar with the discussions said the administration wanted to provide financial assistance to the deeply troubled Big Three Detroit automakers, possibly by using the Treasury Department’s wide-ranging authority under the $700 billion bailout program that Congress approved this month.
If we were to read on in the Times article, we'd see that even more good news is on the way:
A bailout for carmakers would be the latest in a series of government-financed rescue efforts for banks, Wall Street firms and an insurance conglomerate. While few experts dispute the car industry’s troubles, rescuing them would also increase political pressure to help ailing industries like airlines and steel producers.Time to represent my emotional state in the form of a cup of soup:
*not hard for me. The last year a GM car was made that I wanted, I was -14 years old.
27 October 2008
View From The Top, 27 October 2008
-- So, the U.S. attacked some people...in Syria. U.S. military hasn't spoken yet on it, but I think it's safe to say that it happened. What to make of it? Here's a couple of good opinions on it:
1. Roggio at The Long War Journal says we were going after the Terrorist Formerly Known As Badran Turki Hishan al Mazidih, Abu Ghadiya. Dunno if we got the bastard.
2. Arab Media Shack thinks Syria was okay with the incursion, simply because they're worried about some of the more unseemly terrorists starting to congregate in their country.
3. Coming Anarchy lists a few options that all are basically U.S.-centric. Either something reeeal bad was going to happen, or this is a shot-cross-the-bow kind of message to the Assad-thugs in Damascus.
I posted a comment at Abu Muqawama with my thoughts. Basically, I think higher-ups in the U.S. military realize the intransigence of some of these Middle Eastern borders. They're thinking "to hell with this" and just acting.
Syria has been allowing thousands of insurgents to move across the border into Iraq, apparently willing to do nothing to stem the flow. They'll also probably do nothing because of this U.S. attack either, besides the usual keeling and crowd-surfing-coffin-funerals.
-- In another post on Coming Anarchy, there's a review/preview of the HBO miniseries "House of Saddam" which I'm seeing, most def. It sounds like it will be fairly honest about the monster. This is a great retort to some Left-wing moral equivalency:
1. Roggio at The Long War Journal says we were going after the Terrorist Formerly Known As Badran Turki Hishan al Mazidih, Abu Ghadiya. Dunno if we got the bastard.
2. Arab Media Shack thinks Syria was okay with the incursion, simply because they're worried about some of the more unseemly terrorists starting to congregate in their country.
3. Coming Anarchy lists a few options that all are basically U.S.-centric. Either something reeeal bad was going to happen, or this is a shot-cross-the-bow kind of message to the Assad-thugs in Damascus.
I posted a comment at Abu Muqawama with my thoughts. Basically, I think higher-ups in the U.S. military realize the intransigence of some of these Middle Eastern borders. They're thinking "to hell with this" and just acting.
Syria has been allowing thousands of insurgents to move across the border into Iraq, apparently willing to do nothing to stem the flow. They'll also probably do nothing because of this U.S. attack either, besides the usual keeling and crowd-surfing-coffin-funerals.
-- In another post on Coming Anarchy, there's a review/preview of the HBO miniseries "House of Saddam" which I'm seeing, most def. It sounds like it will be fairly honest about the monster. This is a great retort to some Left-wing moral equivalency:
The film can be enjoyed by those of all political outlooks. For the UK’s Daily Telegraph, a review states that Saddam “gave the impression that he was a man with total conviction in the rightness of what he was doing. Which conjured two more, somewhat uneasy comparisons: Messrs Bush and Blair when they went to war with him.”I take the opposite view: the utter debauchery of the Hussein family and administration is so complete in every aspect that it confirms the righteousness of the Iraq War that toppled Hussein (emphasis mine -- S.). Many will disagree with that from the left and the right, but it’s frankly never been clearer.
I'd say that the above quote is what Election-geddon '08 should be about, but it doesn't matter at this point. No one's listening, from either side.
-- Speaking of the Throwdown of the Lowdown, Megan McArdle has a great post on some of the more zealous police-state-ish types in the Obama camp. Apparently some of them don't care for observers pointing out the deep-seated corruption in the Obama fundraising, and want to hush up the critics. Enter McArdle:
Yes, I still support Obama, and I have no reason to think that the error was deliberate. But that doesn't mean that I think the Obama team has a right to have its errors protected from public exposure.
That lady is almost criminally reliably awesome. She needs to slow down, she's making us look bad. The Atlantic has an almost perfect stable of bloggers now. One of them is past-his-prime and needs to be set out to pasture.
-- Ignatius has an okay boiler-plate-ish column on negotiating with the Taliban. There's so much already out there on the pros-and-cons of negotiating, but let me just offer a quick observ:
After WWII American leaders were excoriated for recruiting and employing former Nazis as U.S. actors in Europe against the Soviets. I'm not really sure what was the right move at the time, but most people nowadays think that it was pretty sleazy and morally corrupt.
May I ask, what's different now? Where's the outrage at such a "realist" idea as talks with the Taliban? Why do I sense an inconsistency here, that those who criticize America for past behavior are also smugly cheering on negotiations with cretinous warlords who systematically abuse and murder women?
-- Glad to see it. Throw 'em on the pile, keep on moving. We have to clear before we can rebuild.
23 October 2008
View From The Top, 23 October 2008
--The Nigerian government has detained a blogger, Jonathan Elendu. They're claiming it isn't an arrest, rather it's an 'invitation' to discuss his writings. Right. Here's his website Elendu Reports. This is part of a disturbing trend in Nigeria, a trend of greater repression and secrecy. Count me in with the group of bloggers demanding Jonathan's immediate release.
-- In other government-repression news, the EU gave Hu Jia the Sakharov Prize, the top EU award for human rights. I must say, given the spinelessness of Europe in re: GWoT and All-Things-Russia, they've been quite impressive in their resolute refusal to just let China move into superpower status. The EU representatives have rebuked the commands of China several times. Note the indignation of the Chinese official who said:
-- They're-Not-Theological-Just-Thuggish Watch:
And from my neck o' the woods:
-- I'm sure someone out-of-state will think that Biden speaking to over 1,000 people in Colorado Springs is a sign of the spread of Obama-mania, but here's reality:
1.) He spoke to 1,500 people. That's not a lot, election-season wise. As the article mentions, Palin got over 8,000 earlier this week.
2.) I know that in the current climate this comment will be construed as racist, but he went to Sierra High School, which is located in the predominantly minority neighborhoods of southeast Colorado Springs (as much as a white-as-a-snow-bank city like my hometown can be). It's a smart move by Biden's staff, because it's the only place in the city that would guarantee a crowd, but it's absolutely not representative of the city as a whole. I mean, there are at least 100K within 5 miles of New Life Church, and those people aren't just drinking but keg-standing the Palin Kool-Aid.
-- In Boulder yesterday:
-- Finally, in today's installment of JapanIsCraaazy:
(a) she thought that killing his digital avatar would grievously wound him,
(b) she might've been right,
(c) the police actually got involved,
(d) she's a piano teacher. I mean, we've all taken piano lessons, right? Could any of you seriously imagine one of your teachers not only knowing what Second Life is but logging onto a jilted lover's profile just to delete it? The only topic that would arouse such passion from my teachers would have been any modifications made to the church hymnal.
To reiterate: Japan is crazy.
-- In other government-repression news, the EU gave Hu Jia the Sakharov Prize, the top EU award for human rights. I must say, given the spinelessness of Europe in re: GWoT and All-Things-Russia, they've been quite impressive in their resolute refusal to just let China move into superpower status. The EU representatives have rebuked the commands of China several times. Note the indignation of the Chinese official who said:
''We express strong dissatisfaction to the decision by the European Parliament to issue such an award to the jailed criminal in China, in disregard of China's repeated representations,'' Liu said. ''It also violates universally recognized rules in the world, which is countries should treat each others as equals and respect each other.''I forgot about that rule! It's located between the universally recognized laws that all countries should give pots of gold to China every month and that every mention of the word "Tibet" shall be replaced with "Coming Soon: China!" Silly me.
-- They're-Not-Theological-Just-Thuggish Watch:
A Palestinian man has stabbed and killed an elderly Israeli civilian in a Jewish settlement to the south of Jerusalem, Israeli police have said.-- We all remember that one of the reasons why Iraqis came to the coalition's side was the extreme anti-smoking measures (just search for 'smoking' to save time) taken by al-Qaeda. Well, look at this story from Delhi about anti-smoking raids on citizens smoking in public. Sure, they just fine the guys rather than permanently disfigure them, but degrees-of-severity arguments only go so far. Is it really okay to argue something as just al-Qaeda Lite?
...The man stabbed and injured one of the officers, who managed to shoot back.
