Paying a Substantial Penalty for Early Withdrawal

Fukuyama, in the LAT today, argues, ‘so what if Iraq ends up in a civil war’?

An intensifying civil war will be a tragedy for Iraq, but it is not the worst outcome from a U.S. standpoint to have a number of bitterly anti-American groups duking it out among themselves.

Civil wars eventually come to an end when one side wins (unlikely, in this case) or when the parties exhaust themselves and drop their maximalist aims.

Look, let’s cut to the chase, here. I have no patience for this kind of nonsense.  So I will call it directly what it is; Fukuyama is a blithering idiot.  I’ve always thought so, and this confirms it.
First of all if we pull out of Iraq just now, a civil war is decidedly what we will not have.  A civil war by definition is an internal struggle.  Should we remove ourselves from the process, Syria and Iran will become immediately involved which by definition makes it a a regional struggle.  A regional struggle, wherein the entire region, and thereby the world ends up worse off.

Secondly, the likelihood of the combatants exhausting themselves and dropping their arms in the process, seems remote given the history of the region.  The only time that there’s been peace in the region since the fourteen hundreds, has been when one power holds sway.

Thirdly, Even there, there’s problems; it seems to me that we came to a similar conclusion twenty and of the Vietnam era, and our reliance on the Civil War eventually settling itself, the eventual spread of communism, and the death of millions at the hands of Pol Pot. Hardly a desirable outcome.

And, finally, does anybody are really consider that we won’t be hearing from al-Qaida that they have won over the hidden Americans?  With that victory in hand, do you not think that they would be picking new, more vulnerable targets , to say nothing of more valuable?

What Fukuyama proposes here, IS in fact the worst of all possible scenarios. To which, I must admit containing no surprise whatsoever.

.
And Derb; To answer your question, there is no difference. Which is why I gave exactly the same answer to YOU when you first made a similar statement about a year back. Any questions, class?

So today is cinco De Mayo.  Or as those who actually speak English say it, May 5.  This gets celebrated because of a victory by the Mexicans over the French.  Which, given what we’ve seen of the French, of late, doesn’t sound like all that much.

These days, it serves the purpose of selling corn based Mexican beer, which I wouldn’t drink on a prayer.

You’ll forgive me if I don’t join in.

James, over at OTB writes today about an article posted by worldpublicopinion.org :

(Link fixed, sorry James…-Ed) 

Worldpublicopinion.org a project of the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, has recently published an public opinion poll on attitudes toward the US, terrorist organization, and a generalized ‘clash of civilizations’. [The link is to a 28-page PDF document. The questionnaire is also available as a 20-page PDF] The polling was conducted in Egypt, Indonesia, Morocco, and Pakistan between December 2006 and February 2007.

The results are pretty depressing. Majorities have negative views of the US government. Gross majorities believe it is US policy to undermine and divide the Islamic world and to spread Christianity. Majorities have a negative view of Western culture and believe that groups like Al-Qaeda are right in trying to fight its spread.

Majorities believe that the US is actively working to help Israel extend its territory and large numbers believe that the US is not really interested in a two-state solution to the Arab-Israeli problem.

Surprisingly large numbers believe that the true identities of the 9/11 attackers remain unknown with many believing, still, that either the US or Israel is behind the attacks. In none of the four countries is Al-Qaeda identified as being responsible by more than 35% of the polled population.

Majorities share the Al-Qaeda belief that Muslim countries should be ruled by strict Sharia law and that Islamic countries should be unified in a single Islamic state or Caliphate.

James goes on to identify part of the problem;

A large part of the problem of attitudes is that foreign audiences, even in highly educated places like Europe, do not have a clear conception of how the US government works, the role of policy advocates and opponents, the role of Congress or the media.

Commentor Floyd says in response:

What a surprise! Look at the media. We don’t seem to think much of ourselves lately either!

Correct.

Therein lies the key to all of this, and nobody, including, alas, James, seems to see this one key element. And if we did think much of ourselves, we wouldn’t much CARE what a bunch of holdovers form the 14th century thought of us.

If we didn’t think much of ourselves, the people who don’t understand how our government works, wide, and would likely be trying to emulate more than they are now. But the fact is, that we haven’t been selling ourselves to other nations in the world, because we no longer believe in it. Such is the state of things, after nearly 60 years of Democrat domination.

