Ok, ok. One more thing before I leave on vacation.

Marc Schulman has a great post up about the Carter Doctrine and Iran.

This is very timely, as it looks like we are going to get stonewalled in the Security Council by China and Russia while Iran continues its blatantly belligerent behavior. I think they are betting that we don't have the stomach for more.

On the Road

Alright everyone. I am going to be shutting down for a couple days as I'm leaving for the Coachella Music Festival tonight. It is going to be complete mayhem, but I'll be back on Tuesday.

In the meantime, I have a place for you to visit in my absence. Steven Green usually calls this "Required Reading." In the spirit of plagerism, here is my Required Reading:

In case you have forgotten, my good blog-friend Ian Wood is well on his way to actually taking off on his crazy stunt to tri-cycle across the United States.

Here is a chronology of him getting ready for launch.

I know Ian will laugh at me for saying this, but so far, this is very honest and raw exploration of the human-spirit type adventure. Not only can the boy write, he demonstrates the perceived struggles and limitations of the human mind, body and spirit and the courage to overcome them. Plus, if he keeps spinning dirt into his face and rubbing icy-hot on his privates, you'll get a few outloud laughs along the way.

He's built a mini-data center/power generator that he'll drag behind him to bring it all to you real-time. It's an entire city in a lit'le box. Lucky for you, I've found a lost interview with Nigel Tufnel describing his experiences with the prototype of this impressive little contraption:

Nigel: This is my radio...unit....

Marty: Oh, I see....

Nigel: So I strap this...this piece on, you know, right down in here when I'm (riding) and....

Marty: It's a wireless.

Nigel: Wireless, exactly. And...uh I can (ride) without all the mucky-muck.

Marty: You can (trike) anywhere (across the country) with that.

See ya next week!

Converting Atheists

I've been a convert of the Eastern Orthodox Church about 5 years and have pretty much outright rejected evangelicalism after an early, and brief, battle in college.

However, if there were more sermons like this, I might be enticed...

Go here. Watch from the 3:30 mark until the 4:36 mark as Kirk Cameron's friend tries to convert atheists with a banana...

Banned Acts

Esquire Magazine posted a list of 59 things you are not supposed to do past the age of 30. Since I am only 29, I figured I should get some of these out of my system this year before I reach the age of which I refuse to mention...of course with the exception of the first sentence of this paragraph:

My comments in italics:

1. Coin his own nickname. (I hearby will be referred to by the name of "Doghouse Jenks" for the remainder of the year.)

2. Use a wallet that is fastened with Velcro.

3. Rank his friends in order of best, second best, and so on. (Does this include the order on my blogroll?)

4. Hacky sack. (My hobbies that include playing basketball, rock-climbing and slacklining are far more sophisticated than this juvenile pizzle.)

5. Name his penis his name plus junior. (Why would you name your genitalia "junior"? Might as well start referring to yourself as "tiny"?)

6. Hang art with tape.

7. Hang The Scream, unless he stole it from the Munch museum in Oslo.

8. Ask a policeman, "You ever shoot anybody with that thing?" (This includes asking him the same question referencing his gun.)

9. Ask a woman, "Hey, you got a license for that ass?" (Um, this actually works before you are thirty?)

10. Skip. (I live in San Francisco, so I'm having a hard time with the rationale behind this oppression.)

11. Take a camera to a nude beach. (However, going to South Beach and photographing women with dental floss "covering" their cracks is perfectly fine.)

12. Let his father do his taxes.

13. Tap on the glass. (I'm too busy tappin' that "stuff" to tap the glass.)

14. Shout out a response to "Are you ready to rock?" (If I can't do this, I might as well be a communist.)

15. Use the word collated on his resume.

16. Hold a weekly house meeting with roommates.

17. Name pets after Middle Earth characters. (Why do I get a feeling that if someone has done this, they are also going to have a hard time not breaking rules 15 and 16 too?)

18. Jokingly flash gang signs while posing for wedding photos. (Unless of course you're actually in a gang. Do you think I call myself Doghouse because I think it sounds cute to the ladies?)

19. Give shout-outs.

20. Use numbers in place of words or locations, such as "the 411" for information, or "the 313" for Detroit. (Why on God's green earth would you ever refer to Detroit in any context?)

21. Hug amusement-park characters. (My relationship with Goofy is strictly confidential, will remain so, and I continue to refute and deny the claims that I am effin' Goofy.)

22. Wear Disney-themed neckties.

23. Wake up to a "morning zoo."

24. Compare the trajectory of his life with those of the characters in Billy Joel's "Scenes from an Italian Restaurant."

25. Request extra sprinkles.

26. Air drum. (Unless of course, you are doing an impersonation of Def Leppard's one-armed drummer, Rick Allen. 18-years later it is guaranteed to produce shocks and horrified looks.)

27. Choose 69 as his jersey number.

28. Eat Oreo cookies in stages.

29. Volunteer to be a magician's assistant. (What if the magician is a clown? If the editors of Equire were thinking these scenarios out a little more thoroughly we might not be put into these kinds of uncomfortable situations.)

30. Sleep on a bare mattress.

31. End a conversation with "later skater."

32. Hold his lighter up at a concert.

33. Publicly greet friends by shouting, "What's up, you whore?" (My preferred communication style is non-verbal. Nuggies and wedgies are far cooler and appreciated.)

