![]() |
|
Tuesday, February 22, 2005 - snarktip@snarksmith.com Seeking a Few Good Men... Royal Navy to actively recruit gays. --ND [link]Dollar Dolor... South Korea's Centra bank announced yesterday that it will be plowing money into Australian and Canadian dollars, away from U.S. government treasuries. This is terrible news for the U.S., economically and in Iraq. As the fifth-largest holder of U.S. dollars, South Korea is important, but not vital. What's more troublesome is the possibility that other central banks will follow suit. The world's central banks have been getting very nervous about the dollar's declining value. Since currency markets operate on pure supply and demand, if one bank stops buying dollars, they could all sell out quickly in a rush not to be the last one out the door. What happens then? In the worst case, China or Japan lose a pile of money overnight and a worldwide recession begins. Nobody wants this, so all these banks have a strong incentive not to jump ship. Unfortunately, they're also losing a lot of money buying depreciating dollars, and have a stong incentive not to be the last ones to bail out. What would certainly happen if the central banks balk is a federal government budget crisis. If nobody wants to buy dollar-denominated debt, the government is going to have to pay a substantially higher interest rate, not just on the yawning deficit but on the trillions of dollars of debt the U.S. rolls over every year. Because Americans save so very little, if the foreign banks pull out, I really don't know where we'll find the money without offering a very high interest rate. Interest expense at the curret rates is already something like nine percent of the federal budget, even including Social Security, Medicare and defense; if you exclude those, it's something like twenty percent. So if the interest rate the government pays to borrow doubles suddenly, that imposes a huge cash crunch as the debt rolls over, and there will be no good options for dealing with the problem. Bush could raise taxes to slash the deficit, but the combination of high interest rates and tax hikes would stall the economy and probably prompt a recession. Or spending could be cut. But from what? The new Medicare benfit could go, but we haven't even started paying for that yet. Social Security retirement could be deferred five years. The Departments of Agriculture and Education could be cut without much hardship, but that wouldn't go far toward fixing the problem. As far as I can see, operations in Iraq and Afghanistan are the only federal projects that can be cut without severe hardship or turbulent political backlash, and I'm not sure Bush wouldn't rather cut and run than be remembered for ruining the economy. Bush has positioned himself to be squeezed like LBJ. Bin Laden's last tape acknowledged this; it doesn't cost Al Qaeda much to bleed our military fiscally. If foreign banks stop buying dollars, and Americans don't stop their relentless consumer spending overnight, the war in terror will be gravely endangred. --ND [link] Monday, February 21, 2005 - snarktip@snarksmith.com The Gates... Well, I suppose a $21 million signposting of American support for the Ukrainian revolution isn't such a bad idea. Yet the art doesn't quite speak for itself. It's the 'participatory narcissism,' says the New Yorker. Miles and miles of the 'suggestion' of a maze, like something Lars von Trier might try with rats and the scientific method. What should be hanging on a gallery wall is a photo-mosaic of zombified New Yorkers, all moving slow enough for their dogs to stop and piss on Christo's day-glo bases. --MW [link]Now the Lebanese... If Natan Sharansky's Voltairean 'town square' test of a free society has its flaw, it's that a society must first past that test before becoming free in any constitutional or de jure sense. Imagine Tiananmen Square in 1989 without the tanks. By no means would such a demonstration have turned China into a democracy overnight, but it'd have been an unignorable start. Lebanon, after two decades of military occupation by Syria, is now making its case for democracy. And in tones that would put some of the more colorful elements of our own past election cycle to progressive shame. Beirut, like Baghdad, remembers its historical cosmopolitanism. "Enough bloodshed and disasters. It is the 21st century, and people should be able to govern themselves. The situation has become unbearable and we have to regain our country." --MW [link] Famous For Being Famous Overdrive... Posterity can now begin. Dr. Hunter S. Thompson (Hon.? Sic?), not quite sure of his status in the annals of pharmacoliterature, has demapped himself today at age 67. Oh, nothing fancy. Just a nice suburban minimum-caliber gunshot wound to the head. Something the neighbors and conjured Samoan attorneys would approve of. The sheriff's wife gets an extra tab ration for worst fucking on-the-scene obit quote, ever: "[H]e was not going to age gracefully, he was going to go out with a bang. He was tormented." No, sweets. He was flashbacking to quainter, more peaceful time when people who said things like that were held in sexscrow by the Hell's Angels. He got a little messy on the re-entry, is all. And in other I-saved-Latin-what'd-they-ever-do? news, some benevolent soul has hacked -- yes, hacked -- Paris Hilton's T-Mobile Sidekick, distributing the phone numbers and e-mail addresses (guess who's crossheart@hotmail.com) of everyone she's ever gone to second with. Or thought about going to second with. And not in that order. E.g.: "Dave, Super." Thank God he and brother Albert Brooks changed their name from Einstein. Paris family portraits, coming to a Hallmark frame near you. Who the hell invited Burt Reynolds anywhere? Some Australian guy (Russell Crowe maybe) contacted a few of the involuntarily 411-ed C-listers in what can only, under the most pro forma circumstances, be described as "crank" calls. He, the caller, was exceedingly polite each time. Solicitous and legally helpful, in some cases ("No, no, no, Mr. Backstreet Boy. Sorry, Well-Lit Alley Man, is it? I can't do that from this line. You must call us back to get a new cell number.") Now if only he'd put up advertising all over his website, he'd have earned the kind of ill-gotten gains that land a person on a certain someone's corporate-comped replacement rolodex... By the by, being one of those savvy supersleuth blogs you've been hearing so much about lately -- and harboring one collective guilt complex for stealing and not buying, like she requested, Paris's sex video -- we feel it's important to point out that most of the "censored" e-mail addresses here are, well, heiress-easy to decode. Three XXXs surely denotes chromosomal hyper-feminity, and not the exact number of missing letters in the sequence. XXXil.com is self-evidently hotmail.com. Just like XXXintpcs.com is the only place in spacetime that Hear-Me-Now asshole risks losing reception. You can thank us later at snarksmithy@XYYsmith.com. (We have trouble with relationships, cognition, and violence.) Now, Lloyd Grove may or may not choose to honor his gossip obliviousness (the kind he's consciously subscribed to, anyway) and may or may not cover this grossly overexposed twitcapade in tomorrow's Daily News. Whatever happens, it absolutely doesn't matter. Keep in mind the moral of this sordid little tale about privacy and the dangers of listing your gynecologist next to your publicist: Disaffected Warholian indifference is the only text-message emoticon that counts. /:-| Friday, February 18, 2005 - snarktip@snarksmith.com Sideways Dispatches... 