A remedy for hip-hop   ¶ 2:19 PM 0 comments

  Count on this Bush Iraq Speech: By The Numbers   ¶ 4:04 PM 0 comments

  Bush approval ratings   ¶ 3:32 PM 0 comments

  Man, that CIA sure is smart Iraq May Be Prime Place for Training of Militants, C.I.A. Report Concludes   ¶ 11:45 AM 0 comments

  Recruiting down again

"Elsewhere, the Pentagon said that military recruiting was down for the third straight month because potential recruits are running faster than the recruiters."

http://www.borowitzreport.com/archive_rpt.asp?rec=1157&srch=

  ¶ 11:07 AM 0 comments

  Support for the war: enlisting? I think about enlisting a lot. Both on a macro, society-wide level, and a personal one. I grew up assuming that, if my country ever needed me, I would enlist. I can't say I even questioned that belief too much -- both of my grandfathers were Marines (the older served in WWII in the Pacific and the younger in the Korean War) and it seemed natural. My father was never drafted during Vietnam; he was on the younger side of the draft pool, and probably would've not passed the physical anyway. There was a clear distinction in my mind there: my grandfathers went, because they had to, it was absolutely expected of men of their era; my dad wasn't needed and wasn't called.

So where are we now? Many left-wing bloggers are calling for Republicans to enlist, which, yes, makes sense. There are so many fucking chickenhawks out there, the delusional Believers who still think the war is going well, Bush is spreading freedom like it's cream cheese on a hot and crusty New York bagel. And, enlistment is plummeting. The Army needs people. They want the Army to be able to do its job. They should enlist. Bottom line.
But what about me? I didn't support the war. Certainly don't now. But as I see it, we created a massive nest/magnet for violent, radical Islamists in this country, destroyed any sense of security/stability there, and now have to effectively with that situation. Yes, I want our troops home, but seriously, how is that even possible right now? If we pull out there will be such a goddamn power vaccum, and the radicals will be able to expand the network of camps, training facilities, and ammunition dumps they already have there. That will certainly destabilize the region even more. So we need to stay, right? That's what they mean by quagmire, I suppose.
But, the most important point for me, I think, is that technically, yes, I think we need to keep troops there. The Army needs troops. Does the Army need me?

I'm calming myself in the way many in our not-in-my-backyard society do: I tell myself it's not a critical situation yet, and I never supported this war anyway. But, the way things are going, those arguments might not matter much longer.  ¶ 9:40 PM 2 comments

  The future of US soccer looks a lot like the past
  ¶ 3:04 PM 0 comments

  Mission creep   ¶ 2:59 PM 0 comments

  It's easy to forget he's a mass murderer...

"He was like, 'You gotta find a good woman. Not too smart, not too dumb. Not too old, not too young. In the middle. One that can cook and clean. Then you thank her, and you go...' And Saddam smiled and made the gesture of bending a woman over and spanking her, as if to say: This is how you keep her in line," one soldier said.

President Bush and his father, former President George H. W. Bush, are "no good," while former President Bill Clinton was "OK," Saddam told his captors. The former president led a U.N.-coalition that defeated Saddam in the 1991 Gulf War after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.

 

  ¶ 9:28 AM 0 comments

  The 3rd Annual Nigerian Email Conference   ¶ 4:57 PM 0 comments

  Take that to the bank... Wow, there is this guy who was a very prolific sperm donor for the (supposed) #1 sperm bank in the nation in the late 80s and 90s. His wife was infertile and he wanted to "live on in the gene pool" or something like that so he really got busy donating sperm. Every week for years. When he stopped donating he left a letter saying any kids he fathered could contact him. Read the article, interesting story.
Sperm Whale:
  ¶ 3:25 PM 0 comments

  Music: Diamond Nights I know absolutely nothing about this band except:

• They have an LP coming out in August
• This song is amazing
• They are playing the Siren Festival at Coney Island in July
  

  ¶ 12:10 PM 0 comments

  The future of US soccer Well, one would hope for results like this next year in Germany:



After beating Argentina and Egypt 1-0 each and tying Germany, the US takes first place in Group D of the under-20 World Cup in Holland and moves on to the knockout round. Could this just be the opening act for the US Men's National Team next year in Germany?

