jules crittenden

Party's Shifted

2007-01-17T09:49:00.000-05:00

...to a new venue:

www.julescrittenden.com

You're a Wienie ...

2007-01-17T01:08:00.000-05:00

... if you haven't had it peeled yet.

Nigel Barley on penis peeling and pain.

"They came in the night and grabbed me, took me outside and tore my shirt off. That annoyed me - you know how hard it is to get a decent shirt in the village - but they were all masked so I didn’t know who it was. Then one of them beat me on the back with those sharp reeds that really cut you and pushed me in the bullrushes - you know the ones whose sting lasts for days. Then they dragged me down to the lake to a muddy bit where the crocodiles live and threw me in the water, shouting that the crocodiles were coming. They held my head under the water till I nearly drowned and something sharp grabbed my leg and when I was hysterical they ran away, laughing. I dragged myself home and collapsed. The cuts all got infected and I couldn’t move for three days. The pain was terrible and I got a fever that nearly killed me. It was a wonderful spiritual experience."

... Anthropologists have been beaten and scarified, circumcised and starved, spat on and rubbed in excrement, all in the name of getting inside the skin of local people, understanding the way they think and feel. Pain is the ultimate proof of seriousness of purpose, of sympathy and empathy, the absolute core of the participant observation that is virtually the only intellectual capital of the subject. It is assumed that people who go to Africa or Asia to study exotic cultures must feel pain as the ultimate "being there." You just know that any anthropologist worth the name who was working on Christianity would absolutely insist on being nailed to a cross.

Yet, as my colleague’s words show, you are not supposed to make too much of it. It was a wonderful experience ... To live amongst a people, suffer pain and hardship at their hands and not love them and their way of life is to be simply an ungrateful tourist who failed to grasp the local viewpoint. You are the equivalent of someone who went to Paris and couldn’t be bothered to go up the Eiffel Tower. I once worked among a people where the central rite of a man’s life was to have his penis peeled for its entire length. It literally sorted the men from the boys. Without undergoing it, you were a snivelling child, wet and smelly, as contemptible as a mere woman. After the transformation, you were a real man, the finest thing God had created and allowed to swagger and swear oaths on the knife of circumcision. I sat up all one night worrying about whether to become a "real" man or - more seriously - a "real" hairy-chested anthropologist. Then, I paid a fine of six bottles of beer to the men to be classed as "honorary circumcised." I still think it is the best deal I ever made.

Wait, there's more.

Then there is the pain of the «natives». That, too, is everywhere. Pain is a resource that is deployed lavishly in human culture. In the Third World, we think immediately of a government monopoly of pain, the torturers in their dark rooms who live hand in glove with military dictatorships and absolutist regimes and deploy their batons, castor oil and electrodes in the loyal service of the state. One day, we smuggly believe, progress will sweep them away and everyone will enjoy universal human rights.

Yet pain is not just an aberration within imperfect nation states. In villages and townships, cattle camps and nomadic encampments, pain is proudly and openly deployed in traditional ways. Boys have their penes cut to open like flowers when they have an erection or drive pins through their noses and tongues. Men slash at their genitals with glass. Girls have their clitores sliced off, their lips pierced and their feet hobbled. Backs and faces and stomachs are pricked and carved and tattooed with blunt nails. People are mutilated and maimed and disfigured.

Human culture drips with blood and inflicted pain and the surprising thing is that most of it is voluntary. For pain is an important cultural resource and even in the West, we are raised in an economy of pain. As a child, I was assured that Christ suffered for me. I was to be redeemed by suffering myself and when I suffered I should accept it and offer up my pain to him. The explanation and colonisation of pain is a principal concern of all religions. I once bought a poignant T-shirt. "Shit happens," it declared. "Catholics say shit happens because of original sin. Jews say shit happens because I don’t love my mother. Protestants say shit happens because I don’t work harder. Hindus say here’s that same old shit coming round again. Buddhists say: What shit?"

-- Anthropologist and pain scholar Nigel Barley.

UPDATE: If you care to comment and/or get your penis peeled, the party's shifted over to www.julescrittenden.com.

Saudis in Iraq?

2007-01-16T23:31:00.000-05:00

The Saudis would very much like us to stay in Iraq. We're holding Iran at bay, and preventing a Sunni bloodbath. We are doing their work for them. Again. Thus far, they've paid lip service to those goals, but reportedly have failed to stop money from flowing to the Sunni insurgents who kill Americans and Shiites, outcomes that do nothing to help us help them.

There is also the matter of the Muslim world's failure to address its own problems. Iraq is a great example.

As much as I would like to see Arab nations step up to the plate and behave responsibly, any Saudi role that is not part of a comprehensive involvement of sufficiently responsible Shia and Sunni Muslim nations would need to be sharply limited to Sunni areas, where they might be useful, considering the amount of baksheesh to Sunni insurgents they represent.