1. Today's Wall Street Journal (paid links only; go to the library) has a fourth-column story on Sideways cultists who are stumbling around California's wine country, reciting favorite lines. The article leads with a woman asking the bartender at the Hitching Post for a porn magazine. (Next thing you know, they'll be shouting "Slut!" at Sandrah Oh.)2. I tried Hitching Post pinot noir. It was good, but definitely not worth the emasculating divorce and months of despair. --ND [link] Powers of Deduction... The Motley Fool, the business and finance web site with a sense of humor, has provided a helpful list of ambiguous expenditures and an explanation of their tax status. Not Deductible: Plastic Surgery, Marijuana, and travel expenses to shareholder meetings. Deductible: Sex change operations, Navajo healing "sings," and the expense of moving a sailboat. --ND [link] Wednesday, February 16, 2005 - snarktip@snarksmith.com Atlas Shrugged... Martin Amis, who never works so hard as when buying out every flower shop in town to bestow laurels at Saul Bellow's feet, had this to say about the Great One's "authorized" biography, written by one (note the more generic, democratic capitalization here; more on this in a jiff) James Atlas:"[A] moral disaster; hostile and inaccurate and ill-written, it is a dramatized inferiority complex lasting 600 pages." One gropes at the shelf for assistance, but only a rebarbative pain-registering cliché will do: Ouch. Though I think Martin was onto something about the inferiority complex: I’m so obsessed with this theme that I actually keep a “failure file.” What stands out for me in the biographies of Faulkner and Fitzgerald are the months and years they wasted out in Hollywood, getting sodden over their squandered gifts. Cyril Connolly, one of the most distinguished critics of his day, made his name with a book, Enemies of Promise, that elegiacally bemoaned his lack of distinction. And the novelist Paul Auster writes in his memoir, Hand to Mouth, “In my late twenties and early thirties, I went through a period of several years when everything I touched turned to failure.” Ah! Ah. This is from "The Big F," a New York magazine excerpt from Atlas's forthcoming memoir, My Life the Middle Ages. You can pretty well judge what a forthcoming moral disaster that's going to be by the nasty allusive tumble, always taken with gravity-seduced glee by that particular species of over-the-hill American sadsack who sees little but the canyons of nonaccomplishment behind, and the abyss of mortal oblivion ahead. The good not done (come to that, the bad not done either), the love not given (but the alimony forked over), time torn-off, unused (sigh)... all expressed without even a hint of Larkinesque eloquence. Inferiority complex? We're talking collapsed narcissism. Oh, and the tumble is the invocation of Death of a Salesman. Now I realize that Arthur Miller has just died. I also appreciate that a reputation for being a canonical playwright, let alone a cultural byword for the junior high school English exam, has little to do with the actual quality of one's plays and everything to do with the palatability of one's plaything 'message.' I'll even grant that the insurance scam suicide is as acceptable a denouement (Nabokov, Despair) as the two-for-one autodestruct sequence preferred by star-crossed lovers everywhere. But, well, I mean to say, really. Do a biography of a literary Jupiter whose reputation is, if anything, underlarded with the merits of genuine achievement, and then write about the syndrome of metropolitan failure -- and fucking leave out Seize the Day. Where Bellow does come up in this piece (Chicago, that somber city), he comes up relevantly, muscularly enough. Still. The scuffed loafer and frayed tweed trope Atlas desperately wants weighted on his shoulders was best encapsulated slender volume not about a Willy, but about a Wilhelm. That this is forgotten, or perhaps never learned, shows just what sort of mockery has been made of the very serious study of schlub fatalism. Yeah, and I cried during the last scene of Mr. Holland's Opus, too. The grown-up gawky redhead was off-key. --MW [link] Tuesday, February 15, 2005 - snarktip@snarksmith.com A Tulsa Tussle... Without delving into the good and bad of the blogosphere's effect on the mainstream media (which was a dull topic even before Rathergate), it's worth mentioning the brazen tactics of the Tulsa World, which served the blog BatesLine with a cease-and-desist for inappropriate quotation and, uh, linking. (How dare you direct traffic to our web site, increasing ad revenue, without permission!)Not only is the order without legal merit, but the newspaper is upset because it has been accused of advancing the interests of a handful of Tulsa power brokers and smearing reformists. In my world, where the Boston Herald and Globe use the news to sinisterly advance the ideologies of favored political parties, it's nice to know that there are still major media outlets somewhere in the country practicing the time-honored tradition of destroying individual enemies in print. Unfortunately for the World, it's not only competing with the politicians and the blogs but a new weekly newspaper. The World's only remaining advantage is superior web design. --ND [link] The Unicorn Myth... Pitchfork has decided that the Unicorns have broken up. The quirky Montreal band who put out the best album of 2003 on a Canadian label normally devoted to noise collages with numeric titles couldn't handle the underground buzz that accompanied their deliberately obscure album. According to the news brief, the pop band will be reincarnated as a hip-hop act to be known as Th' Corn Gangg. I wish I was making that up. Attempts to find some kind of verification on their official web site turned up nothing but a sprawling maze with no entrance or exit. Appropriate. --ND [link] Monday, February 14, 2005 - snarktip@snarksmith.com Shiites and Sunnis and Kurds, Oh My... There are three reasons to avoid calling the continued atomization of these three groups an exercise in bad faith (the strongest is the lousy pun; the recalcitrance of the New York Times hurts less and less as time goes by; and reality -- well, when has that ever interfered with the plans of the media?) But check this out:The selection of a Kurdish president would most likely inflame the Sunnis in Iraq as well as nearly all other governments in the Arab world, which are dominated by Sunnis. Now let's translate this into something more home turf gemütlich: "The selection of an Irish president would most likely inflame the Catholics as well as nearly all other governments in the Christian world, which are dominated by Catholics." And the title of the article in which this appeared? "Split Verdict in Iraqi Vote Sets Stage for Weak Government." Weak government. Not "pluralistic" government, not "proportionally representative" government. Among the problems Dexter Filkins' "news analysis" indicates is the requirement for a two-thirds Assembly majority in approving the selection of a prime minister. If the Shiites don't control the Assembly in such number, which we now know they don't, and which the New York Times two weeks ago was going batso predicting they would, then how on earth is a democratic government supposed to get anything done? Wait a minute... This would mean that Shiites and Sunnis and Kurds (who worship a numinous quartz crystal found in Sulaimaniyah's Temple of Doom) would have to cooperate in the very act of even appointing the politicians of their own country. That's it. Call it all off. Mission Not Accomplished. Here's the Times headline after Jalal Talabani is given the presidency. "Iraqi Compromise Suggests Widespread Ideological