"Talk of an Islamic state in Iraq is not very serious or very deeply rooted among the people. It is necessary for religion and politics to be separated."
This man will lead the Middle East to its next Golden Age.
Tuesday, October 07, 2003
Thursday, October 02, 2003
Zero Hour in North Korea
If North Korea isn't bluffing (which, given its past accusations of bluffing, would make this one hell of a bluff) then the time for mere talk is over. Bush needs to take serious action in the next week, or the consequences will not be pretty. Here are two of my ideas of what serious action could entail.
1) Tell North Korea that they can start a bilateral negotiation on a short-term treaty with the U.S. to conclude within weeks, under the unbending condition that the U.N. has total access to all facets of North Korea's nuclear program, and will totally dismantle said program, in exchange for a promise by the U.S. that it will not engage in a conflict to destroy the North Korean government. Also warn that if they do not accept the offer within a week, the U.S. will seek U.N. and NATO cooperation in a war to remove the North Korean government and thereby destroy its nuclear program.
2) (This is less a separate option than a truncation of the above) Create and implement plans to bomb or otherwise destroy all known nuclear infrastructure, while simultaneously beginning operations to eliminate the leadership of the North Korean government. Follow up with complete quarantine of North Korean borders through naval and aerial means to ensure that nuclear materials do not leave North Korea. At this point the country could be disorganized enough for U.S. forces to movein with significantly less casualties then a straight invasion would inflict. Tactical air strikes should also be implemented on all known artillery positions within range of Seoul.
To be honest, neither of these plans will be an improvement of the current situation. The second one should have the caveat that effectively accomplishing the goal of destroying the North Korean government will likely require carrying out a tactical nuclear strike on Pyongyang. The first one has the problem that what will happen becomes much fuzzier and there is an increased risk that North Korea will somehow export nuclear technology or materials. Both of them bring the immense risk that China will become involved. It is unlikely, however, that they will make things worse than the situation will be with continued inactivity. Bush has to ask himself if a nuclear-armed North Korea is an acceptable risk to America's national security. If not, he must act now.
If North Korea isn't bluffing (which, given its past accusations of bluffing, would make this one hell of a bluff) then the time for mere talk is over. Bush needs to take serious action in the next week, or the consequences will not be pretty. Here are two of my ideas of what serious action could entail.
1) Tell North Korea that they can start a bilateral negotiation on a short-term treaty with the U.S. to conclude within weeks, under the unbending condition that the U.N. has total access to all facets of North Korea's nuclear program, and will totally dismantle said program, in exchange for a promise by the U.S. that it will not engage in a conflict to destroy the North Korean government. Also warn that if they do not accept the offer within a week, the U.S. will seek U.N. and NATO cooperation in a war to remove the North Korean government and thereby destroy its nuclear program.
2) (This is less a separate option than a truncation of the above) Create and implement plans to bomb or otherwise destroy all known nuclear infrastructure, while simultaneously beginning operations to eliminate the leadership of the North Korean government. Follow up with complete quarantine of North Korean borders through naval and aerial means to ensure that nuclear materials do not leave North Korea. At this point the country could be disorganized enough for U.S. forces to movein with significantly less casualties then a straight invasion would inflict. Tactical air strikes should also be implemented on all known artillery positions within range of Seoul.
To be honest, neither of these plans will be an improvement of the current situation. The second one should have the caveat that effectively accomplishing the goal of destroying the North Korean government will likely require carrying out a tactical nuclear strike on Pyongyang. The first one has the problem that what will happen becomes much fuzzier and there is an increased risk that North Korea will somehow export nuclear technology or materials. Both of them bring the immense risk that China will become involved. It is unlikely, however, that they will make things worse than the situation will be with continued inactivity. Bush has to ask himself if a nuclear-armed North Korea is an acceptable risk to America's national security. If not, he must act now.
Wednesday, October 01, 2003
Lt. Smash is the Indepundit
Lt. Cmdr. Smash (formerly Lt. Smash) reveals himself to be the Indepundit, someone I have never heard of. So, until next time, I am NF.
That was a joke. And the link is being updated.
I am he,
And he is me,
And we are we,
And now we’re all together.
I am The Indepundit.
I am L.T. Smash.
I am the Walrus.
Goo goo g’joob.
Lt. Cmdr. Smash (formerly Lt. Smash) reveals himself to be the Indepundit, someone I have never heard of. So, until next time, I am NF.
That was a joke. And the link is being updated.
