Monday December 29, 2003
Massive Failure, Pathetic Retreat
It is time for the supporters of this administration to face facts: other than their capture of the tinhorn dictator Saddam, their crusade in Iraq has been a massive failure. Soldiers have been dying at an increasing rate since Saddam's capture, with another killed and five seriously injured just yesterday, and at least 13 killed in coordinated attacks on coalition troops in the once-peacful area of Karbala. Overall, 12 U.S. soldiers have been killed and 105 wounded since Saddam's capture. The administration line, now adopted by the military, is that these insurgents are simply loyalists of the Saddam regime. We can file this in the overflowing trashcan with the rest of the administration's retellings of history. The insurgency is everything *but* that, and I think it does not serve us well to pretend otherwise. This insurgency is full of the disaffected and disenfranchised from the administration's ill-conceived after-war plans. Sure there are former regime members in the insurgency. It would be hard to create a barbershop quartet in Iraq without recruiting someone who was a member of the Ba'ath party. But what's the point? There's surely no one there who is under any illusion that Saddam Hussein is returning. The Iraqi insurgency is a nationalist one, and it is gaining steam, and it is being stoked by the criminal mismanagement of the postwar situation. And all members -- Ba'athists and the others -- are sure that their continued actions will get the US out of Iraq faster.
And now we know they're absolutely right. Remember the Iraqi constitution that was supposed to be completed by December, according to Colin Powell? It's off the table. In fact, apparently any serious measures to shore up a democratic government in Iraq have been jettisoned in favor of the hasty withdrawal of more American troops in time for the November elections. Only a few months ago, Bremer stated that creating a government without a constitution "invites confusion and eventual abuse." It looks like it is no longer a problem for a reconstruction team that has been nothing but a massive failure, that is looking to cut its losses.
"Attacks Force Retreat From Wide-ranging Plans in Iraq", reads a headline in yesterday's Washington Post. It would be better if it read, "Attacks Force Retreat From Iraq," for that is exactly what is happening. The "Iraq reconstruction" team is so focused on hitting their July 1st deadline for the turnover of sovereignty to an interim government that we have to assume that they are unconcerned if the end result is a bloody and at-one-time-preventable civil war, which is sure to follow such an antidemocratic handover. According to one official, "ideology has become subordinate to schedule." As far as I can tell, it was never not subordinate. If you can actually find me an ideology somewhere that can be attributed to this administration, an ideology that is not wholly contingent on political forecasting or scheduling, I'd love to see it.
Things have gotten so bad in Iraq that we've stooped to allowing militias to be created to fight the insurgency. Iraqi policemen roam around in borrowed cars without radios, armed with a single Kalashnikov with a single magazine against insurgents with RPGs. Nearly half the Iraqi army's graduates have quit in disgust.
Yet the neocons are ecstatic. Jonah Goldberg, yesterday on CSPAN, called Bush's foreign policy an "unmitigated success", essentially proving that America owed no allegiance to any ally, no fealty to any treaty. Saddam is captured, and that is going to be their headline from now until November. Nevermind all the lies they peddled about WMD. Nevermind the lack of planning that went into their postwar efforts. Pay no attention to the "transfer tubes" aka body bags slipped into Dover AFB where no cameras are allowed. Ladies and gents, "WE GOT HIM!" But what about the soldier who was kill... "WE GOT HIM, folks!" And the insurg... "WE GOT HIM!" And the... "DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND THE WORDS THAT ARE COMING OUT OF MY MOUTH? WE GOT HIM!"
Is that enough to carry them through the elections? We'll see.
Wednesday December 24, 2003
3; even the cows are pissed
Three soldiers were killed in a roadside bomb attack north of Baghdad.
As a sure sign of the incompetency of the Bush administration, the first case of Mad Cow disease has been found in the US. The cow said, in his defense, that he couldn't afford his rising healthcare premiums.
Monday December 22, 2003
"Marginally" safer
Now that Saddam's captured, and Bush is cruising to re-election, and Kerry, Gephart, and Lieberman are his frontmen in the election battle, it looks like there's little to be said for the fate of the country except "nice knowing ya!"
Oh sure, there is the occasional judge who calls the administration to task for their abusive overreaching and for their malinterpretations of the Constitution.
But day to day the erosion of American civility and governmental accountability becomes more apparent. The one-party system in America has already shown how quickly it is willing to resort to the vilist abuses of totalitarian regimes in order to cement their hold on power. Valerie Plame is a dim memory, as John Ashcroft buries the investigation. Tom DeLay fends off accusations of financial impropriety without even breaking a sweat. Republican idealogues self-combust in a conflagration of immoral and unethical activity, and the nation barely stirs from its slumber.
I didn't feel even marginally "safer" after Saddam's capture, and any chance that I would was dashed by Tom Ridge's raising of the terror alert to Orange. Our fear has cooled enough that our President thought the time was right for frosting it with a thick layer of anxiety.