Apathy; Return to Dictatorship/Monarchy/Sultanate/Caliphate State Likely." --MW [link] Media Jestalt... The Onion occasionally beats the news media to the story. From last week's bin Laden tape: Allah willing, embarrassment and tearful rejection shall rule this day," bin Laden said. "Paper hearts shall be rent and trod upon, and dreams of love delivered stillborn. Body language shall be misinterpreted, crushes unrequited, and sincere expressions of affection mocked. Invitations to dinner will be rejected, just as Americans have rejected Allah, the one true God. Meanwhile, actual Saudis are trying to celebrate the Valentine's Day with their lovers, in spite of a strict religious ban on the non-Islamic holiday and the general, year-round prohibition on gettin' cuddly. CNN: She wanted this Valentine's Day to be perfect. She ordered 100 red roses to be delivered to her husband of a few weeks, bought him the largest-size bar of his favorite chocolate and planned to surprise him with a dinner party at her parents' house. But there was one hitch: She had made the plans for February 12, thinking that was the day the rest of the world marked Valentine's. The muttawa, or religious police, mobilize a few days before February 14, making the rounds of gift and flower shops. As February 14 approaches, the flush of red fades. Every heart, every rose and every item that's red or that suggests love and romance descends underground, to the black market, where its price triples and quadruples. Red flowers are hidden in back rooms. Then don't just want our legal institutions and tolerant civil society. Moderate Arabs crave our shitty, second-tier, industry-driven holidays, too. Hey, Maureen Dowd! What say you write a column titled "Make Love, Not War," and you could weave cute alliterative puns and shallow jibes around an argument for carpet-bombing Iran with Russel Stover's? --ND [link] Friday, February 11, 2005 - snarktip@snarksmith.com Follow Up... Kimball has learned that his Napoleonic headlines joke was a hoax. But it's still apropos, because -- bait and switch -- but for us, they'd all be speakin' German! Hoo-wah! --ND [link]André the Pliant... André Malraux spent a lifetime trying to balance his moral ledger between gifted observer of world-historical events and servile apparatchik to etatist enterprises of varying degrees of squalor. (What seems to have pushed him over to the arrears side is his thoroughgoing pursuit of his own myth through the only channels in which myths are made, but more on this in a second...) He speculated in the Paris Bourse, had a few Indiana Jonesish scrapes in Cambodian temple raiding in the 1920's, wrote a haunting novel about the crushing of the Chinese revolution, and earned the respect and admiration of Trotsky for said novel. That was Early Malraux. Middle Malraux returned the favor to the Old Man by harboring Trotskyist sympathies in the Spanish Civil War. These, however, became unmoored pretty quickly -- crise de la foi, good deeds unpunished, etc. -- and soon transformed into orthodox Republican ones, as the notion of fighting Fascism and Stalinism simultaneously seemed well beyond his ken. He can't even be forgiven for the lesser of two evils canard, since he took the extra trouble to speak in beamish, Nerudamentary tones about the Soviet dictator, who, according to Malraux, "leant his dignity to mankind." ("Dignity" is Georgian for cudgel, I guess.) But mark the sequel: Easily did Left dogmatism slowly, imperceptibly cant toward its seeming opposite in stony wasteland of the twentieth century... Late Malraux can be characterized by a philosophical antipathy to Nazism (well, thank God for that), but with a twist of fabulism about exactly what he got up to in beating back the Nazis. He claimed he was a "regional commander" of a Resistance unit in southwestern France. Not just that, but also arrested and imprisoned by the S.S., from whom he managed a daring escape in '41. This all has some merit, of course, if you consider that Freddie Prinze, Jr. underwent a similiar militant arc in his confrontation with the dreaded Kilraithi Empire in Wing Commander. In point of fact, Malraux live the good life -- that of a regular "shit in a shuttered chåteau," as Philip Larkin once put it -- right up until '44, when he joined a Resistance that had just a few months left to resist anything. Cue "Marseilles," begin slow canting. Next stop, De Gaulle-ville. Malraux spent the remainder of his days toadying to the French dictator, dreaming himself up as a sort of in-house belletrist to the epauletted colossus bestriding the globe -- or Eiffel Tower, at any rate. Follow this by some au courant photographs with Mao, Nehru and Nixon, some cuckolding by a very French wife, some boom-boom-boom Eurotrash moments in the life-of-the-mind mindful, and death. All neatly summarized here, in this Nation review of the new Malraux biography by Olivier Todd. The reviewer is Stefan Collini, whose homage to Catalonia leaves one -- while we're being all euphemistic about things -- slightly peckish for the truth: From the Cambodian escapade onward, the heart of the Malraux myth lay in the ideal of the Writer as Man of Action. The Spanish Civil War provided the perfect stage. Without ever joining the Communist Party, Malraux was committed to the anti-Fascist cause, and he gave practical expression to this allegiance by "commanding" a volunteer air squadron on the Republican side. (It's true that he did largely procure and organize the aircraft, but in fact he never flew them himself.) In reality, the terrain of his greatest triumphs was that of publicity. He insured good press coverage of "the Malraux squadron"; rumor had it that his fetching uniform was specially made by Lanvin. At the same time, the Spanish experience fed his imagination, providing the setting both for the celebration of Republican fraternity in his novel L'Espoir, published in 1937, and for a film he made in 1938, Sierra de Teruel. Malraux was becoming a twentieth-century Renaissance man; it seemed there was nothing he could not do--or at least nothing he could not get away with. "Celebration of Republican fraternity." Only in the pages of The Nation would such a phrase, if ever invoked, be invoked magnanimously to describe the outfit that murdered a far greater Andres (damn that "s") than Malraux. --MW [link] Love, A Culture of Life, Will Tear Us Apart... Meet Dawn Eden. Born Jewish. Converted Christian. Fan of Manchester late 80's post-punk, and American late 60's pop-folk. Fan also of G.K. Chesterton and C.S. Lewis. Once celibate, then not, now celibate again. Once zaftig, then cute, now arguably cutely zaftig. Devoutly pro-life. Fired from the New York Post for artifically inseminating, as copy editor, someone else's article on stem cell research with pro-life agitprop and (yes, there's an and) blogging about her ultraconservative social politics on less conservative Murdochian time. Martyr to a schismatic Jews for Jesus/Buzzcocks-and-Joy-Division-loving/The Man Who Was Thursday-perusing subset of urban/Midwestern extraction. And now -- finally, finally -- the subject of her very own puff profile by fawning New York Observer scribe George Gurley, who writes: Here was my idea of perfection: She was pretty, witty, vivacious, a real character with impeccable taste and conservative. (Blog away, liberal assholes! You're on the wrong side of history!) As Yogi Bera said when a Jew was elected mayor of Dublin: "Only in America." --MW [link] What Do They Know of America, Who Only The Upper West Side Know?... Before the term 'intellectual' became a measure of Googleability as determined by Richard Posner, it had an even