Author: VD

Jed Babbin writes on NRO:Part of the essence of the warriors’ creed is that they will die for their country, trusting that their lives may be spent but not wasted. We are in the process of wasting some of these precious lives in a tactical situation that is unacceptable by any measure. We’re extending a phony “ceasefire” while Marines are fighting and dying. On Sunday Gen. Mark Kimmet — our chief military spokesman in Iraq — announced that our effort to end the insurgency in Fallujah and capture or kill the barbarians who killed and mutilated four Americans almost a month ago is now on a “political track”…. The future of Iraq cannot be won on this political track. We are adrift, and our enemies are taking full advantage of it. One of my pals, an active duty military intellectual whose name I cannot use, sent me a message last weekend. Part of it says:

We are struggling to tip toe through the tulips in Fallujah when it is no longer possible to do so. Fallujah should already have been an object lesson that if handled decisively and quickly would make further operations in the south unnecessary. We have lost the equivalent of two marine infantry companies precisely because of our over-reliance on light infantry again. Sad for the parents’ whose sons have died valiantly, but needlessly

Does it make a difference if a pro-war, pro-Bush cheerleader says it? I wonder if the “we are at war” crowd is going to throw hissy fits at these NROniks with bona fide pro-war on method credentials in the same manner that they threw them at me when I was pointing out the same thing a week or two ago? It is entirely possible to be simultaneously pro-troops and against the military strategy being pursued by the political leadership. To assert that it would have been pro-troops to support the strategy that led to massacres like the Somme and Gallipolli would be idiotic. No more should anyone blindly assume that the Bush administration knows how to fight this war – evidence is quickly piling up that they do not.

It’s time to pull the troops out. Once the politicians start interfering with the generals, you’re on the path to defeat. There are those who would say that pulling out will send a message that America lacks the will to fight and win this war. That message, I submit, has already been sent.

DM writes: At first, I thought you might be worth reading but alas whatever intelligence you may possess you have allowed it to be corrupted…as soon as I saw your use of sweeping generalizations – as you do to characterize ‘liberals’ and using “all” so very frequently, I realized you could not be taken seriously…..many will however and -as has been said “You can fool some of the people all of the time”

I have no idea if DM is a left-liberal or not, but this is a favorite tactic of theirs. To pretend to be disappointed at the actions of an opponent, and to act as if there was any chance in Hell that if only for X, they would have supported them. What a crock of bovine ejectus! First, DM reveals that he’s barely familiar with my writing as I almost never use the term “liberal”, favoring instead the terms “leftist” and “left-liberal”. Second, I defy anyone to prove that I frequently use the word “all”. In fact, I seldom use that either. DM has clearly read the word into my generalizations about the left when it is not, the vast majority of the time, there at all.

I do often write critically about the left-liberal mind and about left-liberals. And I often use sweeping generalizations, certainly. But it is silly, even downright stupid, to expect anything but generalizations when one is discussing a group that consists of over one-tenth the population in a country of 300 million. Does DM mean to insist that these people have nothing in common? Can “liberals” truly not be characterized? Interesting. DM, with his disingenous pretensions and weak logic, shows every sign of belonging to that group of logically-challenged individuals known colloquially in this country as liberals.

Doug Grow writes in the Star and Sickle: This grab for mediocrity isn’t unique to the marathon. I got my first unapologetic introduction to it a year ago in a conversation with Dan McElroy, who was then the finance guru for Gov. Tim Pawlenty and now is the governor’s chief of staff. We were talking about the state’s financial cuts to cities, including Minneapolis. “Your spending is not stupidly high,” McElroy said of Minneapolis financial management. “But it’s at or above the levels being spent per capita in comparable Midwest cities.” The cities McElroy found “comparable” to Minneapolis? Des Moines, Omaha, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Kansas City, Indianapolis and — gasp — Toledo. Fine places all, but not exactly the world-class spots Minneapolis and the rest of Minnesota once aspired to be.

Please. Minneapolis will be lucky if it manages to hang onto mediocrity in the next 20 years. It’s got the classic insecurity of a city that knows it’s second-tier, but without the wisdom to accept the fact and deal with it. One thing that Space Bunny loves about the Premiership is watching the teams get relegated and promoted; one common theme is a second-rate team with delusions of grandeur goes into debt by overspending in the hopes that it will finish in the top four. The idea is that it will make so much money from its success and a subsequent infusion of Champion’s League cash that it will be propelled into the league’s elite with Arsenal and United. This never works, of course, and after a run of two years, the team usually collapses and is relegated to the Nationwide league, where it struggles to avoid bankruptcy and liquidation.

