Weapons for a sensitive war
Dave Shearon says that the ideal weapon of a more sensitive war is the marshmallow blowgun.

by Donald Sensing, 8/31/2004 09:52:00 PM. Permalink |

He's baaaaaacccckkk!!!
Vanderleun of American Digest, that is.

by Donald Sensing, 8/31/2004 09:31:00 PM. Permalink |

Arnold!
An incredible political speaker, certainly rivaling Rudy Guiliani. If the Constitution permitted immigrant citizens to be president, I have little doubt he could sit in the Oval Office.

And no, I don't favor amending the Constitution to permit it.

by Donald Sensing, 8/31/2004 09:27:00 PM. Permalink |

Supporting the vets
Steve Gilbert explains how John Kerry stood up for veterans one day in September 1970. There was demonstration in Valley Forge which Kerry helped organize. Kerry was also one of the featured speakers at this event. Below is a facsimile of the leaflets the demonstrators left behind by the hundreds.



The next year Kerry told a Senate committee that these things were done by "thousands" of American soldiers throughout Vietnam and that they were deeds of American policy.


by Donald Sensing, 8/31/2004 08:43:00 PM. Permalink |

Can't win the WOT! Or the WOC! Or the WOP!


This ain't gonna happen with Islamofascists

Okay, I do have some thoughts after all on President Bush's usually-snipped answer to Matt Lauer this morning. The heart of the exchange went like this:

Lauer: “You said to me a second ago, one of the things you'll lay out in your vision for the next four years is how to go about winning the war on terror. That phrase strikes me a little bit. Do you really think we can win this war on terror in the next four years?”

President Bush: “I have never said we can win it in four years.”

Lauer: “So I’m just saying can we win it? Do you see that?”

President Bush: “I don't think you can win it. But I think you can create conditions so that those who use terror as a tool are less acceptable in parts of the world –- let's put it that way. I have a two pronged strategy. On the one hand is to find them before they hurt us, and that's necessary. I’m telling you it's necessary. The country must never yield, must never show weakness [and] must continue to lead. To find al-Qaida affiliates who are hiding around the world and … harm us and bring ‘em to justice –- we're doing a good job of it. I mean we are dismantling the al-Qaida as we knew it. The long-term strategy is to spread freedom and liberty, and that's really kind of an interesting debate. You know there's some who say well, ‘You know certain people can't self govern and accept, you know, a former democracy.’ I just strongly disagree with that. I believe that democracy can take hold in parts of the world that are now non-democratic and I think it's necessary in order to defeat the ideologies of hate. History has shown that it can work, that spreading liberty does work.

Amazing that until just a few minutes ago all I had heard since early this morning on radio news reports was - Bush said terror war is unwinnable!

Obviously, not sound-snipping the answer reveals that what Bush said was in fact thoughtful, probing and well considered. He just blew the first sentence in a political sense. This is a war of a highly unconventional nature. Only two weeks after 9/11's attacks I wrote,

This war will not have a clear ending in either time or space. There will be no surrender ceremony of abject capitulation by the enemy. Victory, whatever that word will actually indicate, will be neither final nor obvious. To the question, "How will we know we've won?" the answer is, "We won't."

To buttress my point, and the president's let's change the question:

Q: Do you really think we can win the fight against crime in the next four years?

Would you not think it either arrogant or stupid for a president to answer, "Absolutely, and by the end of my second term there will be no more crime"?

Or let's take a time machine back to 1964:

Q: President Johnson, do you really think we can win the "War on Poverty" in the next four years?

And this answer - "Yes, by the 1968 presidential election, there will be no poor people anywhere in America."

We can "win" the fight against crime or the war on poverty only in the sense that fewer criminal acts are committed or fewer people live in poverty. But can anyone expect that the time will come when America will have no crime and no poverty, as much as we desire that day to come? Not I.

So it is with terrorism. Terrorism is a tool, a technique and in many cases a raging act of nihilism. Anyone expecting victory over that in the same manner as how Japan surrendered aboard USS Missouri is not thinking. I wrote in October 2001:

Almost everywhere in the world where international terrorism grows we find poverty and human oppression, especially toward women. Tribalism and ethnic hatred also remain strong. We Americans are more free of these oppressions than almost any other people. We and our western allies must lead the way out for those people. It will take a new kind of national commitment. It will cost a fortune. It will require new kinds of armies, armies not of soldiers but of engineers, agriculturalists, financiers, administrators and educators.

It will take decades and there are no guarantees.

