The KP Casualty

Well... except for those pesky bombs going off.... Iraqis are fine!

While avoiding a general answer to "Are we better off?" Cheney did not hesitate to proclaim Iraqis better off because of the regime change initiated by the American invasion.

"I think Iraq is much better off than it was before we went in in '03 and got rid of Saddam Hussein," he said. "I think we are close to achieving most of our objectives. We've seen a significant reduction in the overall level of violence; it's lower now than virtually anytime since we've been there in the spring of '03. We've seen the elimination of one of the world's worst regimes. We've seen the Iraqis write a constitution and hold three national elections. We've now entered into a strategic framework agreement with the Iraqis that calls for ultimately the U.S. completion of the assignment and withdrawal of our forces from Iraq.

"All of those things I think by anybody's standard would be evidence of significant success. And I think we're very close to achieving what it is we set out to do five years ago when we first went into Iraq.

I'm sure the Iraqis would like to thank you in person, Dick. Because just today:

At least 38 civilians have been killed and 65 wounded in a suicide attack at a shrine in northwestern Baghdad, Iraqi government officials said.

An interior ministry official put the death toll at 40, including 17 Iranian pilgrims.

(Update: Mark Adams of American Street lists the deaths in Iraq since the New Year began. Better off, my ass.)

And just what was it that you were trying to achieve in Iraq, Dick? Because your excuses and reasons keep changing...

What does this looming concentration of Iraqi power at the top portend for U.S. oil interests? The omens are mixed at best. A tilt away from the United States may have come late in August, in the thick of negotiations over the U.S. withdrawal, when Iraq signed a 22-year contract in Beijing for development of an oil field southeast of Baghdad.

Without parliamentary approval, the al-Maliki government seems capable of making or unmaking whatever oil development arrangements it chooses to make. Thus, in September, it canceled six no-bid contracts it had awarded to big-name Western oil corporations. China provides the now cordially partnering Shiite governments in Baghdad and Tehran a clear alternative to Western companies.

Where America's politically unmentionable oil interests in Iraq are headed as the Bush administration leaves office remains anyone's guess, but out in the cold seems as good a guess as any. Back in 2002, the better class of commentator sniffed at the naiveté of "No Blood for Oil" - the chant of anti-war demonstrations around the country. But blood for oil may not be the worst of it. The worst, in the war's subdued and sorry denouement, may prove to be blood for no oil.

Because the war was about oil all along, wasn't it?

Several of the architects of the Iraq war no longer even bother to deny that oil was a major motivator for the invasion. On US National Public Radio's To the Point, Fadhil Chalabi, one of the primary Iraqi advisers to the Bush administration in the lead-up to the invasion, recently described the war as "a strategic move on the part of the United States of America and the UK to have a military presence in the Gulf in order to secure [oil] supplies in the future". Chalabi, who served as Iraq's oil undersecretary of state and met with the oil majors before the invasion, described this as "a primary objective".

Invading countries to seize their natural resources is illegal under the Geneva conventions. That means the huge task of rebuilding Iraq's infrastructure - including its oil infrastructure - is the financial responsibility of Iraq's invaders. They should be forced to pay reparations, just as Saddam Hussein's regime paid $9bn to Kuwait in reparations for its 1990 invasion. Instead, Iraq is being forced to sell 75% of its national patrimony to pay the bills for its own illegal invasion and occupation.

crossposted at Rants from the Rookery

All the way to reno, you’ve dusted the non believers

Janet Reno's reputation isn't entirely her own fault. The Right-wing spin machine, hard at work during the Clinton administration, made her one of its high priority projects.

But this isn't going to help her legacy:

Speaker Series 2009 w/ Alberto Gonzales, Janet Reno & John Ashcroft

Radio City Music Hall

New York, NY
Mon, Apr 20, 2009 08:00 PM

VIP tickets include a formal pre-show reception in the Roxy Suite with each evening's speakers. Cocktails and hors d'oeuvres will be served and each guest will have a photo opportunity with the speakers. Receptions begin at 6:30 each night. Instructions for entry will be sent to purchasers before each individual performance.

