Random thoughts 15

A random rant

I sometimes think if I hear one more time that George W. Bush stole the 2000 election or the 2004 election or that the war in Iraq is illegal or that members of the Bush political administration are guilty of war crimes, that there were no WMDs in Iraq in 2003, that Saddam had no connection with terrorists (including some who did have connections with 9-11 although Saddam was not in on that operation) or that Israel is the source of all the problems in the Middle East, I think I just will go off the deep end.

First: GWB did not steal the 2000 election. The U.S. Supreme Court did not select him. If anything, it was the Gore campaign that tried to use the judicial system to change the outcome in Florida. I am tired of hearing that all election officials down at the county level are in the hip pocket of this campaign or that political party. In the 30 years I covered elections, the local election officials have done their darndest to be as accurate and accountable as possible. So, when I hear people talk of conspiracies to steal elections, I think of those hard working folks at the local level and just shake my head.

As for Gore and his campaign: They just couldn’t let Bush have in the appearance of a victory, so they tried everything they could to stop the count until they could line up a judge or two to allow manual recounts, but only in areas that favored Gore. The hypocrisy of that just made me sick. For God’s sake, I wanted to scream, just let the process work itself out. There is a procedure for challenging the results of an election and asking for a recount, just follow it. Rather, the Gore campaign had to jump to the courts. And don’t go on about the GOP controlling the Florida secretary of state’s office, that is just hogwash to the extreme. Don’t go on about suppressed votes or butterfly ballots. It is all stuff to obscure the fact that Gore did not win.

Besides, in the ultimate end, after all the dust settled and a coalition of media outlets went back in a recounted the ballots ... guess who was the winner in like all the various scenarios: GWB.

So, if you don’t like the result, get over it.

Also, even if the minority vote was suppressed in some areas of Ohio in 2004, which it apparently didn’t happen but makes a convenient urban fairy tale, the margin of victory for Bush was such that it wouldn’t have mattered ... in other words, Bush-haters, you lost; time to get over it.

Nor was the war in Iraq illegal nor are Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc., guilty of any war crimes.

First, how many U.N. resolutions threatening AND authorizing force does it take to make a war legal? The UN Security Council since 1991 had passed 19 resolutions on Iraq that Saddam supposedly was in violation of. Even Hans Blix admitted that Hussein had violated the last one in November 2002, but he wanted more time.

If you truly believe that Saddam Hussein’s regime had NO WMDs, please read the entire Duelfer Report, http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/duelfer.html , not just cherry picked passages.

Also understand, if I put a bar of soap in my jacket pocket where you can’t see it and tell you it is a gun, you most likely would believe it was a gun. Especially if all my buddies with me are saying it is a gun, because they actually believe it is a gun. And when the cops show up and see me pointing my “gun”, they are not going to assume it is a bar of soap. They are going to assume it is a gun and tell me to put it down. And if I don’t do it immediately, they are liable to open fire and justifiably I might add.

Saddam may have had a bar of soap or he may have really believed he had WMDs, but 45 nations believed he did and formed a coalition (and so what if GWB allegedly coerced most of them, the man is not omnipotent and they still put their people on the line in one way or another) to take Saddam down. It was not something that just the Americans did, or just the Brits did, or the Italians or the Poles or any other of the members of the coalition.

Just because you don’t like George W. Bush does not make him a liar or a criminal.

Bush did not lie. He did follow the law. He got Congressional approval, that in essence (except that it did not have it as its title) was a declaration of war. He had a U.N. resolution to back him up. OK, granted it didn’t specifically authorize the U.S. to invade Iraq, but the November resolution authorized unspecified measures to compel compliance if Saddam’s regime did not satisfy its provisions. It didn’t.

Saddam had no links to terrorists, specifically Al Qaeda. Arrgggghhh. Please read the Iraq Perspectives Report.

http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/iraqi/index.html

And what has been released so far is just the tip of the iceberg.

I also wish people would understand the difference between a lawful and unlawful combatant. Unfortunately, since we have had a slew of bombing over the last 7 years, a lot of people think we can go back to status quo ante 9-11. When will we realize that we really are at war with these hoods and it is an honest to goodness root’n toot’n shooting war?