Yet the war can be won in substantial and substantive terms by enabling democracies abroad. The race is whether we can do so sufficiently to lower the threshold of threat before al Qaeda et. al. can successfully carry out an WMD attack against us.

by Donald Sensing, 8/31/2004 06:29:00 PM. Permalink |

The problem with being in the hospital most of the day . . .
... is that other bloggers write what I wanted to write, and there's no point in posting it myself when I can just post a link.

It was not I admitted to the hospital, btw.

by Donald Sensing, 8/31/2004 06:27:00 PM. Permalink |

Blogger stinks
But many of you knew that. In the past several days, Bloger has had the nasty habit of eating posts rather than publishing them. I've been writing posts on WordPerfect, then pasting to publish, but it's a pain to do that for short posts.

For a time I wanted to switch to MT, but then their price schedule got a bit foolish, so I canned it. Besides, a few bloggers had written that MT was a resource hog. James Joyner switched to WordPress not long ago, and it looks like a transparent change, so I might check them out.

by Donald Sensing, 8/31/2004 06:18:00 PM. Permalink |

Flags
Geitner Simmons has a visually brilliant essay on flags of the world that were modeled after the American flag.

by Donald Sensing, 8/31/2004 08:05:00 AM. Permalink |

Speeches
Rudy Guiliani is perhaps the most effective political speaker in America today. John McCain was good, but Rudy was the brightest star in the Republican sky last night, and I predict for the rest of the convention. Captain's Quarters has more from the convention floor.

by Donald Sensing, 8/31/2004 07:55:00 AM. Permalink |

Thought I'd be better by now
Today I attended the funeral of a former parishioner who took his own life last Thursday at age 18. I didn't officiate the funeral, thank the Lord. (The minister who officiated did an excellent job, frankly a better one than I would have.)

I don't feel like writing tonight.

by Donald Sensing, 8/30/2004 06:59:00 PM. Permalink |

Campaign Truth
NZ Bear's latest effort is superb - Campaign Truth, "a portal where bloggers and other interested folk can gather links to information which sheds light on where the candidates stand on issues in the 2004 Presidential Campaign."

by Donald Sensing, 8/30/2004 03:08:00 PM. Permalink |

Mexico - afloat on oil?
AlphaPatriot reports a story in El Universal that the Mexican government confirms t5he dfiscovery of enormous new oilfields there.

Luis Ramírez Corzo, Pemex's director for exploration, told EL UNIVERSAL that on a "conservative" estimate, almost 54 billion barrels lie underneath the oilfields. That would take Mexico's reserves to 102 billion barrels, more than the United Arab Emirates (which has reserves of 97.8 billion barrels), Kuwait (94 billion) and Iran (89.7 billion), and almost as much as Iraq (112.5 billion).

The official also said the discovery could enable Pemex to increase Mexico's oil production from the current level of 4 million barrels per day (bpd) to 7 million bpd.

Saudi Arabia currently produces 7.5 million bpd, while Russia's oil output is 7.4 million bpd.

Of course, the question of how easily the oil can be retrieved is important. According to the American Petroleum Institute,

U.S. petroleum imports (crude & products) in July were 13,123,000 barrels per day (b/d). Total imports in July as a percentage of total domestic petroleum deliveries was 64.2 percent. U.S. crude oil production in July was 5,436,000 b/d (of which 824,000 b/d was Alaskan).

But oil imports from the Persian Gulf are down 1.5 percent from the same month last year. 41.2 percent of imported oil comes from just three countries - Canada, Mexico and Venezuela, all of which supply more oil each to the US than Saudi Arabia. In fact, Saudi Arabia and Iraq are the only Gulf countries in the top 10 suppliers of foreign oil.

Update: David Mobley emails that the Washington Post has a thorough analysis of the oil claims, which he analyzed on his own site.

by Donald Sensing, 8/30/2004 02:30:00 PM. Permalink |

Linkagery
Some very miscellaneous links:

Why Jim Rassman is mistaken (not lying, mistaken) about being under fire in the Hap Bay river when John Kerry fished him out, March 13, 1969. This was the event for which Kerry was awarded the Bronze Star Medal. This essay by Marine combat veteran Grant K. Holcomb makes a persuasive case, IMO, and buttresses accounts by other swift boat crew members at the scene that there was no enemy fire.

John Kerry wrote, "everywhere around me there is nothing but violence and war and gross insensitivity" when he was patrolling the Mekong, right? Nope, it was when he slept in clean sheets and enjoyed three hots a day

... in Febuary 1968, while Kerry was an ensign aboard the missile cruiser U.S.S. Gridley as it plied the dangerous waters of war-torn Pearl Harbor, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA. The Gridley was still almost 6000 miles and many weeks away from the waters offshore of Vietnam.

What drama!

Freeware you can't live without (PDF file). BTW, if you hold down the shift button when clicking on a PDF link, Adobe's PDF reader opens amazingly fast.