The wounded attacker then grabbed an 86-year-old passer-by and stabbed him before being overpowered. The civilian later died of his injuries in hospital.
And from my neck o' the woods:
-- I'm sure someone out-of-state will think that Biden speaking to over 1,000 people in Colorado Springs is a sign of the spread of Obama-mania, but here's reality:
1.) He spoke to 1,500 people. That's not a lot, election-season wise. As the article mentions, Palin got over 8,000 earlier this week.
2.) I know that in the current climate this comment will be construed as racist, but he went to Sierra High School, which is located in the predominantly minority neighborhoods of southeast Colorado Springs (as much as a white-as-a-snow-bank city like my hometown can be). It's a smart move by Biden's staff, because it's the only place in the city that would guarantee a crowd, but it's absolutely not representative of the city as a whole. I mean, there are at least 100K within 5 miles of New Life Church, and those people aren't just drinking but keg-standing the Palin Kool-Aid.
-- In Boulder yesterday:
"Prepare to be seriously disappointed in the election of Barack Obama," Nader said, calling Obama's bid "an unprecedented upward career move."You know, when the Right is using the same lines as Ralph Nader, perhaps its time to re-examine the strategy. I mean, when was the last time Nader was in touch with public opinion? 1965?
-- Finally, in today's installment of JapanIsCraaazy:
TOKYO (AP) - A 43-year-old Japanese piano teacher's sudden divorce from her online husband in a virtual game world made her so angry that she logged on and killed his digital persona, police said Thursday.I don't know what's weirdest:
(a) she thought that killing his digital avatar would grievously wound him,
(b) she might've been right,
(c) the police actually got involved,
(d) she's a piano teacher. I mean, we've all taken piano lessons, right? Could any of you seriously imagine one of your teachers not only knowing what Second Life is but logging onto a jilted lover's profile just to delete it? The only topic that would arouse such passion from my teachers would have been any modifications made to the church hymnal.
To reiterate: Japan is crazy.
Lil' O'Reilly: A Voice For Our Times
Okay, now I just found another "Lil O'Reilly" video. I can't help myself:
/laughingatpsychoticdemagoguery
/laughingatpsychoticdemagoguery
ADMIT IT: FANNIE AND FREDDIE TANKED BECAUSE YOU WERE TOO BUSY HANGING TOM BRADY POSTERS ABOVE YOUR BED!!!
I know I am way late to the party on this one, but I have to post this video, which had me collapsing into a loose pile of giggles not once, but three times:
Now I just need to see a 4 year old do Olbermann and a 7 year old girl as Skip Bayless.
Now I just need to see a 4 year old do Olbermann and a 7 year old girl as Skip Bayless.
22 October 2008
H.R. McMaster's Crib Notes on Future Wars
H.R. McMaster is a name history will remember. A leading theorist on the failures of the Vietnam war, McMaster is the author Dereliction of Duty, which was widely-read in the Pentagon and is considered authoritative on the subject of Vietnam military leadership. Quick summary of the book: a pox upon all the bastards' houses.
He's even more impressive in my young eyes (Viet-what?) as he is considered one of the creators of our successful counterinsurgency methods in Iraq. What he did in Tal Afar has been applied across Iraq, and everyone but President-to-be Obama can see it's worked great. (C'mon Barack, it's not that hard to say: "the surge worked." 3 simple words.) In any case, McMaster's a friggin' genius. I'm not alone in thinking that his theories and writings will be textbook material for U.S. leadership as we face new threats in the 21st century.
Anywho, he's got a new piece coming up in the Foreign Policy Research Institute's Orbis titled "Learning from Contemporary Conflicts to Prepare for Future War." You need the magazine for the full article, but here's a summarizing essay of sorts, based upon the full article.
Stuff that popped out to my untrained eye:
1.) These kinds of comments scream out to me that the small-war/counterinsurgency emphasis in military training is needed, but is hardly sufficient to answer the issues:
2.) Another trope that seems to be repeated quite often is the one along the lines of "human intelligence is irreplaceable." McMaster is definitely skeptical of the proclaimed advances in military technology, especially in re: counterinsurgency and asymmetrical warfare:
3.) And the award for Ridiculously Restrained Criticism of Head-In-The-Sand Leadership goes to Col. McMaster for this comment:
4.) I'll blurb this part and then command you to go forthwith and ReadTheWholeThing. Now. Toot-sweet.
An extra link to the essay for you readers too lazy to scroll back to the top. I've been there.
P.S. 'H.R. McMaster' is one of the best names I've seen in the public eye, ever. He needs a nickname, but I'm drawing a blank on anything good. Submissions from the crowd, si vous plait.
-----
*Note that I'm not suggesting (a) Able Danger didn't work the first time or (b) that I even want an effective Able Danger style program. I'm not in-the-loop enough to speak to (a) and I'm enough of a squish civil-libertarian that I'm pretty sure I would vociferously protest such an outcome as (b).
He's even more impressive in my young eyes (Viet-what?) as he is considered one of the creators of our successful counterinsurgency methods in Iraq. What he did in Tal Afar has been applied across Iraq, and everyone but President-to-be Obama can see it's worked great. (C'mon Barack, it's not that hard to say: "the surge worked." 3 simple words.) In any case, McMaster's a friggin' genius. I'm not alone in thinking that his theories and writings will be textbook material for U.S. leadership as we face new threats in the 21st century.
Anywho, he's got a new piece coming up in the Foreign Policy Research Institute's Orbis titled "Learning from Contemporary Conflicts to Prepare for Future War." You need the magazine for the full article, but here's a summarizing essay of sorts, based upon the full article.
Stuff that popped out to my untrained eye:
1.) These kinds of comments scream out to me that the small-war/counterinsurgency emphasis in military training is needed, but is hardly sufficient to answer the issues:
"Iran’s engagement in proxy wars through terrorist and insurgent groups in Lebanon, Gaza, Iraq, and Afghanistan demonstrates that the greatest danger to international security may lie at the intersection between hostile states and terrorist organizations. That is why the U.S. Joint Force must expand its ability to deter, coerce, or defeat nations that either threaten U.S. vital interests or attack those vital interests through proxies."In other words, we need to take a small page from federal law enforcement's playbook, which has developed different divisions such as Organized Crime and White Collar to deal with wildly different criminal issues. The military would be poorly served by a continued focus on large-scale capabilities. We need to find ways besides direct action to make the mullahs toe the line. Personally, I can't see anyone in Tehran worrying that many of his operatives have been detained by coaltion forces. Perhaps its already being done, but we firstly need some good ol' spying. Turn some agents, grant others asylum to America. Y'know, the usual.
2.) Another trope that seems to be repeated quite often is the one along the lines of "human intelligence is irreplaceable." McMaster is definitely skeptical of the proclaimed advances in military technology, especially in re: counterinsurgency and asymmetrical warfare:
The major offensive operation that quickly toppled the Hussein regime in Iraq clearly demonstrated the possibilities associated with new technology, as well as the effects that improved speed, knowledge, and precision can have in the context of a large-scale offensive operation. However, the initial phases of the operation also revealed important continuities in warfare that lie beyond the reach of technology. Unconventional forces will continue to evade detection from even the most advanced surveillance capabilities. Moreover, what commanders most needed to know about enemy forces, such as their degree of competence and motivation, lay completely outside the reach of technology.Amen. Until we get pre-cogs or an effective Able Danger* scheme, nothing, I repeat nothing will replace local knowledge and human interaction as strategically effective information. But such programs are inherently messy, often unsuccessful, and very time-money intensive. Such are the perils of national defense in a democracy, I suppose...
3.) And the award for Ridiculously Restrained Criticism of Head-In-The-Sand Leadership goes to Col. McMaster for this comment:
Some commanders and defense officials were slow to recognize the character of the conflicts in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Initial emphasis was on an attrition approach to the complex problem of growing insurgencies. Using technical intelligence and surveillance capabilities, U.S. forces attempted to defeat networked enemy organizations through attacking leadership and reducing critical capabilities."Slow to recognize." Riiight. Where as Tom Ricks tore some guys new orofices, McMaster's critiques are much more restrained but, under it all, you can still smell an equal amount of disdain. I love it.
4.) I'll blurb this part and then command you to go forthwith and ReadTheWholeThing. Now. Toot-sweet.
We need to reject the assertion that future war will differ fundamentally from recent and ongoing conflicts in order to protect future commanders from what could become a tendency toward risk aversion and over-control. Assuming information superiority might lead some commanders to conclude that making near-perfect decisions based on near-perfect intelligence is the essence of command. Commanders must be capable of conceptual thought and have the ability to communicate a vision of how the force will achieve its objectives.Flexibility, y'all. Flexibility.
An extra link to the essay for you readers too lazy to scroll back to the top. I've been there.