As for torture: Maybe I have misplaced my faith and trust but I find it difficult to believe that the type of soldiers I have had the pleasure to serve with actually engaged in torture. Of course, your definition of torture and mine differ. I mean, to me torture is like beating somebody with fists or a rubber hose. It is like breaking limbs and dislocating joints. It is like drilling holes in a body or chopping off digits. It is like carving on someone or using them for a human ash tray. Let’s not forget sexually violating someone.

However, it is not torture to subject someone to loud music that they dislike for 24/7 or to put them in a cold room with little clothes on. It is not forcing them to stand for hours, or squat for hours or keeping them under a bright light for hours. Those psychological pressures do not meet the standard for torture in my book. Nor does the Good Cop-Bad Cop routine.

My personal jury is still out on waterboarding. I don’t know enough about the procedure to know if it qualifies as torture. Drowning some one is, but then they would be dead. I do think that keel-hauling would qualify as torture, but that is primarily due to the barnacles, plus ships’ keels are much longer than they used to be. We could be back the cat-o-nine-tails, but they flogging really is more than punishment. It is torture.

Still, I am not sure humiliation is torture. It is humiliation and torture is more physical.

One thing I do wonder is that when did combatants (whether lawful or unlawful) get rights other than those laid down by the Hague and Geneva Conventions on the conduct of war. Remember, we are in a war. Oops, I forgot ... we aren’t, even if Congress authorized the use of military force to resolve the problem.

Finally, for all those who hate GWB so much that they lose all sense of proportion. Understand this, in a few months on Jan. 20, 2009, at noon, a new president will be sworn in. This person will be the winner of a national ballot held on Nov. 4 (and days preceding in some jurisdictions) and your long nightmare will be over. I wonder what you will say if your preferred candidate doesn’t get elected this time. What excuse are you going to trot out this time.

Ok, I have vented enough for today.

Random Thought 14

I find it almost humorous the current saber rattling on the northeast coast of South America.

The Colombiam military successful struck a FARC rebel base and killed the No. 2 man in the FARC organizational structure. Granted, the FARC base was maybe 3 kilometers inside Ecuador, but then the U.S. just hit a suspected Al Qaeda hangout in Africa, so what is the difference.

Ecuador admits that the camp was in its territory. Ecuador admits that government of Colombia advised its government that the action had taken place and apologized for the necessity of entering Equadorian air space and territory in order to accomplish the mission.

Now, it seems that they are upset that the attack apparently took place in early morning hours when everyone was asleep. I guess it is not macho enough to wake the rebels up and give them the chance to vamoose.

Now, Hugo Chavez, the president of Venezuela decides to get involved. Is this some form of comic opera or what. The Venezuelans send 10 battalions, at some of them armored units, to the border to fend off the evil Colombians and to protect the sanctuary for FARC bases it wants along the common border. Then the close the border to economic traffic. I am not sure who this hurts worse: the Venezuelans or the Colombians. Still it is a bit like cutting your nose off to spite your face.

Chavez, on the other hand, is following a familiar template for petty dictators. Create a foreign devil, create a foreign enemy for the masses to rally against and forget the failings of the dictator's government to provide a stable economy and justify its actions as necessary sacrifices in order to carry the fight to the enemy.

If it wasn't so serious (in that a lot of people could get killed in this soap opera), this would be so funny.

Random Thoughts 13

I see where the House Democrats have a new plan to end the war in Iraq. The Democrats are advancing a resolution that would accuse the nation of Turkey of genocide when 1.5 million Armenians died at the hands of the Ottoman Empire, that preceded the current Turkish state, back in World War I.

I think the Democrats have finally hit on a way to force George Bush to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq. They have been unsuccessful at cutting off funding for the war, so now they are going to piss off the Turks so much that the Turks will cut the supply line into Iraq, forcing a reduction of troop strengths becase a vast majority of the supplies (like 70 percent) are routed through facilities in Turkey.

