I’m back, for today at least. This job business everyone told me would bite me in the ass after college is no good, at least when it takes up all my free time as well. I might have to consider backing off to a once-a-week thing, I don’t know. Meanwhile, this is still cross-posted on The Conjecturer.
Defense
- Boy, wouldn’t it be great if we didn’t have a Defeatocrat as SecDef? I mean, sure, the security situation is improving in a few areas around Baghdad, but with the government fractured, the surge will not and cannot work as advertised. Hope is wonderful, so long as there is a reasonable alternative… like begging the UN? I thought we hated the UN? Because they thought invading was a bad idea?
- Iraq War costs soar… as do contractor profits. But who said anything about profiting from war?
- Kevin Drum so called it last week: “Eventually some small part of Thomas’s account will turn out to be slightly exaggerated and the right will erupt in righteous fervor.” That’s true—one incident took place in Kuwait, rather than Iraq. Hence, the HOLY OUTRAGE from the selectively critical pro-war types. Normally eager to link to Howard Kurtz (such as when he was a skeptic on this case), the Instapundit cleverly avoids doing so, when Kurtz hits the more important piece: aside from getting the location of a single incident wrong, Beauchamp’s account was true. Oh, and The Weekly Standard tried using a gay hooker under investigation for fraud to discredit him. Now, this says nothing about the war. But it says pages about the war’s supporters.
- Speaking of which, dig the moving goal posts: first the objective was WMD, then human rights, then democracy, then the surge to bring security so democracy might flourish, then… well, f*ck it, let’s just go with the surge working in a few places. In your face, libtards! Gah. I might have to write on this topic at greater length, later.
- Until then, in case you hadn’t popped over to read it, I did a series on how the military is systematically failing its own standards and principles, and how by not questioning this, the Right is asking them to continue in it. So I touched on the Scott Thomas Beauchamp mess (to which I added additional thoughts above); the slap on the wrist of the general in charge of Pat Tillman’s shameful aftermath, with a comparison to what happens when a single discharged Marine dares to question the war, and how the Right isn’t wondering why a murder investigation was silenced; a look at Bush’s Saudi arms deal (which isn’t strictly military, but bears deep questioning); two pieces on how the military is subtley trying to tell the administration and public at large that the surge really isn’t working (at least, according to its original principles; see above for my growing frustration with how those principles seem to change the moment they don’t work); and a final roundup post putting the Tillman investigation in the context of a massive equipment problem in Iraq. Strangely, these news briefs take more time than writing those pieces.
Around the World
- I should quit these things. Bonnie Boyd does the Central Asia beat, and keeps it real. I kept it real on The Economist yesterday, which actually warranted an Instalink… for whatever reason, Lance. At least he’s not linking to coverage like The Economist‘s, which was what I had complained of before.
- Argh, she also snarks me on the Afghanistan beat. Curses to you, Bonnie! I’ll have my revenge! …with science!
- A disturbingly pretty tire fire in Korla.
- Péter Marton posted an excellent followup to some of my musings on the difficult nature of air strikes and the legal consequences of dealing with the NWFP in Pakistan (something of which Barry Hussein Osama—that’s right, I went there—should take note). In short, it’s a legal briar patch, with the outside chance that the UNSC might authorize limited strikes. The trouble is, “limited strikes” means air strikes, and those are not constructive at this point. You don’t handle a lone gunman with a 1000, or even 500 lb bomb. Except right now, we do. The nasty, unpopular reality is that we need to accept the fact that we have to take casualties to win—that war can no longer be bloodless in the public eye. Kind of makes advocating war a touch harder, doesn’t it?
- While the reporting situation in China remains subpar, what is noteworthy is the role international pressure is playing on easing restrictions. In other words, since China is so reliant upon international flows—whether money, influence, or oil—they’re slowly coming around to international standards on human rights, political restrictions (notice the relatively gentle way they’ve handled the Hong Kong protestors, compared to Tiananmen), and press rights. They are on a positive trajectory, and I think it behooves us to encourage them along.
- The ICG sees trouble brewing in Pakistan, with the only solution being a free, fair and transparent election. Well… yes. But don’t count out Musharraf just yet. Meanwhile, the NWFP wants to rename itself as either “Afghania” or “Pakhtunkhwa.” I know one is easier to pronounce, but not which would be better or more appropriate. Or which, if any, might ease border tension.
Back at Home
- Bush keeps granting himself the power to grab personal property at his pleasure, so long as he says they’re doing something of which he disapproves. Of course, these are things of which I disapprove as well—I don’t like the idea of Syria reinserting itself into Lebanon anymore than anyone else does. But didn’t we used to have restrictions on what the Executive could do? Especially when it wasn’t even a domestic law enforcement issue?
- The disappearing gender gap in wages. I never really thought one existed, or that if it did it was for reasons other than discrimination. The speculated reasons behind this reversal amounts to the same: not discrimination, but other factors.
- Thank the Maker my state’s speeding fines have been thrown out on equal protection. Of course, the Radley Balko I think gets this right: “they plan to address the public outrage by applying the fines to more people, not fewer.” Sounds about right.
- Did you know the chattering class is composed mostly of retards? I’m glad foreigners think so as well.