more dubious aura about it in the American culture. This had a lot to do with the radical (in both senses of the word) departure most intellectuals had taken from their appellative point of origin. A Dreyfusard in fin de siecle France was to be a man or woman of abstract thinking jostled into -- if not necessarily 'mugged by' -- reality, someone who knew that the rights of man as defined on paper meant very little unless reified in the unlocking of chains and the forced prevention of ignominious bloodshed. In this, the first intellectuals -- so-called by epithet-hungry cynics and reactionaries who couldn't abide the defense of an innocent Jew at the cost of civil turmoil -- were as engagé as possible. How more wide awake or bracingly 'tapped in' could one be than the author of Germinal doffing the thin but suasive integument of fiction that had separated his conscience from his readership, and coming right out and accusing that readership of hysterical race hatred and barbarism? I bring this up because by the 1940's and 1950's, the American intellectual had become a cloistered and self-referential phenomenon, someone utterly disconnected from the polity that had generated him and, ostensibly, was there to be regenerated by him. Lionel Trilling, who this year turns a venerable one hundred, was the first of that most noteworthy stamp of smart setters -- the Trotskysant New Yorkers -- to point out just how necessary was a periodic field trip out of the Ivory Tower and into the agora. His essay/lecture, "The Situation of the American Intellectual at the Present Time," which I think might have been serviceably subtitled what I've titled this post, is a classic example of punctuated cultural equilibrium: a tocsin to redirect the focus of an elite community so stubbornly progressive in outlook that it had grown quite resistant to change. (That more modern coinage, 'think tank,' belies the integrated cerebral plumbing system of the clubland intellectuals, the identifiable Partisan Review crowd of a legendary Manhattan netherworld of letters and wit and opinion. Dwight Macdonald then would be a guilt-stricken Oprah guest now, which lends some teleological credence to the categorization of epochs by precious metals.) Trilling's stuff also pulsates with the kind of exigency that keeps the contributions of great minds ever consultable, even if the reputations of those minds are, regrettably, less than everlasting. But consider: at a time when an American president is being guided -- or, as some would have it, manipulated -- by the epigones of a reconciled liberal intelligentsia, he is also being supported by what those who would prefer the word 'manipulated' might call the proudly anti-intellectual everyman. (Auden would have called this entity the sensual man-in-the-street, whose romantic lie in the brain, I can't help adding, might just be the greatest accomplishment yet of an intelligentsia said to value the 'noble lie' for the express purpose of penetrating and convincing the agora.) Whether or not the lineaments of neoconservative thinking were entwined in Trilling's plunge into the expansive terra incognita of American life is irrelevant. Frankly, there's usually a sinister motive behind trying to 'claim' dead figures for one's contemporary galère of dittoheads; and neocons should never forgive Norman Podhoretz for trying, unsuccessfully and mendaciously, to do just that with George Orwell, whom Trilling comprehended with infinitely greater subtlety and aplomb than the windbag editor of Commentary ever could do. That said, however, when Gertrude Himmelfarb commemorates the Sage of Morningside Heights in the pages of The Weekly Standard, one sits up, takes notice, and listens for the seductive chanting of the End of History Lost Boys: Join us. Actually, that's very unfair. Gertie explicitly leaves a question mark where Norm would leave a declaration of co-dependence. And yet... all signs do point toward the anxiety of neocon influence. Her evidence? An equally brilliant essay/lecture entitled "Mind in the Modern World." (Don't let these Brief-History-of-Everything subjects fool you: Trilling bit off just as much as he could chew, then savor with a brandy and cigarette.) --MW [link] Staring at the Sea / Staring at the Sun / I'm alive / I'm dead... Roger Kimball over at Armavirumque is waxing Francophobic again. The substance? Rice's diplomacy can't hurt, but we need France to be quiet more than we need it to help. Kimball: "Well, the United States cannot do the most satisfying thing with the world's fifth largest economy, which would be to tell M. Chirac and company to go choke on their escargot. Nope, we're all adults here.." I'm pretty sure the hypocrisy is ironic. Still, when he refracts that tired surrender monkey refrain into a marginally literary Napoleon joke, it's hard to wonder what Kimball thinks he's up to. Invert the viewpoint on this blog post and he could be Lewis Lapham. Slagging France is counterproductive. Chirac may be a dirtbag -- he was reelected, after all, on the slogan "vote for the theif, not the fascist"-- but he knows what he needs to do to stay afloat. France needs America, and America needs France, desperately. Whether they like it or not, both countries require the other to solve their greatest foreign policy dilemmas. France's ethnic and religious tension with its Muslim minority is largely driven by -- or speciously attributed to -- the Israel-Palestinian conflict. But only the USA has enough leverage with Israel to make any headway with the Jewish state. On the other hand, Bush has made halting the Iranian nuclear weapons program a priority, and strongly associated Iran with terrorism. (Iran goes for local, Shiite suicide bombers over global, Sunni ones, but one man's Hamas is another man's Hezbollah.) Unfortunately, America has few sticks or carrots to use against Iran. We don't have the military capacity to fight them right now, and we don't have enough trade to usefully threaten sanctions. Western Europe, however, has the ability to help or hurt Iran -- and France is far more respected in the Arab world than Britain or Germany. The United States and France both have much to gain in domestic peace through collaboration on each other's most pressing foreign problems. Let's pick on a country truly worth needling. --ND [link] Thursday, February 10, 2005 - snarktip@snarksmith.com If You Hate Pina Coladas / Ululating In The Rain... For East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet, huh? This Jordanian man and wife on the rocks have discovered their rightful soulmates: each other. Aughts democracy comes to Iraq, while the 70's come to Hussein's kingdom. --MW [link]Wednesday, February 9, 2005 - snarktip@snarksmith.com Happy New Year...Today is Chinese New Year and Ash Wednesday.I'm going to celebrate by ordering a big plate of General Tso's at the Chinatown Peach Farm and not eating it. --ND [link] The Winner Gets a Taser... The Guardian writes up a new reality show being designed for Britain's Channel Four (the one that doesn't depend on a TV tax). The theme? Inflict "torture lite" on seven volunteers in a warehouse, using actual techniques allegedly used at Gitmo. The programme exposed the volunteers, three of whom are Muslim, to 48 hours of "torture lite" including sleep deprivation, the use of extreme temperatures and "mild" physical contact. As at Guant·namo and more vividly in Abu Ghraib, the volunteers were also subject to periods of enforced nudity and religious and sexual humiliation. But if the participants are volunteers, and it's being broadcast on TV, and the most atrocious aspects of US torture have been stripped from