In addition, the resolution will further complicate U.S. efforts when the Turks, who are currently be held at bay by the good offices of the U.S., will no longer feel restrained from attacking the Kurdish separatists who have taken refuge in Iraqi Kurdistan and strike accross the border in terroristic raids.

I think Nancy Pelosi is absolutely brilliant and this is a wonderful strategy to force the defeat in Iraq to a conclusion and make sure that any efforts of the Bush Administration to salvage the mess in Iraq fail for lack of supplies, without the Democrats being accused of failing to support the troops.

Now, it will be a simple matter of pointing to the incompetence of the Bush Administration in handling the "Turkish situation."

I do so love American politics ... it is so educational

Random Thoughts 12

In reviewing the news , I see where the Iranian president and the Ayatollah are back out baiting the U.S. and daring it to smack down Iraq. What is with these guys? It is like they want a fight, and are doing their best to ignite one all the while saying they just want peace. I fear the president what's his name that seem impossible to pronounce as has some apocalyptic vision that he wants to fulfill. It really is haunting though.

.

Random Thoughts 11

My rant today is about OJ Simpson. Enough already even. I see where Simpson supposedly has been arrested for an incident in Las Vegas where he and his bodyguard entourage allegedly rousted a couple of entrepreneurs who were auctioning off his memorabilia ... which apparently had been illicitly acquired. Well, I really would not like to get worked up over this, but its headline status on the news makes me want to throw up. I guess I am tired of this apparent fixation on Simpson, the murder of his ex-wife and all the other stuff about this once-great football player and sometime movie star.

Why oh why do we get so hung up on celebrities like him? Is it because he is "black" and got away with murder? OK, I don't know if it murdered his ex, the criminal jury said there was reasonable doubt, a civil jury said the preponderance of evidence was that he was responsible for the two deaths and now every one is coming out of the woodwork to say that a book that was ghost written for him is the real truth and Simpson is confessing. Well, they say that confession is good for the soul but I hope the book flops. Of course, given all the media attention, it won't and thousands, if not millions, of copies will be sold.

I guess I want to be an ostrich went it comes to celebrities and just ignore them. Who cares what idiots like Simpson, Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, Britney Spears, Brad Pitt, Angeline Jolie, Katie Couric (did I leave out any names I saw on the front of the checkout rags I saw at the grocery store when I got milk last?) happen to be doing, thinking or outraging?

I know ... it is what passes for news these days ... much like the news of who was appearing in the Colosseum in Rome this week was for the Romans two millennia ago (or was it 15 centuries, who the flip cares?)

I sometimes feel like the Rearden guy in Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged ... trapped in this world and wanting to change it so people would focus on reality ... but then I could go off on the tangent of whose reality. Anyway, the Sunday New York Times (9/16/07) had an interesting piece that book and Rand's Objectivism philosophy has had on a lot of business leaders.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/15/business/15atlas.html?em&ex=1190088000&en=cd6337257785a5ce&ei=5087%0A

OK, I guess I am done ranting now.

Oh, and for those who want another perspective on Iraq, George Bush, etc.

http://english.pravda.ru/news/world/14-09-2007/97145-bush_iraq-0

Random Thoughts 10

I have been doing my usual thing of reviewing the news on CNN, Fox, MSNBC, BBC, Al Jazeera, and commentary from the Drudge Report and Neil Boortz (He is an Atlanta-based talk-show host who actually went to the same high school I did ... although he was ahead of me by four or five years) and have a whole bunch of random thoughts ... well some are related.

It was interesting to read that Russian President Putin picked a relatively political unknown as prime minister to lead a caretaker government until the parliamentary elections in November and the presidential elections early next year. The thing that most interests me is whether Putin will just leave office (as he is barred from seeking a third term) and pass the reins of power to a successor yet to be determined. That will be the true test of democracy in Russia.. Another thing that sort of amazed me ... here the Russians are a few short months from having an election for president and like nobody is campaigning for the job ... this seems weird, especially when we look at the U.S. where it is like 14 months before the election and still six months before the primary mess begins (I will not digress on that as I think I already have) and most of what is on the news is about the two mobs seeking to become their party’s candidate. It makes one wonder what it going on in Russia these days.