34. Wear Converse All Stars with a tuxedo. (Lump this in with the Frodo and Sam dog owner.)

35. Propose via stadium Jumbotron.

36. Decide anything based on the ruminations of Howard Stern.

37. Call "shotgun" before getting in a car.

38. Dispute someone else's call of "shotgun."

39. Whine. (Someone forward this to Howard Dean to post on the DNC website.)

40. Mist up during Aerosmith's "Dream On."

41. Purchase fireworks. (Fireworks are illegal in the State of California and I would never dream of breaking the law in anyway.)

42. Google the word vagina.

43. Ride a pony.

44. Sport an ironic mustache.

45. Hit 13 against a 6.

46. Organize a party bus. (Does my 30th birthday count?)

47. Say "two points" every time he throws something in the trash. (If you are a real man, you'd shoot for three. Lay-ups into the garbage can are simply "gay".)

48. Buy a novelty postcard in another country of topless women on a beach and write, "Wish you were here" on it.

49. Keg stands.

50. Purchase home-brewing paraphernalia.

51. The John Travolta point-to-the-ceiling-point-to-the-floor dance move; also that one from Pulp Fiction. (Otherwise known as DWW--Dancing while white.)

52. Put less than ten dollars' worth of gas in the tank. (Unless of course you are filling up the lawn mower.)

53. Keep a minuscule amount of marijuana extremely well hidden.

54. Read The Fountainhead. (If you haven't read this by 30, then its even money on the odds of you having Michael Moore, Zinn, Pinter, Chomsky on your bookshelf.)

55. Watch the Pink Floyd laser light show at a planetarium.

56. Refer to his girlfriend's breasts as "the twins." (Again, if you are the Frodo dog owner, this won't be a problem for you.)

57. Own a vanity plate.

58. Whippits.

59. Say goodbye to anyone by tapping his chest and even so much as whispering, "Peace out."

Pass the meme on....

The Path to Enlightenment - A Music Review

I'm sure if you knew the following bit of information that I'm about to tell you, you would not be wasting your time reading this ridiculous blog. Instead you'd be sitting in your lazyboy with a pair of headphones attached to your ears while listening to sonic pleasures delivered to you by none other than the Zen-man himself: Steven Segal.

If you slightly chuckled or scoffed at what I just wrote, it is because you have yet to become one with the triad of Brahma the creator, Vishnu the preserver, and Shiva the destroyer. If you seek a higher consciousness, I'll introduce you to the pathway of enlightenment.

Put Steven's Song from the Crystal Cave on your CD player and hit pause. Take his latest DVD release, Today You Die and fast-foward through the previews. Wait, nevermind, for some reason the production company was unable to find anything so enlightened and declined to put any previews beforehand for fears of comparison.

As soon as you see the first credit, hit Play on your CD-player.

At first, you might not "get it." That's ok, because your repressed subconscious has not been able to comprehend freedom. Girl Its Alright and Don't Cry were not written as songs lementing the loss and hurt of interpersonal relationships, they are whispers to Vishnu the Preserver that everything is ok. On the other hand, your eyes are absorbing Shiva the Destroyer as Steven beats the living %@#! out of people in a Pleather Jacket.

If you don't "get it" by track 7, Lolipop, when Steven is swinging from a chandolier and "talkin' jive" to his new "black" friend, then you really have no soul.

Here are some further reviews from Amazon:

Dear Mr. Seagal,

Tuesday, February 12th, was a pretty average day for me. I woke up, brushed my teeth, had my morning glass of mayonnaise, put on my beret, tossed my scarf over my shoulder, heaved a heavy sigh and ventured out into the cold. The suspension on my electric scooter sagged deeply, not unlike my longing heart. While the vanity bumper sticker that Mother had bought me proclaimed "A smile a day keeps the doctor away", I was a very, very lonely 42 year old man. I was morbidly obese and quite frankly, I didn't have the most pleasant odour about me. I was lucky if even that kid with the club foot that everyone chased after school would wave to me when I passed.

Doing the rounds of my paper route, I rode by my local music store. I heard Something about Lollipops emanating from the speaker. I heard the low and shrill sound and it immediately began soothing my jangled nerves. Little did I know that this little piece of plastic, with the wondroous words and lyrics of Steven Seagal burned onto it for all of eternity with a laser, was soon to change my life.

I immediately got out of my scooter, ran into the store, took a few minutes to try to catch my breath. Finally I was able to gasp out to the clerk: "That Cd. That voice of the angels. I need to have it now". I bought several copies in case I became hungry on the way home. I rushed home, changed into my athletic gear and utility belt and immediately began doing pushups. It was like I was a man possesed. I didn't know it at the time, but this CD harnessed the work ethic, the martial arts prowess and, above all, the stunning handsomness and fashion sense of Steven Seagal into one small package. All that I had to do was press play and I was transformed into the essence of Casey Ryback, ex-navy seal, counter-terrorist expert and environmental mercenary.

To the sounds of Mr.Seagal I was able to shed my weight and began taking daily showers. I now entertain several women per week, sometimes even several per day. I am making over $5000 a week stuffing envelopes from home. My life has become full of many smiles a day, and I look forward to each day with more anticipation than the last. I owe it all to the inspiring and electrifying work being done each and every day by Steven Seagal.

Thank you, Steven Seagal.

