July 3 - Excellent post at Expat Yank (you may need to hit "refresh" a few times, darned Blogger) about France, the Roman Empire and the USA:

The assertion that the U.S. is the modern Roman Empire, which must be opposed, is particularly dumbheaded.

The U.S. is NOT the "new" Roman Empire, as if that Roman Empire were only the U.S. Even with all their variety today, societies which have evolved out of the real, historical Rome -- examples include possessing all of the readily identifiable likes of the following (and more than anyone could hope to fit into a blog post): a professional military; a governing class; rule of law; a government that is relatively secular and regularly employs words like "senator" without thinking from where such words came; intervenes in the economy; is not adverse to wine; speaks a Latin-based language, or one greatly influenced by Latin; and is a country that, above all else, has an overall, Christian religious ethos (even if churchgoing is sporadic at best)-- share the same heritage. In short, the "Roman Empire" is today's "Western Civilization", and vice-versa, you moron.

So to note stupidly that the "Roman Empire" is someone else, and does not include today's France (and Europeans opposed to the U.S.) is to display remarkable -- and remarkably arrogant -- ignorance.

Posted by: Debbye at 09:31 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 236 words, total size 2 kb.

July 1 - First, Happy Canada Day to us up here in the Great White North. It's pretty warm in Toronto, and summer has officially begun. (Updated) Or, as Paul insists: Happy Dominion Day.

What is Canada Day? (I'm a bit jaundiced by the election results, so I'm letting this one go.)

I gave up watching the CBC coverage of Canada Day events when their military angle focused on tombstones. I get it, already. CBC doesn't think freedom is worth fighting and possibly dying for. Check.

In the news: Saddam was defiant during his court appearance. Lord knows he's watched enough CNN to know how to perform in court, so don't colour me surprised.

The internationalists are out in force whining that this trial will lack legitimacy. Let me see if I have this straight: those nations, some of which refused to oust Saddam in 1991, some of which harbour those who paid kickbacks to Saddam in order to profit in the UN Oil-for-Food program, many of which shipped expired medicines and hospital equipment that didn't work along with limousines, sports stadiums and plastic shredders, and most of which turned a blind eye to his crimes against his own people, and even those who acted within the U.N. to keep Saddam in power ... those people have the audacity to utter words like justice and legitimacy?

Why are they attempting to deprive Iraqis of their right to their day in court? Because they are anxious to give the International Criminal Court legitimacy, perhaps?

Sorry, International Community, but organizations and people gain respect by their deeds, not by their words. If you want to try a genocidal dictator, consider being aligned with those who stopped his evil regime and apprehended him.

Just a thought.

More to the point, who freaking cares what a bunch of wankers and self-appointed elitists think? We heard the same stuff from the same nations back around 225+ years ago; they were wrong then, and they are wrong now. (Kind of poor timing on their part, given the promixity of the Fourth of July, to cast doubt upon the capability of the Iraqi people to build a free and prosperous nation. I'm just saying ...)

Final thought on Saddam: Wolverines!!! (I just watched Laredo (a show I loved as a kid and which bears up well even today) on the Lonestar channel and William Smith was a regular on Laredo, and he was the eeevil Col. Strelnikov in Red Dawn. That's only three degrees of separation! Eat your heart out, Kevil Bacon.)

On a more sober note, it's not really a surprise that there would be more terrorist attacks on this day but it serves to remind us that freedom isn't free.

I don't have that much to say about the handover except Hurrah! As have many, I've been irritated beyond patience by the unending ominous pronouncements from CNN that every firefight in Fallujah "threatened the handover" because I felt every dead "insurgent" strengthened the ability of the incoming Iraqi government to organize elections and lead Iraq on a new path.

21:19: Spinkiller has an eloquent post over at The Shotgun Iraqis embrace their freedom... that is a must-read.

Peggy Noonan in today's Opinion Journal says

The early transfer of sovereignty to Iraq has hit everyone here, friend of the invasion and foe, as a brilliant stroke. Leaving early, and with such modesty--it was a pleasure to be here, let us know if there's anything we can do--tends to undermine charges of U.S. imperialism. President Bush is feeling triumphant--one can tell even from here--and the Western press is looking very irritable indeed. They don't like to be surprised, they don't like it when Mr. Bush scores one, and they don't like it when the troublemakers they've been so banking on to prove their point that Iraq was a fiasco don't even get a chance to stop the turnover.

That expresses a fear many of us have, that having addressed one root cause of terrorism, i.e., the lack of human rights and opportunities for self-advancement in the Mideast, and having done so with loss of American lives, the temptation to run and hide will translate into a belief that having friends who won't watch our backs but will spout all the correct sentiments is more important than being right, and that could lead to a Kerry victory in November.

I live in one of those countries which have strained relations with the USA because of Sept. 11 and the Iraq War, and I can assure Americans of one thing: they want us to fail because it will make them look less inadequate, not because we are wrong.

For proof, read Saddam was defiant again, and note that CNN is acting as though this monster has any credibility or respectability.

Noonan asks what President Bush can do about it, and I suspect that it is a rhetorical question, because most of us have expressed the wish that the president would be more vigorous in reminding us why we are fighting terrorism and why Iraq was key to turning the Mid-east to a new course.

He faces stiff opposition (mostly with alphabet names like CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, CBC, BBC, and the other ABC) but I'm convinced the American people themselves just need a bit of encouragement and bolstering.

Those who want to retreat have to ask themselves very seriously: what will you expect from the American President when the next terrorist attack occurs? Sadly, Pres. Clinton's response was to investigate fundamentalist Christians, which lead to the Waco disaster. Is that what we want?

Call me a warmonger, but I prefer the Republican president's track record to the Democrat's candidate.

Posted by: Debbye at 05:33 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 994 words, total size 7 kb.

1 Amen.

Posted by: Dex at July 01, 2004 08:17 PM (vpzED)

2 Excellent post, and cheers for the link as well.

Posted by: Paul Jané at July 02, 2004 01:10 PM (Ys+Ti)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

June 11 - It seems like a lifetime ago when President Bush said that he had looked into Russian President Putin's eyes and "seen his soul." The press mocked that assessment (of course) but one of the things we've learnt about President Bush that when he tosses out comments like that one it is wise to shut up, pay attention, and see what transpires over the long run.

Russia was opposed to the Iraq War, but at least they were consistent: they also opposed the NATO bombing of Kosovo. (Consistency may be the mark of small minds, but inconsistency is often an indication of opportunism.)

There are still some open questions about Russian involvement in Saddamite Iraq including the final days before the fall of Baghdad, but if the Bush administration chose to see how much rope the Russians might require, it seemed that the length was short the amount they needed to hang themselves and we have been able to maintain cordial relations with Russia.

Actually, relations between the USA and Russia seem the best possible between two sovereign nations: we disagree, but do so agreeably; Russia pursues courses in her best interests, we pursue ours; we didn't ratify Kyoto, and neither did they.

In short, both countries are behaving like adults without the burden of control freakery that seems to consume some of our other allies.

Whereas the foreign leaders who are said to prefer a Kerry presidency choose to remain hidden, the Russian leader has come as close as is proper to publicly taking a stand and does so consistent with his opposition to the war in Iraq: Putin Takes Bush's Side Against Democrats on Iraq saying

"I am deeply convinced that President Bush's political adversaries have no moral right to attack him over Iraq because they did exactly the same.

"It suffices to recall Yugoslavia. Now look at them. They don't like what President Bush is doing in Iraq."

(Link via Let It Bleed. I found while my post fermented that Kate at the Western Standard blog, the Shotgun, has also picked up the story from the Reuters link from which the Yahoo article was taken.)

Posted by: Debbye at 09:53 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 411 words, total size 3 kb.