I’m sorry, but I’m running out of patience with leftist attempts to get people so fundamentally opposite from us in terms of worldview, to like us. I dare say, the Nazis didn’t much care for us, either. And I think the comparison apropos.

If we thought more of ourselves, the issue would be whether not we like them. And, properly so.

As it is, we’re so worried about whether not bay like us, that we’ve stopped being ourselves. It’s not only we in America that lose, when we do that, but the rest of the world as well. In my view it is not they who should be sitting in judgment of us, but rather, we of them.

I recognize that’s not going to make the us any more popular; in the short term it probably won’t.  But what will? And what would the advantages be of making ourselves popular among a group of people willing to stone to death a 17 year old girl for falling in love with the ‘wrong boy’, since we would have to cast a tolerant eye on such events?

Let’s play ‘what if’….Let’s say, just for giggles, that we were to pull out of Iraq tomorrow, for example. Or, let’s say we would never have gone in there. Would they dislike us at any less? I doubt it. There’s only one way that we can get them to like us, and that is capitulation. That is something America must never do.

And this not only applies to Islamic fundamentalism, and the results of that, but socialist fundamentalism, such as the current situation in Venezuela for example, and the results of that.

So asks the AP.

NEW YORK -AP- In an angry commentary on April 25, MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann accused Rudolph Giuliani of using the language of Osama bin Laden with “the same chilling nonchalance of the madman” to argue that Republicans would keep Americans safer than Democrats from terror.

Eight days later, Olbermann hosted MSNBC’s coverage of the first debate among Republican candidates for president.

Olbermann’s popularity and evolving image as an idealogue has led NBC News to stretch traditional notions of journalistic objectivity. The danger for MSNBC is provoking the same anger among Republicans that Democrats feel toward Fox News Channel.

Anybody who has watched the Bad Rug man’s show, even just once knows the answer to the question posed in the headline.

The answer, is an unequivocal, uncompromising, unwavering , rock solid “HELL NO”.

Anyone, that is, who isn’t biased to the left to begin with.

It really shouldn’t be a surprise, I suppose, that Barack Obama’s run for the presidency is bringing out innate racism of so many right-wingers these days. After all, so many of them have had to suppress their Inner Theodore Bilbo for so many years now, it’s bound to come squirming out when given the opportunity — and nothing draws them out like liberal blacks running for political office. Making it the presidency drives them into another sphere altogether.

So sceams Dave Neiwert.

Well, about that, Dave, tell me how Obama, with the very limited, and very questionable record he has, would be getting the support he’s getting from the Democrats if he were NOT black. Put another way, change Obama’s skin color to white and tell me he’d be getting the support he is. You KNOW he would NOT be.  Tell me how he’s not getting large support simply because of the color of his skin. Tell me how more qualified people are not getting passed up based on that ONE FACTOR.

And tell me again, who the race zombies are.

Just a few quick thoughts… as I settle down for the night, after getting the trailer home with the new truck.  as expected, there’s a good deal more power available, though the mileage still isn’t the best; the run up 390 to Rochester from Dansville, ended up giving me just a hair under ten MPG.

Which isn’t bad, given that we’re dealing with about 50 miles of an all uphill run.  The engine, while hungry, performed flawlessly; the transmission as well, performed flawlessly, and without any manifestations of overheating.  The somewhat lighter construction had me fighting the wheel more than I did in the van, as crosswinds were encountered, and as large trucks went by.

* I can’t say enough kind words about Ballantyne RV center, in Victor and Dansville, the latter location being where my trailer gets stored each winter. They’ve been quite helpful, always, and never moreso than today. Some major repair work done, and some serious rewiring to get the old brake controller to work in the new truck… but work it does. Thanks, guys. And no, I’m not getting anything for the mention.
* Wow… what a game…. Hockey, I’m afraid is the bane of the Blogging classes. And you know what? If I’m Max Afinogenov, I’m feeling vindicated.
* So now we’re told a chimp is a person?  So we’re being told from Austria, where the animal rights whack jobs are in full cry. Right WIng news notes the same article and says:

“Chimps share 99.4 percent of their DNA with humans,” he said. “OK, they’re not homo sapiens. But they’re obviously also not things—the only other option the law provides.”

