Month: April 2004

Chaos Theory

by

Note: if you’re allergic to conspiracy theories, I don’t recommend this posting

I have an acquaintance I love discussing politics with. I’ll call him Dr. V. A self-made multimillionaire with a quickly growing international banking business (he’s opening five new European offices this year alone, I believe), Dr. V collects advanced degrees and classic electric rock-and-roll guitars. Dr. V also has what I’ll generously term a “vivid imagination.” (Look up “conspiracy theorist” in the dictionary and you’ll find his photo.)

We’ll meet socially every month or two and eventually find ourselves free to bring up politics, and normally he’s chock full of outlandish predictions. He’ll usually begin “So, what have you learned recently?” in a slightly insulting tone that suggests I have potential as a protege. I refrain from bringing up the predictions he made that didn’t come true (that leads to mindnumbing tangents), but he’s right far more often than he’s wrong. Right after 9/11, he predicted both the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions more or less exactly the way they happened. Some of his other predictions are too wacky (or scary) to share, but at a party this past Saturday night he outlined a doozy. I’ll call it “The Chaos Theory.”

Read more

The Art of Ambipartisanship

by

It’s conventional wisdom that when your opponents are bickering among themselves, it’s best to simply stand back and let them go at it. But the expanding fissure between neoconservatives and more isolationist traditional conservatives (who are increasingly calling for withdrawal from Iraq) is threatening to involve liberals somewhat and in doing so is making the … Read more

Tough Steps

by

Matthew Yglesias has an interesting post:

Indeed, I would say that the major flaw of American efforts at democracy-promotion is a failure to recognize that the bipartisan tradition of realpolitik was not some fifty-year long silly error. I think it’s true that, some time ago, this ceased to be a viable strategy and that we ought to revise it. Still, there are many things to be said in its favor. People need to really think about that before they advocate abandonning it. If you’re prepared to give up the gains of dictator-promotion (and I am) then you need to face up to what you’re doing. What Bush has been trying to do is discover a cost-free democracy-promotion scheme. Thus you get the very odd Iraq bank-shot.

This is half-way to a really good point. The problem is that all sides use rhetoric implying that there is some sort of cost-free or super-cheap democracy promotion scheme. An uncharitable view of Bush’s rhetoric would be that you invade Iraq and PRESTO you get a U.S.-friendly democracy right afterwards. Obviously he never says any such thing directly, but the fact that he never outlines the (rather significant) costs makes it an implication (perhaps a fair implication, perhaps not). Many of Bush’s opponents, especially in Europe, seem imply that if only the U.S. would quit fucking up, PRESTO democracy or at least peace would come to the Middle East. This is closely related to the fantasy that if only the U.S. would apply pressure to Israel that peace would come to the Middle East. Obviously they don’t say so directly, but the fact that they never outline steps about the significant changes that would need to come about other than the U.S. not fucking things up makes it an implication (perhaps a fair implication, perhaps not).

While each side may decide to tacitically deny the difficulty of the project, I think in their more candid moments each realizes that the Middle East has to be changed and that the changes are likely both to be very difficult to implement and very costly for the West.

But neither side wants to deal with difficult and costly, that doesn’t sell well.

So many on the right act as if a quick war will bring democracy to the Middle East and the left act as if a lack of Western military action will bring peace to the Middle East. And any useful debate fails to occur.

Let me be clear in my views:

Read more

I don’t think that a secret identity will help the situation.

by

Via Tacitus we see this NYT article about the aftermath of the Rantisi assassination. Most of the article is unsurprising – Hamas vows revenge and promises to retaliate even more harshly, Arafat’s regime flew flags at half mast in mourning, Israel promises to keep targeting known terrorist leaders whenever possible (with the unstated suggestion that … Read more

Society is apparently not doomed, after all.

by

At least, according to this article, which is essentially about how wonderful it is that kids are getting more conservative these days. Of course, to support its thesis it uses anecdotal evidence, umpteen billion polls that aren’t even linked to, surveys ditto and shows some signs of having the graph drawn first, then picked out … Read more

Waitangi Day!

by

I’m – OK, I actually did type “giving a big shout-out to my Marxist peeps over at Socialism in an Age of Waiting“, but let’s face it, I don’t even think I said that correctly, let alone in a way that wasn’t sad, lame or both – at any rate, they’ve got up a nicely-long … Read more

“Still Blogging?” Open thread.

by

Sort of the equivalent of banging on somebody’s door, just to make sure that they’re still alive and kicking and stuff. Frex, it’s been a month since Constant Reader Catsy’s blog Slouching Donkey, Lying Elephant got updated; it never hurts to doublecheck, eh? Add your own “Um… hello? Anybody home?” below.