P.S. 'H.R. McMaster' is one of the best names I've seen in the public eye, ever. He needs a nickname, but I'm drawing a blank on anything good. Submissions from the crowd, si vous plait.
-----
*Note that I'm not suggesting (a) Able Danger didn't work the first time or (b) that I even want an effective Able Danger style program. I'm not in-the-loop enough to speak to (a) and I'm enough of a squish civil-libertarian that I'm pretty sure I would vociferously protest such an outcome as (b).
View From The Top, 22 October 2008
Some serious grouch-ing today, fair warning.
-- Nice, IBPO, nice. It's not as if unions already have reputations as corrupt, self-serving thug-ocracies, right? Asking for a paid holiday on 9/11 is worse than asinine, it's demeaning and, since it's the Peabody, MA police force, transparently disingenuous. Why in the world would they need the day off? /unionbashing
-- The Military Times polled its subscribers, and no surprise here: McCain wins 68%-23%. I know that this will be considered a victorious referendum on the troops support for the Iraq War and OEF, but I find the results unsettling. We talk about the various Two Americas ad nauseum: red-vs.-blue, north-vs.-south, east coast-vs.-west coast, main street-vs.-wall street, &c. No one talks about the very real schism of military-vs.-civilian.
This isn't to say that there is antipathy between the military and civilian groups, rather that it's profoundly unsettling that a nation's defenders, by large margins, agree/identify with only one wing of American politics. I'm sure that everyone has their own reasons for why this is so (the increasing left-ism of the Democratic party, the long-entrenched reactionary nature of our military culture and leadership, to name two opposing views), but it shouldn't be an exultant point for either side.
-- Linking through from Blackfive to Maj Pain's blog for the above post, I also found this rant on 'winning' that I found hilariously splenetic. It's these kinds of minds, minds that haven't been tarnished by modern child-rearing theory or mealy-mouthed anti-competition sports leagues, that stand atop the bulwarks each night, allowing us yet another peaceful sleep. That thought might frighten you or thrill you, but it's reality nevertheless.
**WARNING: Maj Pain's blog, while always entertaining and full of insight into the modern military mind, has an embedded player that has what I can only describe as a truly gawdawful selection of rock and country. Personally, I can think of few circles of hell lower than the one that consistently streams Eric Clapton, Eagles, Brooks & Dunn, and Nickleback. So make sure your speakers are turned off/turned up depending on your tastes. 'Lay Down Sally'? Really?!**
-- Yet another post in the "Taliban are nothing but gangster thugocrats" series: U.S. troops pull a (probably kickass) raid and rescue a kidnapped-for-ransom American hostage.
-- BUDs, A-School, Force Recon school, and PJ school are intense, but I'm pretty sure we don't allow this kind of stuff to happen, for good reason.
-- Nice, IBPO, nice. It's not as if unions already have reputations as corrupt, self-serving thug-ocracies, right? Asking for a paid holiday on 9/11 is worse than asinine, it's demeaning and, since it's the Peabody, MA police force, transparently disingenuous. Why in the world would they need the day off? /unionbashing
-- The Military Times polled its subscribers, and no surprise here: McCain wins 68%-23%. I know that this will be considered a victorious referendum on the troops support for the Iraq War and OEF, but I find the results unsettling. We talk about the various Two Americas ad nauseum: red-vs.-blue, north-vs.-south, east coast-vs.-west coast, main street-vs.-wall street, &c. No one talks about the very real schism of military-vs.-civilian.
This isn't to say that there is antipathy between the military and civilian groups, rather that it's profoundly unsettling that a nation's defenders, by large margins, agree/identify with only one wing of American politics. I'm sure that everyone has their own reasons for why this is so (the increasing left-ism of the Democratic party, the long-entrenched reactionary nature of our military culture and leadership, to name two opposing views), but it shouldn't be an exultant point for either side.
-- Linking through from Blackfive to Maj Pain's blog for the above post, I also found this rant on 'winning' that I found hilariously splenetic. It's these kinds of minds, minds that haven't been tarnished by modern child-rearing theory or mealy-mouthed anti-competition sports leagues, that stand atop the bulwarks each night, allowing us yet another peaceful sleep. That thought might frighten you or thrill you, but it's reality nevertheless.
**WARNING: Maj Pain's blog, while always entertaining and full of insight into the modern military mind, has an embedded player that has what I can only describe as a truly gawdawful selection of rock and country. Personally, I can think of few circles of hell lower than the one that consistently streams Eric Clapton, Eagles, Brooks & Dunn, and Nickleback. So make sure your speakers are turned off/turned up depending on your tastes. 'Lay Down Sally'? Really?!**
-- Yet another post in the "Taliban are nothing but gangster thugocrats" series: U.S. troops pull a (probably kickass) raid and rescue a kidnapped-for-ransom American hostage.
-- BUDs, A-School, Force Recon school, and PJ school are intense, but I'm pretty sure we don't allow this kind of stuff to happen, for good reason.
A Japanese sailor dropping out of an elite navy training program died in an unofficial farewell ritual requiring him to fight 15 classmates, the Defense Ministry said Wednesday.I'm not into tags, but I think I might create a "Japan is Crazy" tag just to catalogue all the wackiness.
21 October 2008
View From The Top, 21 Oct 2008
-- I'll get the domestic-side of my comments out of the way first. Apropos of my post last night about Halberstam and the Powell endorsement, here's another man trying to seem cool by proxy to the impending Obama electoral victory: Mark Foley! That's right! He too is an Obama supporter! He is also apparently rockin' the Beverly Hills circuit now that he's out of "rehab" for "alcoholism."
-- Here's David Brooks being thoughtful and yet still writing something so unintentionally condescending and inaccurate as to make his readers doubt whether he's been anywhere west of Philadelphia and south of Alexandria, VA in twenty years. I've lived the past 9 years of my life in the Front Range of the Rockies, and I have no idea what on God's green earth he's talking about.
And here's an even better response to the Brooks column. Lt. Nixon, PBUH, nails it.
-- If this op-ed piece from Germany is any indication, it's no small wonder that the people and governments of Western Europe are enfeebled and morally vacuous. Allow me to summarize this column for you:
-- I found this through Michael Yon's latest post: the Free Range International blog has a heartbreakingly close look at a women's prison in the Nanagarhar Province. Note especially the stories of abuse that are everyday occurences in rural Afghanistan.
-- One of the more predictably inane trends in popular culture is this industry of "questioning the status quo" or taking on the "sacred" elements of American society. As Lileks put it once when discussing Lewis Black's Nothing's Sacred (which had a cover of Black laying in the lap of a statue of the Virgin Mary): "now mocking Islam, that is irreverent". My problem is similar to Lileks: there's no real iconoclasm, it's all posturing. Rare is the person who actually takes on an accepted tenet and fearlessly moves in a different direction.
I bring this up because, in the midst of my faux-rebel ennui, I was awaken from my stupor by one of the most deliciously transgressive theories I've read in a while: "Expert Says Nuclear Terrorism Is Not A Threat."
Say What?!
I don't know if I'll agree with Mr. Jenkins, but it's a stone-cold lock that I'm going to read his book Will Terrorist Go Nuclear?
Now that's irreverent.
-- Here's David Brooks being thoughtful and yet still writing something so unintentionally condescending and inaccurate as to make his readers doubt whether he's been anywhere west of Philadelphia and south of Alexandria, VA in twenty years. I've lived the past 9 years of my life in the Front Range of the Rockies, and I have no idea what on God's green earth he's talking about.
And here's an even better response to the Brooks column. Lt. Nixon, PBUH, nails it.
-- If this op-ed piece from Germany is any indication, it's no small wonder that the people and governments of Western Europe are enfeebled and morally vacuous. Allow me to summarize this column for you:
"Our troops are being attacked by very bad people who blow themselves up in front of civilians and NATO troops. They don't like us, and don't want us in Afghanistan. Perhaps we should leave. These Taliban people are so mean! Our troops are troubled!"European equivocation and spineless fever! Catch it!
-- I found this through Michael Yon's latest post: the Free Range International blog has a heartbreakingly close look at a women's prison in the Nanagarhar Province. Note especially the stories of abuse that are everyday occurences in rural Afghanistan.
-- One of the more predictably inane trends in popular culture is this industry of "questioning the status quo" or taking on the "sacred" elements of American society. As Lileks put it once when discussing Lewis Black's Nothing's Sacred (which had a cover of Black laying in the lap of a statue of the Virgin Mary): "now mocking Islam, that is irreverent". My problem is similar to Lileks: there's no real iconoclasm, it's all posturing. Rare is the person who actually takes on an accepted tenet and fearlessly moves in a different direction.
