Pick Your Spots

Someone needs to tell President Bush to shut up.  His credibility has reached the point that if he told me that sticking a fork in my eye would be painful, I would have to seriously contemplate that eyes were actually immune to pain.

Bush is now stomping through Europe attending the NATO meetings and is actively getting in his own way, by opening his lying yap.  The two most contentious aspects of Bush’s goals would be getting more troops in order to secure Afghanistan, the place that actually had Al Qaeda, and getting the Eastern European countries Ukraine and Georgia -the country not the state- into NATO.

These are good things.  Getting troops into the area that has terrorists and actually was responsible for the training of hijackers is necessary and one of the more responsible aspects of leadership that Bush has, accidentally I am sure, come across.  But it comes across as he is an incompetent boob, that messed up Afghanistan by a premature invasion of Iraq.

The man who spurned advice, caution, and strategy is now asking for help to fix one of his many blunders.  Now I understand that Bush is used to dealing with an inept and partisan driven Congress that would give him whatever he wanted, but that is no longer his audience.

“The Uniter” is going to have to rely upon his ability to persuade and convince our allies that this the important fight of our times and that success is only achievable should we be united.  That of course would assume that Bush would have a personality transplant or be so doped up out of his mind that he becomes a decent human being.

The second aspect that he is fighting for is equally notable.   NATO was founded on the principle of providing Democracies within the sphere of Europe collective security.  To be sure that protection was against a militarily aggressive Soviet Union seeking to take advantage of post WWII Europe.

NATO has evolved with the times however and now provides collective security in an altogether sense.  It is important to note that political freedom is directly correlated with the level of security that the government faces.  Thus entry into NATO provides the necessary security blanket, that governments can allow the release of boundaries upon their citizens in order to achieve a more perfect type of democracy.

Even in our own history, when the fate of the Union has been threatened, rights of Americans have been infringed upon in order to maintain security of the state.   What Bush, of course, is failing to understand is the deep seeded historical feelings that exist between Russia and NATO, and the sentiments of Russian and its former Soviet Satellite States.

Politics is about give and take.  Bush can have his war, but he must pay for it - ok bad example.  Politics  should be about give and take.  Keeping with the topics Bushmust decide which is more important to the immediate interests of the United States, and tone down the rhetoric on the other one as an immediate crisis.

This would be especially true if the CITIZENS of the said countries are no where near a consensus on if joining NATO would be a good idea.  Since they are in the shadow of Russia they still have jobs, trade routes, family, WWII articles in common with mother Russia even if they hate her for all the abuse she handed out when they were growing up.

This would especially true of the Ukraine who had a great number of their troops be sent to Afghanistan when they were still part of the Soviet Union and got killed when Tom Hanks - Charlie Wilson- messed it all up by sending stinger missiles.

It comes off that Bush is expecting Eastern Europeans to bail him out of a mistake that hubris doesn’t win wars.  I will give him credit that it does win him elections, but then the military doesn’t have to write letters to families of soldiers killed in elections.  So Bush…Pick Your Spots

Hanging by a Moment

It is rare for me to hope that the part of humanity that is decent will touch people and make then turn against their initial urges and do the right thing.  What is troublesome to me is that I see the opportunity for the Mugabe Legacy to not be redeemed, but be less tarnished.

To hope that a cruel madman would voluntarily give up the power he has worked so hard, and slain so many to keep is absolutely foolish.  I can only assume that the pharmaceutical drugs that have been leached into our drinking water are to blame for this momentary lapse of my sanity.

I will attempt to preserve some sense of academic integrity, whatever that is, by saying that despite what he will do, this is a defining moment for Mugabe.  He is respected by many across Africa because of his fight against colonialism and to preserve the sovereignty of Independent African Countries.

He gained even more street cred with his obvious support for the Anti-Apartheid movement in South Africa.  His involvement is has a direct correlation with the current system/political parties being in power in South Africa, and is why they are so hesitant to criticize his regime.

Only Mugabe can know if he truly believed in these causes, or merely used them in order to gain the spotlight to raise his level of influence to ever reaching heights.  However just believing in something doesn’t make it work, kinda like Bush thinking that invading Islamic countries would not be protested by other Islamic countries.

The main fight between the Black Africans, and the White Africans was over equal opportunity.  In fact, one may look at this region in Africa and see possible outcomes that the United States could have faced.  Violence was advocated among some groups of African Americans in order to balance the violence that had been perpetrated against them.  Zimbabwe was not so lucky to have a Martin Luther King Jr. Figure in order to stem that tide of revenge.