June 6 - Peter Worthington reminds us of things We should remember about the storming of Juno Beach by Canadian soldiers 60 years ago, and Mark Bonokoski reminds us to remember today's Canadian soldiers who serve in Afghanistan, the Golan Heights, and Bosnia.

The problem with lies is the intellectual disconnect necessary to maintaining those lies: if Canada has always been a peacekeeping nation, how does that square with those who served in the Boer War, WWI, WWII and Korea? Clearly the Canadian participation on D-Day was a military offensive, yet the Canadian Prime Minister is in France to comemorate that non-peacekeeping mission.

The lack of financial support for the military and the cynical misuse of funds earmarked for the military (exemplified by charging the military budget for former PM Chretien's purchase of two Executive Jets from Bombardier) resulted in Canada's meagre troop assignment in Haiti, the only other francophone nation in this hemisphere and thus the only place in which a French-speaking military command would be of practical value.

How many young Canadians have enlisted in the US military? How many young Canadians have considered doing so? Both the Conservative and Liberal parties have promised to increase the funding and size of the Canadian military, but to what end?

I'm an American, so I see the military through American eyes. I can't accurately judge how Canadians see their military but I do wonder at the pacifist philosophy of the ruling Liberal Party that seeks to recruit young Canadian men and women to a military that is not supposed to fight.

French President Chirac reportedly warned US President Bush against making any comparisons to the war in Iraq during D-Day commemorations, which of course drew more attention to those comparisons than any words President Bush might have spoken!

We finally learnt on Sept. 11 that evil never dies but merely assumes a new face, yet on this D-Day anniversary we are hearing the usual platitude that they fought so that we don't have to which is also is a lie. The truth is that they fought so that we would be able to continue to do so.

Be grateful to those brave men who stormed the beaches, and do so by remaining true to their cause. That is the only possible tribute.

Posted by: Debbye at 11:41 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 388 words, total size 3 kb.

June 1 - Yesterday was the third Memorial Day since Sept. 11, and, as on the past three, I spent the day online but couldn't find the heart to link or post.

I think I have come to understand the full measure of Memorial Day. We collectively pay our respects to our collective dead and, as a nation and as a family, seek healing. There is comfort in collective grief.

Then we square our shoulders, and proceed with the mission.

It seems to harsh to put it like that, but what else is there? We knew going into Afghanistan that we would be burying young Americans who deserved to lead full and productive lives. We knew going into Iraq that it would be bloody, and when the fight for Baghdad didn't materialize, we feared the very things that have come to pass.

We've spent nearly three years waiting for the other shoe to drop on the homefront and, despite that fear in the backs of our minds, we've stood our ground, overcome setbacks, and kept the pressure on.

Those who deliberately shed the blood of civilians hope that their actions will terrify and cause strength, heart and will to fail. When attempts at appeasement and conciliation result in the enemy believing their victims won't fight back, the last possible deterrent has been removed and thus our last possible hope for defense. All that remains is to surrender or go on the offensive.

(Well, actually there is a third alternative: we can nuke Mecca. Threatening something the enemy holds dear is sound military strategy, but taking out Mecca would probably be the very last card we'd have to play.)

Yes, I know. We should try something else. All those who claim to be wiser, nobler and more enlightened than we speak those two words but offer no solutions or strategies even as they blame us for not coming up with that unspecified something else.

And then it's our fault for not being smarter than they because we didn't come up with the solution that they couldn't provide.

Why am I supposed to listen to such people again? They've already admitted they're dumber than me.

Blood answers blood, and anyone who doesn't comprehend that is either very young or very naive but it is certain that our enemy understands that.

Those who bewail that an armed response sets a cycle of violence into motion are evidently unaware that a cycle of violence was already in motion; those who fret about "how it will end" overlook that it will end when the enemy is dead.

There will be more tears shed on next year's Memorial Day too, and some of them may be shed on behalf of civilians killed on home soil in a terrorist attack. We've become hardened and battle-scarred, and the next attack won't be met with the shock and disbelief of Sept. 11. We'll handle it.

Posted by: Debbye at 02:02 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 490 words, total size 3 kb.

May 30 - The great one marks Memorial Day by pointing to the ubiquitous victimology that dominates our senile Old Media and elites in Recalling a time when setbacks didn't deter us recalling the turmoil of the Civil War:

But that's the difference between then and now: the loss of proportion. They had victims galore back in 1863, but they weren't a victim culture. They had a lot of crummy decisions and bureaucratic screwups worth re-examining, but they weren't a nation that prioritized retroactive pseudo-legalistic self-flagellating vaudeville over all else. They had hellish setbacks but they didn't lose sight of the forest in order to obsess week after week on one tiny twig of one weedy little tree.

There is something not just ridiculous but unbecoming about a hyperpower 300 million strong whose elites -- from the deranged former vice president down -- want the outcome of a war, and the fate of a nation, to hinge on one freaky jailhouse; elites who are willing to pay any price, bear any burden, as long as it's pain-free, squeaky clean and over in a week. The sheer silliness dishonors the memory of all those we're supposed to be remembering this Memorial Day.

Today it's those opposed to the war who wave the bloody shirt, presumably to prove they support the troops although they oppose the mission, and they too have become tiresome.

I'm a little out of the newsloop. Every time I turned on CNN we were back to old photos out of Abu Ghraib with a brief foray which tried to depict disgraced Gen. Kapinski as a victim or attempts to paint the situation in Najaf as failed negotiations even as they report the numbers of more dead al Mehdi thugs. Evidently Old Media failed to draw some lessons about strategy from events at Fallujah. As for Fallujah, it's off the map now, which tells me things are going according to plan.

CNN dutifully reported on the discovery of more sarin and mustard gas but the commentator (David Ensor, I think?) said that they were old, pre-Gulf War I, but still "technically" WMD. Usually the death-quoted "technically" is followed by an explanation of what something "really" is, but the pundit left it there. Nice spin. Do "old" WMD not indicate the violation of the ceasefire agreement that halted Gulf War I and several subsequent UN resolutions? Do "old" WMD not kill?

The goal posts were moved after Dr. Kay's report which said that although they had not found stockpiles of WMD they had found active weapons programs and numerous violations of the ceasefire and UN resolutions.

Now it seems nothing will do but finding a huge cache of WMD with a sign that says "Saddam's Personal Stash."

I'm still an unreconstructed optimist: every dead Medhi fighter is one more reason to be optimistic about the June 30 handover. Iran's withdrawal of support for Muqtada al Sadr is another reason to be optimistic.

The question in November is becoming, increasingly, the extent to which the American public can read past the propaganda and spin put out by Old Media and use their common sense.

Posted by: Debbye at 01:11 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 577 words, total size 4 kb.

May 30 - Both Canada and the USA face national elections soon. The March 11 bombing attack in Madrid and the impact it had on the national elections there produced a lot of theorizing and speculation and Wednesday, US Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller (ref. 'Clear and present danger') went public with their concerns about the potential for a terrorist attack in the USA given the upcoming US elections.

The inclusion of two Canadians, including the notorious Jdey, forces the thought that Canada may well be the target. (There will be a national election here June 28.)

Shortly after Sept. 11, I asked Mark what he thought the public response would be in Canada if there was a terrorist attack here. He replied that people would complain about gas prices (he's a dyed-in-the-wool cynic.)

Well, Canadians are already complaining about gas prices, so I raised the question again last night, and he responded that Canadians are finally "getting" it and would correctly aim their outrage at the terrorists even though Old Media would use the attack as another plank in their anti-American campaign.

The one thing Westerners (civilisationally, not regionally!) still have had difficulty grasping is that al Qaeda doesn't care which party rules a country: their aim is to destablize and terrify, period. How do I know that? Because al Qaeda told us so.

We also have trouble accepting what al Qaeda says at face value, even though their track record indicates that are stating the unvarnished truth.