Stratfor.com on the Saudi position (Nov. 30, still relevant today):

Saudi Arabia's top strategic adviser warned Nov. 29 that Riyadh will intervene in Iraq to prevent Iran from gaining a foothold there if the United States withdraws its forces. The only viable option for intervention the Saudis have is to back jihadist forces against the Shiite-dominated government in Baghdad. In the short term, this could benefit both the Saudis and Washington, as it could lessen Iranian influence in Iraq; however, in the long term, it will empower transnational Islamist militants who will threaten both Saudi and U.S. interests.

Saudi Arabia will use money, oil and support for Sunni militants to thwart Iranian efforts to dominate Iraq in the wake of a U.S. military pullout, the kingdom's top strategic adviser wrote in the Nov. 29 edition of the Washington Post. In a blunt op-ed piece, Nawaf Obaid, managing director of the Saudi National Security Assessment Project -- a Riyadh-based government consultancy -- acknowledged that such a move on Riyadh's part could precipitate a regional war, but wrote, "So be it: The consequences of inaction are far worse."

So the Saudis are interested in stepping in. I'd like to hear from anyone who knows anything about the Saudi military. While their police and special ops have been aggressive and effective on al Qaeda in Riyadh in recent years, I'd be very curious to know what thoughts people who are directly familiar with them have about their potential usefulness, lack thereof or potential for hindrance is in Iraq.

GlobalSecurity.org on the Saudi Arabian National Guard. Apparently not weekend warriors, sound somewhat squared away and it sounds like you want to keep them away from the Shia.

GlobalSecurity's take on the Saudi regular army, less enthusiastic.

Meanwhile, the UK Telegraph's view of Iran in Basra, whence the Brits would like to split.

Al Qaeda headed for Diyala. So says Pajamas Media, as Omar had said earlier. This means a predictable game of whack-a-mole for the surge force. Allowing them to lie low is not an option.

Gateway totes up who's with us and who's with them on the Bush surge plan.

Paks attack

2007-01-16T22:29:00.001-05:00

Pakistan whacks al-Qaeda on the Afghan border. The heat has been on Pakistan. As wonderful as it is to see them take out several terrorist compounds, Pakistan remains a marginally productive partner who, as Gates noted, needs to do a lot more.

Slightly off topic, the 165th anniversary of Gandamak and the last stand of the 44th Foot just passed on Jan. 13, marking the end of the poorly led, ill-fated British 1839 invasion of Afghanistan. Not counting Dr. Bryson's ride into Jallalabad later that day.

Back in 2001, this was one of the incidents everyone pointed to, along with the Russian invasion of 1979, crying quagmire before it started. Entirely different situations, cautionary in the sense that no Afghan adventure should be entered lightly. Nor Iraqi, it would appear. Our Afghan war, though its had its missteps and setbacks, shows no signs of going the way of either of those. Yet.

UPDATE: change of venue to www.julescrittenden.com. Come check out the new site.

Iranian Logic

2007-01-16T09:04:00.000-05:00

Stratfor.com examines Iranian support for Sunni insurgents and posits it is part of a two-pronged strategy: use Sunnis to keep the U.S. tied down, while keeping the heat off Iran's primary proxies, the Shiite militias, while Iran strengthens them. But it is a dangerous game that provides openings for the United States:

Iran's primary militant assets in Iraq are Shiite militias and unaffiliated gunmen. But Iran's support for the Iraq insurgency is not limited to its Shiite allies. Tehran also has been providing support to segments of the Sunni insurgency. Though it might sound like a contradiction for Shiite Iran to support Sunni groups in Iraq, it is not unprecedented -- and there is a certain logic behind the groups the Iranians choose to support.

... By offering support in the form of training, weapons and logistics to these groups, Iran has been able to influence Sunni militants and encourage attacks that suit its interests. Such groups are willing to accept assistance from wherever it may come in order to enhance their own positions within the insurgent movement, and are unlikely to become Iranian proxies. They have their own agendas, which they see as being served through cooperation with Iran. Some of these groups feel that the United States is a far greater threat than Iran, while others simply want access to the sophisticated technology the Iranians have to offer.

... Iranian support for Sunni militants will further complicate an already complex insurgency, making it all the more difficult for U.S. and Iraqi forces to contain it. It will also create suspicions and rifts among various Sunni groups that will cause intra-Sunni violence. On the other hand, the situation provides an opportunity for Washington to drive a wedge between the Iranians and their Iraqi Shiite allies by showing that Tehran has actually been backing their enemies. This is why Iran has tried to encourage the Sunni militants it supports to focus on U.S. and other non-Shiite targets.

UPDATE: change of venue to www.julescrittenden.com. Come check out the new site.

Wind direction

2007-01-16T08:12:00.000-05:00

UPDATE: change of venue to www.julescrittenden.com. Come check out the new site.

Great news for those who like to govern by poll. USA Today: Americans 'more pessimistic' after Bush's Iraq speech.

"President Bush's address to the nation last week outlining a 'new way forward' in Iraq failed to move public opinion in support of his plan to increase U.S. troop levels and left Americans more pessimistic about the likely outcome of the war," USA TODAY Washington Bureau Chief Susan Page writes this afternoon.