I bring this up because, in the midst of my faux-rebel ennui, I was awaken from my stupor by one of the most deliciously transgressive theories I've read in a while: "Expert Says Nuclear Terrorism Is Not A Threat."
Say What?!
I don't know if I'll agree with Mr. Jenkins, but it's a stone-cold lock that I'm going to read his book Will Terrorist Go Nuclear?
Now that's irreverent.
20 October 2008
Echoes
This past weekend at my parents' house, I was happily surprised to stumble upon an autographed copy of The Best And The Brightest by David Halberstam in one of the bookshelves. A classic, I can't offer up enough praise of the book, and any attempt would just make me look like the giddy-eyed political n00b I already am.
I decided then and there to reread the book, mainly because: 1) it's always a good idea for an aspiring political writer to return to the greats that came before his time and 2) I have vague memories of the book (it's been 5 years), and I want to confirm/debunk my niggling suspicion that the stories within (a young JFK and his staff interacting with D.C.-establishment-types in re: Vietnam) will have a lot to say about the current state of the US.
Sure enough, on page 8 I found this passage in the opening chapter describing the first encounter between a nascent-national-star Kennedy and uber-insider-backroomer Robert Lovett:
I decided then and there to reread the book, mainly because: 1) it's always a good idea for an aspiring political writer to return to the greats that came before his time and 2) I have vague memories of the book (it's been 5 years), and I want to confirm/debunk my niggling suspicion that the stories within (a young JFK and his staff interacting with D.C.-establishment-types in re: Vietnam) will have a lot to say about the current state of the US.
Sure enough, on page 8 I found this passage in the opening chapter describing the first encounter between a nascent-national-star Kennedy and uber-insider-backroomer Robert Lovett:
One had a sense of the Establishment [represented by Lovett --ed.] in an election year being like a professional athletic scout watching a championship match, emotionally uninvolved with either competitor, waiting until it was over and then descending to the locker room of the winner, to sign him on, and to offer him the club's facilities -- in this case the trusted, respectable, sound men of the Establishment.Sound familiar?
Democrat Barack Obama, who has pledged to include Republicans in his administration, already has his eyes on one: former General Colin Powell, who handed him a high-profile endorsement on Sunday.
"He will have a role as one of my advisers," Obama said this morning on NBC's "Today" show. "Whether he wants to take a formal role, whether that's a good fit for him, is something we'd have to discuss."
Hmm.
A Rampart of Defense*
I received this video earlier today. I haven't posted a "View From The Top" today, but I know that watching this clip will educate the average reader far more than any links or analysis I might provide:
Please pass it on.
*"In battle it is the cowards who run the most risk; bravery is a rampart of defense." --Sallustius Crispus
Please pass it on.
*"In battle it is the cowards who run the most risk; bravery is a rampart of defense." --Sallustius Crispus
17 October 2008
Robot Chairs and AT-ST's
Presented, without comment. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you. . .Japan!
Allez cuisine!
And here as well (sorry I couldn't embed.)
(h/t: Technovelgy)
Allez cuisine!
And here as well (sorry I couldn't embed.)
(h/t: Technovelgy)
16 October 2008
View From The Top, 16 October
I'm getting lazy in my posting, I know:
-- Can Gen. Petraeus work his crazy COIN magic once again? That's the way this article in the Post makes it sound, what with the "strategy reviews" and "longtime advisers". I'm beginning to think that the average journalist and average citizen's view of The Surge is: Petraeus pulled out Tinker Bell, spread some pixie dust on Anbar, and commanded "happy thoughts" from the muzzeins throughout Iraq. Given DARPA's strict anti-pixie-dust guidelines, I think we can safely rule that idea out.
Thankfully Petraeus isn't listening to Sir Surge-A-Lot McCain and minding his steps and lowering expectations. But that's why we love him, right?
-- Gates: The U.S. is more popular than you think. SecDef gave a speech describing his experiences with the dozens of countries he's met with in his time at the Pentagon:
-- Can Gen. Petraeus work his crazy COIN magic once again? That's the way this article in the Post makes it sound, what with the "strategy reviews" and "longtime advisers". I'm beginning to think that the average journalist and average citizen's view of The Surge is: Petraeus pulled out Tinker Bell, spread some pixie dust on Anbar, and commanded "happy thoughts" from the muzzeins throughout Iraq. Given DARPA's strict anti-pixie-dust guidelines, I think we can safely rule that idea out.
Thankfully Petraeus isn't listening to Sir Surge-A-Lot McCain and minding his steps and lowering expectations. But that's why we love him, right?
-- Gates: The U.S. is more popular than you think. SecDef gave a speech describing his experiences with the dozens of countries he's met with in his time at the Pentagon:
“Every single one of these countries wants to have a better relationship with the United States, wants to have a stronger relationship, wants to increase our military-to-military relationships,” he said following his address.
Gates said these countries view the United States as “the last, best hope.”
He goes on to say that the U.S. just needs to "open its arms" and we'll have more allies. Fair enough, but you just know that part of the reason we've had difficulties over the past 8 years is because GWB and his inner circle haven't exactly been "international citizens". It's not as if Cheney is jetting off to Milan or Brussels every other weekend to kibbitz with the EC.
Gates has a point, up to a point: I think the waning presence of Dubya and the rising prospect of President Barry O are also helping grease the diplo-skids. (Great name for a band, btw)
-- Here's an analogy I find accurate. Crazy Horse:George Custer::Thomas Ricks:Nathan Sassaman and Ricardo Sanchez. ReadTheWholeThing.
13 October 2008
Just Awesome
This is no Hollywood movie sneak peek:
Live-fire practice running simultaneously with "Best Warrior" competition at Fort Lee.
Definitely in the running for best picture of the year.
(Biggest of hat-tips to Blackfive, PBUH)
Live-fire practice running simultaneously with "Best Warrior" competition at Fort Lee.
Definitely in the running for best picture of the year.
(Biggest of hat-tips to Blackfive, PBUH)
Nathan Hodge and Sharon Weinberger: Nuclear Vacation Tour
It's a rare pleasure when someone from the broader nat'l-security news and wonkery complex visits my home state of Colorado. It's weird, because we have loads of military here, but I don't think enough policy or leadership is present in the state to warrant public visits from such cognoscenti.
Well, this past Friday was an exception to prove the rule: bloggers and writers Nathan Hodge and Sharon Weinberger came not only to the Centennial State, but to my cozy hamlet of Boulder. They were invited by the Boulder Museum of Contemporary Art to talk about their book, Nuclear Family Vacation and show a slideshow from their travels. The book is a good 'un, full of neat anecdotes and asides, and is incredibly informative. For those interested, you can pair this book up with Spying On The Bomb, another personal favorite, and you'll be waaay more informed than your elected representative on the US nuclear arsenal.
Their talk was great, and they gave the crowd an ample time for questions. There was about 40 of us, and I was the youngest member of the audience by 7 years (conservatively). As is wont to happen at such events, there were good questions sprinkled among cranky whinings from septagenarian ex-hippies.
I asked a question about the relationship my generation (millenials) has to nuclear weapons. I was 7 when the USSR fell, and I've never actually seen a live nuclear explosion. The "die-ins" and hysteria of the nuclear-freeze 80's is just as distant as the Cuban Missile Crisis. I'm sure it makes some people feel old, but it's something worth pondering. I have quite a few friends who are junior officers across the branches, and in 15-20 years, they'll be the leadership of our armed forces, and unless something changes, the use of nuclear weapons will be as hypothetical to them as horse-driven cavalry maneuvers would be to Vietnam leadership.
I'm rambling at this point, I think, so I'll wrap it up by saying thanks to BMOCA and to Nathan and Sharon for making a stop in my state. They're welcome back any time.
Well, this past Friday was an exception to prove the rule: bloggers and writers Nathan Hodge and Sharon Weinberger came not only to the Centennial State, but to my cozy hamlet of Boulder. They were invited by the Boulder Museum of Contemporary Art to talk about their book, Nuclear Family Vacation and show a slideshow from their travels. The book is a good 'un, full of neat anecdotes and asides, and is incredibly informative. For those interested, you can pair this book up with Spying On The Bomb, another personal favorite, and you'll be waaay more informed than your elected representative on the US nuclear arsenal.
Their talk was great, and they gave the crowd an ample time for questions. There was about 40 of us, and I was the youngest member of the audience by 7 years (conservatively). As is wont to happen at such events, there were good questions sprinkled among cranky whinings from septagenarian ex-hippies.