Zimbabwe was known as the bread basket of Africa.  This was due to the enormous exports of products that came from the White African population that, through colonialism, tamed the land and became very wealthy.  With Mugabe’s rise to power, and using a distortion of democracy - it was voted that the land held by White Africans could be seized by their Black African Counterparts.

While Reverend Jeremiah Wright may see this as just retribution, the violence and corruption involved was the fundamental cause for the collapse of the Zimbabwean economy.  Mugabe gave these fertile lands to friends, family , and cronies who quickly allowed the land to fall into disrepair because of their ignorance of the trade of farming.

Inflation has risen on average 32% since, and 100,580% in 2008.  The average lifespan fell from 60 years to 35 years.  While Mugabe himself is 82.  He has fixed elections, intimidated and beaten opponents, executed rivals, and thrown Zimbabwe into vast pits of despair.

The one thing that he could not do is kill hope.  Much like other tyrants through history this elusive foe is difficult to kill.  Blades, bullets, torture, even executions seem to merely make hope weaker, but never fully die out.  So the people of Zimbabwe have allowed their hope to be voiced, that they turn the page of history and attempt to true reconciliation with their colonial past.

Mugabe’s moment is to step aside, and be remembered through propaganda as a man who loved his people and defended them against colonial aggression, and championed causes important to all Africans.  His presidential reign could be whitewashed as a man who lost his way, power is a tempting mistress and has many victims.   Mugabe could at this moment make this a chance to allow his legacy to be allowing democracy to be expressed in Zimbabwe.

The more likely scenario is that he will fix the election to allow himself to participate in a run off, and then allow himself to win a landslide victory, continuing the now all too tragic military coup upon his death in order to maintain the status quo - no matter how deadly that may be.

So the world stands with Zimbabwe wondering what the outcome will be - Hanging by a Moment

Fade to Black

It strikes me that people in the Media, and Presidential Campaigns say how “complicated” the situation is in Iraq.  Perhaps this is because they believe the American people are so stupid that they cannot handle plot lines that are more complicated than Heroes, but then the ratings for that craptastic show are better than voter turnout now isn’t it?

The best way to understand Iraq is to understand the motives of the players involved.  Then we can formulate a plan to either fix the problems, or get the hell out of there and let countries deal with their own problems, its not like the oil prices will go down no matter what we do - and the oil profits seem to be rising as well guess they need more subsidies.

What follows are the motivations behind where we are now-

The United States - the Prime motivation for invading Iraq was to get George W. Bush a second term as President of the United States.  American’s are very hesitant to switch horses mid stream in a war no matter how how poorly things are going initially.  Reference Abe Lincoln and FDR, even LBJ perhaps would have received a new term, but decided not to run.

The secondary motivation was for the US to look tough.  The terrorist attacks shocked and were a decidedly large PR hit to the vulnerability to the lone Hegemon -Greek word meaning ultimate badass- on the globe.  Knocking out Afghanistan wasn’t all that impressive cause nobody knew where it was.  Even knowing that the Soviet Union couldn’t do what we did was no longer impressive because as it turns out nobody is impressed with what a dead empire did 30 years ago.

The last motivation was to make all the Arabs play nice and bring peace to an are of the world that has either been at war with itself, or war with the outside world, since God kicked Adam out of the garden of Eden.  Then it turned out that not all Arabs are the same and there are different dialects, ethnicities, religions, and we have a huge pile of mess with burning oil on the side.  The goal then became to stabilize it enough to go after Iran.

Great Britain-  Great Britai’s motivations fall squarely on the shoulders of one Tony Blair.  Prime Minister Blair has at his core the fundamental belief that International Organizations such as NATO, and the UN, can only be effective as organizations if they carry the credibility of force should mandates not be followed.  This point can be directly seen as to the British forces involvement in the military strikes against Serbia during the Clinton Administration.

US forces, namely politicians, were not interested in the least of having another Somalia situation where the death of 29 soldiers by combat related incidents caused huge uproars and demands that our forces be pulled - ironic now that in Iraq that total has topped 4,000- and the Republican Party criticized our forces even being present in Serbia because -meddling in other countries affairs is not the role of the United States- As such US forces were relegated to backup positions and air support.

It was the British forces that took the responsibility to carry out front line  operations and suffer the casualties that were inevitable.  So that the teeth of NATO could be seen in order to strengthen the resolve of the newly formed Countries caused by the fall of the Soviet Union.