So they share 99.4% of their DNA with human. Whoop-de-doo! Humans and mice share 99% of the same genes. Heck, even 60 percent of the genes in chickens are similar to ours. Think about that the next time you eat scrambled eggs.

And what amazes me, is that these same people will make the claim that the unborn , are not human.  And they have 100% of the same DNA. So much for THAT line of “reasoning”.

* No, I have no plans to apologize for my comments on Mitt Romney, the other night, to answer an angry letter.
Look; if you understand nothing else, I need you to understand this; If, by some stroke of bad luck, he manages to get nominated, I will probably vote for him because whoever comes up on the republican side is going to be better for the country than any democrat on the field of the moment, or ever for that matter as far as I can see. Which is really saying something, because as best I can tell Romney’s a full blown idiot. right behind John McCain.  And yes, Patrick, I’m expecting your e-mail forthwith to complain about THAT comment. Pppppffftttthhhhhh.

* One of the benefits of the older, Film based TV shows, is that the resolution on them is far higher than the more recent ones. As a result, old Startrek shows…(The Original series) take on new life.  However, with all the 20/20 hindsight given me, I can’t help but wonder if some of the more recent shows shot in 4:3/525 aren’t missing out on future reruns because they don’t look as good as their older counterparts?

Fox News:

Postings on the New Jersey State Troopers’ Union Web site are urging fellow officers to engage in a ticket-writing blitz this month — as payback to the public for ridicule of the police following the accident that left Governor John Corzine badly injured.

Corzine was hurt when his state trooper-driven SUV crashed after going as fast as 91 miles/hour. And the governor wasn’t wearing a seat belt. The Gannett News Service reports the state police superintendent ordered commanders to make sure the troopers do not launch the ticket blitz.

And the head of the union was so upset with a couple of talk radio hosts who broke the story that he launched into what Cybercast News described as a profanity-laced tirade, even threatening to release to the public their private personal information — such as home addresses and license plate numbers.

He says since the Corzine crash, motorists have been increasingly confrontational when they are stopped by troopers for speeding.

Yeah, well, why doesn’t that surprise me?

And (you know who you are); before you get started with me, this is not an issue of the power given these people… this is an issue of the quality of the people to whom the power is granted.  And why am I not surprised that these low quality people are represented by a union?

From my Democratic friend: “Thompson is winning—Fred Thompson.” 

That’s Rich Lowry.

Indeed; exactly my thought. 

Congrats, Rich; You win the prize. Win enough of them, and you’ll have won… lotsa prizes.

The show last night… and make no mistake, that’s what it was… involved all of the contestants trying to lay claim to the mantle of Ronald Reagan and failing miserably… mostly because they make it startlingly clear they haven’t a clue as to what it was the Reagan revolution was about.

SAN DIEGO —FOX- Walter M. “Wally” Schirra Jr., who as one of the original Mercury Seven astronauts combined the Right Stuff _ textbook-perfect flying ability and steely nerves _ with a pronounced rebellious streak, died Thursday at 84.

He was the only astronaut to fly in all three of NASA’s original manned spaceflight programs: Mercury, Gemini and Apollo. Although he never walked on the moon, Schirra laid some of the groundwork that made the lunar landings possible and won the space race for the United States.

I’ve written about his exploits in the past, most particularly the ones that I watched on the flickering black and white television at the elementary school where I was several hundred other children watching that same TV, saw history being made.

As the Bard said, I fear we shall not see his like again.

You know, maybe that’s part of the problem, here.  Schirra, whatever else he may have been, earned himself the title of “American hero”, though his actions.  One of the things that I tried to suggest in my every week links to McQ’s Project Hero postintgs, was that we have heroes among us, already, that we refuse to recognize.

The point I’m trying to make here, (and perhaps this post isn’t the place to do it, but I don’t think Schirra would mind) is that perhaps the reason we don’t have much in the way of heroic actions amongst the general population, is because the actions of a hero, are no longer held high. No longer looked upon with respect.    Schirra was from the time that heroism was held high.  He justifiably received respect for his deeds.  His heroism.