She adds that "in a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken Friday through Sunday, more than 6 of 10 back the idea of a non-binding congressional resolution expressing opposition to Bush's plan to commit an additional 21,500 U.S. troops to Iraq."

• 47% said it is "certain" or "likely" the U.S. will "win" in Iraq, vs. 50% who said that before Bush's speech.

• 49% said it is "unlikely" the U.S. will win or "certain" it will not, vs. 46% who said that before Bush's speech.

• 29% said the president does have a "clear plan" for handling the situation in Iraq, vs. 25% who said that before the speech.

• 69% said the president does not have a "clear plan," vs. 72% who said that before the speech.

So Americans responding to whatever kind of questions USA Today put in front of them don't like Bush's plan. Why would they? They're on an intravenous "abandon all hope" drip, with tsking docs around the deathbed offering up disaster prognoses.

• 21% said Democrats in Congress have a "clear plan" for Iraq, vs. 25% who said that before the speech.

• 75% said Democrats in Congress do not have a "clear plan" for Iraq, vs. 66% who said that before the speech.

OK. More people think Bush has a clear plan now than before the speech, and fewer people think Congress does. But what Democratic plan is that 21 percent talking about?

There are also a couple of questions they apparently forgot to ask.

If the United States follows the Democratic plan for Iraq, do you believe:

(a) Iraq will descend into greater chaos and violence, destabilizing the entire region.

(b) Iraq will return to the Eden-like state of peace and security enjoyed under Saddam Hussein, destabilizing the entire region.

(c) Don't give a damn.

Post-abandonment, Iran will:

(a) see the error of its ways, stop sponsoring violence in Iraq and Lebanon and abandon its nuclear weapons program.

(b) launch a large-scale bloodbath in Iraq, install a Shiite puppet, effectively control a large share of the world's oil supply and menace the region with its nuclear weapons.

(c) don't give a damn.

Chicago Boyz on sports vs. news reporting:

"A reporter who consistently attempted to sabotage the local team’s game plans would quickly be looking for work in a different discipline. Fans have too much invested in their teams to let that kind of behaviour continue.

Thus my broader view for the day — America will get the MSM it wants when America takes its national security as seriously as its football."

Don Surber on the UN's Iraqi death estimate. And other stuff.

A Rifle In Every Pot

2007-01-16T08:06:00.000-05:00

Glenn Reynolds in support of mandating gun ownership. Cuts down on burglaries. Yeah, but what about the right not to own a gun. And the right to get burglarized. I thought Glenn was a libertarian.

Heads You Lose

2007-01-16T01:12:00.000-05:00

UPDATE: change of venue to www.julescrittenden.com. Come check out the new site.

Washington Post headline:

Iraqi Hangings Bring More Denunciations
Head of Hussein's Half Brother Is Severed

Both halves of Saddam's half-brother taken to Auja, the family's bucolic retreat.

I'm beginning to think that if you don't draw denunciations in this world, you're probably not really doing anything worthwhile. Here are some reax:

"We knew that he would be executed and would join a parade of heroes, but Maliki, why did you behead him?" asked Salam al-Tikriti, 41, a relative of Ibrahim. "Why did you insult his body? Are you still afraid of him even after he is dead? We will cut your heads the same way that you are cutting the heads of the heroes of Iraq."

Other reviews:

Alaa Makki, a Sunni legislator, cut the baby in half, as it were: Justice was done but the manner of the execution was disturbing.

"Everybody knows that when you hang people, rarely the head will be decapitated from the body," he said, criticizing what he called a "revenge on the body."

Elsewhere, the Moroccan Human Rights Association said they were a "criminal political assassination masterminded by American imperialism." I'd be curious to know what statements they issued about Saddam during his regime, if anyone out there has been paying attention.

A U.N. spokesman expressed regret that Secretary General Ban Ki Moon's request to spare the two men's lives was not granted. Not about the head-body separation issue, however.

Jose Manuel Barroso, president of the European Commission, the European Union's executive arm, said after the hangings that he would back an Italian initiative for a worldwide moratorium on capital punishment under U.N. auspices. Also apparently silent on the head thing.

You Say Ug, I say Ugh ... Let's Call The Whole Thing Off

2007-01-15T23:46:00.000-05:00

Romanian skull dated to plus 35,000 years could be the product of Human-Neanderthal intercave love. I'm guessing this kid got beat up a lot. By humans and Neanderthals. Because cave children can be cruel.

UPDATE: change of venue to www.julescrittenden.com. Come check out the new site.

Heads Up, Iran!

2007-01-15T23:13:00.000-05:00

UPDATE: change of venue to www.julescrittenden.com. Come check out the new site.

Gates says all that stuff moving into the Gulf is a message to Iran. We're not tied down in Iraq. UK Guardian:

The defence secretary, Robert Gates, told reporters that the decision to deploy a Patriot missile battalion and a second aircraft carrier to the Gulf in conjunction with a "surge" of troops in Iraq was designed to show Iran that the US was not "overcommitted" in Iraq.