Appearing with war-criminal Gonzales and village idiot Ashcroft is just a bad idea, unless she hopes to creat a compare-contrast scenario. But that isn't likely to happen. No one who thinks even the tiniest good aobut Reno would pay $0.01 for a ticket to this event, so she'll likely be booed by the dead-enders who actually still support Gonzales.

Waste of time.

Though I want to be with you, be with you night and day, nothing changes on New Year's day

Because I have no choice; U2: New Years' Day:

We’ll tak a cup o’ kindness yet, for auld lang syne

For Auld Lang Syne:



And then there's this one:



And this classis:



Happy New Year, dammit!

Don't Fiddle About This New Year

...Be the change you talk about, and bright moments to you.

Namaste

;>)

Dogs of war and men of hate, With no cause, we don't discriminate

(The Dogs of War-Pink Floyd)

I clearly remember the 6 Day War of 1967, it was quite scary. And I remember hearing about the Suez Canal crisis in 1956; I was only 6, but it was on the news every night.

History in the Middle East is complicated, especially by empire-building western nations. England, France, and the US have all made changes in the region which have reverberated for years, and causing consequences many years later. If you don't believe that, ask the Iranians about Mohammed Mossadegh.

I was hitch-hiking through Europe in the summer of '72, and spent a few weeks in a campground in Amsterdam. We (ex-wife & I) had been planning to go to Israel and work on a Kibbutz. That never happened. But I remember talking with a Canadian fellow who had just come back from Israel. His words stick with me today:

Imagine a country where every one of its neighbors hates them.

Clearly that's not a great political imperative or analysis; the same might be said for many countries on earth. But in light of the recent attack on Gaza, it resonates a bit.

Liberals have a natural inclination to defend the underdog in most fights. Israel at one time was clearly an underdog. The foundation of the country was questionable, but it happened, so we move on. And Egypt and other Arab countries have struck out at Israel many times. The animosity is evident, and sad.

But in this latest case, where the brutal blockade and repression of Gazans has been condemned by many, Israel has overstepped its legitimacy:

Numerous world leaders have called for a cessation of the violence, but so far there has been little indication that peace might be at hand. France has called for a meeting of the foreign ministers of EU member states in Paris on Tuesday evening to discuss the situation. German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier spoke with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on the phone Monday evening and pushed for an immediate cessation of hostilities. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said that the blame for the violence lies squarely with Hamas.

Juan Cole has probably the most definitive and even-handed analysis at Informed Consent. On the parity of the Israeli attack:

Israel blames Hamas for primitive homemade rocket attacks on the nearby Israeli city of Sederot. In 2001-2008, these rockets killed about 15 Israelis and injured 433, and they have damaged property. In the same period, Gazan mortar attacks on Israel have killed 8 Israelis.

Since the Second Intifada broke out in 2000, Israelis have killed nearly 5000 Palestinians, nearly a thousand of them minors. Since fall of 2007, Israel has kept the 1.5 million Gazans under a blockade, interdicting food, fuel and medical supplies to one degree or another. Wreaking collective punishment on civilian populations such as hospital patients denied needed electricity is a crime of war.

The Israelis on Saturday killed 5% of all the Palestinians they have killed since the beginning of 2001! 230 people were slaughtered in a day, over 70 of them innocent civilians. In contrast, from the ceasefire Hamas announced in June, 2008 until Saturday, no Israelis had been killed by Hamas. The infliction of this sort of death toll is known in the law of war as a disproportionate response, and it is a war crime.

And on the current irrational actions by Right-wing leaders in Israel:

The Israeli government appears to have rejected international calls for a 48-hour truce to allow humanitarian aid to reach Gaza. Lack of electricity, fuel, medicine and even food is threatening to create an even deep crisis there than during the Israeli blockade that has been in force off and on for the past year.