Where is his like, today?

* I succeeded in slicing my thumb open with a bagel slicer. As a result, it’s been a bit of a problem trying to type. That said, I’ll use my voice dictation system, and soldier on.

* Pics of the new ride:

Well, I did manage to get a few in, last night, which is another reason why I didn’t post a Ramble… and here’s the best of the bunch. Drill each for the (much) larger view.

Call me a victim of winter, if you will, but I just liked the way the light played on some of these shots. I haven’t managed to get any shots of the interior yet, but for now I’ll pass along one that I ripped off from familycar.com which seems a rather nice resource for such things.the interior on mind is the same color. Indeed, the pictures from this other site could very well the same vehicle.

I suppose it doesn’t look like much from the outside, particularly in comparison to the van which was the flashiest vehicle I’ve ever all, bar none. Not a very flashy car, much as I tried for the glamor shots here. But take another look at that interior, and you’ll understand what all this is about. Comfort.

The thing rides like a luxury car and has a feel like a luxury car, while being what we consider these days, a truck. It plows easily through turns, with the confidence I had not thought to find in this class of vehicle.

Interestingly, they have not only the interior pictures but the outside as well, in the same color.

I should say at the outset this is the first black car/truck I’ve ever owned, so it’s going to be interesting to see how I manage with the paint on this truck. My wife had a black Escape, and scratches were a serious issue.

OK, enough of that, for now.

* Surber notes… as does Beck, a story about how several federal agencies are spending healthcare money as in… TAX money… for a conference. I suppose, that doesn’t sound to abnormal until you consider that the location for the conference is Disney world. Says Surber:

This is a taste of what government-run health care will be like.

Was there ever any doubt of that point?

* I note the push toward ‘hate crime’ laws by the Democrats. of course, this is simply more political posturing, because they know they’re not going to get it signed into law. But more, such legislation doesn’t make sense. Consider, please, the statement:

“I hate intolerence”.

I wrote,back in march of ’01:

The pattern is well established. Politicians and others have frequently blamed “hatred” for headline making crimes, particularly when in the act of pandering to so-called Minority groups..
*After the April 1995 bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma City, President Clinton named G. Gordon Liddy among the conservative talk-show hosts he called “purveyors of hatred and division,” saying they were “encouraging violence.” The liberal press, who has long been willing to prostitute itself to the end of defeating anyone who holds views to the right of say, Fidel Castro, gleefully agreed with him.
There was serious talk of McVeigh being charged under “Hate crimes’ laws, but I’ve forgotten if he ever was prosecuted under those laws. I suspect though, that he was so charged.
*’Concerned’ over arson attacks on black churches in 1996, (You recall, the ones Mr. Clinton lied about) civil rights leader Joseph Lowery accused the Christian Coalition of fostering an “extremist climate.” The non problem was followed up as a group of hate crimes.
*When avowed homosexual Matthew Shepard was killed in Wyoming last year, Homosexual-extra-rights advocate Joan M. Garry suggested it was the result of a conservative anti-homosexuality campaign she said “fuels the fires of bigotry.”, and his killers were subject to and convicted under Hate Crime statutes.
*Following the shootings at a Jewish community center in California, the leftist media and politicians jumped onto the hate crime bandwagon, labeling those episodes of violence “hate crimes”..
*In Texas, the dragging death of a black man has brought two white men to conviction and the death penalty. These were reported by the press, most notably CBS and CNN (who forever shill for big government ) as hate crimes.
Yet there is another pattern, also well established… a more disturbing one.
#When a gunman spouting blasphemous rhetoric burst into a youth service at a Fort Worth Baptist church this week, and fatally shot seven persons, the liberal’s war on hate crimes was nowhere to be seen. Nor were there endless lines of liberal leaders, making as much out of the situation as possible.
#When in 1997, a kid who had been known as anti-Christian shot up a high school prayer group in Paducah, KY where were the people protecting us from ‘hate crime’? They must have hidden behind the folks who want to remove the second amendment from the books. It’s the oddest thing; these looked just like the folks who had been screaming about hate crimes in my first examples.
#When the April murders of Christian students at Columbine High School in Colorado, made the front page… where the shooters specifically picked out Christians to shoot at by asking them for professions of faith and then killing them for their answer, we saw no crying and wailing from the usual suspects about ‘hate crime’. Yet, there can be no question that these crimes too, were motivated by hate.
Such discrepancies alas constitute legal life in America today. And with our over dependence on law, and on government, such nonsense penetrates every aspect of our day to day lives. The obvious question is why such double standards are permitted to exist. The answer, I fear, goes directly to the heart of the motive behind the hate crime laws. Understand; “motive” is not an idle choice of a word.. I consider the laws and the motive behind them, criminal. Why?
Well, in answer, it doesn’t pass my notice, and I hope it doesn’t pass yours, that there are many who scream loudly to the populace for hate crimes laws when certain groups… groups whom they have historically favored… are targeted. Yet, these same people keep stony silence when other groups that they don’t favor are. You should also take note, of which are which. This disparity, (along with the disparity in the implementation of hate crime laws themselves) sends the message that hate itself isn’t the real issue… but rather WHOM you hate… that it’s OK to hate certain people. And of course, by passing hate crime laws and selectively implementing them, the government sends the clear message of which we shall and shall not hate.
A look around provides the idea that open hostility to Christians, and others who hold traditional American values, is growing rapidly, and government is doing much to foster this hostility. Let’s be honest enough to say that this is the real purpose of “hate crime” legislation; to provoke hatred against politically incorrect groups, such as those who dare to try and uphold traditional cultural values, and/or those who are Christians.
I suggest that this double standard is just one more front on the culture war … a war so many deny exists.