Iraq -  The motivations that got Iraq invaded was Saddam Hussein making the right decisions, but at the wrong time.  Invading Kuwait was the correct decision, given the circumstances presented at the time.  The current President of the United States was the Vice President to Ronald Reagan- who had given aid to Iraq in its war with Iran due to the hostage situation that embarrassed the United States.  The same Ronald Reagan who was President when a terrorist organization in Lebanan- Hezbollah - attacked a Marine Barracks killing 241 American Service Men- and responded with complete withdrawal.  Ronald Reagan the Cold Warrior - became a cut and runner.

We must also place into context  that Kuwait was one of the only Arabic states who was pro-Soviet Union rather than pro-America during the Cold War.  Thus, one would assume that the United States would not be terribly beholden to keep said country form being invaded.  Combined with the US Ambassador April Glaspie, who told Saddam in a conversation, “We have no opinion in Arab-Arab conflicts”and “the Kuwait issue is not associated with America” -both of which come from transcripts published by the New York Times September 23rd 1990 issue-

This was an almost clear green light, and the tanks rolled and the world was shocked.  Saddam got his tail whipped, but still clung to power through intimidation of force and WMD.  That was his only card in keeping power in an area where assassinations, and coups are not all uncommon.  But Republicans who wanted to conquer the land of Babylon, Cheney, Rumsfield, Wolfowitz- were determined to finish what they started.

Iran -  Iran’s motivations are actually quite simple.  They are the third Axis of Evil, and they have on either side of their border a country that was invaded and still holds large numbers of US military personnel.  Having the possession of neither Chemical, Biological, or Nuclear weapons that would deter a US invasion, it is in their best interest to keep Iraq an utter disaster to literally keep the US occupied and unable to advance on Iranian soil.

The trick is that it would be devastating to Iran should Iraq fall apart for a variety of reasons.  The first of which is, nobody likes large number of immigrants and a dissolved Iraq would bring thousands to the door step of Tehran.  Second, Iran has a large Kurdish population that borders Iraq’s own Kurd population and would be deeply concerned the two would attempt a merger, and that would be unacceptable.  The third reason is that since the Iranian Revolution, the Mullahs have seen Iraq as the Gateway to export their Islamic Republic system throughout the Middle East, for it to disintegrate would be a fundamental blow for that goal.

Saudi Arabia - As the self seen leader of the Middle East because of the possession of the 2nd and 3rd most holy cities in all of Islam - Mecca and Medina, Saudi Arabia seeks to be the champion of the Sunni Islam.  They also realize that with the Saudi family’s close relationship with the United States, they would be a prime target for the Export of an Islamic Republic form of government should Iraq fall.  Thus to keep that from happening they too try to keep the flames of unrest burning, while not seeking to break the balance of power so the country dissolves.  This turns Iraq into a proxy war in much the same way Africa and Asia was between the United States and the Soviet Union during the cold war.

Shia-  the European way of doing things was to put the minority population in charge of the majority through the giving of advanced weaponry money and placing certain rules on who can and cannot do something.  Apartheid was an extreme form of this legacy and was why the Sunni population was in control in Iraq.  The problem becomes that when you have no job, responsibility, money- the only thing to do is have babies, and then that majority becomes a lot bigger, and a lot more bitter.

Fast forward through the brutal nature that Saddam held onto power with, and you have a population itching to get some level of payback for all the past humiliation and the like.  It would be like giving Reverend Jeremiah Wright and a bunch of his friends truck loads of guns and saying, “work out your aggression now”.  They now want a piece of the pie and want to make up for the years of being ostracized and give the Sunni a taste of their own medicine.

Sunni -  Having just read that, the Sunni want to keep from being subjected to the same level of degradation they heaped on the Shia counterparts.  They don’t have the numbers to outright win a civil war, but do have the level of sophistication to make it very bloody and drawn out, almost to make the Shia believe they could win.  Power is a wonderful thing, and the Sunni have been at the front of the line gulping it down for a while, so they of course want to hold on to at least enough to make sure they still get a large oil money check.

Kurds - The Kurds want what it seems every ethnic group wants these days, to be an independent country.  The problem they face however is that such a country is not always viable, they were conquered at some point for a reason after all, and will need the assurances of the United States protection to even have a chance.  Having a longstanding terrorist group dedicated to unifying land that currently belongs to Turkey, doesn’t aid their cause.  So they seek to be the good soldiers waiting patiently and helping when they can to show they had intentions of making it work, and thus deserve a legitimate shot of independence.