That's why appeasement is as fruitless now as it has always been, why US withdrawal from Saudi military bases and the ending of UN sanctions on Iraq (remember bin Laden's justification for jihad against the US?) resulted in an increase of armed confrontation in Saudi Arabia and their open alignment with the Ba'athists in Iraq even though it was Saddam's corruption of the U.N. Oil-For-Food program that caused the deaths of Iraqi babies.

There is an additional complication: the full-blown, outright anti-Americanism led by the Toronto Star and CBC is bound to cause a reaction from Americans. The outpouring of American solidarity with Spain - then an ally - after the March 11 may not be matched if Canada - not an ally - is hit. The fact that Canada's military and security forces are already over-extended and the unfortunate circumstance that an idiot (Anne McClellan) is in charge of Canadian security puts the ruling Liberal Party in a bit of a briar patch: if PM Martin choses to use Opposition leader Stephen Harper's support of the US effort in Iraq as a weapon during the electoral campaign, he further exacerbates relations between the US and Canada but if a terrorist attack happens up here and he calls upon the US to help Canada, more than a few Americans will say "Call France."

It saddens me, but I'll be one of them, or at least I'll be conflicted. Is a docile Canadian citizenry worth the lives of America's sons and daughters? Or are Canadians less docile than they themselves have been led to believe?

Tomorrow is Memorial Day, and it will be sadder this year than in years past. We've lost some outstanding men and women in Iraq and will lose more. We knew going in that the losses would deprive us of the kind of people that make our country strong and could only pray that their sacrifices would inspire others much as President Lincoln articulated in his Gettysburg Address: so "they not have died in vain."

It's hard to keep perspective up here in Toronto, and hard to remember that, despite it's pretensions, Toronto is not the Center of the Universe much less Canada.

But (and this may seem contradictory) there is a different Canadian that co-exists with that portrayed by the media. The hockey game last night is a case in point: Jerome Iginla scored a Gordie Howe hat trick: a goal, an assist, and a fight.

Is a country that cheers Canadians like Iginla truly passive? I don't think so. But then, it's not me that has to get it, it's Canadians themselves who could be on the brink of defining themselves in something in terms other than unlike Americans.

Posted by: Debbye at 10:55 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 717 words, total size 4 kb.

May 20 - I guess this my formal good-bye to mainstream media (unless Justice League shows some spark, and I don't mean the 'shipping) as the last program I regularly watch ended last night.

Some posts marking this sad event from Denise Angel Goes Bye Bye and Laughing Wolf It Will Be Alright.

The rabid fan following must seem weird to those who didn't follow Buffy the Vampire-Slayer and Angel, but when you think about it, it isn't the least bit strange.

In the pre-Sept. 11 world, there was little admission in the entertainment industry that "evil" and "soul" existed much less were significant. Those things were canon in the Buffyverse.

Remember how the news media pundits gravely stated that "irony was dead?" That may have been the first thing that made me belly-laugh after Sept. 11, because I was on strictly moderated Buffy and Angel forums that dealt forcefully with spoilers, flaming posts and off-topic discussions.

Buffy in particular told stories within a framework of metaphor and sub-text, so discussions about the sub-text of the show merged sub-textually with discussions about Sept 11 and the existence of evil which had suddenly leapt from the realm of fiction to a gaping hold in Manhatten.

And, at times, it seemed the only one who didn't "get it" was Joss, because Buffy that season focused on growing up, not because we "wanted" it but because we "needed" it. It's no accident fans called it the Season from Hell and regretted that Buffy had been resurrected. And Spuffy. I'll never get over the long season of Spuffy and those three pathetic evil-doers.

I could so clearly see the demise of irony. Oh yes indeed.

Angel, on the other hand, had an arc that seemed tailor-made to a post-Sept. 11 audience. It told of a good man who knowingly lapsed into evil in his fanatic quest for vengeance. I have no idea how Keith Szarabajka regarded his Holtz character, although the name of his official website might be a clue.

The Holtz arc remains and will probably always be an all-time favourite of mine, and along the way we got the MacOracle and one of the best death scenes of all time.

Angel also gave us "Numfar, do the Dance of Shame."

People who want to examine this from an intellectual perspective might wonder why the same fan base seemingly exists with the three Whedon vehicles, Farscape, and Babylon Five. And a fairly good number of posters were overt Gilbert and Sullivan fans before Gunn had his upgrade. (It was an Iolanthe thing over Connor's mixed heritage. Don't ask.)

I'm off to work, but left some mild spoilers and more analysis in the extended section ... more...

Posted by: Debbye at 07:24 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 783 words, total size 5 kb.

1 The hazard of squeezing posts in between breaks at work I never got past asking about Lorne killing Lindsay. I was surprised Eve didn't betray them to get her immortality back, but she stayed true. I always liked tha character of Lindsay, but I wasn't as emotionally invested in him as I was with Wesley. I watched Wesley grow and change, and I felt a connection to his story. I cried a lot last night Now all I have left is Stargate.

Posted by: Ith at May 20, 2004 09:23 PM (5FhN3)

2 Did you manage to catch the 2nd season finale of Justice League on YTV? I missed all but the last 20 minutes. And they aren't rerunning it any time soon.

Posted by: Dave Ruddell at May 21, 2004 02:01 PM (PgtWq)

3 But Ith, must I remind you that you were going to get her clothes? We had all worked out, remember? Dave, I am not sure which episode was the season ender. The last ep I saw was the conclusion to Hereafter, which had some nice Conan touches but wasn't at the level of Knight of Shadows. I should visit the web site (we seem to get the episodes months after their US release.) Time to write to Toon and YTV asking for a return of Batman: The Animated Series I guess.

Posted by: Debbye at May 21, 2004 05:36 PM (PELMg)

4 Justice League, as in DC Comics? Heck, I canned WB and their lousy station fare when they canned Birds of Prey, well, except for the occasional Smallville, but have not even caught much of that recently. Awaitin' syndication, I suppose.

Posted by: Tiger at May 21, 2004 06:04 PM (G5PGV)

5 Oh yeah! I'd totally forgotten. I would have traded the clothes for Lindsay [g] I'll have to settle for Loreli Gilmore's clothes on Gilmore Girls now.

Posted by: Ith at May 21, 2004 07:22 PM (5FhN3)

6 I too liked Birds of Prey, which was my first clue that it would get dropped. (Buffy and Angel were the exceptions, and even Buffy was dropped by WB and picked up by UPN.) That psychic ability also worked with the Fox shows Firefly and Brimstone, and the greatly missed Space: Above and Beyond. I tried to get interested in Smallville, but it never took. On the other hand, that's probably why it is still running. I seem to have some kind of reverse-Neilson rating thingy attached to my set.

Posted by: Debbye at May 21, 2004 10:39 PM (PELMg)

7 The season finale was a 3 parter called Starcrossed, wherein Hawkgirl's people visit the Earth...

Posted by: Dave Ruddell at May 22, 2004 07:15 PM (/rhDe)

8 Thanks Dave, only now do I remember reading some spoilers for a episode about something along those lines ages ago, and some speculation about Hawkgirl's relationship to Hawkman (because in the comics she was his wife, or something?) and if it would put the eternal triangle into JL. Seems to me that YTV began Season 2 mid-November, so maybe Starcrossed will re-air in the Fall. (Sure, I'll wait that long! Off to fan sites.)

Posted by: Debbye at May 22, 2004 09:13 PM (HM4Jw)

9 You, like me, are a "Killer Of Quality Television".

Posted by: Ith at May 25, 2004 03:08 PM (5FhN3)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

May 13 - ... But if the combat is not soon ended, the terrorists (or so-called "militants" or "insurgents") will learn something else: they have made the war personal. When that happens, the American experience of war shows that our troops will shed the veneer of restraint like a snake's skin. And for every American head Zarqawi severs, he will soon find three of his own men's heads. -- Rev. Donald Sensing

I doubt I'm the only blogger who has been shocked by the enormous number of hits my site has had for searches on Nick Berg.