Your friend in arms,

Kevin Keast, Toronto, Ontario

One More:

I am a little perspect to read all the "joking" reviews here about the Steven Seagal band CD, "The Crystal Caves". I don't know what this "Gunnar Flint" guy is on about, but I heard no jew's harp on this and in addition this is an anti-semantic expression, tradition or no. I have enjoyed many of Mr. Segal's movies and also his appearances on Johnny Carson where he sang those fun little ditties, and I guess this is a development of that to its logical end, the BLUES! Also, you would have the blues too if you had the "Weird Science" dream lady Kelly LeBrock and then it didn't work out and she was gone, although maybe they're still together, I don't remember, in which case he shouldn't have the blues at all (unless she is no longer hot). Anyway, listen to this if you like slick blues recordings or enjoy Steven Seagal, and if you like both, you are in luck in spades. Enjoy!

Write your own reviews of what Steven's music has done for you in the comments or on your blog. Please be careful, as Steven has been known to Google the Internet in search of those brave enough to degrade him. Consider this your first and only warning, as Steven is far less merciful than I.

Putting Rummy in Crosshairs--Who Can Help Us Win This Fourth Generation War?

I haven't commented much on the recent Rumsfeld flap because I don't believe there has been much substance to it. This is political battle in the heat of war from many sides. The Generals in the middle of the Pentagon who were big advocates of Cold War-style kinetic engagements on a pitched battlefield against Rumsfeld's more technologically reliant, yet pitched battle focus through manuever and speed. With the Generals launching forward in attack, the Democrats smelled blood and, in typical fashion, have attached themselves to those who have launched into full-opposition with someone from the Bush Administration regardless of the actual substance of the attack.

In this current "argument" the biggest loser, regardless of outcome, is our country. The debate has come down to one thing: should Donald Rumsfeld lose his job? The most important question of how we can wage a more effective assymetric, or more specifically, Fourth Generation War against our Islamic Fundamentalist foes, has almost been entirely ignored.

Like any complex political battle, the lines have become blurred as to where each person actually stood during their relative places in space in time during the initial invasion period. Many of the Left opposed the intitial invasion and thought (hoped?) it would inevitably turn to disaster. Since the lightening quick strike that placed Coalition forces in control of a country the size of California in three weeks, they've looked for a foothold of opportunity to prove that they had been correct in predicting disaster all along.

The overall war in Iraq didn't turn out to be as clean as previous operations in Afghanistan. Within a few months, there was a full-fledged insurgency on our hands, and regardless of initial intentions or plans, we found ourselves in the middle of a Fourth Generation war unlike any other we had been a part of.

Mistakes were made in the early part of the war by the whole gammut of decision makers. You can point a finger to each and every leader from the President, to the Pentagon, to our boots on the ground, to our Congressional leadership, to our Intelligence Community, etc. Nothing went as it was planned, and given the knowledge and background of our current force structure, it was inevitably going to be a situation where we were going to have to learn hard and fast how to fight and win against an assymetric foe. However, the biggest and loudest criticsms during this time were not substantive, and loudly driven by Left in order to prove that their "patriot" opposition to the "illegal" war in the first place was correct, and they were able to leverage certain military minds who were eager to push back on Donald Rumsfeld in favor of their more Cold-War minded strategies.

I'm willing to give our leaders a rather wide-birth when it comes to conducting war. Firstly, there is an opponent on the other end of the stick that gets to have a say in the outcome, and secondly, the thought that there is a plan that can be conceived that can be so swift and decisive is so ridiculously absurd in it face, it can't pass the horselaugh test. There are so many components to geopolitics, kinetic warfare and general circumstances that the only perfect plan is the one developed in hindsight and in my view, this is what the recent Generals jumping on the Rumsfeld-bash wagon are trying to do.

Much has been said about the now famous General Eric Shinseki's view that a proper victory in Iraq could not be acheived without the aid of several hundred thousand troops. According to many who have come to throw heeping scorn on the initial invasion plan, these troops would have been able to snuff out the insurgeny before it began. Nothing, however, has been said on exactly how these additional troops would have been used to acheive such a task (Read Bobby Bran's post on the subject. As an Afghan-war veteran and West Pointer, he has a much better and more substantive argument that I can come up with on this).

Additional manpower on battlefield essentially helps you to increase kinetic firepower. But one thing our 3 years in Iraq has demonstrated is that if there is any strength American forces already have an abundance of, it is the incredible ability to deliver concentrated and lethal amounts of force at will. What we lack, is the ability to turn that firepower loose on an enemy whose sole purpose is not to beat us on the battlefield, but to cause increasing amounts of disorder in the hopes that American forces will politically be forced to withdraw.

Initially, the military strategy for defeating the insurgency was to hunt down and kill or capture as many as possible. While the military was able to do just this, it didn't do much about cutting into the strategy employed by the groups of insurgents terrorizing Iraqis and killing American soldiers in front of the Western Press.

Then, after two years of falling-down the stairs, our military and civilian leadership employed a strategy, which I ultimately believe, will give us the best chance of landing on our feet in Iraq. Based on copious amounts of intelligence, they determined that the way to stop bombs from blowing up in Bagdad, was to choke the long supply-lines that originated across the border in Syria, and continued along a network of strategic cities along the Euphrates into Bagdad. However, in conjunction with these operations, they would simultaneously train and put into action an indigenous Iraqi force who would hold ground gained from fleeing or dead terrorists, that were previously abandoned by attacking American forces. It was sound Fourth Generation Military Strategy.

