Michael Yon

I came across a discussion of different takes on the Iraq War on Micheal Yon's site. But, I discovered a punditradio interview (just over 40 min) with Michael from the middle of August. Good stuff.

Merry Christmas

Heading off for holiday fun.

British Pension Reform

The Times of London has a good FAQ on the Turner Report and pension reform. It looks like the basics of the plan are these: A basic benefit to keep people out of absolute poverty, and mandated savings to cover the rest of the benefit, and encouragement to save, either with the program or elsewhere, at an even higher rate. This is more or less "partial privatization" in American parlance.

Dilbert Blog

It seems Scott Adams has been blogging for about two months. Some of it looks like comedy writing, and some of it looks like a comedian's observations of life, and a small portion of it seems to be the more blog-flavored comments on current events.

"Yet another “third highest ranking al-Qaida leader” has been killed, this time by a rocket attack from an unmanned drone. There are a lot of jobs that I wouldn’t want, and “third highest ranking al-Qaida leader” is right at the top. "

Order, Liberty and Equity

Conservatives are order seeking, liberals liberty seeking, and socialists are equity seeking. Reuters reports that Arab states are more concerned with security and are suspicious of the Bush Administration's liberty (democracy) agenda. Sounds like they're a buch of conservatives to me, looking to maintain the status quo, because like the monarchs of 19th century Europe, no one would think to put them in power otherwise.

America is a country born of revolution and always has been willing to rock the boat a little bit for freedom. Why should the US give more than a passing concern for the conservative forces of the Arab world?

Anti-War Indoctrination encounters obstacles at Allis

The Wisconsin State Journal reports that "A letter-writing campaign by third-graders at Allis Elementary School encouraging an end to the war in Iraq was canceled."

"Madison School Board policy prohibits teachers 'from exploiting the institutional privileges of their professional positions to promote candidates or parties and activities.' [...] 'We don't want our staff ever using our students in a political activity, which this obviously was,'"

"Susan Abplanalp, assistant superintendent for elementary and secondary schools, said she does not believe the teachers involved viewed the assignment as a political activity."

Of course this impeaches the teachers' good sense and understanding. Not only are these people idealogues, willing to indoctrinate children, but they don't even realize that its objectionable.

Julie Fitzpatrick said, "We're really stunned by the reception. In hindsight, I guess we should have anticipated it. It's kind of sad when peace causes a furor."

This kind of statement is so idiotic, a mandatory review of her credentials to be in a classroom seems to be in order. Fitzpatrick just put herself on record opposing American independence, the Civil War and its natural consequence of freeing the slaves, the Second World War to end Fascism and its natural consequence of ending the Holocaust. Instead she stands in favor of the Nevillian quest for Peace in Our Time, or as it is also called, appeasment. Today, that includes some terribly illiberal forces.

One must think of the Niemöller quote in this context, about how foolish it is to watch one group after another capitulate to evil because you did nothing to aid them. Or likewise, Edmund Burke's, "All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

When one's opponants are merely creatures of self-interest, it can be possible to oppose them with arguments to their interest, or with actions short of violence which aim at their interest, but some opponants are motivated by ideology, not interest. Such opponants will martyr themselves to achieve their goals, either because they think that some diety will use their deaths or because without their victory life is simply not worth living. In such cases, talk, diplomacy, sanctions, and scrunched up faces only serve to give the enemies of freedom more time to hit you in the head with a large hammer.

Teaching kids to look the otherway in the face of injustice and evil. Nice work. Instead, lets apply pressure to those who might do good, albeit imperfectly, and who, being concerned with justice and legitimacy are succeptable to reason and argument. So the evil ones being unpersuadable, let us therefore persuade the flawed forces of good not to confront those who gas their own people, pay bounties to terrorists, train and supply terrorists, plan and attempt assasinations of politicians out of office just for personal spite or to intimidate free peoples, and pursue weapons of mass destruction. Let's not bother them. Good job educators.

This problem isn't limited to foriegn policy, as Kimberly Swygert observes (regularly, click Zero Tolerance). What do principals recommend when their charges are attacked by bullies or other aggressors? "He should curl up on the ground in a ball and hope someone else runs to get help." I wonder who is supposed to play the role of the mean American and intervene? Probabaly someone with much more power and authority than the participants themselves. Sounds like Imperialism to me.

VDH on the Iraqi Debate

"The moral onus should have always been on the critics of the war. They should have been forced to explain why it was wrong to remove a fascist mass murderer, why it was wrong to stay rather than letting the country sink into Lebanon-like chaos, and why it was wrong not to abandon brave women, Kurds, and Shia who only wished for the chance of freedom."

I certainly would be happier with an administration more capable of getting this message out there, but I have to observations to make on this subject.

One, as I have argued in previous posts, they really are, it just doesn't get out. Just a few days ago I made mention of the Pentagon podcasts and the Pentagon Channel. Rumsfeld speaks all the time, and he's clear and direct. But his arguments are not being covered in the MSM. Condi Rice gets out there and makes arguments. I hear the President. If you know where to look, its all there. The MSM is elsewhere, however. Who is to blame? The Administration for not breaking through, or the MSM for its hear no evil approach?

Second, Mark Steyn has observed that he can identify with the notion that there is nothing more to say, either you get it or you don't. So while I would like to see this argument a bit more front and center in the national dialogue, I wonder if it would have any effect.

Hitchens on Iraq

Some good recent Hitchen's posts on Slate. On Ramsey Clark:
"I meanwhile shall recline, happy in the knowledge that Saddam Hussein has engaged the services of an attorney who proclaims him to be guilty as charged."

On the double standard which takes no notice of Afghanistan, but wrings its hands over Iraq.
It links to this nifty cartoon in which maleavolent vipers labled Syria and Iran hover, detered by a powerful American eagle, while a little Iraqi baby eagle says, "I need to know your timetable for withdrawl." Indeed anyone in his situation would like to know when it would be that they would be abandon to the vipers.

On the nature of the debate over Iraq and the consequences of an early withdrawal.

Belgian Woman: Suicide Bomber

Another Western seeker has been found on the other side. Muriel Degauque, the so-called "Belgian Kamakazi."