Middle East Open Thread.

by

Today, Israel assassinated Hamas leader Abdel Aziz Rantisi, Muqtada Sadr is reportedly proclaiming his willingness to be martyred (if it’ll kick off a Shia civil war, one assumes) and they’re having what sounds like serious problems with two of the highways into Baghdad. In other words, it looks like it’s going to be a busy … Read more

Better restock that liquor cabinet.

by

Ricky of North Georgia Dogma and Oliver Willis have staked out early claims to provide the essential Democratic and Republican Convention Drinking Games, respectively. Mine was going to be much simpler for both: Drink. …yeah, well, it’s not like either of these are going to be particularly gripping events, desperate media stories (past, present and … Read more

Secretary Powell and the “Pottery Barn” Rule

by

According to reports of what’s in Bob Woodward’s new book “Plan of Attack,” Secretary of State Colin Powell was a reluctant team player in the invasion of Iraq:

Two months before the invasion of Iraq, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell warned President Bush about the potential negative consequences of a war, citing what Mr. Powell privately called the “you break it, you own it” rule of military action, according to a new book.

“You’re sure?” Mr. Powell is quoted as asking Mr. Bush in the Oval Office on Jan. 13, 2003, as the president told him he had made the decision to go forward. “You understand the consequences,” he is said to have stated in a half-question. “You know you’re going to be owning this place?”

I watched with disbelief as Powell, the member of Bush’s administration I’ve always held in the highest regard, made the case for invading Iraq before the United Nations. Not that I knew he was doing so against his best judgement, per se, but from a source very close to Powell, I’ve known for some time he had no intention of serving in a second Bush administration (despite his insisting otherwise publically).

Read more

More rules of thumb.

by

Not quite as funny as the classic When I am an Evil Overlord series, but still worthy of note: The Pulp Movie Survival Tip List. Some words of wisdom: 19. If a local person who has spectacularly saved your life before indicates that you have some kind of supernatural power, role, or place in custom, … Read more

Where Have You Been Banned? Open Thread

by

Feels like a slow day on the blogosphere…all the big news items sort of up in the air…I did manage to get myself banned from my first blog today though… well, not really banned as much as politely asked to never return… It was sort of anti-climatic, actually….not that I was trying to get banned, … Read more

Umm, right.

by

Not to be indelicate, but seeing as the male/female blogging ratio is somewhat skewed (not nearly as skewed as other forms of geekdom, mind you), when someone happens to be offering what is apparently a demented fusion of group blogging, cybersex and reality show-style elimination rounds and apparently there are three times as many women … Read more

So that’s what it looks like.

by

The famous Dilbert line “Must… restrain… fist… of… death…”, that is. I’ve never seen it in real life before, but by the end of this Ann Louise Bardach interview of Oliver Stone (via Sullivan) the sentiment is so obvious it’s almost crystallizing off of the screen. So much so that I’m admitting to suspicious thoughts about the interview, truth be told. Stone can’t be this much of a tool:

Read more

Who said Irony was dead?

by

In a statement that’s most likely not going to be repeated in Bush campaign ads, the “See! Invading Iraq IS Making the World Safer” posterboy Moamer Kadhafi today noted Saddam’s fall has not brought terrorism to an end. Far from it: it has found a bigger opportunity to flourish…The security of the whole world is … Read more

The Apocalypse is around the bend . . . .

by

For perhaps the first time since 1992,* a public figure has actually admitted making a mistake!

“Words can sting and hurt,” [Sen. Christopher] Dodd [D-CT] told The Associated Press Wednesday. “If in any way, in my referencing the Civil War, I offended anyone, I apologize.”

He said he was trying to make the point that Byrd would have been a good senator at any point, and “I was not thinking of the KKK or his vote against the Civil Rights Act.”

Add my voice to the chorus of those who are congratulating Dodd for doing, umm, what seems self-evident. (Have we really sunk so low that we cheer the admission of obvious blunders? We have? Well, carry on then.)

(Via John Cole via RJ West.)

Read more

In honor of the concept of “Not gonna happen”…

by

… somebody should go explain to Mel Gibson that it is exceedingly unlikely, to say the least that The Passion of the Christ will ever be shown uncut on network television. Yes, I know, bringing a gross of $353 million in the domestic market normally turns a director into the proverbial 800lb gorilla, but I … Read more

Long live the glorious blogging proletarian revolution?

by

I always enjoy it when the Commissar metagames this thing of ours, but I’m unsure whether his latest (The Blogger’s Manifesto) is serious, or not. I’m hoping ‘not’: when it comes right down to it, hitcount is lovely, yes, bragging rights are wonderful, indeed, I like the idea of a wide audience, sure… but, really, how are the bigger blogger’s successes taking bread out of my mouth? It’s not like any of the bloggers here get paid for this*, after all.

Still, Manifesto #6 – “Linking to smaller comrades” – is something I like; there’s always somebody out there saying something that I wish that I had said first, after all. Besides, I understand all too well how addictive Trackbacks can be.