The result of this well executed plan was panic in the eyes of our enemy. The most bloodthirsty part of the insurgency, al-Qaeda, began to panic as they started bombing each and everything they could get hit. They bombed women, children, religious sites and those who turned against them. Previously agnostic or sympathetic Sunnis turned against and openly fought them. Once the Iraqi elections were held, Sunnis defied many by turning out in great numbers to partcipate in their new government. Party they joined out of fear and resignation over being at the losing end of this war. Being a true democrat at that point was not the goal, and nor was it in 1865 for the Southerners who were welcomed back into the Union after their bloody rebellion.

Now, the political fights are left to the Iraqis, and the end results are far from certain, but that is beyond the scope of this post for now.

The American Army learned a tremendous lesson in how to fight Fourth Generation War. Given the sheer size and amount of bureaucracy that comes with such a large and potent force, it is actually remarkable to this average citizen that we responded so "quickly." However, our lessons are far from conclusive as it remains to be seen how much of what we learned has been institutionalized.

This is the debate I'd like to be having right now. Unfortunately, the only thing we get is a trumped-up "scandle of the week" designed almost entirely to destroy the credibilty in those in power, regardless of truth, by those who are seeking to regain it. Partisan politics have actually hampered and affected our ability to win a war against a foe that will not give up so easily.

I'm not entirely sure how committed Donald Rumsfeld is to waging and winning a Fourth Generation Style War in the long-run, but I do know that he has allowed his commanders on the ground to employ a very risky and ultimately successful strategy in Western Iraq. This is the wide-birth I'm talking about. Under no circumstances am I here to convince anyone that Rumsfeld is blame-free (and as SecDef, he should ultimately be held accountable), but I do believe that it is important that we allow our leadership, civilian and military, some significant room to make mistakes, learn from them, and to refine our warfighting capabilities against a real and nihilistic enemy. We don't have time to take our new ideas into the simulators and war-game them to death. We have to fight now, we are doing so, and have been seeing some favorable results recently.

In conclusion I support Rummy to stay on these grounds, as we'd just be firing someone over partisan pressures and mostly likely replacing him not with someone of superior ideas in fighting this war better, but with a contrarian benefitting from serendipidous circumstances. Find me someone with a better pedigree and I might reconsider, but John Kerry, Anthony Zinni and Wes Clark have done nothing but demonstrate that their ideas are a thing of the past, and that is the last place we need to be now.

Work has been crazy busy. I launched my company's first business performance management system on Friday and have spent a good deal of the weekend ironing out the kinks. Huge time killer...

I have a big Death Valley post with pictures on the way. Maybe later tonight or tomorrow. I have it written, but getting all the pictures loaded is a huge pain.

Sorry for the lack of posting in general, as I actually miss writing.

Anyway, back to work for me! Talk to you later...

Something Stinks (Afganistan Operations and Proxy War)

Coming back from my hiatus in the desert, I've been reading some backpage news stories about some pretty significant operations in Afghanistan as the Taliban and al-Qaeda attempt to reassert pressure on the new Coalitino-backed, democratic government.

C.S. Scott has a great post with a map detailing the confrontations between Coalition and Taliban/al-Qaeda forces.

My initial thoughts are that the Taliban will have a much more difficult time launching a "successful"* insurgency like the way al-Qaeda has done in Iraq. While they will use the same strategy in Iraq--attacking soft targets like convoys and civilians--they don't have the strongholds of support within Afghanistan to sustain continued operations against Coalition and democratic forces.

The strongholds of support within Iraq were not only willing to harbor terrorists, they were also rich in resources (money and caches of things that go boom). Al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan are not devoid of these resources, but they are going to be much more reliant on outside supply lines into the country than the insurgents required in Iraq.

The goal here would be to cut the supply-lines into Afghanistan and choke the feeble and more vulnerable Taliban-insurgency. Any guesses as to where they are getting their supplies from? The Waziristan region of Pakistan is the easy guess, but I would beg the question that there is a border country just to the south that is far richer in resources and would be very interested in diverting our attention into other areas.

Do you think the Iranians are suppporting proxy wars on multiple fronts to keep the perception alive that we are unable to militarily fight them with our hands tied in other, and "supposidly" less militarily problematic areas?

I'm becoming more convinced that an all-out offensive against the mullahs in Iran will not only solve the nuclear issue, but Iraq and Afghanistan will grow into their newfound freedom by leaps and bounds. If Iran gets nukes, the problems our efforts have encountered in the region are going to mulitiply. Choking the rat-lines will help, but I think killing the Big Rat that is breeding the little rats running up and down the rat-lines is the ultimate solution.

Do we have the resolve and the stomach left for another push to win this war? Can the West put partisan politics aside to make what could be the most important push in this war against Islamic-expansionist fascism?

I hope the sickness in my stomach resulting from my perceived answer to these questions is just a case of me being far too pragmatic...

----

* My scare quotes around "successful" have to do with the fact that the insurgency has been anything but "successful" in Iraq. They've managed to delay and project the appreance of real power through disinformation in the media, but on the ground they have done little to change the course of establishing an elected government in Iraq. The quagmire that is projected by the information channels in the West exists more in their heads than in actual reality.

Back

I'm back.

Remember when I said I'd be back Monday? Well, my trip back to the lowest point and hottest point in North America was thwarted by snow.

The pass getting over the Sierras that we took out (Highway 88) was closed due to avalanche danger. We drove another 50 miles north to Reno to catch Rt 80 and the billions of people who used the long weekend to ski in Tahoe. So away we went.