The Metrostars have a new, well-known general manager who has promised to shake things up. Good for fans like me, I think.  ¶ 11:20 AM 0 comments

  Uzbek Ministries in Crackdown Received U.S. Aid Promoting freedom?

The United States has worked closely with Uzbekistan, a corrupt and autocratic state with a chilling human rights record, in the fight against international terrorism. It has also tried to professionalize the Uzbek military, improve its border security and help secure materials that could be used in nuclear, chemical or biological weapons - areas of engagement that American officials say are of clear national interest.

But such policies can backfire, improving the martial abilities of units that commit crimes against Uzbek citizens, and associating the United States with repression in the eyes of Uzbek people and the Islamic world. Uzbekistan is an overwhelmingly Muslim country with severe restrictions on freedoms of worship and expression.

  ¶ 11:13 AM 0 comments

  Uzbekistan, Democracy, and the War on Terror More than two years into a failed war in Iraq, very few people haven't seen this picture:

There he is, our SecDef, with his then buddy Saddam, both of them happy to have US arms on their way to Iraq. Sure, less than a decade later Saddam (using many of those weapons) would invade Kuwait and thus shift the whole geopolitical landscape of the region. And we all know how the story goes, leading us right into the quagmire where we find ourselves today.

But what about this picture?

Who is Rummy's new playmate? Did he get some new weapons, too? Perhaps he is working hard on behalf of Bush the Democratizer, spreading the seed of freedom throughout some region of the world? Or perhaps he is a great believer in free trade, ready to open his domestic market to US business?

Or perhaps not.

As many may know, he is Islam Abduganievich Karimov, President of Uzbekistan. A report by Human Rights Watch notes that Karimov is not exactly a democratically elected leader. Google his name and you will see that he is a brutal dictator, much like Saddam Hussein, who will stop at nothing to maintain his hold on power and to destroy any voice of opposition.

So why was Rummy meeting with him? The War on Terror, of course. Yes, Karimov, needing outside backing for his dictatorship, and also struggling to suppress Islamists within his own country, was happy to open up old Soviet airbases in his country for US use (particularly relating to combat in Afghanistan), and to become Bush's partner in the global war. Notice the convenient strategic location of Uzbekistan:


Only, a funny thing happened on the way to Iraq, and the earlier US casus belli of weapons of mass destruction evaporated, only to be replaced by "democratization of the region." But what of Dictator Karimov? Well, he's having some trouble lately, and he has responded as any dictator would: send in the troops, destroy the opposition, and hope the ship doesn't spring a leak.

Realizing the instability in the country, the US has pulled out all non-essential diplomatic staff. However, the Washington Post today unleashes a major article on behind the scenes negotiations for a permanent US base in the country. Recent events have thrown a bit of a wrench in the plan...

How can Bush preach Democracy for Some, Dictatorship for Others, if Freedom for All is the in thing for him this spring? The article notes some of the disputes between State and Defense on this issue, and you know what? There is plenty more to come. This is the problem with making up your justification for war as you go along. The War on Terror is not about freedom, it is not about democratization. The War in Iraq, which actually works counter to the War on Terror in that is has created a new "terrorist nest" conveniently located in the Middle East, is not about democratization either, and we all know that. The US is acting in its own strategic interest, and there is nothing wrong with that per se. However, with the combination of setting a new precedent for unilateralism and ever changing its justification for war, the Bush administration has created a dangerous new world order, in which countries can act anytime they feel threatened by "terrorists" (and we all know how far that definition can stretch). Furthermore, the concept of freedom and the reality of democracy has been cheapened to a level where, coming from the Mouth of Bush, they mean nothing.

The US has thus lost its position as a moral and ethical leader in the world. The new world order is left to be defined and reshaped at the whim of individual actors, and the US can say nothing. After all, as we have taken down an Old Dictator Friend, we have created a new one in Karimov. What will be our justification for overthrowing him once he turns on us?
  ¶ 10:24 AM 0 comments