Turkey - Once known as the Ottoman Empire that controlled all of the Middle East and was a rival to the great Empires of Europe, Turkey has drawn a line in the sand that no more territory will be stripped from their control.  This makes the statement Iraqi Kurds have said they are a part of “Southern Kurdistan” raised the question of where they think northern Kurdistan would be since that territory is Turkish.  Thus they are adamant that the Kurds remain a part of Iraq, as well as attempting to quell their own Kurdish independence problem.

There you go, the motivations and characters involved in Iraq.  I tried to use small words that even our President could use, so I will now…Fade to Black

Back Again

It is amazing the various things that can alleviate the undercurrent of pent up frustration, and thus distract from the necessary angst to supply the information provided on this site.  Meeting an interesting Chick, finding all of the hidden skulls on HALO 3, killing Arabs/Russians on Call of Duty 4 and Army of Two.  A sense of serenity takes hold and the world doesn’t seem as stupid and pointless - then of course one hears about the ultimatum set by the Iraqi “government” and it all comes crashing down.

The interesting chick turns out to be, not all that interested- the quest to find all terminal locations on HALO 3 needs to be started, and eventually killing Arabs/Russians becomes not entertainment or self preservation, but more of a muddle some task- I was as surprised as Israel at this revelation.

To fully understand the futility of the meaningless …or else statement issued by Washington- I mean Baghdad to the Shia’ militias is to gain insight into the stereotypical views of Middle Eastern culture.  Arabic culture takes on the premise that if you talk a good game and look tough, you will avoid the inevitable ass whipping they will receive.

To prove this point, as it is still the Easter season, a parable is in order, possibly even two.  In the waining days of the ‘91 Persian Gulf War, which is to say a couple days after it started, their were pockets of Iraqi forces that were camped out - and were told by their US counter parts to “Leave the area without your weapons by 9am or at 9:05 we will come in there and kill you.”

The Arab generals of course puffed their chest and replied with great zeal, “We will leave when we are prepared no earlier than noon, with all of our equipment and at a pace of our choosing.” This made the US officials smile and gently laugh among one another.  The US general then reiterated, “No, you will leave by 9 or we will come in there and kill all of you by 9:30.”

The Arabs then looked at one another, conversed, and replied, “In that case we will be gone by 7.”

This is the major culture clash that exists between the Middle East and Western civilizations.   By and large when Western Nations speak about invasions, military actions they follow through.  Arabic governments do not.  The reason for this in my mind, is that Western nations can afford to have a functioning, equipped, and competent military without fear of them taking over the country in a coup.  Arab nations do not have that luxury- and thus have the most dysfunctional, underfunded, group of muppets as there armed services.

To demonstrate this let us examine the Israeli experience.  Jews that had migrated before WWII, or had survived the Holocaust, were defend not even half of the land they currently posses, against the combined forces of Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, as well as a presence from Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Yemen.  To survive against such an alliance is to be impressed, but for the Israeli military to EXPAND the territory that would fly the star of David against such a force is a true accomplishment.

Surely the questions in your minds go something like this, “Oh great disperser of the true knowledge if this is the case - why are groups like Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, or Hamas so hard for Western Powers such as Israel and the United States to stamp out.  The answer is that these organizations are run like Western Armies, only the fanaticism in their cause is notched up a bit, and the moral qualms are diluted.

For example, the leadership of Al Qaeda is not worried that the fighters they train to become martyrs will take part in an insurrection against them and take over their positions by execution.  There is a hierarchy within these organizations, as well as an indoctrination program to get these people all thinking of the cause, and not the actual planning of these events.

These men fight for a cause greater than themselves, and are willing to sacrifice their lives in order to see that the job is done, and seek to destroy as much of the enemy as they can- such a definition could refer to any number of Hollywood action movie protagonists.  In a moral vacuum it could refer to the enemy that we fight so valiantly today.

The greatest failing of the Bush Administration and the likely McCain Administration, is the inability either by desire, understanding, arrogance, or contempt, of making the Islamic world know- and believe that this fight is not in a moral vacuum.  Killing civilians by design is not the moral equivalent of  killing civilians through collateral damage.  That merely saying one is following the “words” of Allah does not make it so.  To challenge the Islamic world to truly define the Nature of Allah as best as mere mortals can, whether it would be a being of understanding or hate.  To put the terrorists on the defensive not only on the battlefield, but ideologically as well.