Then we hit the parking lot (what was once a freeway) and sat in the blizzard for 3 hours. After 3 hours, we moved the 1/2 mile needed to turn around back to Reno.

Warm beds and showers awaited.

I'm a day late getting back. I'm all tore up about it, you see. Another day away from you, my loyal readers and friends.

So, what do you want to talk about now?

Outta Here

Ok, I'm out like gout for a few days. I'm leaving the office for the greener pastures of, um, Death Valley?

Wish us Godspeed in our adventures and I'll be sure to bring back written narrative and photographic evidence so rich, you'll be tasting the sand on your computer screen.

Tiger's Special Word

Apparently, Tiger Woods has offended "disability rights" advocates by referring to himself as a "spaz" after the Masters.

Anyhow, in this BBC story is a poll taken by one of the BBC's interactive pop-culture sites that lists the Top Ten Worst Words you can call someone:

1. Retard 2. Spastic 3. Window-licker 4. Mong 5. Special 6. Brave 7. Cripple 8. Psycho 9. Handicapped 10. Wheelchair-bound

What's wrong? Did Tiger offend his inner-Window Licker?

1906 Earthquake - Cont.

Here is the front page of the SF Chronicle from April 21, 1906:

Three days after the great quake, the headline in the bottom right really grabbed me:

"Faith Abounds in United City: Determination to Rebuild is Everywhere Found"

1906 Earthquake

The San Francisco Chronicle has had a great series about the 1906 earthquake.

Today, they have an audio slideshow and a great slideshow here.

Here are a couple of the images:

The Ferry building then:

Ferry building today:

This one is a little scary:

These men are standing almost where my apartment building is located today. I have a nice little view from my pad, and I like it best without flames sweeping the landscape.

Suffering is Redemptive

Reading the papers today, you'd think all hell is breaking loose in Iraq.

Meanwhile, our troops are out there winning this damn war.

The Iraqis need to form their government, and I'm waxing weary of the posturing by clerics, radicals and Islamo-cry-babies. But, for crying out loud, they have to go through this. This is part of their history where all the ideologies that have been warped by years of tyranny, radical Islamic rhetoric and 5th century thinking are clashing in the middle of Bagdad for the first time in a political arena. This is the first time in history of the Middle East that this is occurring.

Have you ever seen The Mission? In it, Robert De Niro plays swindling, opportunist slave-trader (Rodrigo) who kills his own brother over another woman. Rodrigo, in the depths of despair, meets Friar Gabriel who challenges him to face his sin and seek divine forgiveness through an act of penance. Rodrigo accepts and goes back with Gabriel to the rain forests to live with the Guarani people whom he used to trade and sell.

For the journey, Rodrigo is forced to carry a bag/net full of armor with him. To get the Guarani village, he must carry this heavy burden up a cliff face several hundred feet tall. In doing so he struggles mightily. At any point, this beaten man could have given into self-loathing and turned around and went home, or just let go of the rope to end his life. After all, he did murder is brother. Instead he clumsily fights his way up the ropes and makes it, with the armor intact, to the top.

As he lays by the edge of the cliff, exhausted and the armor still tied to him, a Guarani man takes his macheti and cuts the rope loose. The armor, which he struggled carrying all the way up the cliff, fell all the way back down to the bottom, splashing in the river never to be seen again. He looked up at the man who set him free--a man whom he used to enslave, and broke down in a laughing, gut-renching cry. It was the cry of a man who understood complete redemption and the suffering endured to get there. The tears flowed and his smile beemed.

This is a bit of a leap, but the Iraqi people and their leaders have a lot of suffering left to do before they can understand the redemption that will lead to their ultimate peace. The radical elements have not yet been purged, and they won't be handled purely by military means. Our military in conjunction with the lethally trained Iraqi Army have given them a chance for redemption. Now they must collectively scale the cliffs in Parliament with the bag of armor attached to their backs.

It isn't going to look pretty, but in the end they have to go through it. They must decide whether they are going to continue to the top, or just let go and plunge into the river below.

But, you can count on our mainstream media to stand-by with play-by-play the whole event, pointing out each and every mistake they make as they struggle to the top. Using the freedoms that they gained on the backs of those that have suffered for them long ago, they'll be rooting for the Iraqis to take the plunge, but I hope, just like Rodrigo, that they'll embrace this period of suffering and keep pushing.

Alright Already!

I dreamt last night of sitting in the sand after surfing some beautiful and curling Hawaiian waves. As I sat on the beach, a beautiful young woman with a grass skirt comes over and hands me an ice cold Pacifico.

Ah, the sun, the rays, the smell of Hawaiian Tropic sunscreen, the crashing waves. Nowhere on earth could be better.

Just as I take a gulping swig, a big, massive man picks me up over his shoulders, carries me into the kitchen and throws me in the freezer. I sit for a couple of seconds in stunned silence, then I realize he isn't letting me out. I started to shiver and shake, while my fists pounded the door in futility.

Then, a muzzled beeping sound put my fists to rest. Cold and frigid, something was buzzing on the outside.

My alarm. I woke up cold and clammy. I left my window open last night, only to awake to more clouds and rain.

I go weather.com for the forecast.

Monday - Rain
Tuesday - Rain
Wednesday - Rain
Thursday - Rain
Friday - Rain
Saturday - Rain

I've had it.