Then, of course, the Russians had to set off a massive fuel-air bomb that was four times more powerful than the reported force of the U.S. MOAB bomb that uses basically the same technology. I think we just reverted back to the 1950s with a schoolyard demonstration of our bomb is bigger than your bomb.

Then there was the item about the Japanese prime minister saying he was stepping down. It is interesting to see the Japanese leadership fall on their swords in traditional fashion when things are not going well for their party. It also is one of the drawbacks of parliamentary systems ... government’s tend to fall all too often which leads to a certain amount of instability. I still think fixed terms are better ... more stable, even if the national media in the U.S. seems to start the campaign for the next election the day after the voters finish voting.

Then there was the massive earthquake down in Indonesia ... I imagine the first questions asked by Bush upon hearing this was: where is the nearest American aircraft carrier; where is the nearest American Marine/Navy amphibious ready group; and where are the Mercy/Comfort/Hope, the hospital ships. Once more, I suspect American forces will leap into the breach with little fanfare or recognition. Such is the way of things.

Last but not least, there is the “Patreaus Report.”

First, it really contained nothing new, nothing unexpected. All the usual suspects said all the usual things and things are pretty much status quo ante. However, I would recommend reading an Al Jazeera analysis for the story (http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/160735B8-6995-44FA-9891-274A29CF60E5.htm) for the “Arab” take on the story.

Another recommendation would be to read Newt Gingrich’s take on the report (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200709/POL20070911a.html) which I happen to agree with (for the most part). I respect Gingrich as a historian, political theorists and a political bomb thrower, but he has made too many enemies to be an effective leader and his public persona has been ground down to where he really seems to be fringe character these days. That is a long way from his heady days as Speaker of the House. Still, in this case, I think his assessment is right on the mark. Our political leaders have taken the eye off the ball and have lost sight at whom the enemy really is, how it fights and how long this “war” really is going to go on. That is the problem and it is going to sink us. No one seems to have a vision of how to fight this World War IV (WWIII was the Cold War) or at least no one really has articulated a vision how to fight it. Iraq is just one front and, from the comments and actions from one side of the U.S. political spectrum, it is a front that the U.S. has no right to win on. We are just throwing away troops and money on a lost cause. Which leads me to ask what cause they would be willing to invest the lives of our troops and the wherewithal and resources to equip and supply them. Right now, short of tanks on the beach at Atlantic City or Newport Beach or Padre Island or tanks rolling across the desert toward Tucson or El Paso or Austin ... or across the bridge and through the tunnel between Windsor and Detroit, I don’t think some Americans think that military force is acceptable ... and I imagine in those cases they would be screaming that the U.S. just needed to negotiate in good faith and confess all its sins and give its wealth away to atone for those sins. I really believe that these people have lost track of the fact that the world they live in is not the same world the rest of us live in. To them I would say: There really are people out there who don’t care if an American is a liberal/progressive or a conservative, a Democrat or a Republican, worker or management; all they care about is that they intend to kill Americans and do harm to America in any way they possibly can.

It is beyond me how these Americans - as intelligent and as educated as I know them to be - can’t understand that America – the United States – is the object of a love/hate relationship with the rest of the world. For the most part, the rest of the world loves this idealized image of the U.S. and its culture as it is spread through books and magazines, TV and movies, CDs and DVDs, but, at the same time, it hates the U.S. culture because it is not their culture. It also hates the Americans because they keep demonstrating that they don’t really live up to the idealized but artificial image of who and what Americans are.

Yes, Americans can be arrogant ... but so can any other nationality you can name that is proud of their nation and their culture. American “exceptionalism” is not so exceptional, except for the fact that the American system is the most successful in history in providing for needs of its citizens. Look, even the poorest of Americans have a standard of living that far outstrips the poor in other countries. This is not to belittle the poverty (mostly of spirit) that can be found in the U.S., but it is to point out that there are very few, in reality, in the U.S. who lives in the grinding poverty that can be found in most Third World countries and even in some developed countries. This wealth is why a lot of the world resents Americans; that and the fact we keep telling people that if they would just follow our example, it, too, could be theirs. That plus the fact that we often fail to live up to our own ideals and standards, which makes others ask how can we follow such a flawed example.