Republicans often bemoan the fact that Reagan the God-King is no longer present in their party.  Perhaps they are lucky, for the inevitable question would be asked of the Iraqi’s “Are you better off now than you were five years ago?”  When the violence of Saddam Hussein was at least predictable and avoidable, as opposed to now, when the violence is unavoidable and unpredictable, and a proud people must look to an occupying force for safety.  I for one would think Reagan would be ashamed…

Everybody’s Doing It

Now it comes as no surprise to me that the Unites States would be copied by the other nations of the world.  Things like showers, food, and democratic principles tend to make life a little better, if not more interesting.  What I don’t understand is why they are copying our policy of invading Islamic countries.

To be fair, I see why they are an enticing target.  They are very opinionated on why they should be regarded as the elite of the world, mostly because of achievements that predate 1492, and most of them have that delightful fossil fuel that makes the world go round.

They also have traditions of possessing really weak military branches.   The chief reason for this is to make sure that the military is too incompetent to take over and depose of, ie execute, whatever present leadership that is in control.

The down side of course is that they have a tendency to blow up.  Reasons for this might be from the diet, frustration over the constant lack of rain, or from strict adherence to religious practices that were intended to gain converts when the religion was first starting out, not an entrenched one.

Now because Bush was involved in a two for one deal- invade one, invade one free.  Now the alleged reasons for invasion was at least supposed to be to be strict on terrorism, and to wipe the scum off the earth.

So of course the Israeli’s, who have had to deal with the problem of Muslim terrorists for over 50 years.  They decided to try and put an end to the slime that is Hezbollah by invading and attacking their neighbor of Lebanon.  Of course the invasion was judged as a failure, by an independent review within Israel and may have only further inflamed future terrorist scum.

Now of course we have our Turkish allies fighting our Kurdish allies in Iraq.  Apparently Iraq is a good place to invade this time of year.  Now to be fair, as good as the Kurds have been by not being whiny brats like the Palestinians, still have a militant group that is wanting their own country.  Turkey has been the target of that terrorist rage, and decided not to take it any more.

Now I should hope that the Turks but a little bit more planning into their incusion ito Iraq than the Bush Administration, and really how could they not?  They are after all the group that controlled the Middle East for centuries, and boy do I miss the Ottoman Empire.

So hey everybody it is open season on Middle East countries, so if you have always had your eye on that one particular type of resource,  go ahead Everybody’s Doing It.

…Beyond Contestation

I had the unfortunate “pleasure” of having to listen to the Glenn Beck show, and listen to his postulations on various topics.  His pronouncement that they Maya may have been right about the end of the world being 2012 because of a Obama or Clinton Presidency is particularly amusing.

I also have realized that even though he was a Vietnam Veteran, a real one unlike Bush, the level of vehemence directed towards him is very personal and apparently very heartfelt.  I thought that the Republican Party only attacked those veterans that were a part of the Democratic Party, men like Max Cleland.

(Cleland was a Vietnam Vet who lost 3 limbs defending his country, and was then attacked on his patriotism by the Republican party and likened him to Osama Bin Laden - since he was from Georgia voters fell for it.)

Amidst the raving banter that was expelled by Beck, one thing that was said seemed to ring particularly hollow.  “Liberals dislike debate because they cannot logically back up their idealogical dogma”  I paraphrased a little, but that was the basis of his argument.  Liberals assert specific truths then recoil, when challenged, because they don’t have an underlying truth from which their ideals spring forth.

Though I would not say I represent all Liberals, it would be fair to say that i am closer to being a Liberal than a Conservative.  Therefore I thought it would be necessary to speak on my opinions of an issue and the underlying truth that allows me to feel that it is just.  The fact that I need a post for the week is of mere coincidence.

Abortion- no need to start off slow lets get to it.  It is my belief that Abortion, should be rare, but legal.  The reason for this is that the procedure to have an abortion is dangerous, and comes with certain risk to the woman.  Though we are a moral society, we also are a secular one.  This is to say that although the morals and standards of behavior are influenced by religious doctrine, the necessity of our multicultural society to function disallows one religious faith to dominate society.

On the moral issue, while it is true that I believe that it is a sin, I think that the gift of Free Will must also be respected and that the Woman, Couple, that decides to take the procedure knowingly make that decision.

Military Force -  If you have the reputation for strength and the capabilities for victory, it is better to get some of what you want than fight to get all of it.  The reason being is that no matter the low odds, there is always that chance you might lose.  Vietnam, and our current military engagements are examples of when technological hubris discounts an enemies will to fight.  This is especially true of a country such as the United States where the above stated moral standards do not allow for wholesale decimation of population centers, and making the effort to separate  military targets from civilians.