I asked a question about the relationship my generation (millenials) has to nuclear weapons. I was 7 when the USSR fell, and I've never actually seen a live nuclear explosion. The "die-ins" and hysteria of the nuclear-freeze 80's is just as distant as the Cuban Missile Crisis. I'm sure it makes some people feel old, but it's something worth pondering. I have quite a few friends who are junior officers across the branches, and in 15-20 years, they'll be the leadership of our armed forces, and unless something changes, the use of nuclear weapons will be as hypothetical to them as horse-driven cavalry maneuvers would be to Vietnam leadership.
I'm rambling at this point, I think, so I'll wrap it up by saying thanks to BMOCA and to Nathan and Sharon for making a stop in my state. They're welcome back any time.
View From The Top, 13 October 2008
Oodles of links, oodles I tell ya.
-- Now no one who's read this blog is uninformed on the developments in Iraq, but Bob Krumm has a good summarization of the changes taking place over the past 6 months or so. Good email material.
-- While there has been a lot of concern over the past few weeks about the deterioration in Afghanistan, we might be approaching a "pessimism bubble." Gen McKiernan has come out and said "we will win." Not that it's easy at the moment, but that ISAF has the potential to succeed.
The NYTimes article also relays the story about a large-scale attack from the Taliban in Helmand province. From reliable sources it looks like coalition forces killed over 50 Taliban forces. Is it just me, or does this article make it sound like we lost the battle?
I love the quote from the Canadian general about the fight: "If the insurgents planned a spectacular attack prior to the winter, this was a spectacular failure." wordplaylolz
-- I think I'm coming to the position with Maliki that this man is a perfect illustration of "Boy Who Cried Wolf", or more specifically "Prime Minister Who Cried Success". He's totally squandered any crediblity on anything deployment-related. He is 100% posture.
-- I don't know much about this Kashmir dam fight, but it seems fairly petty from both sides. I mean, any time you have the mediating World Bank judge that a dam is acceptable only if it's made 1.5 m shorter, you are waaaay into the bureaucratic weeds.
-- "Why did the United States remove North Korea from the list when it is clear to anyone's eyes that the North is a terrorism-assisting country?"
When Japan, one of the US's most steafast allies, is pissed off at your spinelessness in re: North Korea, President Bush, it's time to raise the Lame Duck Threat Meter from 'Elevated' to 'Severe'. (Orange to Red for the illiterate)
-- Armchair Generalist, a quality read for a left-ish perspective on military policy, has some good clean snark about Wolfowitz and nuclear arms policy. Count me in agreement with the gist of the post, that we don't need to worry about our own stockpile being superceded as Best Pile In The World. I don't, however, think that it's just Wolfowitz whose pushing this. I think we have enough of a Cold War bureaucracy still in place that we'd be fretting the Chinese nuke growth anyway.
-- Hitch pulls his rhetorical-lever for Obama. Not Will Smith, the other Hitch.
-- For anyone who thinks a Castro-ated (groan!) Cuba is a place of freedom and all stories of the dictator abusing power are American agit-prop, read this story and shut up. This isn't an isolated incident, and until you've been to the island and seen the abject poverty and deep-seated sorrow in the eyes of everyday Cubans, just keep your idiocy to yourself.
If you can't tell, this is a touchy subject for your bloggespondent.
-- Oh, my city-on-the-Huron, when will you learn? In yet-another Detroit-is-dying article about the possible merger of GM and Chrysler (a bad move, IMHO) there's a deliciously protectionist quote near the end of the piece:
-- Now no one who's read this blog is uninformed on the developments in Iraq, but Bob Krumm has a good summarization of the changes taking place over the past 6 months or so. Good email material.
-- While there has been a lot of concern over the past few weeks about the deterioration in Afghanistan, we might be approaching a "pessimism bubble." Gen McKiernan has come out and said "we will win." Not that it's easy at the moment, but that ISAF has the potential to succeed.
The NYTimes article also relays the story about a large-scale attack from the Taliban in Helmand province. From reliable sources it looks like coalition forces killed over 50 Taliban forces. Is it just me, or does this article make it sound like we lost the battle?
I love the quote from the Canadian general about the fight: "If the insurgents planned a spectacular attack prior to the winter, this was a spectacular failure." wordplaylolz
-- I think I'm coming to the position with Maliki that this man is a perfect illustration of "Boy Who Cried Wolf", or more specifically "Prime Minister Who Cried Success". He's totally squandered any crediblity on anything deployment-related. He is 100% posture.
-- I don't know much about this Kashmir dam fight, but it seems fairly petty from both sides. I mean, any time you have the mediating World Bank judge that a dam is acceptable only if it's made 1.5 m shorter, you are waaaay into the bureaucratic weeds.
-- "Why did the United States remove North Korea from the list when it is clear to anyone's eyes that the North is a terrorism-assisting country?"
When Japan, one of the US's most steafast allies, is pissed off at your spinelessness in re: North Korea, President Bush, it's time to raise the Lame Duck Threat Meter from 'Elevated' to 'Severe'. (Orange to Red for the illiterate)
-- Armchair Generalist, a quality read for a left-ish perspective on military policy, has some good clean snark about Wolfowitz and nuclear arms policy. Count me in agreement with the gist of the post, that we don't need to worry about our own stockpile being superceded as Best Pile In The World. I don't, however, think that it's just Wolfowitz whose pushing this. I think we have enough of a Cold War bureaucracy still in place that we'd be fretting the Chinese nuke growth anyway.
-- Hitch pulls his rhetorical-lever for Obama. Not Will Smith, the other Hitch.
-- For anyone who thinks a Castro-ated (groan!) Cuba is a place of freedom and all stories of the dictator abusing power are American agit-prop, read this story and shut up. This isn't an isolated incident, and until you've been to the island and seen the abject poverty and deep-seated sorrow in the eyes of everyday Cubans, just keep your idiocy to yourself.
If you can't tell, this is a touchy subject for your bloggespondent.
-- Oh, my city-on-the-Huron, when will you learn? In yet-another Detroit-is-dying article about the possible merger of GM and Chrysler (a bad move, IMHO) there's a deliciously protectionist quote near the end of the piece:
Still, many Detroiters believe it would be better for G.M. to swallow Chrysler before an outsider.
“Should this happen, look for a lot of bloodshed,” wrote one person who posted a comment on a local Web site called DetroitYes.com. “However, it is better than another alternative — a Chinese company buys up Chrysler.”
That's the ticket, Detroit. It's better to be unemployed than to be bossed around by some furriner. That's the kind of thinking that leads to an economic recovery.
-- And finally, an update from Illinois (new state motto: The Land of Obama):
Early voting begins today in Chicago. What does that mean? Bring out your dead! Get 'em to the polls early and often!
And I loooove this picture from some friendly spectators at the Chicago Marathon. Nothing says Windy City like some alcohol while exercising.
10 October 2008
View From The Top, 10 October 2008
-- From time to time, I forget just how rapid the expansion of the Afghanistan National Army is happening. Then I read in press releases like this one that report:
-- I saw this report from the BBC, and can I say it's one of the least-informative and rambling newsreports I've ever seen? If you read it, what do you take away from it? Coalition plane blows up house? Is that newsworthy? This is the kind of thing that comes to mind when I talk about the over-reporting of conflicts. It's not a public disservice to keep this story from the public, because it says nothing anyway.
/oldmangrumbling
-- Here's a good article from the Washington Post, in contrast with the above, that brings fresh info to reader. Pakistani celebrities are speaking out against terrorism. This might be waaay off, but I take this story quite positively. It seems like many Pakistanis semi-ignored the fight happening in the western regions, writing it off as Not My Problem stuff, like how many Americans ignore the U.S. border or inner-city crime. Once there's a riot in Detroit, though, everyone starts to pay a little more attention. Same in Pakistan. Terrorist attacks are making it a more immediate issue. Greater public scrutiny could be a great disinfectant to the diseased intelligence service and military leadership of Pakistan.
-- WSJ op-ed on the real-world effects of the legal-world SCOTUS shenanigans in Boumedienne.
-- In an almost comical farce of lame-duck presidential politics, it looks like the U.S. State Dept. is thinking of de-listing North Korea as a sponsor of terrorism. It looks like this is just another nosebleedingly idiotic moment from the Bush administration, but wait! North Korea responds by saying Whatever, I'll Do What I Want!:
The Afghan army is set to grow to 134,000 soldiers. It now has about 70,000 troops, a number projected to grow to 90,000 by the end of the year. In Macedonia yesterday, Gates urged southeastern European nations to consider sending military trainers to Afghanistan.and I'm amazed. 20,000 more people by the end of the year?! Remembering the slow road for much of the Iraqi army training, it's safe to say that this undertaking by the coalition is one of a kind, historically speaking.
-- I saw this report from the BBC, and can I say it's one of the least-informative and rambling newsreports I've ever seen? If you read it, what do you take away from it? Coalition plane blows up house? Is that newsworthy? This is the kind of thing that comes to mind when I talk about the over-reporting of conflicts. It's not a public disservice to keep this story from the public, because it says nothing anyway.