the, er, curriculum, how is this different from any other reality show? I'm not making a sweeping statement of moral equivalence. But the salient issue with Guantanamo Bay is that prisoners are held against their will, without anything resembling judicial oversight or government transparency. If you're allowed to leave and millions of people are watching, do the political overtones really make these poor losers different from any other self-debasing schmuck vying for a few minutes on television? --ND [link] Monday, February 7, 2005 - snarktip@snarksmith.com Colombian Fields... Martin Amis, whose recent fumblings with fiction and history still have not touched the genius escrow he accrued in the eighties, is trafficked through one of Latin America's most violent urban hellscapes, courtesy of Medicins san Frontiers (which sounds like a Peter Gabriel song with a U2 mission.)I'm not exactly sure how I feel about a Times series that grants 'prominent authors' fantasy sabbaticals to plunge right into the shards and plasma of this kind of reality (what's next? Julian Barnes in Darfur? Don DeLillo's Tsnuami?), but warriors against cliché are always needed 'on assignment.' Gang slang for a home-made gun is una pacha: a baby's bottle. The violence starts at once and never goes away. Kevin's scars are not at all disfiguring. He has an entry wound and an exit wound. His was easily the most hopeful story I heard in Cali. In general, you suspect, emotionally and psychologically there may be entry wounds, but there are no exit wounds. Never complain about your day job again: Blooded, his bones made, Raul took a job in an office. That last sentence may look slightly odd to a non-Cale–o, but when someone around here says that they worked in an office or did 'office work', you know exactly what they did: they sat by a phone, on a retainer (£250 a month), and did targeted assassinations through an agent for a further £100 a time. Boys who work in offices, incidentally, are not called 'office boys', so far as I know, but boys are valued in office work, because they are cheap, fearless and unimprisonable till the age of 18. Raul would have been in his twenties at this stage. John Anderson, though, for example - he may well have worked in an office. --MW [link] One Of Those Fingers Is For Michael Powell... Janet's nipple has got nothing on this friendly little foam feature. Where did US soldiers in Iraq get The Shocker? And more important: What is The Shocker. --MW [link] Thursday, February 3, 2005 - snarktip@snarksmith.com The Intelligent 'Design' Is Evolution... Do we need an invisible man in the sky to feel awed by the resourcefulness of nature? The greatest compliment ever paid to some numinous explanation for the sheer fantasy catalogue of organic variation on earth was paid, in my mortal opinion, by Vladimir Nabokov in his brilliant memoir Speak, Memory. Here he is describing the obsessive attention to detail that some presumed superevolutionary power used to seduce him into his lifelong detail-attentive obsession:When a certain moth resembles a certain wasp in shape and color, it also walks and moves its antennae in a waspish, unmothlike manner. When a butterfly has to look like a leaf, not only are all the details of a leaf beautifully rendered but markings mimicking grub-bored holes are generously thrown in. 'Natural selection,' in the Darwinian sense, could not explain the miraculous coincidence of imitative aspect and imitative behavior, nor could one appeal to the theory of 'the struggle for life' when a protective device was carried to a point of mimetic subtlety, exuberance, and luxury far in excess of a predator's power of appreciation. I discovered in nature the nonutilitarian delights that I sought in art. Both were a form of magic, both were a game of intricate enchantment and deception. Oh, and Maureen: Male nipples prove embarassing in cold weather, just like yours. --MW [link] Wine Assholes Out In Full Force, Post-Sideways... What Trainspotting did for Highland smack, Alexander Payne's road-trip buddy dramedy does for the discriminating Dionysian grape. --MW [link] Georgian Premier Dead... Of a gas leak, they say. Why do I get the feeling that a carbon minoxide detector might have found a fusty little niche somewhere in this apartment had Zhvania been a Soviet nostalgic? Och, no. Begone, conspiracy theory! Accidents happen all the time now that the motive-plumbing phrase "It's no accident" has been purposefully retired from revolutionary consciousness. Might have been all that asphyxiating sushi he ate last night... --MW [link] Dowd: Still Blatherin'... My least favorite columnist is back with another disaster. The first paragraph of her newest op-ed: Do male nipples prove evolution? And the last: With their brutal assault on history and their sanctimonious manner, they give a whole new meaning to Teddy's philosophy of the presidency. Bully pulpit, indeed. The path from the former to the latter reads like Six Degrees of Leftist Hack Non Sequiturs. I have no idea where she was going with it. I'm not sure Dowd does, either. Either every sentence in this piece is a thesis statement, or none of them is. Doesn't the Times have the money to just buy up the contract of, I dunno, Molly Ivins? Can nothing be done here? --ND [link] Bush's Book Club... A lot of people may not like Natan Sharansky's latterday descent into Solzhenitsynoid conservatism, but if anyone deserves the title 'refusenik' or 'dissident,' surely it's -- George Bush? "I told him: 'You are the real dissident. Politicians look at polls -- what is popular, what is not popular. A dissident believes in an idea and goes ahead with it ... even when there are so many people who disagree,'" Sharansky said. That's sweet. But when Fareed Zakaria mutters some vaguely acerbic things about Illiberal Democracy being shilled next month by the tastemaker of every red state housewife, don't come running to us because someone's black-tie invite to the White House has suddenly been rescinded... --MW [link] Wednesday, February 2, 2005 - snarktip@snarksmith.com Now She Knows a Thing Or Two About the Master-Slave Dynamic... Martha Stewart, new host of The Apprentice. No, really. --MW [link]Toy Soldier... A group calling itself the 'Mujahadeen Brigade' claimed yesterday on a website to have captured 'American military man John Adams,' offering as 'proof' a photograph of what looked to be a black soldier sitting against a wall, his hands tied behind his back, with an assault rifle pointed (sort of) at his head. Well, if the name alleged by the jihadists seems a little too -- perfectly proto-American, it's because it is. 'John Adams' bears a striking resemblence to a toy doll manufactured by Dragon Models USA, Inc. (Check out the image posted of the 'hostage' here, the product here.) US forces say they knew the image was bogus after no soldier was reported missing from any units in Iraq. But a mere glance at the evidence shows we're not dealing with the sharpest scimitars in the dissimulation shed here. For starters, there's an all-too-stoic -- one might even say plastic -- expression on GI John's face. Could this have to do with a false sense of security that comes with being better equipped with body armor than any of our underfunded flesh-and-bone troops? The game was given away before it even started. Still, I'd love to sit in on future collaborations among these holy warring swifties.
'Hasim, what is this?' A Lingo Grows in the Desert... Bedouin sign language, only 200 years old, and 'spoken' by just 150 people today. The language has a rough morphology and its syntax is subject-object-verb, which is as common to world languages as right-handedness is to human dexterity. Score one for Chomsky's generative theory. --MW [link] Call Bill Murray... Two rats duke it out for Tiresian supremacy. One's from Pennsylvania, the other's from Staten Island. What, no Detroit?