I think that indicates that it has suddenly gotten personal for millions of people.

Ever since Sept. 11, anyone who is old enough to have actually been taught U.S. history without the nuance and subtlety and cultural relativism and feminist slant and ... you know what I'm driving at here ... has understood some critical facts both about this war in which we are now engaged and about us - what we love, what we are capable of, and what we could and might yet do.

We love freedom. We are a free people, and no one is more dangerous than a free person. Every dictator throughout time has understood that basic fact, and our enemy today understands it as well.

That is why we are their primary target and their primary enemy. It is, if you like, a perverse honour to be singled out so.

That is also why this time is so dangerous. That is why we took so risky a gamble in Iraq, and why the stakes are so high.

The Arab media is not altogether wrong to consider the sanctions against Syria a major news story, you know. Maybe they are beginning to understand what "You are either with us or against us" really means in American.

Read Rev. Sensing's post Retribution. Read the whole thing, and the comments. Know yourselves.

Then read this letter from Iraq. I'm excerpting some because it says what urgently needs to be said:

It [the campaign against Sadr] has been subtle and very well done by our leaders. You should be proud. It would have seemed impossible to have achieved our four main goals against Sadr even just a few months ago. Now today, despite the message of the pessimists who are misleading you into despair, we are have scored all the victories needed to bring this battle to a close. First goal was to isolate Sadr. Second was to exile him from his power-base in Baghdad. Third was to contain his uprising from spreading beyond his militias. And the last goal was to get both his hard-line supporters to abandon him, and to do encourage moderates to break from him. This has been done brilliantly, and now we are on the march in a way that just months ago seemed impossible to do. Sadr is losing everything.

[...]

Our units, in fact, are operating w/in 500 meters of the most sacred Shia religious sites in these cities, and you should notice that the local people are not resisting. This is what the pessimists amongst you are preventing you from understanding.

[...]

... What you need to do is be strong and persistent in your faith with us. Sadr's militia is in panic and desperate, so they are dangerous, but you need to keep this all in perspective. The pessimists would have you believe this is a disaster. Don't listen to them. I think some of them feel that their reputations require our failure because they have been so negative all along, so they are jumping at every opportunity to sensationalize what is happening here as a disaster. Eliminating Sadr's threat is part of the overall mission and we are further ensuring the liberation of the Iraqi people. This has to be done, and we are doing it.

Don't be seduced by those who would rather that we sit back and just enjoy the freedoms past generations of Americans have sacrificed to gain for us. This is our time to earn it. I remember President Bush saying after the September 11th attacks: "The commitment of our Fathers is now the calling of our time."

Take heart, America! Your common sense has risen above the ponderous, fatuous news media and punditry this past year, and you are being proven correct. It isn't over, not by a mile, but steady as she goes, home port is in sight.

God bless and protect our soldiers and coalition forces, and may their bullets fly true.

We have asked so much of them this past year, so show them your support and a million thanks here.

A Very Special Message to CNN: we are approaching the anniversary of a another major combat operation: D-Day (you f***ing wankers.)

Posted by: Debbye at 11:41 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 828 words, total size 5 kb.

May 11 - As if we needed reminding as to who are the sickest of them all: Video shows beheading of American captive in Iraq:

[Nicholas] Berg is heard screaming as his throat is cut. One of the captors then holds up his severed head.

"For the mothers and wives of American soldiers, we tell you that we offered the U.S. administration to exchange this hostage for some of the detainees in Abu Ghraib and they refused," the hooded man standing behind the American said just before the killing.

"Coffins will be arriving to you one after the other, slaughtered just like this."

Big, brave men, careful to slaughter someone held in captivity and bound so he can't fight back. Incapable of honour and devoid of humanity, yet they released this statement:

"Where is the compassion, where is the anger for God's religion, and where is the protection for Muslims' pride in the crusaders' jails?" the man says.

They try to depict this as a response to the shocking images of prisoner abuse, but they also recorded Daniel Pearl's murder for propaganda purposes; they tried to do the same with Fabrizio Quattrocchi but he denied them.

They will never run out of excuses, but their reason will always be the same: they are evil.

The pictures of prisoner abuse that have shocked the world have shocked me as well, but I've never pretended that we Americans are any more perfect than any other group of people (although we may be more honest about our warts than others.)

Those who have already been and will be charged with prisoner abuse forgot the mission, which was to bring freedom to Iraq. That's the short and long of it, and they will be held accountable for their crimes but it will not derail the rest of us from that mission.

CNN keeps asking "how will we win the hearts and minds after this?" and I keep wondering when CNN is going to clue into why we went into Iraq.

It's not about getting Iraqis to trust us. Gaining their trust is a part of the true goal, which is to get them to trust themselves and each other. That's why a political solution to Fallujah was crucial, and why Iraqis dealing with Muqtada al-Sadr is so important.

Al Qaeda doesn't worry about gaining trust or building self-confidence. Why go to all the trouble of gaining trust when you can achieve your aims by spreading fear? (And let's be honest: it is much easier to spread fear than build confidence.)

Our mission in Iraq isn't about easy. We are fighting terrorism by opening a door that was hitherto closed for Iraqis, and thus all oppressed people, to give them a chance to prove to themselves that they are capable of running their own countries and their own affairs.

It isn't even about proving to other countries - including Canada and maybe especially Old Europe - that Arab countries can be self-sustaining and run by consensual government, because the patronizing attitude of elitists doesn't allow for the prospect that people don't need watchdogs.

That is why I believe the handover must happen. That is why I believed and continue to believe that the war in Iraq was just and right. We will make mistakes for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that this has never been done before, but the most important reason is that however strong the USA is as a nation, it is composed of human beings who come complete with human failings and weaknesses and thus make mistakes.

That is another difference between us and them: we are mere humans, and acknowledge it.

May 12 - 7:54: Burnside has more here and some good links.

Posted by: Debbye at 08:02 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 671 words, total size 4 kb.

Apr. 24 - I came to a full stop yesterday when I learned of Pat Tillman's death in Afghanistan (Former Cardinals safety Tillman killed in combat.)

Maybe this story has had so much impact because it is about everything, and, like everthing, it can't be summarized.

When placed beside media piffle-stories about other celebrities who are so prominent in the news, this story - and the man - stand while the others just lie supine as do all sick things.

I tried to put everything into words but I can't. There are those who just can't get beyond their disbelief that a man would give up fame, gridiron glory and millions of dollars to serve the country he loves because they know they never would. I doubt anything I or others might write will clarify matters for such because they lack that language of the heart that defines the overwhelming love of country.

The USA isn't perfect. It's not about how things are but how we continue to strive to form a more pefect union. It's about ideals, and hopes, and dreams that aren't shattered by an oppressive regime that dictates how long the beards must be, restricts the freedom of our thoughts, and decaptitates those who say "No."

Love isn't about perfection. If it was, none of us could love; it's all about loving despite flaws and often even because of them.

What astounds me is not how much we love our country but the lack of bold admissions from others that they love their countries. I may be a simpleton because I love my country, but they are ungrateful, shallow bastards for not honouring the blood and dedication of those who came before them.

Love of country isn't pride, people, it's humility. It's being bowed by the burden of mighty examples and, even as we enjoy the freedoms bequeathed by those who came before us, we freely accept that our heritage includes the admonition that we highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain.

Is that the real reason modern education obscures the country's history? Are they trying to eliminate the debt we owe to those of the past by juggling the books? History, which didn't end in the last decade, still informs our thoughts like an insistent whisper that won't be stilled.