/oldmangrumbling
-- Here's a good article from the Washington Post, in contrast with the above, that brings fresh info to reader. Pakistani celebrities are speaking out against terrorism. This might be waaay off, but I take this story quite positively. It seems like many Pakistanis semi-ignored the fight happening in the western regions, writing it off as Not My Problem stuff, like how many Americans ignore the U.S. border or inner-city crime. Once there's a riot in Detroit, though, everyone starts to pay a little more attention. Same in Pakistan. Terrorist attacks are making it a more immediate issue. Greater public scrutiny could be a great disinfectant to the diseased intelligence service and military leadership of Pakistan.
-- WSJ op-ed on the real-world effects of the legal-world SCOTUS shenanigans in Boumedienne.
-- In an almost comical farce of lame-duck presidential politics, it looks like the U.S. State Dept. is thinking of de-listing North Korea as a sponsor of terrorism. It looks like this is just another nosebleedingly idiotic moment from the Bush administration, but wait! North Korea responds by saying Whatever, I'll Do What I Want!:
"We neither wish nor expect to be delisted as a 'state sponsor of terrorism,' " the North's state-run news agency, KCNA, quoted a ministry spokesman as saying. "We can go our own way."Well played Pyongyang, well played.
09 October 2008
View From The Top, 9 October 2008
-- Admiral Mullen is not optimistic on Afghanistan, at all. Nor should he be. Some interesting comments, though. Apparently there's been a bit of a vigorous debate on the part of all NATO participants on how to best prosecute the counter-narcotics effort. He's also pessimistic about Pakistan's long-term effort in cleaning out FATA and NWFP, since that nation is also in a big-time economic crisis.
-- Arabic Media Shack has a fantastic post on the reality of Middle Eastern public opinion. Also has some good insight on the Egyptian book market. AMS is always a good read.
-- Start out at Blackfive, but follow through on his links to learn about a mini-feud re: Congressional "support" of the troops. I'm so sick and tired of the term "support". Let's just put it this way: I think what IAVA is doing is noble-minded but statistically idiotic. Rarely is military policy so black-and-white as to be categorized as "pro-troops" or "anti-troops".
-- Some DangerRoom guys are coming to Boulder. I'm sure as heck gonna be there. It's at the CU Law school, 1830 on Friday the tenth (tomorrow).
-- It wouldn't be a week at this blog without a link to something Michael Yon's done. Takeaway line: "It has become clear to me that we're losing this war. But losing doesn't mean lost."
-- And finally, read this opinion piece from one Mushfiq Murshed about the need for Pakistan to "own the war on terror". It is fantastic. Fan-frickin-tastic. His key point: Pakistanis, as a people need to get their s**t together and have some popular support in the fight against the terrorists. Murshed thinks it's to the government detriment that they haven't had firm leadership to help unify the country. The piece also posits that Musharraf's hands-off policy in FATA and NWFP are to blame for the current troubles. A healthy-sized blurb:
-- Arabic Media Shack has a fantastic post on the reality of Middle Eastern public opinion. Also has some good insight on the Egyptian book market. AMS is always a good read.
-- Start out at Blackfive, but follow through on his links to learn about a mini-feud re: Congressional "support" of the troops. I'm so sick and tired of the term "support". Let's just put it this way: I think what IAVA is doing is noble-minded but statistically idiotic. Rarely is military policy so black-and-white as to be categorized as "pro-troops" or "anti-troops".
-- Some DangerRoom guys are coming to Boulder. I'm sure as heck gonna be there. It's at the CU Law school, 1830 on Friday the tenth (tomorrow).
-- It wouldn't be a week at this blog without a link to something Michael Yon's done. Takeaway line: "It has become clear to me that we're losing this war. But losing doesn't mean lost."
-- And finally, read this opinion piece from one Mushfiq Murshed about the need for Pakistan to "own the war on terror". It is fantastic. Fan-frickin-tastic. His key point: Pakistanis, as a people need to get their s**t together and have some popular support in the fight against the terrorists. Murshed thinks it's to the government detriment that they haven't had firm leadership to help unify the country. The piece also posits that Musharraf's hands-off policy in FATA and NWFP are to blame for the current troubles. A healthy-sized blurb:
However [critics] fail to realize that any respite in military action, as was suggested by the adviser on interior affairs, Rehman Malik, for the month of Ramadan, will only provide an opportunity for the militants to regroup, rearm and reorganize their flanks. Whereas the need for economic aid is undeniable, it should not supplant but supplement military action.RTWT.
The previous government attempted to implement a similar indulgent policy in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA). The fallout has been negative. The erosion of the writ of the state is no longer a phenomenon restricted to the tribal areas as it has spread to the settled districts of the North West Frontier Province (NWFP). With it comes oppression of the weak, women and minorities as well as vigilante justice such as public executions and floggings under the pretence of enforcing Shariah.
The failure to pre-empt the spread of extremist dogma within the country by the previous government resulted in avoidable incidents such as the Lal Masjid debacle and led to a phenomenal increase in terrorist attacks.
07 October 2008
Could We Just Call It The Michael Gordon Times?
Well, I'm gobsmacked. This is a simply wonderful article from where else? The New York Times.
Okay, Michael Gordon wrote it, so my gob is only partially smacked. He's been consistently high-quality on all things Iraq. Let me point out a few highlights:
- "There is no question that the American reinforcements dispatched by President Bush have helped reduce sectarian violence, both directly through military operations and indirectly by helping encourage the spread of the Awakening movement, in which neighborhood watch groups have taken on Sunni extremists."
Well, it's in the Times now. Does that mean that the Lower-West-Side-types are going to give GWB and Petraeus credit? We all know the answer to that: probably not.
Will Senator Obama give them credit? Same answer? What does that say about our future president? That he's as stubbornly pig-headed as the Frank Rich crowd?
-Gordon is fair to both parties, highlighting strengths of each, but you can read through his restrained prose to see what he's saying here about Obama's troop-withdrawal plan:
"Mr. Obama’s position on troop cuts was forged in late 2006 as Iraq appeared to be approaching a full-scale civil war. Drawing on the bipartisan Iraq Study Group report, he opposed Mr. Bush’s troop reinforcement plan and sponsored legislation in January 2007 that would have removed all American combat brigades by the end of March 2008, while allowing a small force to remain for training, counterterrorism and the protection of the American Embassy and its personnel.
I'm actually warming to the guy. I'm not a right-winger who's convinced he's a closeted GayCommunistMuslim, I'm not going to wear "Nobama" t-shirts if he's elected. This refusal to admit the success of the surge, however, is the worst kind of partisan behavior.
- Gordon also manages to tease out some specifics from the Obama planned drawdown. Bottom line, his guys think it'll be somewhere between 30k and 55k.
- Here's a good summary quote of the politics of Iraq:
“The danger with Obama’s rigid timetable is that it may not allow U.S. commanders to react to events on the ground,” said Toby Dodge, a specialist on Iraq at the University of London and a former adviser to General Petraeus. “McCain’s policies lack the detail needed to confront the challenges of politics in Iraq. Policies developed to please the party faithful are not being subjected to close electoral scrutiny and do not match the complex political and military realties of Iraq.”
Very true, very true.
Okay, Michael Gordon wrote it, so my gob is only partially smacked. He's been consistently high-quality on all things Iraq. Let me point out a few highlights:
- "There is no question that the American reinforcements dispatched by President Bush have helped reduce sectarian violence, both directly through military operations and indirectly by helping encourage the spread of the Awakening movement, in which neighborhood watch groups have taken on Sunni extremists."
Well, it's in the Times now. Does that mean that the Lower-West-Side-types are going to give GWB and Petraeus credit? We all know the answer to that: probably not.
Will Senator Obama give them credit? Same answer? What does that say about our future president? That he's as stubbornly pig-headed as the Frank Rich crowd?
-Gordon is fair to both parties, highlighting strengths of each, but you can read through his restrained prose to see what he's saying here about Obama's troop-withdrawal plan:
"Mr. Obama’s position on troop cuts was forged in late 2006 as Iraq appeared to be approaching a full-scale civil war. Drawing on the bipartisan Iraq Study Group report, he opposed Mr. Bush’s troop reinforcement plan and sponsored legislation in January 2007 that would have removed all American combat brigades by the end of March 2008, while allowing a small force to remain for training, counterterrorism and the protection of the American Embassy and its personnel.
At that time, American intelligence agencies warned in a national intelligence estimate that the removal of all American and allied forces within 18 months would “almost certainly” lead to a significant increase in sectarian fighting, suggesting that the speedy, if partial, withdrawal advocated by Mr. Obama would also risk a major increase in violence."
