Victor Davis Hanson considers the question, and says it is not a matter of numbers, but choice of strategy and tactics:
"Our problem, in short, is not that Donald Rumsfeld is fighting wars with too few troops and then being too stingy in allotting occupation forces. Rather, our concern with restraining the use of the vast power of those already in the field has put us at risk of creating self-fulfilling prophecies. We have seen a Gulf War I and now a Gulf War II. Gulf War III is surely on the horizon if, failing to learn the lessons of the last two victories, we once more remove the stakes from the hearts of seemingly defeated and moribund killers."
Friday, June 25, 2004
Healing Iraq
Found this Iraqi blog on AndrewSullivan.com. Healing Iraq is written by Zeyad, an Iraqi dentist. It makes for interesting reading.
Are Women the Key to Democracy?
Raymond Lloyd argues that democracy can be measured by how women are treated. His organization,shequality has a website, and numerous proposals for bringing about what he calls "paritocracy." That is, political parity among women and men. His latest posting is a paper for the NATO summit, and there are also archives of earlier proposals.
Thursday, June 24, 2004
And Ralph Nader's Website, too...
Featuring an attack on Michael Moore, and the premiere of Farenheit 9/11. (Editor's Note: Moore used to work for Nader). Read Nader's letter to Michael Moore: "Hey Dude Where's My Buddy?
Wednesday, June 23, 2004
Bush's IQ is Above Average
Aubrey Immelman calculates that it must be over 115, compared to John F. Kennedy's 119, and places him in the 86th percentile of American college graduates. He adds that JFK graduated 65th in his high school class of 110 students. For more, read Bush's bad rap.
SAT Scores of the Rich and Famous
George W. Bush: 1206. Al Gore: 1355. Bill Bradley: verbal 485 (math not disclosed). Amy Tan: below 1200. Paul Wellstone: below 900. Drea de Matteo: 800 (combined verbal + math).
All this and more in Bad Scores, Good Company.
All this and more in Bad Scores, Good Company.
CIA's Anonymous -- Not.
Explananda linked to Laura Rosen's item exposing the CIA critic of Bush Administration policy known as Anonymous . His first name is Mike, and we learn that his suggestion to blow up an Al Qaeda training camp was turned down by the CIA because it might involve killing "members of royal families." Looks like Mike might be outed pretty soon. He's already clearly identifiable to those who follow the CIA.
Now, if we could only find out who the Royals in question might be...
Now, if we could only find out who the Royals in question might be...
Mobile Phones, Cable News, and the Internet fight terror better than the DHS, FBI, and CIA
So says J.B. Schramm in the Washington Post today. His point:
"On Sept. 11, 2001, American citizens saved the government, not the other way around. A first review of the Sept. 11 commission's report indicates that the system failed, but that is wrong. While the U.S. air defense system did fail to halt the attacks, our improvised, high-tech citizen defense 'system' was extraordinarily successful..."
You can read it all here.
"On Sept. 11, 2001, American citizens saved the government, not the other way around. A first review of the Sept. 11 commission's report indicates that the system failed, but that is wrong. While the U.S. air defense system did fail to halt the attacks, our improvised, high-tech citizen defense 'system' was extraordinarily successful..."
You can read it all here.
Tuesday, June 22, 2004
Fascinating Testimony about America's Iraq Failures
From Rend Al-Rahim. After obligatory statements of gratitude, she quickly makes her point:
"I will concentrate on the issues of occupation, loss of sovereignty, dis-empowerment of Iraqis, and failed expectations. Occupation. One of the reasons for deteriorating relations is the strategic decision by the Coalition to declare a military occupation of Iraq. Iraqis wanted and welcomed the US and the Coalition as liberators and partners, not as occupiers. We wanted liberation to have an Iraqi face and to take ownership of it. In the event, we felt we had been sidelined. Prior to military action in 2003, Iraqis who spoke to policy makers in Washington urged the US not to adopt the posture of occupation. We felt that this would be counterproductive and send the wrong signal to Iraqis. Despite our recommendation, the Coalition declared that it was an occupying power, and took on full military, political and operational authority, to the dismay of many Iraqis. There really is no "nice" way to describe military occupation once you experience it first hand. Occupation is offensive, both in principle and in practice, and it is especially sensitive in a part of the world that has suffered long periods of foreign rule. Declaring an occupation dealt a blow to Iraqi dignity and national pride...."