On Social Security... I wanted to blog on Krugman yesterday, but didn't get around to it. His column yesterday was a base hit. It's like he got tired of shooting in the dark and turned on the lights. As you know, I've been somewhat in favor of experimenting with Social Security privatization; but I think Krugman has finally persuaded me against it. Krugman's argument is simple, and it doesn't require any personal assaults. (Any week the good doctor doesn't mention Bush by name in the first five paragraphs means he has an idea he can actually talk about.) Having done some back-of-the-napkin calculations, he argues that projections for the performance of the stock market under privatization can only happen if the US maintains a robust pace of economic growth that is greater than what we've averaged historically. That's very possible, but if the economy is going to grow that quickly, then it renders the "crisis" projections of the SSA outrageously pessimistic. The upshot: if the growth projections are right, then privatization can't fix the problem. If the growth projections are wrong, then privatization is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Of course, privatization might still be better than the current system. But we don't know it is. And if Krugman is right, then the whole discussion is a red herring. [Side note: I made an argument for privatization a couple weeks ago. Since then, I've realized I made at least two flagrant errors in the argument. If you want to hear them, email me and I'll fisk myself on this page. Otherwise, I'll consider supporting Krugman apology enough.] --ND [link] Ayn Rand at 100... She influenced Alan Greenspan's economics, which justified Nixon's elimination of conscription in the United States. She modelled Howard Roarke on Frank Lloyd Wright, who repaid the compliment by designing her a level-two-Tetris cottage studio house. And, perhaps most memorably, she wrote the book that the asshole waiter in Dirty Dancing kept alluding to. So what did Ayn Rand really want? Besides The Incredibles winning best Animated Film? The Unstifled Nietzchean Grey Lady is on the case... --MW [link] Tuesday, February 1, 2005 - snarktip@snarksmith.com B-Euro-cracy... I thought that the refusal to brand Darfur a genocide on technical grounds sprang from unwillingness to fly in the face of a Chinese veto over oil. But apparently there's more to it than that: the Europeans oppose the US proposal for an ad hoc committee to work on this, preferring to use it as a chip for the International Criminal Court. The BBC does a pretty fair job describing the spat. Is the prosecution of future war criminals really worth playing politics with the ongoing atrocity? How many second mortgages can the UN get on its credibility?On the lighter side of the news (it doesn't get heavier), Armavirumque has linked to this shocking article about the German labor liberalization. Unemployed workers who have been one the dole for over a year can be dropped from payments now if they decline to take the first job that comes their way. Also, prostitution is now legal in Germany. The problem is obvious; the solution is not, since excepting certain industries from the welfare reform on moral grounds would open the door to exempting many more. (Although not as many as Stefan Beck conjectures. Germans realize those union members gotta come from somewhere.) --ND [link] Interview With Nechirvan Barzani... The Financial Times conducted this revealing interview (reprinted on the Kurdistan Observer website) with the prime minister of the Kurdistan Regional Government in Arbil. Barzani discusses the undersung merits of Bremer's de-Baathification, the alliance between the PUK and KDP for the purposes of national elections, and Kurdish reparation plans for Kirkuk. This last point bears special notice: Saddam's brutal 'Arabization' policy, which began in some form in the late 60's but hit its gruesome fever pitch a decade later, forced the displacement of thousands of native Kurds and Turkomen and Assyrians from their homes in the oil-rich region, without compensation. Now that the wretched Sudanese government has been deemed 'innocent' of genocide for the murder and exiling of non-Arabs in Darfur, humanitarian activists would have good cause to revisit Saddam's 'ethnic cleansing' program as a mere warm-up to the hideous Anfal campaign of 1988. Barzani's uncompromising position on the right of return of dispossessed Kurds is certainly understandable, although more telling is the sensitivity with which he answers questions about the Arabs (mainly Shiites, according to him) and oil workers who took over the region under Baath Party orders: Q: What is the timescale for making decisions about Kirkuk? A: In TAL, article 58 addresses the issue and a committee has been established [this month] to implement it. The head is Hamid Majid Musa [al-Bayati] the head of the Iraqi Communist party. It will start its mission. I think the issue is not that complicated. If the United States had been able to address that problem in the early days, and if Iyad Alalawi’s government had been able to but we realised that neither Baghdad nor Washington realised the depth of the sensitivity and feelings of the Kurds regarding Kirkuk. They thought time might solve the problem, but this was wrong. This is something that Kurds are not going to make any concessions over. All the words, the fights, the Kurds have had with the regime in Baghdad have been over Kirkuk. Our fear is that Baghdad is weak today and ready to make a solution, but tomorrow it might become stronger and refuse to solve it and there would be a major problem in Iraq. Our belief is that the issue should be addressed immediately and properly. Kirkuk is part of Kurdistan geographically and historically. People were brought by Saddam, settled. What we ask for is that these people be taken back where they came from. We do understand that they might not have the financial capability and that the Iraqi government should compensate them to resettle in their original areas. The Kurds and Turkomen who were expelled from their homes should be taken back. We believe it is possible for different ethnic groups to live together in Kirkuk. Q: Is it possible to define who was brought as part of Arabisation and who went to Kirkuk just to get a job? A: We have documents that prove how these people came. The majority brought were Shia. Of course we have been very careful in dealing with that, and we have never wanted problems between the Kurds and Shia. But it is very obvious from which city or which governorate people were brought, and which year they were brought. We know who was there naturally. There are few villages near Arbil with Arabs, who came as the result of a natural movement in 1961-2. We don’t ask for these people to go. But those who came as part of the process carried out by Saddam, we ask for these people to go. --MW [link] Gunner Palace... This is the next big documentary about the war in Iraq, filmed and told by the soldiers fighting it. --MW [link] Not Quite an About-Face, More of a Profile Pose... Mark Brown opposed the war, now he's having doubts. I won't say that [the idea that 'Bush was right, and we were wrong': his words, not mine. --ed] had never occurred to me previously, but it's never gone through my mind as strongly as when I watched the television coverage from Iraq that showed long lines of people risking their lives by turning