Monday, September 22, 2003
Hope For The Middle East
I believe this article from IsraelInsider.com is a pretty good explanation of how I feel about Israel sometimes, and explains a lot about the opinions of Jewish-Americans on Israeli actions. The whole idea about how Jewish-Americans want Israel to be a credit to Jewish culture is probably correct (witness Abraham Foxman of the ADL criticizing the recent marriage ban), and I completely believe that it should be a shining example of the Jewish people. Unfortunately, as the author points out, the world isn't that nice a place, and Israel has had to do a bunch of things to ensure its survival that would be considered morally repugnant in America. In certain circles off and on over the last few decades, there has been talk that by having to live on the same continent as millions of Muslims intent on expunging Israel, the character of the nation has coarsened and degraded. Some of the people who have argued this are the very extremists whose character one thinks has been degraded. Others may sincerely want peace even if it involves tough compromises. The reason I mention this is that I fervently hope it isn't true and is never true. This, and the above argument, is much of the root cause for the comments below rejecting extreme action against the Palestinian people.
Because of all I have said, I think it is a necessity that Israel reach a final agreement with its neighbors that guarantees peace and security in Israel. Israel itself does not need to reach that agreement, given free reign in the territories it can defend itself for decades. My concern is, at what cost?
A peace agreement that actually brings peace and security is still possible. The "facts on the ground" have not changed, in a sense we may be back to '92, after the Intifada died down but before Oslo. The problem so far has been finding a partner who is willing to negotiate that agreement. Someone on the other side may rise up to the challenge. Stranger things have happened.
Do I have any answers? No. I am predicting rain, not building arks. All I really have to offer is the hope that somehow, perhaps through the inherent goodness of people that Anne Frank believed in, there will be peace and happiness in Israel and the rest of the Middle East.
I believe this article from IsraelInsider.com is a pretty good explanation of how I feel about Israel sometimes, and explains a lot about the opinions of Jewish-Americans on Israeli actions. The whole idea about how Jewish-Americans want Israel to be a credit to Jewish culture is probably correct (witness Abraham Foxman of the ADL criticizing the recent marriage ban), and I completely believe that it should be a shining example of the Jewish people. Unfortunately, as the author points out, the world isn't that nice a place, and Israel has had to do a bunch of things to ensure its survival that would be considered morally repugnant in America. In certain circles off and on over the last few decades, there has been talk that by having to live on the same continent as millions of Muslims intent on expunging Israel, the character of the nation has coarsened and degraded. Some of the people who have argued this are the very extremists whose character one thinks has been degraded. Others may sincerely want peace even if it involves tough compromises. The reason I mention this is that I fervently hope it isn't true and is never true. This, and the above argument, is much of the root cause for the comments below rejecting extreme action against the Palestinian people.
Because of all I have said, I think it is a necessity that Israel reach a final agreement with its neighbors that guarantees peace and security in Israel. Israel itself does not need to reach that agreement, given free reign in the territories it can defend itself for decades. My concern is, at what cost?
A peace agreement that actually brings peace and security is still possible. The "facts on the ground" have not changed, in a sense we may be back to '92, after the Intifada died down but before Oslo. The problem so far has been finding a partner who is willing to negotiate that agreement. Someone on the other side may rise up to the challenge. Stranger things have happened.
Do I have any answers? No. I am predicting rain, not building arks. All I really have to offer is the hope that somehow, perhaps through the inherent goodness of people that Anne Frank believed in, there will be peace and happiness in Israel and the rest of the Middle East.
Thursday, September 11, 2003
Meanderings on Mass Destuction
Comments on a post on Israpundit:
Comments on a post on Israpundit:
I think the author's recomendations, if carried out, would be a severe over-reaction that would only lead to further loss of allies and greater scale of conflict in the Middle East.
The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was done against an enemy that was broken in all but spirit. If it had not been for the declaration by the emperor that Japan was turning away from warfare and the strict observance of authority by the Japanese it would have been necessary to turn all of Japan to ashes to end the war. In retrospect it can be clearly said that far more Japanese died in Nagasaki and Hiroshma then Americans and allies would have died in an invasion. Even after both cities were nuked, Japan did not finally surrender until a last bombing raid was launched on nearly every major Japanese city. The emperor realized that the Americans would not stop until Japan surrendered, and that ultimately the Japanese would lose, that it was simply a question of how many more Japanese would die. However, the Arabs believe they have Allah on their side, and that the will win because Allah wants them to win.
My criticisms of the author's plan are two-fold. One, killing on the scale that is recommended is indeed a 7th-century action and is in no way morally justified by the broad opinion support of terrorism by the Palestinian people. If we are forced to sink to that level then the terrorists have won, because they and the Muslim world can claim moral equaity, and then there will be nothing that will stop the killing from continuing. It is true that these tactics are continually repeated by even the defenders in conflicts, such as the WWII fire-bombing by the US and the nuking of Japan, but we live in a world where, to borrow a quote from "Herzog" by Saul Bellow, "Annihilation is no longer a metaphor. Good and Evil are real." So, secondly, if we take a path to total-war, that path no longer ends. Acts that are evil can lead to acts that cause the death of large portions of the human race. If we say that the death of a 10,000 partially-innocent people is justified if it ends a conflict, what if it doesn't? Will 50,000 people justify it? 100,000? 1,000,000? Who here has the will or lack of conscience to engage in a war that will kill at least a tenth of all Arabs in the Middle East and untold numbers of Israelis. If it ends the conflict, will you be able to look at yourself in the mirror and say "I ended the Israeli-Arab Conflict." and feel anything but sickness because of the all those who died for to stop it.