When facing a guerrilla warfare scenario, such as the one we face now, it is imperative to understand the necessary parameters for victory.  The United States loses unless we have dramatic and palpable victories.  This is to say public “arrests” of terrorists responsible for the attacks in 2001, as well as the elimination of other such targets.  The boasting of prevented attacks serves no purpose other than to attempt to provide a sense of normalcy to the populace, and an attempt to secure moral support.  The enemy on the other hands wins, so long as they do not have traumatic and obvious failure.  Let us use Vietnam as the example to drive home this point.

The Tet Offensive was seen as the turning point of the public support in the Vietnam War.  While the VietCong suffered tremendous losses and the US lines held, and was a tactical victory, it was a strategic failure for US forces.  It is this same type of circumstance that we find ourselves in battling Al Qaeda, and as such need not take our eyes off the ball and place our military in precarious situations with out a plan with contingencies.  Thus I think that Diplomacy from positions of strength are the true positions that we are to be striving for, using force only when it becomes clear that the danger out ways the benefit of diplomatic stalling.

While I will be postulating on other issues that separate the ideological spectrum, I suppose these will suffice for now in attempting to give some texture to assertions.  So for now understand that these are my words, as as such are…Beyond Contestation.

Star Wars: Futile Empire

While i am sure that some may think that I am referring to the decrepit status of the Star War Franchise, they would be incorrect.  This is much better, in fact to use three words THIS…IS…AWESOME!  It turns out a US “spy satellite” is suffering from orbital decay, and will slam into the Earth at a hundred thousand miles an hour.

While that speed might be exaggerated a tiny bit, the odd of it hitting you are exactly 50%.  It either will, or it won’t.  What is unique is that apparently the school bus sized, I am betting not the “special school” kind, is apparently loaded with toxic fuel.  So that if it crashes into stuff, then a poisonous gas will kill those left alive by the crater.

While some may say that this is a ploy for Bush to define himself as the only president to defend the globe from interstellar terrorism and the obvious need for a missile shield,  they would just be cynics.  No, dear friends the President isn’t that desperate for a legacy, cause if he was we would be invading Iran right…now.

Also you could not literally com up with this stuff before Wednesday, because the writers strike was on, so you see there is no underhandedness that we have come to expect from the Bush Administration over the last very long seven years.

What will be fun is that the Navy -Accelerate Your Life- has been given the duty to shoot this sucker down.   Now the problem exists that despite the existence of the video game industry, and Fauex News attempting to slander it, shooting said satellite is not going to be easy.  They could just graze the thing and then send it on a direct path “accidentally” straight towards Mecca.  (Which would be kinda cool in one way, and cause massive problems)

Then supposing that they do shoot it down, there does exist the possibility,  that the thing may crash and burn on somebody anyway, so then everybody and their pet monkey will be trying to shoot it down.  (That includes Dick Cheney and His pet monkey Bush)

Imagine, India launching its missiles only to have Pakistan think this is a first strike to obtain Kashmir.  Then we will have the French with their twelve guys on a ladder, the whole of their space program, shooting frogs legs and patte trying to knock down the satellite.

So sit back and watch the show, cause this episode can’t be as stupid as the last three, Star Wars:Futile Empire.

Yippy Hippy

If there is one thing that can bug me more than religious conservatives, Christian and Muslim, it is the ideological mistake that spawned Hippies. Flower power is nothing more than turning sunlight and carbon dioxide into oxygen, and who amongst us needs that? (Guess that will get me in trouble with Virescent)

The latest consternation I have with the useless hippies is the new doucheness coming out of Berkley. While enjoying the most liberal of ridiculous policies because of the college, which for a time had a naked Indian, Native American, walking around campus, has decided to target the Marines as evil. (then of course the excess of commas will tick of Conservative Amazon-which is a misnomer)

As if planted by agents of FOX news, this douche giveses gives perfect ammo to show how ridiculous people are on the left by claiming the Marine recruiters are bad and somehow a threat to the community. Their stupid excuse is that this is a protest against the war, rather than the protests that hippies had in the Vietnam era where they called military people baby killers. (I guess that lack of coherent logic makes sense if you smoke a half ton of weed before breakfast)

They then have a 14 year old girl speak at the town meeting, my guess is that a 14 year old girl has a lot of experience in dealing with life and all its hardships, that they “Don’t hate America, but they hate war.” Well good for you, most everybody hates war. Those who don’t are usually gun runners or crazy.