out to vote, honest looks of joy on so many of their faces. Brave of him to say that, though I wish he hadn't cheapened it with a line he knew would be the sensationalist take-away from the piece: Maybe I'd have to vote Republican in 2008. Hold It Right There, Brooksy... After an event like this past Saturday's, no one without ice water in his veins is immune from getting a bit glib-tongued or world-historical, or from taking rhetorical refuge in the words of Hegelian figures. But I'm afraid the neocon scribe with whom liberals can jibe goes it one too far in his column today: I thought of [Whittaker] Chambers when I heard reporters in Iraq observe that beneath the joy and exhilaration that came with voting last Sunday, Iraqis showed something grimmer: a stern determination to not let evil triumph. As Orwell's 'book-wallah' says in Burmese Days upon being offered a Bible in exchange for one of his own volumes: "No, sahib... no." Whittaker Chambers may have been right about Algier Hiss; he may have foreseen and opposed the Hitler-Stalin Pact (the moral hygiene exam for all fellow travellers); he may have warned his anti-Communist epigones, like William F. Buckley, against making common cause with the sinister bully Joseph McCarthy -- but let's be real about Chambers' eventual showdown with evil: it was an act of repudiation, not confrontation, and it was motivated more by paranoia than by noble opposition. The real triumph Chambers feared was personal. The Stalinist forces he had colluded with might, at any moment -- and even during his ensconcement as chief book honcho at Time -- snuff him out. The United States government he spied against was well within rights to draft capital treason charges against him should his first-hand knowledge of Red infilitration and subversion prove otiose in the frying of bigger fish than himself -- which, lucky for Chambers, it never did. But for Brooks to make this clumsy analogy between a Cold War anti-hero and nascent Iraqi democrats -- the good majority of whom had no prior allegiance to either Baathism or jihadism, and now are plagued by the dying gasps of both -- is something worse, I think, than a 'stretch.' The man who introduced 'bobo' into American vernacular seems to have missed the boho innuendo in this more telling apercu about the autumnal revolutionary he remembers: André Malraux read Chambers's work and wrote to him, "You are one of those who did not return from hell with empty hands." More behold-the-pale-horse than hail-the-conquering-hero, that. If there's an irony in seeing Chambers's name awkwardly invoked in this way it's that the recently appointed editor of The New York Times Book Review, Sam Tanenhaus, published the best biography of the man in 1998. One can only imagine the blood rushing from Sam's cheeks this morning after downing this intramural hash with his coffee. --MW [link] Prince Harry Atones... Since all of that fuss regarding my wearing swastika armband at a recent costume affair, I’ve decided to keep this sensitivity journal charting my increasing awareness of the feelings of others, especially those of differen races, religions, and smells. --MW [link] East Meets West End... The Mongolian army-sized question Bernard Lewis posed on book shelves and talk shows in the months following September 11 had a logical assumption built into it: some things must have gone right before they went wrong in the Islamic world. And as indicated by the global reaction to the fate of certain priceless artifacts in the Baghdad Museum two years ago (a reaction that at times seemed to drown out the one about regime change itself), any supposed 'clash' of civilizations had better, at the bear minimum, entrain a universal esteem for the stash of civilizations, tangible evidence of things having gone right, or at any rate, pretty and lasting. For years now Turkey has been clamoring for a place at the supranational European table, and it knows just how to tilt the odds of an eventual invitation, by appealing to just such an esteem. "Turks: A Journey of a Thousand Years, 600-1600" is the exhibition running to April 12 at the Royal Academy of Arts in London, and The New York Times, as ever, is onto the covert 'agenda': The Turks marched into central Europe in 1529 and again in 1683, but their troops were stopped at the gates of Vienna. Now, more politely, Turkey is looking to enter the European Union through diplomacy, but it still faces resistance. Andrew Sullivan Semi-Retires... Somewhere between a Safire and a Barry. He's taking a breather for a couple months to write a book, travel to the Middle East and just generally rejoin the non-pajama'd living. Besides, this is my fifth year of daily blogging - I was doing this when Clinton was president and Osama bin Laden was largely unknown - and I've always thought it's a good idea to quit something after around five years or so. Before it becomes a chore. Before you become numb. No, it's not a response to criticism. I'm a big boy and have provoked critics from the minute this blog started. I deserve much of what I get. And to tell you the truth, I rather enjoy the heat and will miss some of kitchen. But over two million words is a good enough mile-stone to ease up for a while. --MW [link] Down With Dowd... I can't believe I'm writing these words, but if you wait long enough for anything... but The Dowdy One has put me in the position of defending coercive actions of certain Gitmo interrogators as not-torture. Okay, now the parade of caveats: if there's one facet of the Bush administration that has filled me with disgust and loathing from the day it was introduced, it's been its policies toward the detention and treatment of prisoners. Detention without charges, and several deaths by torture; each time I've wanted to give this administration the benefit of the doubt, these flagrant violations of commonplace ethics have checked my trust. We all know what Andrew Sullivan thinks by now, and he'll keep telling us, too. I confronted P.J. O'Rourke about Gitmo before Abu Ghraib even happened, and he, too, admitted that Guantanamo Bay was a betrayal of basic American (and conservative) principles, without even trying to spin it into a crack at the Democrats. This is the main reason I supported Kerry over Bush. I want a president who carries a big stick; I just don't want the stick loaned out for forcible sodomy. But what Maureen objects to is the use of women's sexuality against detainees of a very misogynist frame of mind. Namely, female interrogators at Gitmo who used their womanly wiles to create unease in pious fundamentalist Muslims, either by arousing them or dabbing them with (fake) menstruate and leaving them without running water -- unable to cleanse themselves of the stain of woman, unclean in the eyes of God. How this particular form of psychological torment is ever going to cough up useful intelligence, I don't know. ("God won't listen to you now. Talk to us!") Furthermore, stories of this sort are not going to dispel the rumor that this is a War Against Islam, now are they? So doing this to detainees is certainly ill-advised, and whoever thought this up should be busted back to potato-peeling duty. It's fucking stupid. But torture? If anything, it seems like a sort of poetic justice. Those unfortunate moderates we've detained by accident -- and it seems there are many -- will surely be annoyed and angry at these sorts of antics, but that's about it. Only the hardliner Islamists and the odd ayatolloid will really believe himself cut off from their God by a woman's fluids. You know, the same folks who consider a rape victim an adulteress. Additionally, since dye was used instead of