Some of it whacky

I have a problem with charlatans who steal defense dollars, who are draining the integrity of science and the credibility of our national defense. The linked article:

Pentagon Spends $78 Billion a Year on Weapons and Space Research, Some of it Whacky,

says that about 10 billion (of 78 billion) a year goes to fringe science like "gay bombs" and psychic teleportation.

In her book "Imaginary Weapons," military expert Sharon Weinberger writes that the federal government is spending taxpayer money on war technology at a pace of about $50,000 per second. -- abc news

So the tab for charlatanism is about $6,000 per second! You can buy a lot of bulletproof vests with that.

Whither the Purple Digits

A huge disappointment -- Nat Parry at Consortiumblog

"The Iraqi government is a huge disappointment," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told CNN'S Late Edition on Sunday.

"So far, they've not been able do anything they promised on the political side," the Kentucky Republican said, citing the Iraqis' failure to pass a new oil revenue bill, hold local elections and dismantle the former Baath Party of Saddam Hussein. "It's a growing frustration."

"Republicans overwhelmingly feel disappointed about the Iraqi government," he added. -- Reuters

RIP -- Kurt Vonnegut

I feel and think much as you do, care about many of the things you care about, although most people do not care about them. You are not alone. -- Kurt Vonnegut

Kurt Vonnegut is a lion in my philosophical life.


Favorite Works:

• Cat's Cradle
• Slaughterhouse Five
• The Sirens of Titan
• Player Piano
• . . . and everything else

And so it goes.

Survivors include kilgore trout

Why are we holding Kurdistan?

Nation building anyone? More to come.

"Not all of Iraq is like Baghdad" -- Zalmay Khalilzad

Sanandaj

I am, as an Irishman and as a logician, not in favor of partitioning countries to cover up bad nation building or failed imperialism, but I have to wonder why the US is allowing Kurdistan to be held in to the current abortive version of iraq-oidia. Are we doing favors for our lukewarm ally, Turkey? Are we using kurds for bait in the "democratization" of iraq? Are we using kurds as a human shield until we can set up permanent bases in their confines? Have we promised their oil to some other faction? Have we promised their oil to some cronies of bushco?

Here's a link to Kurdistani news. Here's a link to blogs on Kurdistan.

Which way to the front?

Cunning Realist nails it again. When will our-war-prez and our-war-prez-wannabee be able to answer this simple question?

Coincidentally, I am reading The Assassin's Gate: America in Iraq by George Packer. Dubya and straight-talk are excused somewhat since apparently no one has known the answer during the period from March 2003 to the present. Dick cheney has known an answer at various times, but there seems to be no correlation to the facts on the ground.

Holy Mismatched Mustache

john bolton was on c-span this morning (with the beguiling greta wodele ).

Astonishingly, I found myself agreeing with him on 3 issues:

• We should withdraw (his word) from (the territory fka) iraq as soon as the surge is over, since we have no business in its civil war
  
• we should not pay 22% of all un membership assessments; we should pay only for those programs we are willing to sponsor
  
• the so-called noko agreement is only window dressing, as has been done before, changing nothing but the balance of kim's bank accounts.

It also looks like he is now a richard clark type loose cannon in bushco.

Where in the World?

WaPo: Intelligence Officials Offer Grim Assessment of Security

The new national intell guy, john mcconnell (any relation to mitch?) gave the nat intell estimate today on c-span in front of the levin-warner committee of the senate.

It sounded like a very negative scorecard in the WOT, comparing 2005 to 2006, and projecting 2007.

So I wanted to think about a more detailed breakdown -- see the list of sovereign nations at the link below, and tell us which ones you believe were better off in 2006 than 2005, and which will be better off in 2007.
Link: Wikipedia's List of Countries

Here's the only one I could extract, north korea (and maybe not even them).

Gallows humorously, the part of mexico that is here, is doing better every year.

A Hypothetical Election

pangloss:
We need to elect a new world leader.
Here are facts about the candidates. Who would you vote for?

Candidate A.

Associates with crooked politicians, and consults with astrologists.
He's had two mistresses. He also chain smokes and drinks 8 to 10 martinis a day.

Candidate B.

He was kicked out of office twice, sleeps until noon, used opium in
college and drinks a quart of whiskey every evening.

Candidate C.

He is a decorated war hero. He's a vegetarian, doesn't smoke, drinks an occasional beer and never cheated on his wife.

But wait! FDR is A, B is Churchill, and C is Hitler.



pyrrho:
Hitler had a mistress and was very much into the occult. He got counsel from astrologers and psychics.

forelle:
Partial truths are the most devastating lies. By leaving out the critical information, we can make black into white, and day into night. Watch.

It is all colors. Black or white? All colors reflected = white, all colors absorbed = black.

It is when animals are active. Day or night? Diurnal animals, then day; nocturnal animals, then night.


pangloss:
It's what we KNOW about a person that makes them attractive or ugly. Political elections are like dating, you only see the side of a person he or she wants you to see, and then when it's too late, you see the other side. I think this is what we are speaking of, the other side that is not known of the person is what you need to worry about.

forelle:
It's what we KNOW about [proposed wars] that make them attractive or ugly. [Going to war] is like dating, you only see the side of a person he or she wants you to see, and then when it's too late, you see the other side.

In other words, partial truths are the most devastating lies.

Punchy Palookas

Answering growing criticism in the U.S. and Australia, [cheney] defended the Iraq war as a "remarkable achievement" . . .

In oz this week, I suppose he feels no need to tell the truth in the hinterlands, but wait, he feels no need in the u.s.a!

The line on punchy palookas refers to a theme begun on an earlier post here. There is a great scene in Pulp Fiction where travolta calls willis palooka, willis says, who you calling palooka, and travolta says, that's right, punchy, I'm calling you, palooka.

Commander in Chief

forelle:
I began to wonder yesterday about the genesis of the head of state becoming commander in chief -- see Wikipedia article

And I have learned a few things:

• george washington and james madison actually appeared in a theatre of combat as president (without a plastic turkey)
• rumsfeld did away with actual military CINCs in 1992
• the powers of THE CINC are moot
• and the war on terror (while not a real war) has been used by bushco to declare invented powers of the oval orifice

See the subhead of the above Wikipedia article on The United States

Molly Ivins -- RIP

"If left to my own devices, I'd spend all my time pointing out that [Bill Clinton]'s weaker than bus-station chili."

"The next time I tell you someone from Texas should not be president of the United States, please, pay attention."

"We are the deciders."

WikiQuote