Senator Obama, you were wrong on the surge strategy. Just say it. Spin it however you want, say that you're happy you were proved wrong, anything. This current head-in-the-sand tactic is asinine.I'm actually warming to the guy. I'm not a right-winger who's convinced he's a closeted GayCommunistMuslim, I'm not going to wear "Nobama" t-shirts if he's elected. This refusal to admit the success of the surge, however, is the worst kind of partisan behavior.
- Gordon also manages to tease out some specifics from the Obama planned drawdown. Bottom line, his guys think it'll be somewhere between 30k and 55k.
- Here's a good summary quote of the politics of Iraq:
“The danger with Obama’s rigid timetable is that it may not allow U.S. commanders to react to events on the ground,” said Toby Dodge, a specialist on Iraq at the University of London and a former adviser to General Petraeus. “McCain’s policies lack the detail needed to confront the challenges of politics in Iraq. Policies developed to please the party faithful are not being subjected to close electoral scrutiny and do not match the complex political and military realties of Iraq.”
Very true, very true.
View From The Top, 7 October 2008
I apologize for missing yesterday. Got some tough news over the weekend, and spent yesterday catching up. Anyway... twice the amount of links!
-- So it looks like 2009 will be the "Year of the NCO" for the army. The Secretary of the Army is mandating that every command sergeant major make two media appearances per quarter. Good for the Army. They, of all the branches, seem the most amenable to The New Media.
-- While I've been abysmal at covering the awesome stuff happening in quantum research, that doesn't mean big stuff isn't happening. So, that giddiness I had a few months back about quantum communications? Yeah, not so giddy at the moment, considering a simple laser defeats the encryption.
-- Head over to Defense Tech for some neat posts by Christian about the 60 Minutes "Kill bin Laden" report and the subsequent reaction from the Special Operations community. Fascinating stuff. To boil it down to a few sentences: "Dalton Fury" aka Maj. Thomas Greer, is a retired Delta Force officer who claims now that higher-ups prevented him from killing bin Laden back in Tora Bora. The notoriously tight-lipped Special Forces community is not happy with him blabbing, but no one is arguing to the contrary about Greer's claims. Christian's got some good thoughts as well.
-- Germany will increase its troop support to the NATO ISAF, but will also remove its elite force, KSK. From how I'm reading this, it looks like Germany's firmly behind NATO, but the KSK forces were a straight alliance between Germany and the US outside the purvey of NATO. There are some disheartening quotes further down the piece about many leaders throughout Western Europe thinking Afghanistan is "unwinnable." I bet you they're glad that America didn't feel that way about WWII...
-- One of my new heroes, Secretary Gates, responded quickly to that defeatist talk. (Note how the BBC puts defeatist in quotes). As I told a friend last night: I have a massive man-crush on our current SecDef. It's a shame he won't be able to stay over into the Obama White House.
-- I love, repeat, love this headline: "U.S. Urges Allies To Fight In Afghanistan Or Write Cheque". 'Bout time, in my opinion. It's not an alliance if we're doing all the work.
-- So it looks like 2009 will be the "Year of the NCO" for the army. The Secretary of the Army is mandating that every command sergeant major make two media appearances per quarter. Good for the Army. They, of all the branches, seem the most amenable to The New Media.
-- While I've been abysmal at covering the awesome stuff happening in quantum research, that doesn't mean big stuff isn't happening. So, that giddiness I had a few months back about quantum communications? Yeah, not so giddy at the moment, considering a simple laser defeats the encryption.
-- Head over to Defense Tech for some neat posts by Christian about the 60 Minutes "Kill bin Laden" report and the subsequent reaction from the Special Operations community. Fascinating stuff. To boil it down to a few sentences: "Dalton Fury" aka Maj. Thomas Greer, is a retired Delta Force officer who claims now that higher-ups prevented him from killing bin Laden back in Tora Bora. The notoriously tight-lipped Special Forces community is not happy with him blabbing, but no one is arguing to the contrary about Greer's claims. Christian's got some good thoughts as well.
-- Germany will increase its troop support to the NATO ISAF, but will also remove its elite force, KSK. From how I'm reading this, it looks like Germany's firmly behind NATO, but the KSK forces were a straight alliance between Germany and the US outside the purvey of NATO. There are some disheartening quotes further down the piece about many leaders throughout Western Europe thinking Afghanistan is "unwinnable." I bet you they're glad that America didn't feel that way about WWII...
-- One of my new heroes, Secretary Gates, responded quickly to that defeatist talk. (Note how the BBC puts defeatist in quotes). As I told a friend last night: I have a massive man-crush on our current SecDef. It's a shame he won't be able to stay over into the Obama White House.
-- I love, repeat, love this headline: "U.S. Urges Allies To Fight In Afghanistan Or Write Cheque". 'Bout time, in my opinion. It's not an alliance if we're doing all the work.
05 October 2008
Kaplan's Fight Against A Manhunt
Robert Kaplan's piece in the New York Times, "A Manhunt or A Vital War?", gave me a lot to mull over. While I think he's correct in stating that there's a longer-termed interest in AfPak than capturing Bin Laden, I think he's missing something in his argument.
One of the perils of a democracy is that its populace ultimately drives its policy. Often a nation can, albeit slowly and haphazardly, reach the best possible domestic position. This is in part due to the fact that the people are constantly receiving the input of data required for good decision-making, e.g. the voters will, upon seeing high gas prices, push for more aggressive energy policies.
In foreign policy, however, the required data is often difficult to acquire, whether due to biased coverage, geographical distance, or different perspectives. In other words, while I can go down to the Conoco and see $4.09/gallon gas for myself, to understand the perils of NE Afghanistan requires I read the writings of a soldier/reporter/foreign national with whom I might share zero common experiences.
What I'm trying to get at, I suppose, is that Kaplan overestimates the cohesiveness-of-thought of the U.S. public. While I agree with his view that it's a Vital War, many Americans will lack the patience and education to see this as much more than a Manhunt. Even worse for Kaplan's goals, the U.S. is the most patient nation in the world in re: AfPak: the rest of Europe lost patience with the war years ago.
The American populace has been historically amenable to the idea of nation-building. The North helped (somewhat) rebuild the South, The Marshall Plan practically rebuilt Europe, the U.S. created modern Japan, &c. But do you notice a common thread? We had already achieved tactical victory in each of those examples. There's never been an example of a sustained joint exercise of civil construction and military engagement. That will take a lot of patience.
Combine that with the extreme distance of AfPak, the dearth of a shared cultural-experience via substantial immigration, and the possible recession looming, Kaplan should be worried that once we "get our man", the clamor will be to "bring the boys home."
One of the perils of a democracy is that its populace ultimately drives its policy. Often a nation can, albeit slowly and haphazardly, reach the best possible domestic position. This is in part due to the fact that the people are constantly receiving the input of data required for good decision-making, e.g. the voters will, upon seeing high gas prices, push for more aggressive energy policies.
In foreign policy, however, the required data is often difficult to acquire, whether due to biased coverage, geographical distance, or different perspectives. In other words, while I can go down to the Conoco and see $4.09/gallon gas for myself, to understand the perils of NE Afghanistan requires I read the writings of a soldier/reporter/foreign national with whom I might share zero common experiences.
What I'm trying to get at, I suppose, is that Kaplan overestimates the cohesiveness-of-thought of the U.S. public. While I agree with his view that it's a Vital War, many Americans will lack the patience and education to see this as much more than a Manhunt. Even worse for Kaplan's goals, the U.S. is the most patient nation in the world in re: AfPak: the rest of Europe lost patience with the war years ago.
The American populace has been historically amenable to the idea of nation-building. The North helped (somewhat) rebuild the South, The Marshall Plan practically rebuilt Europe, the U.S. created modern Japan, &c. But do you notice a common thread? We had already achieved tactical victory in each of those examples. There's never been an example of a sustained joint exercise of civil construction and military engagement. That will take a lot of patience.
Combine that with the extreme distance of AfPak, the dearth of a shared cultural-experience via substantial immigration, and the possible recession looming, Kaplan should be worried that once we "get our man", the clamor will be to "bring the boys home."
Political Ad Video-Clip Art
This is stuff fascinates me. Look at these two ads, on the left statewide (Michigan) in 2006, on the right national in 2008:
I'm pretty sure that they were shot in the same studio, probably in the Detroit area. These come from different parties with different audiences, but the same message: the incumbent administration is gawdawful at managing the economy. DeVos's attempt fell flat in 2006, but methinks Obama's might play better.