How do I know Minneapolis is second-rate? Because neither it nor St. Paul has any confidence to recognize its home-grown talent until it is established as being considered worthwhile by the national media. My old band did not rate so much as a mention in the local alternative rags, much less the major newspapers, until Billboard magazine was writing about us. Then, suddenly, we were big enough to rate the front page of the Entertainment section. The same thing happened to Information Society, who weren’t even recognized as local until Kurt had already left for the Bay Area. The book editors will write reams of reviews about books by obscure local press writers instead of the successful local genre writers selling 50x more books- accomplished, award-winning writers such as Rosenberg, Bujold, Dickson, Bethke, Brust, Wrede, (and to a lesser extent, me). Furthermore, if I recall correctly, I am only the sixth writer in the history of the St. Paul Pioneer Press to ever get nationally syndicated, and yet they don’t run my column. Instead, they fill their pages with unknown locals and the rehashed leftovers of the Boston Globe and New York Times. I have no doubt they’ll pick it up once I’m in ten major newspapers and then brag about the local connection.

The danger Minneapolis faces is not toiling amidst second-tierdom, but spending itself into ruin by trying to transform itself into something it can never be. I’m not optimistic. A three-day business piece in the Pioneer Press lamenting the fact that Minnesota had missed the dot com boom didn’t see fit to once mention that the state has very high income taxes. “But so does California,” protested an editor when I called them on this. Sure, and California also has Stanford, Caltech, Silicon Valley, silicone blondes and beaches. Minnesota has freezing cold winters, mosquitos and natural blondes. Do the freaking math.

One of the most important elections of our time will be approaching soon, and it is not taking place in the United States. Tony Blair has finally, reluctantly, decided that the British people, who have not been conquered since 1066, will be allowed to have a voice in handing over their national sovereignty to the fascist Franco-German cabal in Brussels. There’s a fascinating interview on Uncommon Knowledge featuring the historian Paul Johnson, who says of the EU:

I would personally prefer it if Dutch lawyers and German lawyers had played a greater part in the thinking behind all this because they’ve both got good traditions. If you look at the tradition of constitution-making in France, of course, it’s one lurching from one disaster to another and that is true of most Latin countries. But the Germans created Teutonic law before anyone else, certainly Northern Europe. And that is the basis of the English legal system. And that, of course, was a common law system and the English system underlay the American Constitution. So you can trace all back to German. But this is a constitution done by Latins and I think Tim made very shrewd and true remark which I entirely endorse, which is the French and Europe–the moment the French lose control of Europe, they will smash it to bits. They haven’t yet lost control of it by no means, I don’t agree with Tim there.

But sooner or later, they are bound to lose control of Europe and it’s going to cease to be an instrument of French domestic and foreign policy. The moment they are satisfied that they have lost on a major battle, they will withdraw from Europe and smash it up. So Europe is not something you can take for granted because it cannot exist without France, geographically and in lots of other ways, it’s too near the center. Europe is a provisional creation just as those Napoleonic states were of the French. And when it ceases to be useful to the French, they will smash it up.

I’m not entirely sure that Johnson is completely correct on this, as I suspect that an important element of the EU is to serve as a modern secular Holy League against the Turk. The mandarins of Europe can read demographics studies as well as anyone, and whereas no single European nation has the ability to do much about what is beginning to be viewed as the Islamic problem, the EU would provide both the scope of power and territory to do so. As Johnson says: “Europe defined itself for most of its history against Islam, against the Muslim world. So it’s a huge leap for us and for them to accept the idea that you can be a Muslim European. You know, in the Middle Ages, people would have thought that was like saying you can be a male woman.”

Then again, in Johnson’s defense, it’s impossible to deny that the French broke the Stability and Growth Pact without even blinking the moment that they found it obstructing their domestic policy. So, in any case, here’s hoping the Brits have the wits to reject the EU’s so-called constitution and go it alone again.

Hudson comments: “But the truth is that at this point, the jihad is not yet a direct threat to America’s existence.” Uh Huh. By the way, anyone seen those unaccounted for suitcase nukes around anywhere?

Do you think that the suitcase nukes would be any less a threat to America if the global jihad did not exist? Does America have no other enemies? Furthermore, from a historical point of view, the loss of a city or two does not rise to the level of imperiling the nation’s existence – from external forces. Many, many countries have lost entire cities through destruction or enemy occupation and survived. The fact that America is so fortunate as to not have experienced this does not change the fact that such attacks are eminently survivable for the vast majority of the citizenry.

I can, of course, envision a scenario where a suitcase nuke or three is planted, justifying a martial law situation that could, in the wrong hands, extinguish what we know as America. Moreover, the global jihad need not be involved, unless one requires a plausible patsy. But an internal threat such as that would be conspiracy theory of the first order, and that way lies madness. The point is that by itself, the global jihad is not yet in a position to win its war against America, nor will it be for at least another 50 years. As a nation, we are in no serious danger from the jihad until Europe falls. At that point, however, there will be a real question as to whether the war is winnable. But it is not winnable as it is now being fought either; this is nothing but a delaying action and, more than anything, a warning shot.

RM writes: What has truly becoming stunning about the media is the way news shows interview other news people instead of the news makers and just sit there and confirm each others’ bias.

Or better yet, smugly affirm each other’s notions, from their position of objective Olympian majesty. This is one reason why I have zero interest in pursuing appearances on the news shows. The idea of subjecting myself to discussions featuring the length of a fruit fly’s life cycle and the ntellectual depth of a mosquito-breeding swamp puddle makes me shiver. I simply have no any interest in a medium where “I disagree with your facts” is considered an effective rebuttal.