I'm going to Death Valley Thursday night through Sunday night. It is the one place in California where I am guaranteed to see the sun for more than a 10 minute break between showers.

I'm not kidding. Pictures and write-up to follow.

New Home for the Amazings

The Mets are finally upgrading from the rat infested Shea Stadium:

Anything is an improvement over Shea Stadium, however the Ebbets Field look to the new Stadium is really smooth. I love this new design.

It looks like they modelled the idea of the design at Camden Yards--wide-open inner concourses that have all the food vendors, etc. This stadium idea is soaked in baseball feel.

Bonus: the stadium will still be in the same area as Shea, so the planes taking off from Laguardia will still buzz the roof.

I'm just hoping the Mets will be able to field a team soaked in actually being able to play baseball by the time this thing opens.

Here

I said I would be around last night, and apparently, I lied. After having a good friend in town for the entire week, I was spent.

In the meantime, my East Coast blog-friend Colossus posted fantastic National Lampoon's post about dealing with difficult people at work. Here is my favorite remedy for dealing with the lady who tries to make people dress up for silly holidays, and makes you feel like common street trash for not participating:

Let her see things from your perspective.

At one company where I worked as a consultant, I had the men in the office organize Gladiator Days. On Gladiator Day, everyone was required to go shirtless and speak only in profanity. Everyone was forced to carry a club and all requests were ignored unless followed up with a threat (i.e., "Make these fucking copies for me or else I'll see that your daughter starts being an orphan and stops being a virgin on the very same night.")

By lunch, the message was sent loud and clear: what is fun for one and what is fun for another are two very different things.

I would declare Gladiator Day here at TenFingers6Strings, but I fear an all-out riot from the Philadelphians reading this site.

Back later tonight...Lots of stuff going on at work.

Iraq Link

In light of my posts about Iraq yesterday here and here, go read the Colossus for another optimistic take. Here's the money quote at the end:

This will doubtless be reported in the press as a catastrophe. We will hear wailing and gnashing of teeth about how even the loyal Shi'ites who once loved us have now turned against us. But for Iraq to succeed it needs to steer a middle course -- navigating between Sunni strongmen (Saddam) and Shi'ite mullahs (Al Sadr). While we'd all like for this to happen overnight, it isn't going to -- the pendulum will oscillate back and forth until things get settled.

Morning at Work

The day has gotten off to a rough start. I have a manager that I work with who's primary responsibility is to maintain solid lines to our parent company in New York. He's an accounting manager and our parent company has Sarbanes-Oxley requirements, which pretty much means that every accountant working for our Dear Leader's entire job is centered around being as pedantic, ridiculous and anal as possible. We are just a dinky subsidiary that keeps missing our numbers, and it is hard to earn the confidence of our overlords when performance of the company as a whole is unspectacular.

I'm not an accountant, and I can think of no job on earth that would make me want to gouge my eyes out with a spoon more. I appreciate those that do this job like I appreciate the roto-rooter man--they pump the crap so that I don't have to. However, I work closely with these guys because relationships with our parent company is my business.

Well, this morning I received a complaint on my voicemail that prompted a very uncomfortable conversation I had to have with said manager. It went like this:

Me: If parent company troll #2 doesn't understand your spreadsheet, you can't call her a shithead...

Roto-Rooter Accountant: But she's an idiot.

Me: Great, how does that make her a shithead? Not only have you managed to destroy your relationship with those who have us by the tail, your invective mislabeled her incompentcy.

Roto-Rooter Accountant: What doesn't that mean?

Me: If you called her Shit-for-brains at least you would have made a correct association.

Roto-Rooter Accountant: It slipped.

Me: She said you called her a shithead 14 times.

Roto-Rooter Accountant: She called me a meathead.

Me: Well, at least she managed to get the association correct.

Actually, I don't blame him as much as I blame the previous CFO that thought it would be good to hire a former college football player in a role most responsible for maintaining delicate relationships with little old ladies and career assosiate level accountants in a billion dollar organization. If you are looking for nuance, it probably is a bad idea to fill it with someone who slams the phone on the desk repeatedly when thing don't go his way. When all his co-workers refer to him as "Roid Rage," you might think about offering some anger management classes to him, or maybe you can find a job more suitable to his personality, like Sales.

You know, just saying...

Political Developments in Iraq Cont.

(Via the Belmont Club) Robert Mayer, at Publius Pundit, correctly anticipated the latest political scenario in Iraq:

The sectarian killings taking place on behalf of the Sadrists and other UIA affiliated militias are, in a sense, a threat to the others that Jaafari will become prime minister whether they like it or not. They want to keep power and will do anything it takes to keep it. This is why they have called the new Sunni-Kurd-secular umbrella group to bloc Jaafari’s nomination a coup. They have also asserted it to be Jaafari’s “right” to govern simply because they nominated him. This is why they no longer support America’s presence in the country — despite formerly being its staunchest supporters — because America no longer supports their monopoly on government.

It is the fundamentalist branch of the UIA itself that has caused the political gridlock, but it is the more nationalist SCIRI, the smaller parties, and the independents who are finally speaking out and may be ready to break with the UIA in order to support an Abdul-Mahdi candidacy for the premiership. They know it is no longer in their interests to support an alliance in which they do not benefit. They are seeing that working with the Sunnis, Kurds, and secular to form a national unity government will not only strengthen the country, but isolate pro-Iranian elements within the Shia political elite.