... His remarks followed tough comments on Iran at the weekend from other senior US officials. The vice-president, Dick Cheney, accused Iran of "fishing in troubled waters inside Iraq", while the national security adviser, Stephen Hadley, said the US was "going to need to deal with what Iran is doing inside Iraq".
Such remarks, following the prospect of "hot pursuit" raids into Iran as raised by George Bush in his televised address last week, have fuelled speculation that the US is softening up the American public for possible action against Tehran.

Works for me.

The increasingly confrontational pose struck by the US is a repudiation of one of the key recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, which called for the start of a dialogue with Iran and Syria in an effort to extricate the US from Iraq.

Bummer for them.

Mr Gates, who as recently as 2004 publicly called for diplomatic engagement with Iran, said the situation was now different. In 2004, Iran was concerned by the presence of US forces on its eastern and western borders, in Iraq and Afghanistan, but its behaviour had changed.

Not really, but whatever.

"The Iranians clearly believe that we are tied down in Iraq, that they have the initiative, that they are in position to press us in many ways," he said. "They are doing nothing to be constructive in Iraq at this point."

"And so the Iranians are acting in a very negative way in many respects. My view is that when the Iranians are prepared to play a constructive role in dealing with some of these problems then there might be opportunities for engagement."

Otherwise, opportunities for engagement of the destructive variety.

Blue Crab: it's bad enough Ahmadinejad has an Allied fleet crusing offshore, now he's got trouble at home. More from the UK Guardian.

By Fighting Them and Killing Them

2007-01-15T22:55:00.000-05:00

Bill Ardolino's interview with an Iraqi cop in Fallujah.

INDC: What would happen if America left Iraq and Fallujah right now? What would happen?

Mohammed: "It's going to be a disaster."

INDC: How so?

Mohammed: "There will be revenge from everybody. And now they are trying to (form the) Islamic Emirate right here."

INDC: What do you think can be done to stop the insurgents?

Mohammed: "By fighting them back and killing them."

Read the whole thing. h/t patterico.

Michael Yon in Mosul on Pundit Radio.

"Iraq is winnable."

Coup

2007-01-15T22:12:00.000-05:00

UPDATE: change of venue to www.julescrittenden.com. Come check out the new site.

If they aren't talking about it, they should be.

It is increasingly clear that Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki will continue to obstruct U.S. efforts to take down the greatest threat to stability in Iraq, Moqtada al-Sadr and his Mahdi Army. At present, the U.S. military is in fact strengthening al-Sadr in Baghdad with attacks on Sunni insurgents in the Haifa Street area. Nothing wrong with taking down Sunni insurgents, but not if al-Sadr and his militia are allowed to survive and benefit from it.

The current US military leadership under Gen. Casey, now handing off to Gen. Petraeus, is operating in Baghdad with its hands reportedly tied by a joint command by committee of US and Iraqi forces, in which US officers say al-Maliki and his generals are obstructing US plans for the surge.

If that command structure is allowed to continue under Petraeus, it has to be brought under control. Perhaps by the expedient of smile, nod and ignore, while US forces proceed with actions to provoke al-Sadr and compromise al-Maliki.

Because al-Maliki, like al-Sadr, has shown he is part of the problem. He has chosen to align himself with a murderous, destabilizing, Iranian-backed criminal element. He is not acting in the interest of the Iraqi people, he is acting in the interest of a violent faction. If Iraq is to have any chance at security, al-Maliki has to be removed from power.

Late last year, there was a lot of talk about forming a new moderate governing coalition, described in news reports as a parliamentary coup that would sideline al-Maliki and al-Sadr. Pro-US Shiite cleric Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, an al-Sadr rival, was the power behind the scenes of this effort. It failed and dropped out of the news in December.

We can only assume the CIA, the State Department and the US military are actively exploring parliamentary coup options, and with the surge, trying to set favorable terms for such a coup to take place.

The administration's democratic ideals and objectives prevent direct involvement in a military coup, or any overt links to one. It is unclear how much support there might be within the Iraqi forces, actively controlled by al-Maliki. Probably none within the police, some within the army. It could provoke open civil war, but that might not be the worst thing, if it gave the US military the opportunity it needs to destroy al-Sadr's militia.

Baghdad has been rotten with coup rumors ever since Iraq's new government took over. Speculation now is that the Bush administration's aggressive new strategy, in addition to targeting the Shiite militias and Sunni insurgents, also targets al-Maliki.

When Bush announced his strategy last week, the NYT's John Burns added at the end of his Iraqi reaction article:

A Shiite political leader who has worked closely with the Americans in the past said the Bush benchmarks appeared to have been drawn up in the expectation that Mr. Maliki would not meet them. “He cannot deliver the disarming of the militias,” the politician said, asking that he not be named because he did not want to be seen as publicly criticizing the prime minister. “He cannot deliver a good program for the economy and reconstruction. He cannot deliver on services. This is a matter of fact. There is a common understanding on the American side and the Iraqi side.”