actual mestrual fluid, no actual violations of holy law were actually comitted. The poor detainee doesn't know that, but God's omniscient, right? The net effect here seems to be psycological duress that is likely to be far more actute for those who are truly suspects than for those detained wrongly, and that is derived without recourse to water-boards, or infliction of pain, or looping Nancy Sinatra tapes. So while duress isn't something I can really support, this seems like one of the milder examples Dowd could of pulled out of the depressingly thick dossier. But Dowd doesn't even want to break out the "These Boots" mix. Her solution: There's nothing wrong with trying to squeeze information out of detainees. But isn't it simply more effective to throw them in isolation and try to build some sort of relationship? Relationship? Well, you've taken a sexual relationship off the table, so what did you have in mind, Maureen? Boggle? She also brackets the editorial with Bill Clinton sex jokes. And cracks wise about "The Geneva Monologues." So I don't even know if the whole thing is some sort of weird MoDo Hoax. The time has come. Maureen must leave the NYT op-ed page and go back to journalism. There has to be another woman out there willing to write these columns. Preferably with wit and style, but I'd settle for reason and candor. --ND [link] Monday, January 31, 2005 - snarktip@snarksmith.com Pessimism's Sour Grapes... So long as conversations at dinner tables and cocktail parties continue to sample from the house wine of watered-down philosophy, George Santayana will never fail to receive undesirable tribute from those who never read what he actually wrote -- not about history and its pedagogical benefits, but about memory and its indissoluble, if often dysfunctional, marriage to the past. An not-insignificant switch of terms, and at once we have a more eloquent and profound insight that bears heavily on macro as well as micro considerations, on world immensities and human intimacies. Talk of memory and the past will surely be in high supply this week in a revolutionarily changed Mestopotamia, while history in that part of the world, is undoubtedly being learned, but also made.Another -- and in my opinion, superior -- insight of Santayana has to do with fanatics redoubling their efforts at the precise moments they lose sight of their goals. One could write a book on the fanatics doing just that, to increased difficulty and diminishing returns, in and around Baghdad, but it's the ones closer to my own zip code that concern me here... The fanatic adherents of pessimism and high dudgeon over regime change have been dealt a serious blow this week by a massive and unprecendented display of Iraqi self-determination. Even the most sanguine estimates of voter turnout were made to look stingy by the number of Iraqis who participated, at great threat to their own lives, in the fully legitimate election their country has ever had. (The media outlets which have been comparing the elections under King Faisal's monarchy to those under post-Saddam constitutionalism as democratic bookends between a half-century of despotism really do forget history at the expense of the present.) Yet has this stopped some sinister and pathetic elements of the Left from denouncing Saturday's election as inconsequential or meaningless? Of course it hasn't. They've redoubled their efforts and simultaneously made a mockery of Santayana's more famous apercu. This is from a post today on the popular anti-war blog, "Daily Kos": The administration, press, and wingnut blogosphere is all atwitter over the "successful" Iraqi elections. But the fact that 8 million Iraqis voted is not the measure of success. Just like catching Saddam wasn't, or occupying Baghdad, or transfering "sovereignty". Those events are miletones toward the ultimate outcome, but unpredictive whether that outcome is victory or defeat. And elections, historically, aren't the end-all be-all for defeating insurgencies. There was Vietnam, 1967: "United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South Vietnam's presidential election despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting." [quoted from a 1967 NYT article] And nations with vicious civil wars, like Guatemala, El Salvador, Colombia, Sri Lanka, Peru, and so on staged elections (of various legitimacy) even while facing down insurgencies. January was the third bloodiest month for US and allied troops. Will that cease now that Iraqis have voted? Nope. Will economic sabotage of Iraq stop? Nope. Will the terrorists lay down arms? Nope. Will the insurgents? Nope. The war will continue unabated. Staged elections. Various legitimacy. Vicious civil war... Sounds like Kos on the home front, too. And so does this apparatchik of the Democratic Party -- who favored Howard Dean for president and now favors him for DNC chairman -- seethe in vicarious fury over a foreign 'milestone' that was the direct outcome of a domestic one (at least by Kos's bathetic definition of the word), which he still hasn't gotten over. Can the above lines be read only as descriptive of a present situation, or is there something runnily prescriptive being extracted from the squashing of such sour grapes? Something like a not-very-hidden wish for the jihadists and Baathist to defeat what some in the wingnut blogosphere view as George Bush's proxy red state in the Middle East. "The war will continue unabated." You may have won this round... Indeed, though, the war will continue so long as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Saddam nostalgics attempt to hack away at the ever-thickening ramparts of a consensual, civilized Iraq. And here again comes the facile and sham comparison of Iraq to Vietnam. I literally clicked off Daily Kos and onto Slate to see if my friend and former professor had posted something about this past weekend's major doings. He had. Christopher Hitchens tries to bury, for the third time, the dead bird of this season's most feather-headed misuse of a tough-minded axiom: In Vietnam, the most appalling excesses were committed by U.S. forces. Not all of these can be blamed on the conduct of bored, resentful, frightened conscripts. The worst atrocities—free-fire zones, carpet-bombing, forced relocation, and chemical defoliation—were committed as a direct consequence of orders from above. In Iraq, the crimes of mass killing, aerial bombardment, ethnic deportation, and scorched earth had already been committed by the ruling Baath Party, everywhere from northern Kurdistan to the drained and burned-out wetlands of the southern marshes. Coalition forces in Iraq have done what they can to repair some of this state-sponsored vandalism. In Vietnam, the United States relied too much on a pre-existing military caste that often changed the local administration by means of a few tanks around the presidential palace. In the instance of Iraq, the provisional government was criticized, perhaps more than for any other decision, for disbanding the armed forces of the ancien regime, and for declining to use a proxy army as the United States had previously done in Indonesia, Chile, El Salvador, and Greece. Unlike the South Vietnamese, the Iraqi forces are being recruited from scratch. In Vietnam, the policy of the United States was—especially during the Kennedy years—a sectarian one that favored the Roman Catholic minority. In Iraq, it is obvious even to the coldest eye that the administration is if anything too anxious to compose religious differences without any reference to confessional bias. I suppose it's obvious that I was not a supporter of the Vietnam War. Indeed, the principles of the antiwar mo |