News that purports to be entertainment is neither.

Sitemeter seems to indicate that we have a few new folks dropping by today. Please make yourselves comfortable and feel free to peruse the archives and make a comment or two. Don’t mind the Pan-Galactic Gargler he’s always like that. Try to stay out of the way of the White Buffalo, and the hot blonde in black is Space Bunny. If you’re looking for those other blogs I mentioned in today’s column, they’re right here:

Blackfive: the Paratrooper of Love

From the Halls to the Shores

Citizen Smash

Mises Economics Blog

The Evangelical Outpost

UPDATE: Don’t mind the regulars. They can get a little weird from time to time, but I promise you, we do often have intelligent and scintillating debates here. However, the comments following this particular post do not happen to be among them. As was once said of Camelot, it is a silly place. Nota Bene: if someone carrying an M-60 happens to grunt at you, just smile, say “nice to meet you, Bane” and back away slowly. If you don’t show fear, turn your back or speak poorly of the USMC, you should survive the encounter.

It’s hardly a secret that I’m tremendously disappointed, though not surprised, with the left-liberal governance of George Bush and the Republican Congress over the last three years. The Republican Supreme Court too, but that’s another matter. While Joseph Farah is rather less sanguine on the matter, I see no reason to change my assertion that George Bush will thump Jean-Francois Kerry in November.

First, even if the market tanks, it’s done well enough since October 2002 that he’s got enough cushion to make it through the election. Second, no matter how badly the war on method goes, it’s unlikely to have a serious effect one way or the other. Third, a terrorist event will actually drive people towards Bush, not away from him. Fourth, homogamy has normal people increasingly leery of the social left.

Fifth, and most important, Jean-Francois is going to be forced to repeatedly open his mouth in public, on television. If his performance on Good Morning America is even close to typical, he’ll make the Dukakis drubbing look respectable. Karl Rove and company must be drooling like starving coyotes eyeing a fat, legless chicken when they think about the upcoming debates.

1. Predictions of blood-bath every time carry laws are discussed. Never happens in any state.

2. Static tax revenue models. They’re always surprised when tax hikes don’t bring in expected revenue.

3. Stadium financing. Every economic study shows public-funded stadiums don’t boost local economy. This never stops sportswriters from claiming a pot of gold awaits the next tax-increment financed structure.

4. Political spectrum. Everything is posed as progressive vs. conservative, no matter what the status quo.

5. No coverage of adult or Christian entertainment, which combined equate to at least 30 percent of the entertainment industry. Entertainment coverage reads like a pretentious, outdated Tiger Beat.

6. Covering the WNBA. The league is a pure parasite and arena football has a bigger following.

7. Refusing to recognize, much less serve, the conservative 50 percent of their potential market.

8. Quoting government bureaucrats as legal experts. They get played every single time.

9. An almost complete ignorance of ancient, medieval and modern history. Quite impressive, really.

From the Washington Post: U.S. Marines have postponed plans to mount an attack against insurgents holed up here and instead will attempt to regain control of this violence-wracked city without a full-scale offensive, military commanders said Sunday. Concerned about the repercussions an attack could generate across Iraq and the Arab world, senior U.S. military and civilian officials said they had decided to try to confront a band of hard-core Sunni Muslim insurgents, who have effectively taken over Fallujah, by having Marines conduct patrols in the city alongside Iraqi security forces. The new strategy, reached in consultation with the White House over the weekend, represents an effort by U.S. officials to avoid a military incursion that could entail urban combat, civilian casualties and a wave of retributive strikes outside Fallujah, further poisoning relations between Iraqis and U.S. occupation forces.

I’d like the “we are at war” crowd to stop its blind cheerleading for a moment and imagine battalion-level tactical decisions being made by the Roosevelt administration during WWII. Did anyone stop for five seconds to worry about whether sending the 4th Infantry into Cherbourg was going to generate repercussions across Nazi Germany and the Axis world? Every week that goes by strengthens my suspicion that 1) the enemy may be at war with us, but we are not at war with it, and, 2) the present administration is going to be judged a miserable failure with regards to the prosecution and long-term effects of its undeclared war.

Clearly neither the nation nor its leadership is prepared to fight an open war against those who have repeatedly declared war on America. Therefore, it is better that we do not do so, but instead bring the troops home from around the world, secure our borders, expel the many fifth-columnists who are here illegally or temporarily and wait until the global jihad either collapses of its own self-contradictions or grows until it can no longer be ignored. Imitating the Israeli Two-Step and attempting to win hearts and minds in what is a revival of a 1300-year religious conflict is simply stupid and is doomed to failure. The fact that America is now irreligious does not mean it will be able to opt out forever; it’s not as if the Byzantine Empire or medieval Christendom was a collection of quiet Bible-studying evangelical prayer groups either. But the truth is that at this point, the jihad is not yet a direct threat to America’s existence.

I realize that this is not a popular view, either with my fellow libertarians or pro-war conservatives. Still, I have no agenda except to advocate individual freedom in America and I am simply commenting on the facts as best I understand them.