Nuff ranting for now.

Random Thoughts 9

I see where Fred Thompson has entered the Republican lists in the contest for the presidency in 2008. This is probably a plus for the GOP ... Thompson comes across on the TV as none of the others do ... due undoubtedly to his years of acting on the big screen and the small screen. He just looks more presidential than the other candidates.

I see where Oprah is raising money for Obama ... I don't think his campaign will want for anything. I am not a Obama fan ... but I am not all that swept up in the Oprah fever that seems to have engulfed afternoon TV watchers. Actually, I have to say, Oprah impresses the heck out of me. She is a tremendous TV personality who connects well with her viewers and is an incredible business woman ... a tycoon in fact.

I read where Bush is asking the Democrats to unite behind him in a bipartisan front on Iraq, given that the surge actually seems to be meeting with at least a modicum of success. Note to tell Dubya: Don't hold your breath. Too many Democrats have invested too much of their soul in destroying his administration to ever be bipartisan. Such is the pettiness of politics in America today.

For an interesting take on the Iraqi front in the "War on Terror", I really do recommend people visit Michael Yon's web site and blog. http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/ghosts-of-anbar-part-iv-of-iv.htm - read the whole series on Anbar http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/the-ghosts-of-anbar-part-1-of-4.htm http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/the-ghosts-of-anbar-part-ii-of-iv.htm http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/ghosts-of-anbar-part-iii-of-iv.htm

The interesting part is that he says what I beleive ... now ain't the time to cut and run ... but to lead, follow or get the hades out of the way for those who will.

I also see the Mister Bin Laden has rejoined list on the media front of the war between the west and Islamic extremism. Those Al Quaida guys are getting so media savy ... we should be taking notes ... ok, the text of his translated speech is so full holes and screwed up facts but who cares ... his audience doesn't, because like some of those in the U.S. who still think Bush stole the 2000 election from Al Gore, they don't care about the facts.
Anyway, the whole thing is classic propaganda ... oh Where is Frank Capra when we need him? The U.S. desperately needs a new "Why we fight?" series like Capra's films from WWII ... only don't look for Hollywood to help on this one. They seem to be AWOL or working for Major Quisling this time.

Tis enough for now.

Random Thoughts 8

Sen. Larry Craig.


I don't know what to make of his case. OK, he did plead guilty to disturbing public order, but did he?

I sure has heck don't know, but it bothers me that apparently he is being coerced to resign by a spiteful opposition party and the main stream press. I suppose that had Craig been a Democrat instead of a Republican, that the media would have jumped on this just as hard ... I mean they jumped on the Democratic rep who allegedly got hostile at the National Airport baggage claim area, well sort of did. Of course, he allegedly assaulted a airline worker, and that does, sort of might be, cross the line ... but then nobody called for his resignation.

I guess the issue is that Craig is a hypocrite for being an outspoken opponent to special privileges and rights for gays while being a closet gay person himself .... or is he?

Again, I don't know. Haven't a clue ... but I do know the next time I am in the Minneapolis airport ... or any airport ... or rest area ... or any public rest room ... I ain't gonna wiggle my toes no way, no how.

Hell, I didn't know that was a signal to the person in the next stall that you were soliciting for an illicit homosexual liaison. I am not sure I know anyone who would have had a clue it was. Well, the young adults might, because they usually are plugged into the latest language variations, i.e. slang terms and signals.

It does bother me that nothing apparently was said other than the toe wiggling, that to me seems like the basis for an extremely thin case and one that was wont for abuse of police authority.

And it also bothers me that the Democrats are dumping on this issue so vehemently ... shouldn't they be standing up for the senator's rights as a gay person, since gays make a major constituent group for the party? It just strikes me as being a mite bit hypocritical and more than mite bit peevish.

Anyway ... I think if all the hypocrites in public offices in Washington were forced to resign and leave town tomorrow ... a great hush would fall over the city.