Views such as these — increasingly common among the political class in Baghdad — are often accompanied by predictions that Mr. Maliki will be forced out as the crisis over the militias builds. The Shiite politician who described him as incapable of disarming militias suggested he might resign; others have pointed to an American effort in recent weeks to line up a “moderate front” of Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish political leaders outside the government, and said that the front might be a vehicle for mounting a parliamentary coup against Mr. Maliki, with behind-the-scenes American support.

Munir Chalabi, a London-based Iraqi analyst associated with Iraqi Democrats Against Occupation, citing the ISG's call to end de-Baathification, says the US and British are planning a "Baathist coup." He predict the dissolution or suspension of the Iraqi parliament in the first three to six months of this year. Chalabi's article has a strong air of conspiracy theory paranoia around it and would require the Bush administration to entirely and public abandon its democracy project.

But among the big questions that remain to be answered are, is the Bush administration willing to do that, and accept yet another massive public relations blow that could have severe political consequences? Or can a change of leadership in Iraq be handled in a manner that avoids an Iraqi constitutional crisis, whether by parliamentary coup or a suspension of elected government that does not abandon it? In either case, who will step into power, with what public legitimacy and what degree of reliability? What then is the path to democracy in the Middle East, or is that agenda abandoned? What are the risks and benefits? Open civil war has its benefits -- freedom of military action -- as well as its drawbacks in greater potential for innocent bloodshed and uncertain outcomes. Does the United States have sufficient forces to deal with a generalized conflict in relatively short order and bring stability that might make up for a lack of democratic niceties?

It is a highly volatile situation, but that is nothing new Iraq. It was highly volatile before we got there. And we've already established, from the invasion to last week's announcement of the new strategy, that it is not US policy to handle it gingerly. But unless there is a dramatic change soon in the behavior of Nouri al-Maliki, he has to go.

Trouble in Paradise

2007-01-15T12:16:00.000-05:00

John Burns at the NYT reports that Iraqi government officials are balking at aspects of the U.S. surge plan. Sounds like time for another "Come to Jesus" chat with al-Maliki, and similar chats all the way down the line.

... the signs so far have unnerved some Americans working on the plan, who have described a web of problems — ranging from a contested chain of command to how to protect American troops deployed in some of Baghdad’s most dangerous districts — that some fear could hobble the effort before it begins.

First among the American concerns is a Shiite-led government that has been so dogmatic in its attitude that the Americans worry that they will be frustrated in their aim of cracking down equally on Shiite and Sunni extremists, a strategy President Bush has declared central to the plan.

“We are implementing a strategy to embolden a government that is actually part of the problem,” said an American military official in Baghdad involved in talks over the plan. “We are being played like a pawn.”

OK, how about playing them back. Force the issue. Forget the niceties and provoke al-Sadr. Take a page from al-Maliki's book: Smile, nod, then do what you were going to do anyway.

Dan Riehl says give al-Maliki 60-to-90 days to get with the program, or start the pullout. I wouldn't throw al-Maliki into that briarpatch. The stakes are too high to let him get away with it.

Politburo Diktat 2.0 is eager to start the surrender festivities.

Fareed Zakaria at Newsweek quoting LTC Steven Duke: The Mahdi Army "is sitting on the 50-yard line eating popcorn, watching us do their work for them." Again, the stakes are too high to let a Shiite-dominated Iraqi government that is in bed with al-Sadr call the shots. Time for tough love.

Anbar Dividend

2007-01-15T11:38:00.000-05:00

... is also the result of long, hard bloody work in Anbar, by and large not reflected in news reports but brought to us periodically by embedded bloggers such as Michael Yon, Bill Roggio, and now Bill Ardolino.

USA Today reports that recruiting for Iraqi forces is up in Anbar. Via Powerline.

The U.S. military is reporting a dramatic and unexpected increase in the number of police recruits in Anbar province, the center of Sunni insurgent activity in Iraq.
In the past two weeks, more than 1,000 applicants have sought police jobs in Ramadi, the provincial capital. Eight hundred signed up last month in Ramadi, said Army Maj. Thomas Shoffner, operations officer for the 1st Brigade, 1st Armored Division.

Those figures compare with only "a few dozen" recruits in September, the U.S. military said.

Reports have been emerging for sometime that the tribal leaders in Anbar are tired of al-Qaeda and want to play ball. As Powerline notes, the news in recent weeks that Bush is making a go of it has to have had an effect. And perhaps, the Sunnis have finally done the math and figured out that in chaos and open warfare, they lose.

Dynasty to Indy

2007-01-15T10:58:00.000-05:00

I'm a total football moron and even I could tell that was a great game. Trainwreck gets back on the rails. All your Pats coverage here.

Happy Martin Luther King Jr. Day

2007-01-15T10:12:00.000-05:00

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

A great man, great words, and great actions that ended great injustices in our nation.

Now I have a dream that we can, four decades later, finally dispense with race-based policies that judge people on the color of their skin, not the content of their character.

Short Rope, Long Drop x 2

2007-01-14T23:35:00.000-05:00

UPDATE: change of venue to www.julescrittenden.com. Come check out the new site.

AP is reporting that Saddam's half-brother and the head of his kangaroo court system have been hanged. They were initially spared so Saddam could have his own special day.