If humanity cannot prove that it has stopped the evil and meaningless mass murder of the first two millenia, I have little hope it will survive the third.
As for what I would recommend; the full arrest and deportation of all Palestinian leaders not irectly implicatable in terrorism, and the execution of all members of terrorist organizations and leaders who actively supprted them. When that happens we will see what can be done next.
Friday, September 05, 2003
Glenn Reynolds wonders where his jetpack is.
Saturday, August 30, 2003
Kurdish Jews in Israel
Kesher Talk has links. I, being part-Sephardic, appear to be related to the Kurds. I will take this opportunity to remind the reader of the link to the Kurdish National Congress of North America. Their website has information on the historical and present-day oppression of the Kurds, and the organization is active in lobbying for North American support of the Kurdish people.
Kesher Talk has links. I, being part-Sephardic, appear to be related to the Kurds. I will take this opportunity to remind the reader of the link to the Kurdish National Congress of North America. Their website has information on the historical and present-day oppression of the Kurds, and the organization is active in lobbying for North American support of the Kurdish people.
Gregg Easterbrook takes on David Edelstein:
Somebody's Head Was Swimming All Right: A critic for the New York Times swooned that "movies as we knew them changed" because of "The Matrix" and declared that its "inspirations" could "make your head swim." Matrix inspirations included, supposedly, "video games, Hong Kong sword-fighting ghost epics, Japanese anime, William Gibson cyberpunk, Philip K. Dick dystopian science fiction, druggy Alice-in-Wonderland surrealism, the bio-mechanical designs of the artists H. R. Giger and Geoff Barlow, David Cronenberg's visions of cybernetically enhanced flesh and Terminator-like battles of man vs. runaway machine (with a nod to the writer Harlan Ellison and the father of robotics, Hans Moravec), the ancient philosophy of Gnosticism, which in this case overlaps with Jean Baudrillard's postmodern book Simulacra and Simulation (which makes a cameo in "The Matrix"), messianic Christianity and even Zen Buddhism. (Also) a philosophy essential to many Eastern martial arts, that the material world is secondary."
The review further declared, "A science-fiction screenwriter I know said he'd been stewing over his own simulated-universe project for years when "The Matrix" came out. 'What I didn't think of,' he said sadly, 'was the martial-arts angle.' And that's the crux of it." So - Gnosticism, Jean Baudrillard and H.R. Giger, but what was missing was fist fights! Talk about a great breakthrough by The Matrix's producers. Coming soon to a theater near you: Catharism, Andre Malraux and Lo Spagna, plus naked women!
A mere one week after penning the above love poem to the "Matrix" series, the same critic wrote on Slate that Matrix Revisited[sic] was "messy and flat-footed ... ugly, bloated, repetitive ... the disposable feel of a video game ... fake." The same critic complained that "Matrix Reloaded" was bad because it's a bunch of pretentious mumbo-jumbo tied together with obviously staged kung-fu fights: exactly what the same critic had praised as inspirational just one week before.
Wednesday, August 13, 2003
Lt. Smash is a Douglas Adams fan!
"...and many [people] were unhappy, even the ones with digital watches."
-Opening of Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy
"...and many [people] were unhappy, even the ones with digital watches."
-Opening of Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy
Tuesday, August 12, 2003
Today's Critics Don't Boost Movies, They Down Them
I saw The Road To Perdition last night. It was one of the best films I've seen in a while. I believe tat it should have won an Academy Award if The Pianist hadn't also been made in the same year. That it won only one Emmie and was not nominated for Best Picture is a sign that Hollywood is becoming increasingly phobic of films that mean things, give the award to Chicago, an entertaining comedy of little real meaning, in short, the only films David Edelstein of Slate likes, except for films like the Pianist. From reading his review of The Core, you get the distinct feeling he thought it was a better film than The Road To Perdition.