As Glenn Reynolds says, read the whole thing.
"I will concentrate on the issues of occupation, loss of sovereignty, dis-empowerment of Iraqis, and failed expectations. Occupation. One of the reasons for deteriorating relations is the strategic decision by the Coalition to declare a military occupation of Iraq. Iraqis wanted and welcomed the US and the Coalition as liberators and partners, not as occupiers. We wanted liberation to have an Iraqi face and to take ownership of it. In the event, we felt we had been sidelined. Prior to military action in 2003, Iraqis who spoke to policy makers in Washington urged the US not to adopt the posture of occupation. We felt that this would be counterproductive and send the wrong signal to Iraqis. Despite our recommendation, the Coalition declared that it was an occupying power, and took on full military, political and operational authority, to the dismay of many Iraqis. There really is no "nice" way to describe military occupation once you experience it first hand. Occupation is offensive, both in principle and in practice, and it is especially sensitive in a part of the world that has suffered long periods of foreign rule. Declaring an occupation dealt a blow to Iraqi dignity and national pride...."
As Glenn Reynolds says, read the whole thing.
Lilieks on Hitchens on Moore
Lileks on a roll: "I am reasonably sure he wrote both pieces in the same state of furious irritated inebriation, and both strike me as two-pack essays. Forty cigarettes, minimum. "
Ask a future Prime Minister of Israel a Question
Haaretz will have an online Q & A with Nathan Sharansky on Thursday. Many see him as future Prime Minister of Israel. You can ask a question by clicking here: Haaretz - QA
Watch The Clinton Interview
Drudge has reported that Bill Clinton blew up in his BBC interview. You can watch excerpts here:BBC NEWS | Programmes | Panorama | The Clinton Interview. Or the whole thing here: BBC NEWS | Programmes | Panorama
The Master and Margarita
Saw the Synetic Theatre's forceful production of The Master and Margarita, Bulgakov's Russian classic, last Saturday night. It was captivating. The show was largely done through pantomime and dance, in the Russian style, like a mini-Rite of Spring meets Dr. Faustus. The choreography was super. The staging reminded me of the Ilhkom experimental theatre in Tashkent. If you have a chance to see this troupe--and they are coming to New York City for the Fringe festival--don't miss it.
Unfairenheit 9/11 - The lies of Michael Moore
Slate has an interesting article, by Christopher Hitchens:
"A film that bases itself on a big lie and a big misrepresentation can only sustain itself by a dizzying succession of smaller falsehoods, beefed up by wilder and (if possible) yet more-contradictory claims."
"A film that bases itself on a big lie and a big misrepresentation can only sustain itself by a dizzying succession of smaller falsehoods, beefed up by wilder and (if possible) yet more-contradictory claims."
Ray Charles' Memorial Service
Just found this link to NPR's coverage of the Ray Charles Memorial Service. Clint Eastwood, B.B. King, Willie Nelson and Stevie Wonder...
The CIA v. Ahmad Chalabi
Daniel Pipes says blame the CIA, not Ahmad Chalabi, for Iranian intelligence failures:
"In the end, what Mr. Chalabi did or did not do is nearly irrelevant; his detractors in the American government, ironically, bear the onus for having informed the Iranian opponent about a vital piece of intelligence."
"In the end, what Mr. Chalabi did or did not do is nearly irrelevant; his detractors in the American government, ironically, bear the onus for having informed the Iranian opponent about a vital piece of intelligence."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)