Here's another case, a clip I've seen at least three different places, of a panicked trader waving wildly while a stock ticker moves by:
I got this one from a Vote No On 47 union ad here in Colorado. Odds are that this was a normal day for the trader. For those who don't know the exchanges, it's an utterly chaotic environment, even on good days. There's no way to know what kind of day this trader was filmed on, but it's good footage for those panicked by the current economic events.
Just fascinating stuff to study.
I'm pretty sure that they were shot in the same studio, probably in the Detroit area. These come from different parties with different audiences, but the same message: the incumbent administration is gawdawful at managing the economy. DeVos's attempt fell flat in 2006, but methinks Obama's might play better.
Here's another case, a clip I've seen at least three different places, of a panicked trader waving wildly while a stock ticker moves by:
I got this one from a Vote No On 47 union ad here in Colorado. Odds are that this was a normal day for the trader. For those who don't know the exchanges, it's an utterly chaotic environment, even on good days. There's no way to know what kind of day this trader was filmed on, but it's good footage for those panicked by the current economic events.
Just fascinating stuff to study.
03 October 2008
Calling Christopher Buckley...
So the USPS has a new Bette Davis stamp out, but it looks sorta funny. Why is her hand like that?
Well, in a move straight out of Thank You For Smoking, the USPS edited out a key part of the Margo Channing look:
Senator Finistirre: "We're not rewriting history, we're improving it!"
(H/T: Deadline Hollywood Daily)
A bit of nonpartisanship: "Thank you for answering the call of your country."
My eternal gratitude to the Biden family for their service. Beau Biden was sent off today for his tour in Iraq with the Delaware National Guard. Thank you, Capt. Biden, and thank you, Sen. Biden, for having raised an honorable man.
View From The Top, 3 October 2008
-- The Economist has an article pointing out the duplicitous nature of ISI in re: Taliban, Haqqani, or HIG et. al. It raises a good point that even if Zardari wants to change ISI, the Pakistani military still holds the power. I can't imagine it will be easy to convince the generals to loosen their grip, what with India only growing more powerful.
-- Kings of War has a good post on a realist plan for Afghanistan, including the possibility of installing an "acceptable dictator." Read it. I think they're onto something with the idea that many in Europe are looking for a way out, and that while any success would be a "coalition success", failure will be placed at the feet of America alone.
-- DoD creates an AFRICOM command center. Not a lot they can do at the moment, I suppose, other than fight small outbursts of terrorism or genocide, but I like this move, a lot. We'll see down the road, I'm convinced that our charity and aid to the African continent will have some returns down the road. Places like Rwanda and South Africa will remember who extended them a hand.
-- Washington Times has a couple of pieces up, each about Afghanistan. Arnaud de Borchgrave has one up that sounds quite despondent, as it takes into account the U.S. deficit's growth over GWB's administration paired with the need for more resources in AfPak. Also, note this paragraph:
NATO believes more troops in Afghanistan are needed to restore the initiative. France agreed and is sending 100 more of its elite troops, bringing the French total to 2,700. France, which lost 10 soldiers killed in a Taliban ambush last month, its largest military loss in 25 years, is also urging its European partners to lift all political caveats against putting their troops in harm's way. But French opinion polls show two in three French people want their soldiers home. French lawmakers appeared to be out of sync with their voters when they approved 343 to 210 a resolution to keep their troops fighting in the war on terror in Afghanistan.
Another conflict that needs addressing, I'm afraid.
The other is from O'Hanlon and Shearer preaching cautious patience with AfPak. While a "surge" is needed in region, we shouldn't expect a fix in 9 months a la Iraq. Amen. They offer up the suggestions that now seem nearly consensual: build ANA and ANP, invest in Afghani infrastructure, assist Pakistan in its reforming initiatives in NWFP and FATA. Geez, that's a lot of acronyms.
-- The New York Times at its best: international reporting. Solid piece on the crumbling of the Pakistani state, at least in the western regions. And, to reiterate the "Islamothug" label I'm sticking on Taliban fighters, note this section:
Reports of Taliban terrorism are widespread.In one case, scores of Taliban fighters confronted Iqbal Ahmed Khan, the brother of Waqar Khan, a member of the provincial assembly. The fighters ordered Mr. Khan, who was with two of his sons, to choose the son he wanted killed, said the president of the Awami National Party, Senator Asfandyar Wali.After Mr. Khan was humiliated into choosing one son, the Taliban killed both boys, Mr. Khan and seven servants, Mr. Wali said.
-- Perhaps it is a little announcement in the grand scheme of things, but we should at least note the attempt to spark reformation discussions in Islamic quarters.
-- Dear President-Elect-To-Be Obama: please, please, pleeeease make sure Martin Kramer gets to talk to you at least once a month. You guys went to the same school! You can trust him!
02 October 2008
View From The Top, 2 October 2008
-- David Kay states the obvious, that attacking Iran militarily is an option of last choice. Today on NPR's Fresh Air (yes, yes, I know), Robert Baer was hyping his new book The Devil We Know. He stated several times that "attacking Iran" would be monumentally stupid and unsuccessful.
Am I missing something here? Has anyone in the past couple of years seriously suggested attacks against Iran? Let's look at some of the "usual suspects", both gross stereotypes for rhetorical effect: 1.) a General Turgidson type military official, and 2.) a sniveling "neocon" professor or journalist who eagerly spends American blood for the sake of Israel.
1.) I think it's safe to say that the Pentagon is firmly against action with Iran. We're still stretched thin between Iraq and Afghanistan, we're under-supplied in terms of technology, and any action against Iran would require a resource-load that is simply unfeasible.
2.) C'mon, guys. Neocons might be zealous, but they aren't idiots. They know that they need public-support in order to convince inert D.C.'ers to pursue any bold course, and there is no support anywhere in the world to start a war with Iran.
I had to get that off my chest. Carrying on...
-- Press conference with ISAF commander Gen. McKiernan. Good stuff, but very sobering. I'll keep saying it: we're in for a bad winter fight with the Taliban. Don't act surprised when it happens.
-- While I utterly reject an idea of military action against the mullahs of Iran, I'm all for a Solidarity-style support of dissidents and encouraging Iranians to rebel against the clerics. I mean, what's the difference between the Soviet Union and Iran in cases like this?
-- It's not good news (yet), but it should be noted that Mehsud is probably starting his mortal-coil shuffle about now. It's going to have big consequences in AfPak.
For those who don't know, Mehsud is a villain straight out of Hollywood (picture below). He's the functional head of many of the Islamothugs ruling rural Pakistan, specifically in FATA. He basically created the Pakistani branch of the Taliban, has run a campaign of acquisition by killing rival warlords, and is probably (by my lights) the guy in charge of the assassination of Benazir Bhutto.* He's been a several-month long battle against the Pakistani government with his own private army. The dude is one nasty bastard. He's so evil that there is a growing opinion amongst more modern Pakistanis that he's a creation of the CIA in order to turn public opinion against the Islamothugs.
Anyway, Mehsud has/had diabetes (DIABEETUS), and it seems he's close to kicking it, nshallah. When he goes, we'll see if his group Tehrik-i-Talibani Pakistan keeps together. My gut reaction is that it would better benefit the ISAF and Pakistani forces if it splintered, but I could be way off.
-- Finally, nonpolitically, this story just killed me. Possibly the funniest/coolest heist in years, and the most clever use of Craigslist since I traded housewives in the "Missed Connections" page. I hope the robber gets away and blows all the money in a totally irresponsible fashion. That man earned his dollar.
---
*Mehsud's response to the accusation of assassinating Bhutto? "Tribal people have their own customs. We don't strike women." Riiight.
01 October 2008
View From The Top, 1 October 2008
-- Read the speech from SecDef Gates given Monday at NDU. It's thoughtful, provocative, and has long-term implications. More later, but I'll say right now that I think it's a good speech, and proof enough that Gates should have become SecDef at the beginning of the second GWB term.
-- I saw this over at A Soldier's Perspective, so I can't take credit for finding it, but I'll be darned if I'm not going to do my best to pass this video along:
Every time you get down about America and its prospects, take comfort in the knowledge that our country is defended by men like Lt.Gen Hal Moore. If he thinks this land is worth fighting and dying for, it must be a truly great land.
-- This will be the last time I simply post a link to Michael Yon's site, because if you aren't checking on that site daily, I hate to tell you, you just don't care about GWoT. Hyperbolic? Nope. He is the truth when it comes to daily perspective and the truth when it comes to the most intimate photographs. And when he says, as he did in the past week:
I get the foreboding sense the AfPak war might become far worse than Iraq ever was. Everything here feels wrong.
You bet your sweet bippie that he means it and that it's the truth.
-- I know I'm late to the party on this one, but when I read this story, the only thing that came to mind was: I didn't know Elisha Cuthbert was a Muslim!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