History is the story of those who stood up straighter and said Fix bayonets with grim determination. It's about the willingness to fight, die, and yield no quarter.

I used to believe that everyone had something they felt worth fighting for. Now I know better, and maybe that's why I feel so indebted to those who stand so tall and are willing to fight.

That his death should come right now while there's babble about reinstating the draft contains rich irony as well as the definitive response to that debate.

Tillman symbolizes every single man and woman who has chosen to do their part in this mighty struggle. If the fact that his is a household name has lent new clarity to words like honour, valour and service, then I think he's content.

Where do we find such people? Look at your next door neighbour and maybe you'll have your answer.

20:33 Ghost of a Flea pays tribute (and be sure to follow the link under hero.)

Apr. 25 10:41 Just to clarify, when I refer to next door neighbours, I mean that literally. The kids who play hockey in the street or deliver your paper are the stuff from which our real heroes are made.

I sympathize with Al Maviva's epiphany:

I wish I could call him a hero - but he isn't.

He is simply what the rest of us should be. That's right, he's not a hero, it's that most of the rest of us are slackers.

Opinion Journal is republishing a piece by Peggy Noonan when Tillman first enlisted. It makes even better reading today especially given the foolish utterances by those who are promoting conscription.

Posted by: Debbye at 10:30 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 684 words, total size 5 kb.

Jan. 4 - Maybe it's just hard for us to believe that real human beings can act like monsters, much less be monsters. It certainly has been proven that individuals, like Paul Bernardo, can torture their prey for days before finally killing them, but it was a bigger shock to find that his accomplice was his wife. But we quickly categorize them as psychopaths who usually work alone or at most as a pair.

It is even harder to believe that several hundred or even thousands of people can be involved in sadism. I say this even knowing about the concentration camps and "medical experiments" of the Holocaust because howevermuch I may know it happened, my mind balks at the thought that the perpetrators were actual people. I don't know if that makes sense, this disconnect between what I know to be the truth yet what I can only barely believe happened.

Maybe I need to create a new "moment" which I'll call something like a how could they moment.

We all heard stories from Iraq, and the weight of evidence was such that we reluctantly were forced to know that terrible things were happening to the people in that country but these things were so terrible that, much like reports before our soldiers actually entered the concentration camps, things we thought might be exagerated turned out to be grossly understated.

In the midst of ongoing discoveries of mass graves, it is important to remember that there are living witnesses as well. Some of their stories are in this AP article Witnesses to evil and they and others like them deserve justice.

Posted by: Debbye at 09:27 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 278 words, total size 2 kb.

Jan. 1 - I didn't make it to midnight, darn it. (Full disclosure: I didn't make it much past 10 pm.) I really wanted to stay up so I could cheer for Shoshana Johnson, but sleep won out. I hope she'll accept my excuse that the spirit was willing but but I fell asleep on the chair.

I think we all took the PoWs and their families as our family, and their presence in our collective memories shines clearly. The interviews with Mr. Johnson in particular revealed a man of conviction, courage and faith, and, right after receiving word she has been rescued, didn't the Johnson family friend sweeping the aunt into a giant hug while jumping up and down with joy, crying "Glory Hallelujah, Glory Hallelujah" express the jubilation of us all?

Shoshana Johnson, Lori Piestewa and Jessica Lynch have become part of our American legend, expressing the attitude of Americans toward Americans and our common heart. It's not about gender or race, it's about family.

Some may be thinking that the outburst of emotion upon the rescue of the PoWs was an insult to the numbers of dead and wounded in Iraq. Others will declare that we continue to focus on the former PoWs to divert attention from the ongoing casualties in Iraq.

They don't get it. It is precisely those brief moments of grace and hope triumphant that render meaning to our dead and wounded because the former bespeaks hope even as the latter bespeaks sacrifice.

That right there is the difference between those who buy into the cult of suicide-homicide bombers and us. They are said to sacrifice out of despair, whereas we sacrifice out of hope.

Our strongest national belief is hope. It is that hope which caused our ancestors to emigrate. It is why we work our asses off and steadily believe that the future will be better.

It is expressed by our plea to the Almighty that he stand beside us and guide us because we understand that humility and faith are the bedrock of hope: hope defies logic, statistics, and reason. It's why we supported Terry Schiavo's parents against the poor odds given by the arrogant medical profession, and why we were bewildered when pessimistic Iranian officials gave up all hope of finding survivors. We expect differently from our leaders.

So it doesn't look good. When does it ever? Keep digging, keep trying, don't give up. We didn't find any survivors after the first day the WTC collapsed and we know how much it hurts but keep digging anyway and when you find people alive, jump up and down with joy, thank Allah and hug everybody and keep digging. Blow off the naysayers and dig some more!

Never quit. Leave no one behind. We will not tire, we will not falter, we will not fail.

We are a people of unlimiting hope. We are Americans precisely because we hope, because we embrace an idea - our belief in the unlimited potential of the individual and thus our confidence and belief in ourselves collectively - upon which we have chosen to make our stand.

No matter what country you come from, you are an American the minute you consciously choose to be an American. George Washington becomes the father of your country and you become one of his descendants. Some of your relatives may piss you off and others are the kind you keep out of sight when company comes over, that's all.

So some of us are nuttier than the rest. Oh well, we say, there's at least one in every family.

I think we need to rework the concept of hyphenated identities. It is flawed because it is backwards. Fiorello LaGuardia should be remembered as an American-Italian, not an Italian-American. How many airports are named after him in Italy? How many statues of Al Smith have been erected in Ireland, or high schools named after Dr. King in Africa? For that matter, is Sir Wilfird Laurier even mentioned in French history textbooks?

None of those men would have been able to achieve their mighty deeds in their hyphenated lands. Just think: those and other great and innovative minds would have lived and died in obscurity had their forefathers not ended up on North American soil.

That's the USA I celebrate. Not the hyper-power America, because the fact that we are as yet unchallenged in world dominance still gives me the willies: I don't like it, and I don't want it. I want to spend my life griping about the government and bitching about taxes, scoffing the media and sighing when I voted that there was no real difference between the candidates. Tweedle-dee, tweedle-dum and tweedle-dum-dum. (The last, for the age-challenged, came from the Humphry-Nixon-Wallace presidential race of 1968.)

When the Soviet Union fell, I thought good, it's over, and expected the only change would be that we would be able to live our lives without the threat from the Soviet Union (although I never forgot that China was a communist nuclear power.)

Anericans are isolationists, and the French agitation about hyperpuissance went below our radar. The fact that we could conquer the world was flawed: we'd have to leave home to do it, and we don't want to. The world is a nice place to visit, but.

Look at how many times al Qaeda attacked us and killed Americans before we finally got collectively angry enough to fight back? They were forced to attack us on our home soil before we stopped firing across their bow.

That reluctance to go to war forms American history more than can be said of most other Western countries, especially those which criticize us strongest now. Remember that even our half-hearted attempts to join Europe in colonizing other lands in the 19th century were abject failures, and as Americans citizens continued to strongly disapprove, we dropped the notion.

The anti-war movement is moving to the next platform: Bring the troops home now. I want to bring them home the second their job is done. I want to wave and cheer them, and thank them, and let them eat some good home cooking in peace because that's what they were fighting for.

Whenever someone asks when will that be I ask Do you cook? Because every cook knows that just because the timer goes off don't mean the roast is ready. It's done when it's done. And we test it, and check the potatoes and carrots too. That's when we pop the biscuits into the oven.

Hmph. And the rest of the world looks down on us thinking we are captives of fast food and immediate gratification.

We are a people of faith, hope and charity. We think those good values, decent values, and stubbornly refuse to surrender to the fatalism and cynicism of the Old World. That's not new, that stubborness and independence of mind are an ongoing theme in our history since our inception of a country, and they have served us well.