I predicted this would happen last month and even before that. But at that time I warned you all to watch for this to happen. It’s happening. Now watch as Jaafari’s calls for Shia unity go unheard as real political pluralism and cooperation begin to unfold. The only problem now is what the isolated fundamentalist Shia will do with their militias once they lose power.

What is happening is move to the center, and nationalism is carrying more weight than alliances with dictatorial neighbors. Good call on Mayer's part, but I'd like to think about the open ended question he posed to us: "what (will) the isolated fundamentalist Shia will do with their militias once they lose power?"

Omar at Iraq the Model reports:

On the other hand it seems that the radical elements have made up their mind to enter yet another confrontation, after putting redlines on some blocs and rejecting any discussion concerning replacing Jafari, today according to al-Arabiya TV, the Sadrists have issued a warning saying they will withdraw from the political process if Jafari is replaced by another candidate. By doing this, they are even opposing the majority opinion of the UIA as it's been made public that major powers inside the bloc gave Jafari a 3-day deadline as a last chance for him to try to convince the other blocs with his program and win their acceptance, otherwise he must step down. Of course this doesn't mean the Sadrists will withdraw to sit at home and watch others form a government but it means they will fight those who oppose their vision. In fact lately I've been hearing some Sdar followers say they predict a large-scale offensive to target Sadr city and the Mehdi Army soon and that the ranks of the Mehdi Army are kept at full alert to respond to any such offensive.

Omar reports that there is a strong chance that the Sadrists and their Mahdi Army are going to drop out of the political process and possibly fight it out in the hopes of causing further instablity.

If this happens, then the fundamentalists dropped the ball big-time with their political gambit. Tyrannical minded people cannot understand the concept of wait-and-see political compromise, and they have now exposed their soft underbelly by outwardly threatening harm towards those that oppose their power. If al-Sadr and Jaafari were more astute, they would have realized that their power lies within the context of the political process, and not by threatening from the outside.

The American military, for the most part, cannot open up and directly engage these elements, as they have tacitly joined the political process that the Americans have worked so hard to uphold. It is very difficult for the military to operate against these militias without causing some major instability within the brittle government. However, the political process is playing out, the fundamentalists are in danger of losing the power they initially had, and are threatening harm on those that are allying against them. If they get so agitated that they believe they can start a fight outside the ring, they are in big trouble.

If they pull out, the Sadrists will stand outside of the legitimate government. The Iraqi Army and the American military can then go in an crush these lightweights with impunity. To further their problems, this time the Iraqi Army will be able to go in and clean these cowards out when the go running to the Holy Shrines like they did in Najaf back in 2004.

Either way, it looks like the moderates are going to win. They either gain a unified government run by nationalist Iraqis focused on forming a legitimate, federal government with a marginalized Iranian backed group sitting in the background with their fangs declawed, or the fundamentalists continue to overplay their hand and get completely defanged, declawed and buried by taking this fight to the streets.

The Battle for Bagdad

Today, Greg Djerejian looks at the situation in Bagdad, and while he sees some progress, he still thinks that there is a policy failure at the top of the American Administration that is feeding the violence that may derail the democratic experiment:

Needless to say, the Iraqi insurgency is not defeated. Equally needless to say, their chances of victory will be exponentially enhanced if a too speedy U.S. withdrawal is pursued...

...In short, we're already doing some of the things the ICG report calls for. But the situation in Baghdad today showcases how we've failed in establishing a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence, as the ICG report puts it. And one of the reasons I'm so keen to see Rumsfeld step down or be fired is that he doesn't appear to understand that one of the key prongs of defeating the insurgency means denying the insurgents legitimacy. And, of course, the insurgents derive legitimacy in Sunni areas by, say, arguing that Shi'a death squads are operating with impunity and torturing detainees.

The argument hinges on what I think is a mythic view of force projection within Iraq. Establishing a monopoly on the legitmate use of force, as far as the United States is concerned, cannot be achieved by purely military means. This is a political problem that must be solved, and that decision is above Donald Rumsfeld's pay grade (as Rummy likes to say so often). The United States has a current policy that we are to operate with the approval and cooperation of the elected Iraqi government. I agree with this policy, as it is important that the newly elected government be held responsible for the chaos reigning in their cities, and the long-term success of this "experiment" cannot gain legitmacy if the United States is the one that is constantly cleaning up the mess that stems from these people continuing their pattern of resorting to all out violence when they don't their way.

In the short-to-medium-term, this hard to swallow. The political situation in the capital is very precarious right now, but I am going to argue that I think things are starting to clear in the favor of those who are supporters of the democratic process.

First though, and I can only extrapolate from Gregs post here, I think the insurgency needs to be broken down into it's proper elements, and from there we can determine if it is "defeated" or not.

The Sunni side of the insurgency is composed of many groups, but prodominantly was driven by former Baathists, who had the money, the weapons, and the intelligence network, along with the foreign Sunnis of al-Qaeda in Iraq, who consumed the former's resources and used their fascistic, nihilism to conduct a murderous and bloody campaign that could have made Stalin blush (Zarqawi's crew). This part of the insurgency began to lose any hope of achieving its strategic goals once the United States started choking their strongholds in Western Iraq, while also forming a lethal fighting force made up entirely of indigenous Iraqis. This fighting force, for all the flak the Western Press gave them initially, are now initiating their own campaigns.