But whatever anxiety I have comes not from a potential terrorist attack, it comes from knowing that the administration has been deliberately leaving cracks in the wall, as chemical plants housing toxic gasses near population centers go underprotected (or completely unprotected). The cynic in me sees only two possible excuses for this: either the administration has decided that the free market trumps security and that chemical plants must not be forced to make costly security improvements in order to maintain their competitive edge in the new global marketplace, or they are intentionally leaving a potentially disastrous gap unmended.
But could it be that the administration is simply out of money, and can no longer afford to protect the homeland? That they have decided that $87 billion for Iraq and the imaginary security of the war was more important than our actual security concerns here at home? That pots-o-gold disguised as Iraq reconstruction contracts are a better investment than staving off a mass homicide numbering in the thousands or hundreds of thousands?
In any case, when their porous security is finally breached by some faceless madman from some previously inocuous country, the next day we will no longer have a country. As Tommy Franks said recently, as best I can recall, the Constitution won't survive another terrorist attack on our soil.
At that point, our great democratic experiment will be at an end, and our one-party state will become a monster.
We aren't even marginally safer, but our profit margins will be protected until the very end. I can guarantee you that.
Tuesday December 16, 2003
Representative Ray LaHood's amazingly prescient comments about finding Saddam
The question: what did Ray LaHood know and when did he know it? And by extension, what did the Bush administration know, and when? Here's what Ray LaHood said a little over 14 days ago:
Ray LaHood held his thumb and forefinger slightly apart and said, "We're this close" to catching Saddam Hussein.
Once that's accomplished, Iraqi resistance will fall apart, said the five-term Republican congressman from Peoria who serves on the House Intelligence Committee. (emphasis added)
A member of The Pantagraph editorial board -- not really expecting an answer -- asked LaHood for more details, saying, "Do you know something we don't?"
"Yes I do," replied LaHood.
Ok, LaHood, it's time to come clean. What did you know, when did you know it, and who told you? One would think this is rather important, don't you?
What if we have known for weeks where Saddam was? Or what if, simply, we had people who knew where he was and were negotiating with them? In any regard, it casts this "lightning raid" in a quite different light.
Monday December 15, 2003
Juan Cole has a comment on one of the possibilities that I mentioned earlier -- that the Shiite majority in this country may find itself emboldened by Saddam's capture. Essentially now that they know Saddam's not coming back, even if the Americans leave tomorrow, what's to stop them from playing their hand?
Don't expect crocuses
Following the capture of Saddam, I half-expected herald angels to come down from heaven and melt all this damn snow with their soothing chorus of Hallelujahs. Instead all I got was more damn snow.
All these guys got was killed by two more suicide bombings (the second and third suicide bombings since Saddam's capture).
For those Americans who had a prepped, duct-taped room for the inevitable shower of chemical and biological weapons that Hussein was going to rain down on our innocent heads, yesterday was a great day.
For the rest of us, who never saw Saddam as a threat and felt that this "threat" was manufactured by (and decades ago, funded by) members of the current Bush administration, today is a wonderful moment of respite for the Iraqis, but the three suicide bombs that have detonated since his capture prove that the motives and loyalties of the insurgency currently bedeviling the Coalition are much less monotone than some would like us to believe. Our administration, through their inept bungling of the postwar situation in Iraq have managed to make mortal enemies out of many Iraqis who hated Saddam's tyrannical regime. Every cluster bomb we dropped, every unexploded bomblet that today may tear off the limb of a child or a spouse, will eventually fill someone somewhere with the need for revenge. These people are few, assuredly, and certainly outnumbered by the many who will now be more predisposed to working with the Coalition in the rebuilding. But insurgents don't stop fighting because they are outnumbered. We will surely make every attempt to marginalize the insurgency, but that will not deter these people. Until we leave, we can expect nothing to await us but a low-grade war which can only further the demoralization of the American soldiers and the Iraqi people. The head of the snake has been cut off, but it seems like there are other and unknown snakes lurking, it is going to be very hard to achieve another victory (both military and PR) like the one that was had this weekend. If we have another 6-8 months of a low-grade conflict of suicide bombings and remote detonations, whose capture and conviction will provide the needed PR boost?
Now all that's left is the arduous effort to rebuild a country torn apart by years of tyrannical rule and bitter religious enmities. What remains to be seen is the effect Saddam's capture will have on the process. Will it forge a new Iraqi unity? Or will it embolden the once-oppressed Shiite majority? We can't even venture a guess at this point, and even our President wasn't landing onto any aircraft carriers this weekend.
Maybe next weekend, if the weather's suitable?
Sunday December 14, 2003
Captured
Hussein captured without a shot fired.
Suicide bomber kills 17 at police station in a town west of Baghdad. Maybe he didn't get the communique?
Thursday December 11, 2003
McGovern? McGovern? REALLY? Are you sure that's your final answer?
Good luck to the dim bulbs in the Bush campaign in their attempt to paint Howard Dean as the "new McGovern".
I can't wait until Bush hits his first campaign stop with that moronic line, when the TV cameras pan around the audience and we witness hundreds of twenty-somethings turning to their friends, shrugging their shoulders, asking "Who the fuck is McGovern?"