So we continue to dig in the rubble of an Iranian village. We stick it out in Iraq even though each death - Iraqi, American, British, Polish, Spanish, Italian, Bulgarian, Japanese or Thai - grieves us. We clench our fists and tighten our jaws when we hear of another attack in Israel because we have been made brothers and sisters in the one way nobody wanted: people who continue to endure and hope.

We draw from their example and respond to those who would invoke fear by ignoring the cautions of the media, infusing ourselves with courage and shrugging aside the threat to party hearty in Times Square and honour Shoshana Johnson and, yes, pay tribute to the party-goers who were victims of yesterday's car bomb in Baghdad.

I probably shouldn't say this, but what the hell: WE ROCK!

Posted by: Debbye at 12:33 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1318 words, total size 8 kb.

Dec. 29 - I was a science fiction fan at a fairly young age. Anything science-fictiony, and I would watch it or read it. Needless to say, I read a lot of good short stores (especially from Amazing Stories magazine) and saw some incredibly bad movies.

There were also books, like Space Cat, but we won't discuss that. Ever.

Maybe that early fascination with the possibilities "out there" coupled with the number of probes that have been lost on Mars explains my imagination running full tilt. The canyons there are monstrously deep, and I remember a book by Ben Bova about Mars (I think it was called Mars) that had the discovery of permafrost under the surface and hinted there might be more to the canyons than emptiness and rocks.

Maybe there is something, or some thing, on Mars that is an unknown unknown. Maybe the rocks are sentient and felt insulted at being named after cartoon characters.

The really sad part is that I started thinking about this stuff a couple of years ago when the Polar Lander and the two independent probes went AWOL.

Maybe I better find another news story quickly before someone notices that the Bova book isn't all that old. Move along, folks. Nothing here but a senior moment.

UPDATE: They are speculating that the Beagle landed in a crater which would explain the radio silence. Hmm, weren't the probes that accompanied the Polar Lander thought to have ended up - the both of them - in canyons? Bad sign when they start re-cycling excuses. I'm just sayin'.

UPDATE: I am not alone in my lunacy. Rantburg reports the Beagle is another kill for the Martian Defense Force. (Link via Jay Currie.

Posted by: Debbye at 06:22 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 295 words, total size 2 kb.

Dec. 28 - Ran across this interesting post by Fayrouz, an Iraqi woman who lives in Dallas at Live From Dallas (or hit Ctrl+F "Lord of the Rings"):

It's been said to me that each person interprets J. R. R. Tolkiens story of the Middle Earth in a way that reflects his/her beliefs. I believe that's true. I heard different interpretations of the story from different people. Each of these people has different life views.

The first installment, "The Fellowship of The Rings," came three-months after 9/11. I don't know if it was a coincidence, but 9/11 shaped my view of the story.

If you ever read "The Hobbit," you would know that danger was already building up in Middle Earth. However, people kept going on with their lives. As we always think, "if it's not on my doorsteps, it has nothing to do with me."

Okay, I really wish that I had thought of it. Sometimes even Tolkien purists fanatics like me get too bogged down in the overall sweep of the epic and forget the day to day observations Tolkien made that make his work eternal.

Posted by: Debbye at 11:47 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 243 words, total size 1 kb.

Dec. 27 - This should provide plenty of ammunition for those who already think Canada is an amoral nation of free-loaders: U.S. policy on Iraq reconstruction bids is not justified, Canadians say.

A strong majority of Canadians feel the United States is not justified in refusing Iraq reconstruction contracts to companies from Canada and the other countries that did not support its war effort there, a new poll suggests.

Seven in 10 Canadians - 71 per cent - believe that Canada should not be excluded from bidding on projects to rebuild the Middle Eastern country, according to a survey conducted by Ipsos-Reid for The Globe and Mail and CTV.

Residents of Quebec are the most adamant, with four out of five of those polled agreeing that the United States was not justified in making this decision.

Almost as many British Columbians - 77 per cent - offered the same opinion, as did 69 per cent of Atlantic Canadians.

Companies from countries including Canada, Germany and France - critics of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq - were told that they need not apply for any of the $18.6-billion (U.S.) worth of new contracts being awarded to rebuild the country.

More like Oil. For. Palaces. Tatoo that and wear it with all the shame it deserves.

More like acted as a go-between for Saddam and North Korea for the illegal purchase of missiles. (Hey there UNSC member Syria, how much is oil costing you now that the illegal pipeline is turned off?)

More like sold Saddam weapons and plastic shredders to use against Iraqis and keep him in power.

More like supplied Saddam with enough money to keep his torturers and police state apparati in clover.

More like sent military experts to advise Saddam on his military planning.

Tell me: as Canada did not support the Iraq War, just what justifies Canadian bids on those contracts?

Canada's PM Chretien travelled to UNSC member Mexico to enlist their support against regime change in Iraq. (Read the article, it may stimulate a few memory cells.)

Chretien (who is also connected by marriage to a family that controls majority interest in France's TotalFinaElf) collaborated with the countries of the Axis of Weasels, Syria and Saddam Hussein to maintain the pretenses of the oil for food program all the while circumventing the stipulation that the proceeds be used to purchase food, medical supplies, and those things needed to keep the electrical and water supplies functional.

The UN took a 2.2% cut to help foster the illusion. Kofi Annan personally signed off on all expenditures under that program, yet the proponents, including PM Martin, of the "international community" have the balls to proclaim themselves best suited to conduct a trial of Saddam in the international court dominated by frigging Belgium?

A change in faces in the Cabinet does not reflect a change in policy, PM Martin, except to the deliberately delusional. It's still the same Canadian Parliment, a majority of which voted not to support the US and only reluctantly, and with much prodding from the Canadian Alliance, voiced lukewarm support that Saddam had been removed as more mass graves were uncovered.

PM Martin, in the name of Canada, is whining that Canadians want a) US tax dollars and b) to turn Saddam, the man Chretien and Parliament tried desparately to keep in power, over to an international court run by the very people who collaborated with Canada's former PM Chretien to keep Saddam in power with the approval of the Canadian Parliament.

Weasels they were, and weasels they remain.

Yet Chretien, in the name of Canada, had ordered Canadian ships in the Persian Gulf not to detain Saddam or any members of his family if they were caught fleeing Iraq despite a truckload of reports from international human rights organizations that accused them of torture and murder.

That is all way, way beyond "criticism."

Canada wants better relations with the US? On the surface, the Martin government will get it. But if Canadians want better relationships with Americans, which would mean restoring trust, it keeps getting more elusive. The US electoral system and our separation of powers guarantees that the will of the American people will be heard in Washington DC, and no elected official forgets that.

Like it or not, this poll is guaranteed to earn contempt from Americans, because the perception will be that when it comes to lucrative contracts paid for by US taxpayers, 71% of the "morally superior" Canadians are eager to hop aboard the gravy train.

Furthermore, too many Americans know that when it comes to self-defense, Canada is too freaking cheap to spend money on her own defense capabilities so US forces will have to babysit provide security for any Canadian contractors in Iraq.

How can Canadians convince Americans that they are worth it? I live here, and even I can't be persuaded that US soldiers should risk their lives to defend greedy Canadian contractors.

Damned right I want that money to go to countries like Bulgaria and Thailand. Bulgarian and Thai soldiers were killed today, and I am grateful for their sacrifices and to their people. We share something with them we don't share with Canada: the willingness to bear the heavy burdens.

We know who are friends are, who we can count on, and who stands tall in this world. I am overjoyed that we are building stronger and closer relations with them as well as with the British, Australians, Italians, Danish, Poles and Spanish, and if I regret that Canada is not numbered among them, it doesn't mean I'll overlook Canada's lack of moral imagination and give her a pass.

One last time: the US is not the one on trial. The rest of the world is.