The AP wants to make sure you know that there was some international protest by people who didn't like Saddam being made fun of prior to his drop; also, people who weren't satisfied with his guilt and thought he should keep drawing breath. The AP fails to mention that the predicted outburst of pro-Saddam violence never happened, and that Iraqi street reaction leaned heavily to favorable.

Updates:

Gateway Pundit has art of the pair at trial.

Reuters "Botched Hanging Raises Arab Suspicions." Low safety standards of Iraqi executioners has fatal consequences for Saddam kin.

More Reuters. Cowardly murderers "appeared frightened" as they faced the music.

Reuters turns out to be the mass murderer execution news service of record this morning: Hanging mishap an "Act of God."

Government adviser Bassam al-Husseini said the damage to the body was "an act of God". During his trial for crimes against humanity over the killings of 148 Shi'ites from Dujail, a witness said Barzan's agents put people in a meat grinder.

This article also discusses the tricky intricacies of the executioner's art, giving 'em enough rope to snap the neck without pulling the head off. This clearly calls for an investigation into who caused this man to be killed by an improperly strung noose!

Extended Faith

2007-01-14T23:03:00.000-05:00

Blue Crab just learned his son's tour has been extended. The younger Crab is an Army reservist with a transportation unit in Iraq. Convoy duty.

One of the hardest things for me this past year has been watching the erosion of support for the men and women serving in this war. I remember watching almost the same scenes play out during the Vietnam war. Support flagging at home leading to morale problems, leading to more erosion at home, and on and on in a spiral. The media not helping then or now. And I know it troubles my son and his fellow soldiers. Because they are keeping the faith for those back home.

.... too many are here are growing weary of a war they are not even really fighting.

read the rest.

Richard at Hyscience, who also has a son over there, on the traitors in our midst.

Border Agents Facing Time for Doing Job

2007-01-14T22:26:00.000-05:00

Grassfire.org is circulating a petition for clemency for two Border Patrol agents charged after a apparent exchange of shots with a drug smuggler.

h/t Ingrid

Thank You, Ms. Hess

2007-01-14T21:40:00.000-05:00

UPDATE: change of venue to www.julescrittenden.com. Come check out the new site.

"What happens if we lose?" The question no one in the media ... except me* and a few others, in fairness to us ... is asking.

“If as a reporter you do ask the national security question, all of a sudden you’re carrying Bush’s water.”

Pamela Hess of UPI just pointed out the the Imperial media is naked.

Why is no one asking this question? It is a fundamental tenet of journalism that you have to examine all sides of an issue. This one gets lip service, brief mentions as a nod to fairness to the hated administration and its supporters.

As Hess notes, the media is distracted by the shiny object of the political fight. The major news organizations, with a few exceptions, have not accepted that we are engaged in a necessary war, and are opposed to the Bush administration on this and other issues. Their reporting makes it clear they consider it an unnecessary war within a conflict they believe should be handled as a police matter.

Other ignored facts about the Iraq war.

Had we not invaded Iraq, the sanctions regime would have collapsed by now, and Saddam, like the Iranians, would have an active nuclear weapons program. We would be looking at two murderous regimes in an arms race, not one.

Iraq's ethnic tensions would presumeably still be simmering quietly under Saddam's program of murder and torture. That status quo would last exactly as long as Saddam did. Then, it would explode. Only it would be exploding into open civil war that would make Bosnia look like a picnic, instead of the severely constrained sectarian violence we see today. Syria and Iran would also be involved. We would not be involved. Good, yes?

No. We would have little ability to control and influence events in one of the most critical regions of the world, the one where all the oil is, the one that produces the bulk of the world's terrorism.

These are not hypotheticals. Key elements of the above could still come true. All we have to do is walk away.

*Past posts:

US Tribal Feuds Fuel Iraqi Sectarian Violence

How It Ends

On Reflection

The Betrayal Part

Abandonment With Honor

There's more, but you get the point

Meanwhile, here are some of the others:

Don Surber, herd mentality.

Ed Williams, "What if U.S. just pulled out of Iraq? Conflict might erupt into more than just a civil war between Iraqis"

Breathing In History

2007-01-14T11:16:00.000-05:00

Patterico brings us another great GI writer. Here are Teflon Don's thoughts on breathing the dust-laden air of Iraq.

This region is steeped in history. We walk on it; we breathe it in. Eons of history surround us, infiltrate us, and turn to dust beneath our feet. The ashes of countless cultures, civilizations, and rulers dreams lie under the earth. With each breath, I inhale a few molecules of the dying gasp of Cyrus II, the Persian “Constantine of the East”. In the howling wind I can almost hear the cries of a countless multitude dying on killing grounds that bridge across the ages. The same wind carries the red dust that might yet hold a few drops of blood from the battle at Carrhae- the first, crushing defeat for Rome’s red blooded legions. Under my heel, a speck grinds into dust: the last grain of sand that remains of the Hanging Gardens at Babylon that are now known only in legend. Some of the world’s oldest religions tell us that somewhere in this ancient Cradle of life, God himself breathed on this dust, and it became man, the father of us all. Whatever path we take here, we walk on history.