What I don’t get is the “Conflict never solved anything.” bull Huckabee, that these idiots preach. Conflict solves a lot of things, it can sprout new problems when you don’t do it right, we should probably ask the leadership at Carthage their opinion, oh wait- they don’t exist because the Romans killed them. Bad Romans, don’t you know that violence never solved anything?

We should then speak to the Iriqios Nation exist as a buffer between the US and Canada, well shucks again, they don’t exist cause we beat them repeatedly with the help of fake treaties. Maybe we can speak to the Confederate States of America what their opinion is on the subject- damn when will I learn, they lost- and are now voting for Huckabee, so I guess the South may indeed “Rise Again“.

Lets also remember that we didn’t hear a peep outta the Balkans, that place in Europe where Republicans said it was treasonous for Bill Clinton to commit troops in attempting to bring democracy to a place rich with ethnic and religious conflict- nothing like the history of Iraq- when the Soviets were running the joint, mostly because if any group started messing with the other one, they all got run over by Soviet tanks. Being iron fisted is should not exist in all cases, but there are times when it is necessary. When dealing with the Middle East it probably should be the default mode.

Lets be clear war can be a brutal terrible thing to experience, especially when the leaders who are entrusted with the public trust betray that pact by having a shotty plan with no thoughts of troop withdrawal, Damn you Truman! But it is at times necessary, acknowledging the horrors that exist and making the decision knowing that their sacrifice will mean more than ones reelection. Stupid Jefferson. (UVA-ers cringe, while VA-Techers, well hell they can’t read so they can’t be mad at me)

What I am saying is this you disgusting little maggots out there in the Mary Jane smoking, hemp wearing, non bathing, French loving, Valentine’s day celebrating, Obama crushing, but McCain voting, terrorist pitying, nativity scene stealing, non football playing, dodge ball boycotting, tag promotes isolation saying, crapshoot of a town in Berkeley is that it may be your town, but it is our country- so appreciate the sacrifices those Marines accept so that you can be Yippy Skippy

Change For Changes Sake

If there is one thing that we should learn from surviving the Bush Presidency, it is that not everything one’s predecessor did is necessarily bad thing.  Clinton’s rice for calming down the North Korea nuclear program kept the country from thumbing its nose on the grand and public scale of global politics.

Bush canceling the program because North Korea would cheat on the program every now and again to make sure the food would keep coming, was a stark warning sign of how little he knew about global policies and his role as President in dealing with them.

There are certain parts of the world where change, no matter how badly needed by outside influence, cannot be changed through military intervention.  This would include all three parts of the “Axis of Evil”, as well as Africa.  (Africa is included because as famine, genocide, and an aids epidemic sweep the country-nobody seems to care so long as they teach abstinence and don’t have abortions)

North Korea has the protection from their “comrades” in China, as well as their cousins in South Korea.  China still harbors feelings of inadequacy and is uncomfortable having a democracy right on its border, and it knows that should North Korea fall, they will receive immigrants by the bucket load, and they don’t want them.

South Korea wants to keep the North propped up because of the economics involved.  Sure, they will receive immigrants too, but then the possibility of reunification will come to surface, and despite the rhetoric, nobody in the South wants that.   The reasons for this are simple especially when we look at the other example of reunification last century, Germany.

The evil, diabolic, swine infested pinko commie bastards, here to will be referred to as “Russians”, they at least provided East Germany with some sort of infrastructure.  They had roads, schools, buildings, and a really impressive wall.  Germany is still recovering economically from absorbing that half of the country.  North Korea is basically a couple of cities and farmland.  The costs of absorbing would set South Korea back generations.

The other parts of the Axis of Evil we have history.   Aparently the United States was an integrel part of the crusades.  Which I find surprising because if it were true, the Middle East would have been conquered centuries ago and not be the flea infested kitty litter box it is today.

What the next President needs to take from the Bush experiment is that having someone unstable and uncompromising is not a terrible thing.  Sure he can’t have any real power, but it is nice to be able to keep our enemies concerned.  The way we tinker this, is have someone with that personality, that actually knows what they are doing.

Threatening to invade and then do air strikes.   Though I w was thoroughly disappointed with the shock and awe that took place at the opening of Bush’s War.  This is what is good about Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh, they are freking crazy lunatics.  You don’t give them any REAL influence, but they keep people on their toes.

“Speak softly and carry a big stick” was the foreign policy by Teddy Roosevelt,  and it worked for many years because it understood both the global environment and the United States role in it.  The next President needs to take us back to a policy that can do the same.