Nothing can long withstand those who passionately love freedom. If the day comes when we do fall, we'll go down fighting and give future generations such examples of courage and determination as to light their souls with our passion.

UPDATE: I usually enjoy Ralph Peters' columns, but this one has me fuming because it appears the US is again stiffing the Poles. I have an idea: let's not do that. We're still trying to shake off the stench of Yalta. (It is an excellent column, by the way. I just hate the message.)

(Globe and Mail link via Neale News, FrontPage Mag link via Instapundit.)

Posted by: Debbye at 01:04 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1143 words, total size 7 kb.

Dec. 26 - I hope everyone had a Merry Christmas and a new sense of optimism for the coming new year. Life is indeed interesting: how else can you explain how I shared symptoms with someone over 3,000 miles away?

Having a work ethic really sucks sometimes. I've been fighting off a cold for a week, and my first day off Bang! I'm sick. I'm too young for this! My body is supposed to recognize that you're sick during the work week, not on days off!

I've updated the stories about the Queen's message, and it struck me that someday I'll have to explain how a fierce American can have so much affection for a foreign British monarch. Then it struck me that I'm hardly the only American who will have to explain that one . . .

I have more optimism about 2004 than I did about 2002 and 2003. I'm still waiting for the other shoe to drop, but I think al Qaeda has been having more moments of shoes actually dropping than the one I'm worried about, and it seems to me that they are in a bind. They must, must attack us again on the homefront, but haven't been able to.

They must produce a bin Laden tape that proves he's still alive or risk him being branded a coward or dead. I personally believe that he is dead, but I was never as interested in capturing him as I was in capturing Zawahiri and the true masterminds in al Qaeda. Getting the figurehead is all very nice, but the masters of strategy and organizations are what made that organization so lethal.

If he is dead, and the top brass know it and are concealing it, I have no issue with that either. On top of worries that official confirmation of his death could unleash "martyrdom" operations, that his death is being concealed by al Qaeda puts them in an awkward spot, not us.

That's the name of the game this year: putting them on the defensive. I like it.

Posted by: Debbye at 12:10 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 348 words, total size 2 kb.

Dec. 6 - Jay Currie has some insight into the case in the UK in which an officer was sacked because he was overheard making some insensitive remarks about Osama bin Laden (see post "Indeed") and the possible implications:

My sense is that quite the opposite is true. The outrages of the Islamofascists, the idiocy of the Eurocrats, is beginning to tweak the political backbone of England: the Muggles who were initially impressed with the liberality of muli-cult but have begun to suspect that there is something just a little off with stories like this. And when Primrose Lane wakes up....watch out.

Where would the Canadian blogosphere be without Jay? He continually supports and encourages new bloggers here, there and everywhere and joins Steven den Beste and others to encourage people to make Belmont Club a regular read (check Jay's post "Centcom - Fighting to Win.")

Steven den Beste has a good post about the defense of Taiwan. Giving up people who love freedom in both Taiwan and Hong Kong is something I and other Americans are not willing to live with, and I too think the Chinese government knows that now.

Another analyst I would add to my list is American Digest. His recent posts lead to to guess that like me, he too is old enough to actually remember the Kennedy assassination and cuts to the heart of how the "Hate Bush" could lead to an act that would transcend the murder of a President.

I go further than Gerard, and urgently ask if the lefties and Eminem understand that many Americans would blame them directly? Do they realize that such an act would give rise, not to demoralisation but rather to an anger that thus far has been on a tight leash?

The government protects them from us no matter which us or them you are. The explosive anger that accompanied Sept. 11 was contained primarily by the strength of character and iron will of President Bush. I know what was in my heart Sept. 11 and all the way through to the President's address to the Joint Houses of Congress, and I know that, although they don't realize it, millions of people have good cause to get down on their knees and thank their Creator for the focus and restraint of President George W. Bush.

You don't have to like him or love him. He is the American President until the people say otherwise, and any attempt to bypass the electoral system will have consequences that few understand. Anyone who thinks it will be "problem solved" doesn't know us.

Rant over. I'm off to work, so take care and I'll check in tonight.

Posted by: Debbye at 10:01 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 456 words, total size 3 kb.

Dec. 2 - David Warren sure has a way with words. From Conscience:

We are, with rare exceptions, safe to expect the usual recitation of unexamined falsehoods in the service of fatuous conclusions. All the complexities of the world will be reduced, by Pavlovian repetition, to a hate-list of bogeymen and exploiters, as we teach another generation to blame the people we envy.

Reading the three together has given me both hope and despair.

Posted by: Debbye at 06:39 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 91 words, total size 1 kb.

Nov. 21 - Note: any of you ever start a post that had a mind of it's own? Well, this is one. I've improved and tinkered so much I'm not even sure if it makes any sense, but I have to go to work, which is a mercy for anyone who wades through this!

Despite the many intellectual discussions about the President's trip to London weighing the pros and cons, I initially supported this visit for a very personal and very emotional reason.

I wanted Pres. Bush to be able to thank Queen Elizabeth II in person on behalf of the American people for her loving action on Sept. 11 when she requested the Star Spangled Banner be played at Buckingham Palace.

Further, the Queen herself extended the invitation to the President, and it would have been churlish to refuse. Some of us hapen to believe in honour and gratitude, and I'm glad the President went. The possibility that it would be a public relations disaster counted for less than the opportunity, no, obligation rather, to acknowledge and embrace our good friends and allies in the UK, at least to my simple mind, just as the President did when he went to Australia.

If it seems odd, if not downright contradictory, that this proud American would have affection and reverence for the descendant of a monarchy which my own ancestors disavowed, well, it's my paradox and I accept it, as do millions of Americans.

Of course, there are other, more compelling reasons to support the visit including the opportunity to show resolve as well as gratitude and to state (again) the goals of this struggle.

In High Noon, Will Kane's mentor, Martin Howe, says: People gotta talk themselves into law and order before they do anything about it. Maybe because down deep they don't care. They just don't care. I don't agree with the they don't care part, but I do believe it can take a long time before most people realize, however reluctantly, that they must take action and the themes of that movie ran through my mind as I read this:

The slogan "war against terrorism" told only half the story. Bush's idea of putting the spread of democracy at the top of the agenda tells the other half. Now the average Briton knows that he is not asked to fight only against something, but also for something. (Original emphasis)

Note I said ideals. I understand those ideals, and in my younger days I embraced them. My world view is more mature now, and today I understand that the drives of greed, lust for power and corruption are universal problem not limited to the US, so I must weigh my opinions and values against something other than reflexive anti-establishmentarianism. Or rebelliousness.

That's why people like me saw the anti-war's Halliburton with TotalFinaElf, and raised them one Oil-For-Palaces program. The butchery of Saddam didn't enter too much because we lacked evidence that would be acceptable to the world community at large, and now we have much more than we could ever have imagined in our worst predictions.

Please believe me when I say it's not so much that those who honestly wished for peace were wrong: those who wish for peace are never wrong, in the strictest sense of the word, but they did choose the wrong fight to oppose. Bringing up WMD now is a fool's game; nobody dismissed the intelligence from every agency in the world including that of the UN regarding WMD, but the anti-war crowd did dismiss claims by Iraqi refugees in favour of the claims by George Galloway, Scott Ritter, et alia.

It happens. We all make judgements about who to believe, and there are far worse crimes than believing the wrong people. Although the claims about WMD in Iraq remain an open book, the claims of the Iraqis who charged Saddam was a butcher have been proven to be true, and, because we left him in power after Gulf War I, it was our duty to remove him however belatedly. This I firmly believe.

To those on the right who continue to denounce the inactions of the Clinton Administration, I have to wonder if they really and truly believe the American people would have supported war after the first WTC bombing, the bombing of the African embassies or the attack on the Cole. I don't. Maybe it's to our credit in the long term that we are slow to anger and slower to war, or maybe it's more reflective of our naivete, patience or optimistim. Take your pick.