Yet, it is a war that continues to claim victims. As in this case.
Let me be clear, here. I am not suggesting that we give ‘hate crimes’ status to those crimes that we have not. I’m suggesting that we should grant ‘hate crime’ status to NO crime. By their design, and certainly by their implementation, the Hate Crimes statutes tend to reveal motives on the part of the government, which have racial and cultural motives, which are directed against the majority. Lincoln once observed that a house divided against itself cannot stand. Hate Crimes laws, far from being the healing tool they were supposed to be, have only served to deepen our division.

It’s time to remove so called hate crimes from the books.

My take on all of this is, that there are motives about all of this on the Democratic side that haven’t changed since a long before I wrote this six years ago. Those motives are not in the best interests of the country. More, they’re not in the interests of solving the stated problems. The such laws will in fact divide us further. Given some of the legislation the democrats have come up with in my lifetime alone, you have to wonder whether not that isn’t their goal; to divide us further.

* Some notes from Brit Hume, of Fox this evening;

Democratic Congressman John Murtha Tuesday called the recent Washington visit of Iraq Multinational Forces Commander General David Petraeus a “purely political move.”

He added — “Petraeus doesn’t talk to any of us. He only talks to the news media and so forth trying to sell this program.” Murtha later acknowledged that while Petraeus talked to “a group of members,” he said he didn’t talk to committees that act on military legislation.

In fact, Petraeus conducted two 90-minute top-secret level briefings to which all members of Congress were invited, and which 336 attended. Petraeus personally briefed Murtha and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in a telephone call the previous day.

As far as his visit being political — a senior defense official tells Cybercast News — “Members of the military are inherently non-political. Moreover, General Petraeus was unanimously confirmed by this Senate. He is their man, reporting to them on operations in Iraq. There is nothing political about that.”

I must assume that nobody rises to the position John Murtha has risen to, being completely devoid of the ability to discern fact from fiction. On that basis I must conclude that John Murtha is willingly lying to the American people. It’s about time Murtha resign from his office. He does not deserve it. He no longer is worthy of the trust of any of the American people, most particularly that which elected him.

FOIA, reports, “NASA Ponders Mars Issues:”    

A FOIA request by the AP to NASA has uncovered that the space agency has begun to ponder important things about a trip to Mars, such as what happens if one of the astronauts dies on the three year mission?  According to this article, they haven’t thought about sexual relations between astronauts on the three year journey even with the recent events concerning former astronaut Lisa Nowak.

I’d say your average Cub Scout could figure a solution to NASA’s problem in say five minutes.  Given political correctness, NASA may never be able to resolve their problem. 

So, why would Sullivan fall for such a play?

Because it fits directly into his bizzare worldview, that’s why.