The results have been impressive. The Sunnis have split apart, with some understanding that the only hope they have for survival is to join the new democratically elected government. Al-Qaeda decided then to turn their terror tactics on these Benedict Arnolds and their supporters. Unfortunately for Zarqawi, the Sunnis, instead of being terrorized into submission, turned their guns from the American backed coalition onto their former allies. This fight continues today, and al-Qaeda has been so effectively marginalized, it has given up hope of gaining power with their fellow Sunnis in Iraq.

Zarqawi, however, is not going to give up on trying to stop the United States from achieving its objectives. He has given up the fight to return the Sunnis to power, but he still knows that even though al-Qaeda cannot technically win, they can make the United States lose by launching an all out civil war, pitting Sunni versus Shiite. From the Sunni standpoint, the results of an all-out civil war would be catestrophic because the Shiites outnumber them by such a great degree--they would have to leave the country or be exterminated.

This leaves the American effort in a very dangerous and exposed postion--while the Sunni insurgency could be handled through the Pentagon and by our troops on the ground, this new phase has to be handled by first and foremost by Iraqi politics.

Zarqawi has been bannished from Western Iraq, and has re-concentrated within Bagdad. The long-term prospects of operating in an area where your "supply lines" are cut off is suicidal, but his hope is that civil war breaks out before they can be wiped clean. This is a huge gamble, but by attacking Shia populations within Bagdad has given the legimacy to local radical militias such as the Mahdi Army and Badr Brigades. Greg is right, the legitimacy of these groups is disturbing and cannot be tolerated, but I do not believe that the best option for reestablishing a monopoly on power lies within not within Pentagon, but within the Iraqi parliament.

Yikes. Things there have been very frightening, since they haven't been able to establish a government. The more religious and radical side of the Shia political alliance has taken this opportunity during this time of instability to rise up and "promise" protection to their constituents. However, they may have jumped the gun too early. The Shia's know that their power within the country right now hinges on their alliance with each other, and the radical elements within this alliance have fallen out of favor with the most respected Shia in the country, Ayatollah Sistani.

Bill Roggio reports:

As the political deadlock to form the Iraqi government continues, support for Jaafari within the United Iraqi Alliance continues to wane. Another influential member of the UIA has stepped forward and called for Jaafari's resignation following United Iraqi Alliance senior member Kasim Daoud's denouncement of Jaafari's candidacy. Jalal al-Deen al-Saghir, who according to Reuters "sits on SCIRI's main leadership council and is said by Shi'ite politicians to be close to top cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani," has has publicly opposed Jaafari...

...al-Saghir's relationship to Sistani is a strong message, as Sistani is the most respected and revered Shiite cleric in Iraq and the 'glue' holding the disparate blocks of the UIA together. While the various Shiite parties are often at odds and have different political agendas, the need to remain united and maintain a Shiite majority in the parliament is the overriding principle for the existence of the UIA. The memories of Saddam loom large in the eyes of the Shiite political parties.

It is clear Sistani has jettisoned support for Jaafari, which all but spells the end of Jaafari's bid to lead the new government and Sadr's influence with Jaafari. Sadr has overreached with his threats against SCIRI's Abd al-Aziz al-Hakim and members of the UIA, as well as the actions of his Mahdi Army militia, and will pay a harsh political price for his actions.

Al-Sadr in his never-ending quest to gain power has let his Mahdi Army loose and has suffered the consequences. Jaafari allied himself with al-Sadr, and even though he was always opposed by the Kurds and Sunnis, he has now lost the support of his own alliance. In his place it looks like the more moderate and secular Aadil Abdul Mahdi has the upper hand in gaining the Prime Mininster post. If Jaafari is removed and Mahdi is confirmed, the stalemate in the formation of the government will likely end. The goverment will remain intact, and they'll be able to turn their efforts towards fighting the radical militias that refuse to throw down their arms.

The key point that I differ with Greg from is that I am hoping that the Iraqis themselves will handle this crisis. If they can, and there are some positive sign leaning this way, it will go a long way to demonstrate that the Iraqis can work together in this long battle to marginalize their country of those that continually seek power through violence.

The violence in Bagdad is turning out to be a last stand for the most violent parts of the Sunni insurgency, along with the opening shots fired by the radical elements from the Shiites hoping to stand atop of the new government. The violence will not end soon, and to think there is a option out there that can solve this is delusional. This fight is inevitable and it looks as if the moderate voices within Iraq, somehow through all this chaos, are finding a way to surface. This is the most important and best thing that we can hope for. Then the United States, as they stand-by, should be ready to fight alongside the Army they built and trained as soon as the Iraqis can solve their political stalemate.

Back to Writing

News headline today:

It's f'n raining in San Francisco...again.

Just like yesterday, and the day before and the day before...

Ok, my bitchin' belies the joy I feel over the many blessings in life...blah, blah, blah....

But, you should know, I'm back to writing this month! I have a big post that I am formatting some pictures for. It is another mountaineering trip.

Second, I've been following the situation in Iraq very closely and cutting through all the politicized news, I'm seeing some very good signs, while also understanding that things are very tense and dangerous there right now. Outcome is far from certain, but those that want to deem it a loss right now are gravely mistaken. I wrote a post on Friday that I scrapped because I was, well, completely wrong with some of the particulars. I've subsequently gone back to the drawing board.

It goes to show how difficult it is to understand the various Iraqi factions and how they are interacting with each other on the political front. I'd hope that I can give at least a unique perspective for you to chew on.

Live it up and stay out of trouble. See you later...