It. Doesn't. Matter. It's time to come together, and make decisions about who Americans are.

It's time to be honest, and to look within ourselves instead of trying to conform to this stereotype or that one, and to stop rebelling against this stereotype or that one.

It's time to Grow Up.

That means that the ongoing debate about the use of American force cannot, must not be reduced to a we were right and you were wrong exchange, for if we can't allow ourselves to change our minds based on new evidence, then we aren't rational humans and should stop pretending we are.

In other words, if we really care about ourselves and our future, the true debate is only beginning. Both sides have evidence now whereas before we entered Iraq we mostly had conjecture, and we must evaluate that evidence according to American standards, not the bankrupt ones of those we have good reason to distrust.

Only one year ago, the numbers of Americans and British who supported the action in Iraq was very small. Many were hoping renewed UN resolve would settle the Iraq issue without bloodshed, only a few of us were willing to accept that war was likely. Why?

Maybe because some of us learned a hard lesson from the bloody repression of the uprising in Iraq after Gulf War I, and in Kosovo, Bosnia, and Rwanda. I don't blame those who have avoided thinking about genocides that we didn't prevent in favour of those we did, but the harsh reality of the UN is that it did not play a role in stopping genocide anywhere. That fact must be confronted. The looming war in Iraq again clarified the need for the UN to assert itself, its resolutions, and even its existence, yet the UN agencies that have fled Iraq and Afghanistan would seem to make it clear that no people can rely on that feckless body to protect them.

Sadly, the UN has, in traditional bureaurcratic fashion, come to represent maintaining the status quo which too often means protecting dictatorships like that formerly in Iraq and today in Zimbabwe, Syria and Cuba, rather than representing a bright future for oppressed peoples. So if the UN is willing to content itself with providing food and shelter for those in desperate straits so long as these people are already in secure areas, so be it. That is not an unworthy goal unless they pretend they should be more without making an effort to do more.

I remain an optimist. The UN was created by mere humans, and can be adapted or replaced by mere humans.

Change is in the air. Only observe how quickly war sentiment changed, both in the US and the UK if not in the UN, relative to events in the last century. Look at the European countries that joined the coalition, exchange Italy and Spain for France and Canada, and the alignment is hardly unfamiliar. (And note that the Iraq question is hardly settled among Canadians despite the Federal government's stance. Canadian troops are in harm's way in Afghanistan. That fact demands respect by both Americans and Canadians. They didn't run away after two soldiers were killed last month. They are still the bold Canadians many remember from WWII and Korea.)

We went to WWI with "Remember the Lusitania" but overlook the fact that the Lusitania was sunk in 1915 at the cost of 128 American lives and the US did not enter the war until 2 years later in 1917. Five other ships were torpedoed during those two years. That delay reflected to some degree the large number of immigrants with conflicting loyalties to their former homes as well as the political debate around whether the USA fit into a worldview, a view which we now take for granted but which events already have begun to demand we alter. Other options were weighed, including arming merchant ships. That march to war was slow, but the debates that preceeded it were an essential part of understanding the notion of being American regardless of birthplace into the American pscyhe.

Canada is wrestling with that internal contradiction even today. Give it time, and let them find a Canadian solution.

WWII was forced by the Japanese attack at Pearl Harbor, but even then the declaration of war on Germany was disputed, and some of the fears about a German Fifth Column were proven true and the fears about a Japanese Fifth Column were proven false. We learned from that experience which is why, however intolerable some may find it, it is right to trust Muslims in the US (and Canada) until and if they betray that trust.

Ironically, an argument posed today by some Canadians against alliance with the US in Iraq was the delay by the US in entering WWII. I never got the rationale for that: by offering it now, does that mean these Canadians retroactively endorse and approve of the delay? I think that unlikely, but to promote that argument for Canadian opposition to the war in Iraq is perplexing unless they actively desire revenge for events of over 60 years ago, and that doesn't really fit in with what I know about Canadians.

Rather, I believe Canadian reluctance to join the US may be due in part to contrariness more than an approval of the Canadian PM's alliance with France. Canadians don't want to feel they are at the beck and call of the US. But how can any American or Brit condemn Canadian contrariness when, in fact, it is another shared value which we rarely acknowledge but must honestly (if laughingly) admit?

There is another factor as well in the Canadian psyche, namely the deaths of 4 Canadian soldiers in the friendly-fire incident of May, 2002, in Afghanistan. That is never far from the Canadian mind, and although it would be fair to charge that the press has fanned that sentiment for all its worth, the sense of useless loss is real.

Clearly, much patience is still required to continue to promote, discuss and debate the vision articulated during the president's visit to London and historic speech at Whitehall (text here) and I fervently hope that those Euopeans and British who read that speech recognize that it signals a change: can the soft left and soft right finally get to a point wherein we debate the need to take a firm stand against tyranny? Please?

Can we finally arrive in the US at a point at which invoking Monicagate and Floridagate are discarded as irrelevant because this is a new era, and we have to take our stands on whether we believe the yearning for freedom beats in all hearts and drop red herrings which detract from honest debate?

And can we begin to apply Godwin's Law, that most excellent Usenet formula which declared an argument won once the opposition has been reduced to comparisons with Hitler and the Nazis since reason and logic have clearly left the building?

This debate must be non-partisan in the US and undertaken without reference to the US in Canada because more is at stake than mud-slinging and who can make the better (or more bitter) wisecracks.

Who are we? In what do we believe? How far are we willing to go to support those beliefs? Sheesh, this isn't the first time in history people have had to make those judgements so stop f***ing around and get to it.

These are weighty issues, and the ultimate stance taken by countries will determine who and what the peoples of these countries believe about themselves and each other. Some allies, like Syria, have been proven to be false. Some allies, like Canada, have proven to be reluctant but should not be ruled out.

How do we need to do to elevate the issues to an honest debate on the world scene?

Primarily, I think it means getting past prejudice against the United States. Is that simplified? Damned right it is, because when we read anti-war positions both in the media and on websites and listen to the rhetoric of the agitators, what they appeal to is paranoia, which is by definition irrational, and that enables them to bypass the real issue, which is human rights in the Mid-East, starting with Iraq, and extending to the brutality which sees Canadians tortured in Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran. The debate is whether countries which extol the virtues of human rights really believe in them and what they are willing to do about it.

I lived for too long during the Cold War and I understood the President's sentiments when he pointed out that we often allied ourselves with less than savoury characters in order to maintain balance with the Soviet bloc. (It would be nice for Pres. Putin to make the same observation about the USSR, but I'm not holding my breath.)

I remember the feeling of elation during the Prague Spring, and the sense of outrage and helplessness during the Soviet invasion in 1968, and many more people remember Tianianmen Square.

Is it too idealistic to hope I never have to endure those times again? Or at least that repression in one country can be counter-balanced with liberation in another? I know we can't take on every country, but the powers of example and determination can do a great deal to persuade otherwise intractable people once they realize that bringing democracy to their nations is better than the alternative.

It's not so much whether you are for the United States as it is whether you believe that all humans deserve to be treated with dignity and respect, and those who yearn for a return of Saddam and the Taliban are manifestly against human rights.

In many ways, I feel that the United States is finally living up to the beliefs enshrined in the Declaration of Independence because it affirmed inherent rights for all men (and women). Think about it: it could well have read "all Englishmen" or "all Americans" yet didn't, and that was by design.

I first read the Taheri column in toto at Italian Girl's promoting ideas of democracy via Expat Yank, and hopped over to the NY Post in hopes that they too published it and would have the requisite permalink.Thanks to both posters for pointing the way.

Posted by: Debbye at 08:10 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 2536 words, total size 15 kb.