One can't help but wonder why Edelstein is so obsessively negative about films like About Schmidt, The Road to Perdition, The Matrix Reloaded, and Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels; (Caveat: the second half of these aren't high-concept films, but I liked them.) even when it is obvious that they are trying to make something other than a formulaic crowd-pleaser, and almost almost half of the films Edelstein reviews are pure commercial crap, even (or especially, if you want to be cynical) many he liked. (I'm thinkling the whole Austin Powers series, The Core, The Italian Job, etc.) Therefore, I bring you the Thre Rules of David Edlestein's Movie Criticism:
1. If you think the film is good but flawed, remember, a flawed good film is a bad film.
2. If the film is bad, relentlesly attempt to find good things about it.
3. Corollary to #2: If the film is good but you think the creator is a "showbiz whore" for making and promoting high-concept films, or "pickling in their own self-importance" for making a film that is merely decent when you expect them to build the Sistine Chapel, relentlessly use any real or imagined bad points to justify panning it as a horrible film. And remember, the public cares intensely what you thought of acting plot, etc. on a deeply subjective, biased basis. So if you the think the acting is bad because of your own preconceptions of what the acting should have been, the pubic must know that the film is bad because you think the acting is bad.
Coming soon: An "Edelstein-ing" of the Road To Perdition review, and an important announcement.
I saw The Road To Perdition last night. It was one of the best films I've seen in a while. I believe tat it should have won an Academy Award if The Pianist hadn't also been made in the same year. That it won only one Emmie and was not nominated for Best Picture is a sign that Hollywood is becoming increasingly phobic of films that mean things, give the award to Chicago, an entertaining comedy of little real meaning, in short, the only films David Edelstein of Slate likes, except for films like the Pianist. From reading his review of The Core, you get the distinct feeling he thought it was a better film than The Road To Perdition.
One can't help but wonder why Edelstein is so obsessively negative about films like About Schmidt, The Road to Perdition, The Matrix Reloaded, and Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels; (Caveat: the second half of these aren't high-concept films, but I liked them.) even when it is obvious that they are trying to make something other than a formulaic crowd-pleaser, and almost almost half of the films Edelstein reviews are pure commercial crap, even (or especially, if you want to be cynical) many he liked. (I'm thinkling the whole Austin Powers series, The Core, The Italian Job, etc.) Therefore, I bring you the Thre Rules of David Edlestein's Movie Criticism:
1. If you think the film is good but flawed, remember, a flawed good film is a bad film.
2. If the film is bad, relentlesly attempt to find good things about it.
3. Corollary to #2: If the film is good but you think the creator is a "showbiz whore" for making and promoting high-concept films, or "pickling in their own self-importance" for making a film that is merely decent when you expect them to build the Sistine Chapel, relentlessly use any real or imagined bad points to justify panning it as a horrible film. And remember, the public cares intensely what you thought of acting plot, etc. on a deeply subjective, biased basis. So if you the think the acting is bad because of your own preconceptions of what the acting should have been, the pubic must know that the film is bad because you think the acting is bad.
Coming soon: An "Edelstein-ing" of the Road To Perdition review, and an important announcement.
Thursday, July 31, 2003
From staus.blogger.com, July 7th:
Your gross incomtence sickens even my jaded twisted soul. I bite my thumb at thee, and wish that I could beat you to death with my shoe. An eleventh circle of Hell (see the onion for the tenth) is currently being added especially for the contemptibly useless and sadistic assholes who make up Pyra's design group. I wish that you suffer greatly when you arrive, preferably when you are all electrocuted by shorts in your com[puters that you obviously use exclusively to play Daikatana, because it sure hasn't been to make a usable version of Blogger.
Some users of free Blogger will receive Big Post errors when publishing long posts (greater than 8000 characters). We are working to resolve this problem.
Update: This error has been fixed.
Your gross incomtence sickens even my jaded twisted soul. I bite my thumb at thee, and wish that I could beat you to death with my shoe. An eleventh circle of Hell (see the onion for the tenth) is currently being added especially for the contemptibly useless and sadistic assholes who make up Pyra's design group. I wish that you suffer greatly when you arrive, preferably when you are all electrocuted by shorts in your com[puters that you obviously use exclusively to play Daikatana, because it sure hasn't been to make a usable version of Blogger.
I had a really good post on what Bush was actually doing on "Yellowcake-gate," but Blogger ate it with an "internal server error"! Thanks a lot Pyra!
As a result the remainder of the week will be devoted to flaming the new "Blogger".
"...death to all those who would whimper and cry!"
-Bob Dylan, "Tombstone Blues"
P.S. Has everything on the internet suddenly become crap? (note downgrading of Bravenet counter service.)
As a result the remainder of the week will be devoted to flaming the new "Blogger".
"...death to all those who would whimper and cry!"
-Bob Dylan, "Tombstone Blues"
P.S. Has everything on the internet suddenly become crap? (note downgrading of Bravenet counter service.)
Thursday, July 24, 2003
Thursday, July 17, 2003
I have been on hiatus from blogging, but until I return, go read this. Read the post, follow the link to the bottom, and if it doesn't make you smile at least, you must be a, idiot or a black-hearted pessimistic cynic, in which case this will all be too typical.
Brook Trout caught so far this year: 24 fish.
Brook Trout caught so far this year: 24 fish.