Wednesday December 10, 2003
6 more children killed in Afghanistan
A second atrocity - er, "accident" - left another six children dead in Afghanistan, bringing to 15 the number of children killed in Afghanistan by truly senseless applications of military force. A military spokesman stated, "We had no indication there were non-combatants in the compound." Oh really? That line is getting harder to believe every day.
These recent actions if Afghanistan seem to be part of a grander plan across the theatre of operations to turn up the heat on the insurgents and damn the "collateral damage". And who can't be convinced of its effectiveness -- insurgent attacks on Americans in Iraq are down -- they must be doing something right, right?
Tell that to the Iraqis whose hometowns are now encased in barbedwire.
Tell that to the families in Afghanistan who had their children torn limb from limb by a500-lb bomb aimed at one man, and to the familes whose children were crushed under a wall during this latest assault.
Tell that to the people in Samarra who are telling a decidely different story than our military commanders. Why were these commanders so keen to hype the body count there, when usually we hear nary a peep from them about Iraqi casualties?
If we revert to the overexuberant tactics of our Israeli counterparts, there is surely going to be serious blowback against our troops. The first signs of this might already be occurring -- two suicide bombers within a four hour timsepan? The folly of our Iraq excusion is obvious. Our troops are ill-prepared to handle an insurgency and the end result will certainly be either the humiliating pullout of US troops or the never-ending murder and disfigurement of troops, civilians, and insurgents. Our insouciant President has placed us in a fingertrap that he is obviously ill-equipped to extricate us from, and military men and civilians are paying with their lives.
Tuesday December 09, 2003
More on the Penn State College Republicans
Here's the Penn State Student in blackface. I think we should really encourage more of this "free speech" at our Universities, so people can find out what the new Republicans are really all about. They don't even have to open their mouths and they manage to lose credibility.
The real story (underneath the blackface) is that these College Republicans are simply parrotting the behavior of their beloved leader and his lackeys, who absolutely, never ever would admit responsibility for a mistake, no matter how horrific. The founder of their (c)lan, Rick Santorum, would be proud.
Oh, and for a good laugh, read this letter to the editor of Penn State's student newspaper, The Collegian, for an example of how the idea of "logical fallacy" is sadly lost on Republicans. Here's the key bit:
"The allegation that the KKK costume was a promotion of racism is a classic example of logically fallacious context dropping. If the KKK costume was an endorsement of racism, then the Takkeem Morgan costume was an endorsement of both Morgan and bike theft. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe the College Republicans view Morgan as their hero. Therefore, the message that a logical person would deduce from the KKK costume is that the College Republicans dislike the KKK as much as they dislike Morgan."
Sunday December 07, 2003
So, what words do we use to describe this atrocity that killed 9 children in Afghanistan, and another (in the same article) that accidentally killed 11 people from one family? Unfortunate accidents? The price of the war on terror?
Or do we call them by their real name?
Friday December 05, 2003
Penn State's conservatives are out of the closet!
College Republicans whine because they have no representation on campuses and are ridiculed for their beliefs.
If it wasn't obvious why these pimple-assed doofs in too-big suits "get no respect", now you can see for yourself.
The College Republican chairman at Penn State, Brian Battaglia, had some pictures of a recent Halloween party on his website. In one picture, a white guy in black face was seen wearing a bike chain around his neck. The caption: "Apparently Takkeem was released long enough to come to our party. We thank the local police department." Takkeem is the Undergraduate Student Government Vice President.
The Penn State Black Caucus called for Battaglia to apologize, and asked for his resignation. The University spokesman also requested that Battaglia apologize, calling the occurrence "an embarrassment to the entire university."
Battaglia had this to say about the controversy:
"The College Republicans ... stands staunchly opposed to the mindset held by the radical left on college campuses across the country. Their viewpoints, which posit that any action or speech which gives discomfort to a vocal minority should be cause for censorship, persecution or demands for public apologies, are the greatest threat to liberty in our time."
Curiously, "[f]or what Battaglia called unrelated reasons, he resigned as a USG town senator early Wednesday morning, before these events transpired."
Here's the same story from the AP.
Brian Battaglia is the brain behind the recent "Conservative Coming Out Day," a protest which saw a group of about 30 students in too-big suits holding signs such as "I'll tolerate your perversion if you tolerate my disgust!" and "Gun control means hitting your target!"
From that article, "Many of them feared the liberal bias, and were afraid of being labeled as 'bigots,' 'racists,' and 'homophobic'."
Why would anyone think that???
Penn State was also recently host to a bunch of neo-fascists from some hellhole in central PA who stood at the entrance of the University wearing kilts and holding flags on 20-ft-high flagpoles, while other neo-fascists played bagpipes and milled about in too-big suits handing out brochures decrying the Supreme Court's recent ruling dismissing Texas's sodomy laws.
And guess who was one of the founding members of the Penn State College Republicans? Rick Santorum.
Wednesday December 03, 2003
Texas miracle?
Slowly getting back into the swing of things. Here's an interesting bit of news:
The NYTimes dismantles the "Texas miracle". "Over all, a comparison of the performance of Houston students who took the Stanford exam in 2002 and in 1999 showed most did not advance in relation to their counterparts across the nation. More than half of them either remained in the same place or lost ground in reading and math."