OK, granted, Sullivan is not a “reporter”, he’s a “Pundit”.  But…. and think seriously about this, now… are you really going to argue that the change of title insulates a ‘reporter’ from similar biases as Sullivan demonstrated so very well, this time out?

This is rich.  The ultimate hack, John Murtha, calls a professional soldier a “political hack.”   Ian, Hot Air has the video.    Diane Ivey please run again.

Matthew Yglesias seems to have his knickers in twist over this quote from Dr. Thomas Sowell:

When I see the worsening degeneracy in our politicians, our media, our educators, and our intelligentsia, I can’t help wondering if the day may yet come when the only thing that can save this country is a military coup.

Yglesias whines, writes: 

I could feign outrage, but I’ve got to admit that, I, too, have had this thought from time to time especially during moments (see, e.g., 2005) when my political preferences weren’t faring well (I never said “decadence,” though, it seems to me that only real extremists worry about decadence). That said, even though I write a ton of words every day, I’ve always had the good sense to not actually write it because even bloggers know that you shouldn’t publish every random crazy thought that pops into your head. What was Sowell thinking? More to the point, how is it that nobody at Creator’s Syndicate or National Review Online stopped this from going to press?

As to Yglesias, Dr. Sowell is a high school drop out in his seventiies who written numerous best sellers.  The man is a national treasure.   I doubt that Dr. Sowell will be losing any sleep over some young whipper snapper who would presume to censor him.

As to Dr. Sowell’s quote, which so upset Yglesias, I offer an analogy.  I hike just a wee bit   Now as a male, I will never admit having to ever having been lost.  Aferall, I have always found my way back on my own.   No comment on dread and panic.

I have noticed  that every time I was powerfully confused as where I was, I had made the assumption that I could not get powerfully confused.   So when start falling into that comfort zone that I can’t get powerfully confused,  I try to remind myself that thinking I couldn’t get powerfully confused always preceding getting powerfully confused as to where I was.

Likewise, Dr. Sowell seems to suggesting that believing that degeneracy  can not lead to the collapse of our civilization, is a precondition to that collapse.?

Ahem…. 

09-f9-11-02-9d-74-e3-5b-d8-41-56-c5-63-56-88-c0

‘ Nuff said.

As has become standard fare, around here of late, I’m going to take a very correct statement and make an observation that will take the comment in a whole new direction.

McQ over at Q&O:

I think Tony Blankley touches on the concern many have about the possibility that the revolutionary form of Islam, more commonly referred to as radical Islam, can or will reach “critical mass” within the Muslim community.

It should be remembered that a majority of Germans never voted for Hitler. His high watermark was about four in 10 — and that probably over stated his true level of support. Indeed, only a minority of American colonists supported our noble revolution.

Anytime a revolutionary cause — and particularly one that is culturally and violently aggressive — reaches a certain critical mass, its target runs the risk of losing the support of the majority who are not revolutionary, but are susceptible to being intimidated by the revolutionary minority.

That’s an interesting and important point. Blankley uses a recent poll to point out that while certainly not a majority, there is a large radical minority within that community which sees the use of terrorist tactics as justified based on their perceptions of what is happening in the world.

I share Blankley’s concern, but for a different reason than you might expect…. I’m looking at the trends….  

Consider, please,  the political state of affairs in this country versus the concept of ‘critical mass’. My personal estimate is that the cut and run Democrats really only have around 40% of the voters, who really support the concept of cut and run and who suffer from the advanced stages of Bush Derangement syndrome. The rest tend to ignore the rather grusome reality of what the Democrats represent, of late.

Now, consider the recent vote on the Iraq spending bill… which, right after the President (correctly)  vetoed it, the Democrats backed off the part of the bill that specified the hard-and fast date of surrender, saying they’d put up a bill without it, and pass it, all in short order.

Face it; They knew going in, that they’d never get it by the President.  And a good number of them, I expect, though I doubt they’d ever admit it, know it’s exactly the wrong thing to be doing.

So why press for it? To keep the extreme left marching with them, in the hopes of maintaining critical mass come November ’08.

And what do you know… The Islamic Terrorists need the Democrats at or beyond critical mass to achieve their OWN critical mass.