In fact, an Israeli ship rammed a vessel attempting to deliver medical supplies to Gaza, severely damaging it and endangering the passengers, who included Karl Penhaul of CNN and former congresswoman Cynthia McKinney. The boat, which was in international waters, could easily have sunk.

The fable of David & Goliath seems to have been perverted. Instead of being the modern incarnation of David, Israel seems to be acting like Goliath. Hopefully another David won't use his sling against them.

Well can't you just let it ring a little longer

Anyone who has known me for any length of time knows my computer love is reserved for all things Mac. I've been using Macs since 1985, owned my first in 1990, and am typing one one now. I do use PCs when I have to, but using a Mac is like wearing my own comfortable clothes.

Apple has long been considered a progressive company, not only technologically, but socially. Heck, they even donated $100,000 to the recent No on Pro. 8 campaign here in CA. But this really makes me sad, and is hardly progressive:

Walmart has started to sell the iPhone 3G at nearly 2,500 Walmart stores beginning Sunday, December 28, 2008. The retailer is offering the black 8 GB iPhone 3G model with the price of $197 and the 16 GB black or white model for $297, with a new two-year service agreement from AT&T or qualified upgrade.

Damn. Hardly surprising, I guess. Profit transcends ideology for most companies. And for some other allegedly progressive folks too, who felt a need 2 years ago to get in bed with awful Walmart:

Don Henley is famous for his green causes and bad temper. Wal-Mart is famous for hyper capitalism and exploitation of its workers. What do these two parties have in common? Well they are now in business together, probably for the rest of Henley’s life.

An announcement on October 18 claimed that The Eagles are giving Wal-Mart an exclusive on their upcoming recordings that will be made and released sans major label.

Bastards. All of them.

Hope's Monkey Trial

Well, they don't make 'em like that no more, Not since nineteen seventy four. Big cars.

(Heather Myles-Big Cars)

Mark Steyn unleashes a big can of Teh Stoopid™, while trying to make Obama look foolish. He starts with this Obama quote:

"We can't just keep driving our SUVs, eating whatever we want, keeping our homes at 72 degrees at all times regardless of whether we live in the tundra or the desert and keep consuming 25 percent of the world's resources with just 4 percent of the world's population, and expect the rest of the world to say, 'You just go ahead, we'll be fine.'"

It appears that Steyn has embellished the quote. Here's the original from Agence France Presse including the next sentence ol' Markie conveniently left out:

"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK," Obama said.

"That's not leadership. That's not going to happen," he added.

Hard to disagree with, IMO. Yet after his distortion of the quote, Steyn feel compelled to translate for the rubes:

If I understand then Sen. Obama's logic, in a just world Americans would be 4 percent of the population and consume 4 percent of the world's resources. And in these past few months we've made an excellent start toward that blessed utopia: Americans are driving smaller cars, buying smaller homes, giving smaller Christmas presents.

And yet, strangely, President-elect Barack Obama doesn't seem terribly happy about the Obamafication of the U.S. economy. He's proposing some 5.7 bazillion dollar "stimulus" package or whatever it is now to "stimulate" it back into its bad old ways.

Clearly Mark, you don't understand Pres.-elect Obama's logic, or you wouldn't misstate it so blatantly. Jeebus, where to begin.

First, nobility is always overthrown. It's called revolution. And America has acted like global nobility for several years, and we can't afford to any longer. We've told the world, and our own citizens to 'eat cake' one too many times. Or hadn't you noticed? Because the entitlement of the Right-wing economists, pundits, de-regulators, and money lenders has worked out so well for us.

We've lost our manufacturing base, shipped millions of jobs to former third-world, now second-world countries thereby building their middle classes, and ruined the housing market. All under the watch of the Right. Since the start of the ruinious Reagan years, America's fiscal soundness has continually devalued until the dollar and its image are nearly worthless.

But the stimulus package you bitch about, done correctly, will save jobs. Ulike the fantastically larger bail-out given to Wall St., which will only save the jobs of hedge fund managers. I'm guessing you thought that one was OK.

Bastard.