You literally breathe it and taste it constantly there, and I had the same thoughts, because it tastes exactly like the ashes of death and history and reminds you constantly that you are being absorbed by that history. Don stole a march on me with this one, and he did it beautifully.

You breathe a lot of other things in Iraq. Recent death. Sewage. Some people used say the United States had poisoned the entire nation of Iraq with depleted uranium, and I used to tell people they'd have to live on top of it for days and snort it up their noses for it to have any negative effect. Then, guess what, I got to live on top of it for three days, an area that had been heavily worked over by A-10s, where the air was sickly sweet with recent death.

Regarding romanticizing history and Iraq, a nod of respect to anyone who is over there or has been. But I don't know how you take the romance out of history or Iraq, as terrible as both can be. In "Dispatches," Herr recounts how multiply-wounded war junkie and photog Tim Page, in a wheelchair, with a steel plate in his head, was asked to cooperate on a gritty book that proposed to take the romance out of war. Page got PO'd, and said something to the effect of: "Take the romance out of war? How do you take the romance out of war? Why would you want to take the romance out of war?"

Anyone who has been anywhere near a war can point to situations that sucked the romance right out it. And yet, there it always is.

Classic Support for Troops

2007-01-14T09:54:00.000-05:00

Pinups for Vets. Your calendar here. Thanks for reminding me, Tim.

Here's one for the ladies.

Maybe this will start something. The old-people-getting-naked-for-charity thing is running out of steam. Not a moment too soon.

Tim's readers also moved this into the competitive arena: right-wing babes vs. women of Gaia. I suggest adding a charitable element. Right-wing babes can raise money for wounded GIs. Left-wing babes can raise money for Iranian shaped charges.

You can also support the troops here! In a manner of speaking.

Mahdi Army Went Thataway

2007-01-14T09:18:00.000-05:00

Who said surging troops won't have any effect on sectarian violence?

Mahdi Army out of uniforms, hiding weapons, dismantling checkpoints. Whistling and trying to act normal. Large numbers of Shiite thugs suddenly remembered they need to rearrange the stamp collection now that US troops are enroute to kick Mahdi ass.

This is why they will have to be provoked. Their leaders need to be seized. Their homes need to be raided. So that this persistent criminal Iranian-backed threat to stability in Iraq can be destroyed.

Omar at Iraq the Model says terrorist cells are hightailing it for Diyala province.

Belmont Club notes sneaky acts of war by Iran vs. U.S. Of course, the Iranians like to have other people do their dirty work for them.

Speaking of which, Ace wants to know why the Dems want George Bush to do their dirty work for them.

The shining beacon of democracy in Iraq is burning dim at present, but Bush is accomplishing something else. Dividing and conquering in the Middle East. WSJ.

Woman is the N-word of the World

2007-01-14T01:17:00.000-05:00

Apparently a woman's choice to pursue a career and forgo motherhood is only to be supported if she toes the correct political line. San Francisco lesbians back Barbara Boxer when she "speaks truth to power" by bashing Condoleeza Rice's childlessness.

Boxer, defending herself against critics from the right, said Friday that she was "speaking truth to power" at a Senate hearing Thursday when she confronted the secretary of state -- who is unmarried and childless -- noting that neither she nor Rice will "pay a price" personally for sending more American troops to war.

"I was just saying what I felt," the California Democrat said. She said she would not apologize for the exchange because "I delivered a very strong message and tried to find common ground with her ... and I tried to draw us together, and not apart.''

... Gloria Nieto, a Bay Area activist and former chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee gay and lesbian caucus, said the administration's sharp reaction -- and the heated reaction by conservative media -- was hypocritical and suggested undue sensitivity about Rice's personal status.

She said that White House spokesman Snow is hardly a "defender of feminism'' and that he should realize that "this is what democracy looks like.''

Fair enough. Noted for future reference. Any time you say what you feel, its OK. It's what democracy looks like. Also, speaking truth to power is a great way to find common ground. Makes sense! OK, let's go!

John Lennon said it, turns out he was right. Who would have thought a San Francisco Democrat would be showing us the ugly truth?

Dr Sanity analyzes the problem.

Here's what Rice has to say about it in Jerusalem:

“As two single women,” NBC's Andrea Mitchell shouted as the two were about to walk out of the room, “Do you think that being without children in any way hinders your ability to understand the sacrifices of American families losing their children in war?”

Rice paused, heaved a sigh and turned back to the cameras, a pained expression on her face.

“No,” she said adamantly. “And I also think that being a single woman does not in any way make me incapable of understanding not just those sacrifices, but that nothing of value is ever won without sacrifice.”

A Mother's Pride: The War In My Town

2007-01-14T00:01:00.000-05:00

What would you say if your son, 32 and recently married, told you in December of 2003, as the insurgency heated up in Iraq, that he had just enlisted in the United States Army?

Now he's 35, has a 10-month-old son, and is ... no great surprise ... in Iraq.