Diplomacy is a tool that can only be effective when applied with leverage.   While this leverage need not be a nuclear weapon being detonated upon Mecca and Medina, pointing out the option usually gets one’s attention and shows how serious the situation now is.  Economic benefits, military contracts, hosting the Olympics are all tools that can be used to gain that leverage.

It should also be pointed out that Peace for the sake of Peace is incorrect policy as well.  While there are moral absolutes in almost any field, Global policy is the least affected, as the shades of gray are numerous. These are not easy decisions, for no matter what you decide people die.   It is the next President’s job to determine where, what nationality, and how many.

Controlled aggression, just like in poker and love, is often rewarded in global politics.   Where one gets into trouble is when we are over come by our passions, and allow aggression to go unchecked.  Influenced by God, Power, Fearlessness, Principles, or unresolved father issues, we are now living through what can happen when the desire for change goes too far.

The definition of insanity is to repeat the same cycle of decisions, and expect different results.  Change is necessary and sometimes painful.  What this country needs now is to adapt, which can be even more intimidating.  What we cannot do, is Change For Changes Sake.

Islamic Idealism

There is nothing more frustrating, or useless, as those who practice the Islamic faith.  This author typically feels the necessity to shower to get the grime of the endless stream of sleaziness that seems to follow any discussion of the actions of this particular faith.

To be fair, the delusionally devout of any faith are a challenge to deal with, but with those of Islam they feel that the only way to be devout is to endlessly attack those different from them.  This Xenophobic attitude is, if not acceptable, necessary for when one is a new religion among many and is seeking converts for its self preservation.

For those religions that are established exclaiming, “Kill It, Kill it!” to anything that is different or philosophically contrasting with your values is more detrimental to the society that you are attempting to preserve.

For Catholics, of which I am a member, this revelation came with the rise of the Protestant Revolution.   Ideas and practices that had been unquestioned before suddenly became under fire, as well as the emergence of the new religion of science.

The Catholic Church which had been the standard of Christianity in the Western World, now found itself countries, but also as a new minority.  A minority that was looked upon with disdain and even targeted for violence to settle scores, or show one’s legitimacy.

There are one of two decisions that one may take when faced with such humbling circumstances, Republicans should be taking notes, they can either lash out violently and ruining the future for all.  Or redefine what makes one a devout follower of ones particular faith.

One cannot allow scientific research to exist without moral parameters in place so that, while the end result may be noble the methods used do not undercut the achievement.  It is also true that if by destroying those who wish to learn the physical nature of the world, one undercuts the ability of a society to grow.

The West has dealt with these questions in the past, and thus redefined the nature of their religion against that of the written word, and to delve into the spiritual truths those words were to get across.  So it was that the practice of slavery, which was allowed by biblical teachings, was eventually seen as a practice that went against the very nature of how a Christian was to live their life.

What seems to be lacking in the Muslim world is the ability, or the desire, to move past the strict interpretation of the written word and examine the Koran philosophically.  Much of the resentment that the Arab/Persian region has towards the rest of the world is that they were once the cusp of technological advacements.

Philosophically, Technologically, and Culturally, the Middle East was once hailed as the standard from which all other empires would be measured.  It was when the stifling of creativity, due to the crackdown of Islamic rule that we can see the devolution of their society.

Thus arises the ideology that if they only became more devout, then they would be placed at their, suppose, proper place as among the top of the global pecking order.  So they have governments like the Taliban, which despite its adherence to the most violent of Islam’s teachings is still a toilet bowl of the world.

With the Middle East being a place of vast economic in-opportunity segments of the population then emigrate to places that do offer the possibility of a better life.  These places most often exist in the decadent West, but they seem to overlook these facts.

So they travel to the places where the reason for opportunity is directly proportional to the level of interference religious leaders exert in the society.  Much of the West has a separation of the spheres of influence between civil and religious institutions, so the diverse economy can be fueled by diverse people.

What then seems to occur in Islamic Muslims is the culture shock of freedom and opportunity, also comes with a feeling of isolation since they are now a minority the new country they travel to.  This leads them to define themselves as devout Muslims by seeking to do violence to the very place that allows them the freedom to practice their faith, unopposed.  (Try being a Christian in Saudi Arabia)

It is the level of competition that has seen the West attempt to one up each other that has driven our societies forward.  A world where everyone is on a level playing field, because everyone is at square one is not a staple of Western thought.  It is however the foundation of Islamic Idealism.