Random Thoughts 7

I have been hanging out of late at a web site for writers (www.helium.com), which seems to be an eclectic place with both mostly poets and occasional scribes. Anyway, they do have discussion threads for a host of different topics including one on the liberal bias of the mainstream news media.

In that vein, I came across and interesting article by a former BBC editor I would commend to any one's perusal. (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article2240427.ece) Having been a journalist for most of my life, and having witnessed exactly what this former editor says, his take is spot on ... even for a Brit.

I also note that Dubya's top political advisor is stepping down from his official White House position at the end of the month. I imagine the Democrats and anti-Bush Luddites with be jumping with joy at this news. Thinking as many do, I believe, that Rove was one of Bush's puppet masters and Dubya is just a mouthpiece and puppet on a string, I fear they are going to be surprised to find that the president is going to be just about the same. I think those who hate Bush to the point of myopia, fail to see that what is going on in the White House at this time is almost predictable. The end times for this administration is near and those weary from the constant struggle in the highly partisan environment that is our nation these day, especially its capital, are leaving the epicenter in order to prepare to get on with their lives. This is just one more step that belies the canard I seem to hear so often in the blogosphere about King George and how he is a threat to democracy and our freedoms and the nation is going to hell in a hand basket. Well, it ain't and he ain't. I predict that on January 20, 2009, at noon, someone not George W. Bush will be standing in front of the U.S. Capitol Building taking the oath of office as president of the United States in what remains the most exceptional and incredible acts in the world: The peaceful transition of power from one administration to another. After which George Jr. will return to Texas and do whatever ex-presidents are wont to do.

A lot can happen between now and then, but I am willing to bet my shirt that everything that can be done will be done to make this peaceful transition occur as scheduled and on time.

Random thoughts 6

Question for the day: Should the United States pull its troops out of Iraq and surrounding countries in the Middle East to stop the violence?

Not unless everyone stops looking to the United States for leadership is my thought.

If the U.S. pulled out the Middle East, why should it not also pull out all the other countries where it has forces forward deployed?

The problem is that because the U.S. is the 900-pound gorilla in world affairs, it is caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place. Today, the U.S. with its huge economy that drives much of the world’s commerce is dependent upon and inexorably linked to the economies of other countries. It cannot just withdraw and try to isolate itself, to be dependent on its own resources and no other markets.

The same holds true militarily. There are those who are begging for the Americans to intervene in Dafur and the Sudan, while nothing was done in Bosnia and Kosovo until the Americans took the lead. When disaster strikes, who often is the first responder to bring immediate relief? It is the U.S. military, which has the resources, the training and the capability to go almost anywhere in the world.

Many countries took for granted during the Cold War the protection of the U.S. nuclear umbrella that kept the Soviet Union at bay for more than 40 years. The war in Korea happened because the U.S. said South Korea was outside its area of interest. The invasion of Kuwait in 1990 happened because the U.S. told Saddam Hussein that the sheikdom was outside the area of American defense interests.

If the Americans are to withdraw, then don’t ask them to return or intervene anywhere, militarily or economically. No military aid or economic assistance and the Americans will not be there to help those asking for American help and/or leadership.

IF the Americans pulled out of Iraq tomorrow (physically impossible, but let’s consider the hypothetical), what would be the result? Would peace immediately descend on Iraq? Does anyone really believe that? No, the factions – tribal groups, clans, Sunnis, Shiites, Kurds – probably would descend into a frenzy of internecine warfare as they jockeyed for power and dominance. Little to no effort would be made to achieve political compromise or community co-existence. And who would be blamed? Not the Iraqis, not the foreign jihadists flooding the country. No, it would be blamed on the Americans.

The Americans always are responsible for everyone else’s problems. It is easier to blame the Americans than to look inward and find where the responsibility truly lies.

The sad thing is the Americans are guppies and they have yet to overcome their innate desire to do good in the world. In their blind arrogance and imperious hubris, surrounded by their incredible wealth, they can’t see that nothing they do in the world will be perceived as attempting to help the less fortunate, to protect the weak, and to help end the killing.