How would you feel? Alarmed and terrified, that your flesh-and-blood is on the line in George Bush's great, tragic misadventure in Iraq, when everyone just wants to pull out? Angry?

"I was just filled with pride. He put it to us that it was his duty and he was going," said Marion Beckwith of Marshfield, Mass. Her son, Spec. Bryan Beckwith, is with the 1st Cavalry Division in Baghdad. As a mother, she's frightened. But as a mother and an American, she recognizes that some things come first.

Bryan Beckwith is like a lot of soldiers we only hear occasionally. The ones who enlisted in mid-life, after the invasion of Iraq. I know some others. Their reasons are complex. Bryan's family says he hasn't talked much about it. He didn't drape himself in the flag. He discussed it with his wife for a year, he signed on the line, and then he told his parents.

"He said he was able to, so he should," said his wife Leslie, at home with their 10-month-old son John Charles, named after his grandfathers. "He wouldn't use the word patriotic, but that was what he was trying to say."

A graduate of New Hampshire's Plymouth State College, Bryan had figured out in short order that he didn't like office life. He spent the late 1990s landscaping and working at ski areas to support his new passion. The rugged life, as much life as you can take from it. He hiked the Appalachian Trail and met Leslie, a Delta flight attendant, on the way. Both of them hiked it again, and then the Pacific Crest Trail. Sept. 11 happened, and then the invasion of Iraq. He had met some old soldiers on the trail who talked about the soldier's life. He remembered his own dream of living it.

"We were stunned. He really surprised us," his father, John Beckwith, said about the cal he got in December, 2003. "You worry about what could happen. But I was extremely proud of what he was doing."

You may have read about the alarm some military parents felt last week when they heard about President Bush's aggressive new strategy. The Beckwiths received it with the kind of quiet determination their son has exhibited.

"We'd love to have him home. But even he would think that is not going to work," said John Beckwith, who likes the plan Bush laid out last week and is impressed by Gen. David Petraeus, the man chosen to execute it.

"He wants to complete the mission," Beckwith said about his son. Of pulling out, he said, "It's unthinkable. What would follow?"

Leslie Beckwith has supported her husband all the way, though she doesn't like the war he is a part of, and has never been a fan of Bush and his policies. But of the controversy over Bush's war plan, she said, "I wish they could pull them out, but I'm not sure it would be the right thing."

Marion Beckwith says the president's "heart has always been in the right place ... Congress and a lot of the American people are looking at the shorter picture. The administration is looking at what we need to do to prevent future attacks."

Which is where their son and husband comes in.

Crossposted at www.bostonherald.com.

Postscript: The Beckwiths live about a mile from my house in Marshfield, Massachusetts, and used to be my nextdoor neighbors. I think of them when I hear about how much America hates this war and wants out. I figured it was time the rest of you get to know them. No hoo-ah flag-waving, nothing like that. Just good neighbors that you can rely on. We've had people like that in my town going back to King Phillip's War.

Some Iraq/GWOT developments:

Meet KIA Maj. Mike Mundell, via Solder's Angel. And make sure you visit angel's main page for what you can do.

Jason Dunham earned his Medal of Honor by giving his life to save his friends. By his death, he shows us how one lives one's life.

A Lumberjack in the Desert down a few digits, and due to lose more, but still typing. Blackfive tells you where you can donate.

Bush: "To oppose everything while proposing nothing is irresponsible."

Bush: Toppling Saddam was no mistake.

Gateway on who the US raid in Irbil snagged. Dan Riehl wants American liberals to know what the Iranian Islamists think about them.

WSJ, Daniel Henninger: "The Petraeus command is the overdue beginning of the counterinsurgency."

WaPo: The fight with al-Sadr starts within the ranks of the Iraqi Army.

In the Captain's Quarters, a thoughtful counterpoint to surge.

CO of Marine RCT7 running the worst parts of Anbar describes progress. As you'll recall did Roggio, embedded there.

"I went to Iraq Prepared to Die ..." A soldier's thoughts as he considers signing up again.

"This was how Baghdad looked to me." Mohammed, at the incomparable Iraq the Model.

Ron Rosenbaum at Pajamasmedia talks about Iraq and Cambodia, and the Soviet lies he believed when he was young.

Barcepundit, a small light in a nation that has surrendered to the darkness of terrorism, knows of what he speaks.

Ronery. She's so ronery. The Weekly Standard would have you believe that Hillary has not repudiated her October 2002 vote to invade Iraq and now occupies the lonely middle. But I think she did, and still, Clintonesque, wants it both ways.

Buyer's regret, wanting it both ways, or is McCain just saying too much to the wrong people?

Somalia: America's Boots on the Ground.

I hate to send anyone to my sworn enemy, The Boston Glob, but you have to read this: Dems want to shutter war prisons. I suggest boarding al-Qaeda suspects with Dem Cong.

Talabani: Overcoming sectarian violence is Iraq's job. Terrorism, everyone's job. Thank you, Bush, for the help.

Just go read everything at Castle Argghhh!!! especially if you're a right-wing gun nut.