Moe

Read more

Presumably the relevant names will be spelled correctly this time.

by

Robotic Menace (to the world in general, and Sydney Poitier in particular) Mecha-Streisand Entertainer Barbra Streisand, not being content with contributing to Gephardt being gutted like a cod on a Atlantic trawler* having discovered that she has a taste for Democratic politics, has apparently decided to permanently associate the current Democratic candidate with her name, politics and inability to do basic research throw Senator Kerry a party. I am actually feeling sorry for the man, now: I mean, he has to be nice to people like Streisand, not to mention actually pretend to take her seriously. I wouldn’t go into politics if my life depended on it hope they all have a good time. I watch helplessly, every day, as my cobloggers suck up all the important stories, leaving me nothing but scraps and Barbra Fragging Streisand to blog about** always find this sort of thing interesting.

Via Wonkette Wonkette

UPDATE: On reflection, deliberately misspelling the names wasn’t as funny as I imagined it being, so I fixed it.

Read more

Timing is everything (or so I’m told)

by

Assume that, in theory, I agree with this (I do). Is it nonetheless inappropriate for me to ask: (1) How does announcing it now advance our interests in Iraq, where our attackers are acquiring an overtly religious bent? (2) How does announcing it now advance our interests in Afghanistan, which is all-too-well obeying the law … Read more

Gotta love Google

by

Via Wonkette via Slumdance Search-engine editorials…God’s chosen mode for communicating with us all? Go to google Click on News Search on “president bush news conference” See top entry

Idiocy on the Left

by

Sometimes you wish you could just go back in time and smack some sense into the fools… Democratic club’s ad suggests shooting Rumsfeld Camp Kerry’s comment: “We are calling the Pinellas County Democratic Party chair about this ad and demand that it be retracted,” Kerry campaign spokesman Stephanie Cutter told CNN. “John Kerry does not … Read more

Soldiers do the darnedest things…

by

I’ve never served in the military, let alone fought in a war, so I tend to be very generous about how soldiers act out under all the stress. I do think this is extremely unhelpful however: The Marines are investigating a photograph circulating on the Internet that depicts a soldier with two Iraqi boys and … Read more

Things are not made for the sake of words, but words for things.

by

Paul Cella has an interesting article in the American Spectator Online, which concerns (broadly) the difficulties of interpretation. It appears to be a slightly-condensed version of a recent entry Paul’s outstanding blog.

Paul isn’t the first, of course, to touch on how difficult it can be to read a certain text “correctly” (or, indeed, whether any reading can be termed “correct”).* But I can’t help but relate his piece to my work. I’m a patent litigator, mostly, and a lot of what I do requires me to construe and apply frightening-vague patent claims. I know the limitations of the written word all too well. An old case, AutoGiro, put it best:

An invention exists most importantly as a tangible structure or a series of drawings. A verbal portrayal is usually an afterthought written to satisfy the requirements of patent law. This conversion of machine to words allows for unintended idea gaps which cannot be satisfactorily filled. Often the invention is novel and words do not exist to describe it. The dictionary does not always keep abreast of the inventor. It cannot. Things are not made for the sake of words, but words for things.

Read more

Mistakes, I’ve made a few…

by

And while Bush may feel there’s “too few to mention,” Fareed Zakari respectfully disagrees. From his excellent article in Newsweek, “Our Last Real Chance: The way forward: The administration has to admit its mistakes and try to repair the damage. Here’s how”:

The Bush administration went into Iraq with a series of prejudices about Iraq, rogue states, nation-building, the Clinton administration, multilateralism and the U.N. It believed Iraq was going to vindicate these ideological positions. As events unfolded the administration proved stubbornly unwilling to look at facts on the ground, new evidence and the need for shifts in its basic approach. It was more important to prove that it was right than to get Iraq right.

Read more

9/11 And the Need to Prove Policing Can Stop Terrorism

by

Now that I have my angry post out of the way I want to talk about 9/11 and policing.

The US is a country with one of the largest unsecured borders in the world. It is also one of the most open large societies in the world. This has many advantages: an economy so excellent that people are willing to immigrate to become what counts as poor here, an intellectual culture so vibrant that we make an outsized number of the world’s scientific discoveries, the freedom to move about a huge and varied land mass for almost any reason imaginable. But terrorism exploits this openness.

Let me first be clear about my understanding of 9/11:

I don’t believe it could have been stopped by acceptable levels of increased security. I don’t believe it would have been stopped by the current levels of security, and we are willing to put up with far more than we would have before the attack.

I believe it is highly unlikely that it would have been stopped by ‘increased intelligence’ in any level which we would have found acceptable before 9/11. One of the most intensive intelligence capabilities in the history of the world, employed during the Cold War, still missed Soviet moles in some of our most sensitive branches of government. Long-term undercover agents penetrating our most secretive branches ought to be somewhat easier to detect over decades than the relatively short-term (1-3 years) planning employed by the 9/11 attackers who merely need to get into the country. Yet still there were agents who went undetected for years and years.

Read more

Geopolitical Pop Quiz

by

Hat tip to Constant Reader Phil for alerting me to this item.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OK, so guess what these countries have in common (note the glaring absence of the United States):

Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Israel, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, Sweden and the United Kingdom.

Oh, yeah…add Brazil as of December 2003.

Give up?

Read more