Here's a whole library of freeware links, some of which look pretty promising, although I haven't tried any of them out.

by Donald Sensing, 8/30/2004 10:41:00 AM. Permalink |

Kabul blast a near miss
I just learned that the Kabul bombing today was not far from where one of my National Guard parishioners was on duty. His wife told me he is fine.

by Donald Sensing, 8/29/2004 08:01:00 PM. Permalink |

Letter from Iraq
Army Reserve Col. Austin Bay, a syndicated columnist with Creators Sybdicate in "the world," is wrapping up his tour in Iraq and heading home tomorrow. This is his last email from Iraq before leaving.

August 29, 2004

The intricate action in Najaf (August 5-27) absorbed my time and energy. One night in the joint operations center I called the effort "comprehensive warfare." Sounds so academic, but it does begin to describe the complexities, risks, and goals. For ten days the Corps' chief planner, Lieutenant Colonel Dewitt Mayfield, lived with the 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) in Najaf.

The 11th MEU had one Marine battalion and two mechanized infantry battalions from 1st Cavalry Division (none of this is classified). Mayfield is an exceptionally gifted planner. Our section (Plans) has two full colonels, me (Chief of Strategic Initiatives) and USMC Colonel Ray Griffith (Chief of Plans). Ray and I kid Dewitt that we really work for him. ("Can we carry your maps? You briefcase? What about your laptop?" It flusters the heck out of him.)

I was in downtown Baghdad ten days ago, and a rocket struck the building I was visiting. The large building (which I can't name) is a huge chunk of concrete --huge, a real edifice-- so it absorbed the hard smack, though the impact still bounced us all an inch in the air. Whump, and you're levitating in your combat boots. One person was injured--a broken arm I heard.

I did make another trip to Babylon on August 26. I went with British Major General Andrew Graham. MG Graham is the Deputy Corps Commander. We attended a briefing given by the senior staff officers in the Polish headquarters that command Multi-National Division Center-South (named for its location in Iraq). The center-south division also has a large Ukrainian contingent as well as an El Salvadoran unit. I've gotten to work closely with many foreign officers and that's been another intellectual boon.

For the past three months I've run the evening meeting of the Geo-Political working group; it's manned by captains and majors from Australia, Britain, and Denmark. US representatives include US Navy, Air Force, and Marines. We've also three civilian specialists who address economic and security issues. We produce a daily assessment of events and opportunities. I say I've run it , but the group more or less runs itself. I "sort of" shape discussion. I'll miss this talented group of young people. I've lined up a colonel to replace me-a fellow who just finished up a year in national security studies at Harvard.

My trek to the States begins tomorrow with a flight to Kuwait on a Royal Air Force C-130. I'll fly on Lufthansa to Frankfurt and from Frankfurt to Dallas on American Airlines. The Lufthansa flight leaves Kuwait at 1:45 AM Kuwaiti time. American Airlines --bless'em-- for a pittance in Advantage Miles has bumped me up to business class on the Frankfurt to Dallas leg. I'll enjoy that. I'll also be flying in uniform, which will no doubt be a conversational ice breaker. I'm supposed to get into Austin on September 2 - a very long but happy day.

My first assessment of a tough four months-- I know I've made a contribution here, a small, miniscule bit of sweat equity in a difficult and sobering project. I'm off to church. The Anglican/Episcopal/Lutheran service starts at 1600 hours (4pm). A young enlisted man has replaced me as the pianist. He is a chaplain's assistant (a Spec 4) with a music degree and he does a much better job than I did. However, I've been asked to make a brief encore. I'll play the postlude today. I'll reprise "Joyful joyful we adore thee." You know-"Ode to Joy."

Thank you, Austin, for a job superbly done. I am grateful, and you have served your country most capably. I hope your service is appropriately recognized.

In other military news, Cathy and attended for the first time a monthly meeting of Tennessee Military Families, an informal gathering and support group for mothers and fathers and spouses and other relatives of Tennessee Marines on active duty, including Marine Reservists called to fulltime service.

We learned after we got there that the woman who invited us less than two weeks ago had gone Bethesda hospital with her husband. Their son, Lance Cpl. Ryan Autery, lost his left arm in Iraq and is now a patient there, along with several other Marines wounded in the same blast.

There is a company of Tennessee USMCR now at Twenty-Nine Palms training up to go to Iraq. I was struck by the fact that almost none of the family members yesterday had any prior military experience or connection with the Marines or another service. Cathy and I commented on the way home how much tougher it must be for them to understand what's going on than for us.

We pray for them all, and hope you will, too.

Update: Austin Bay emails further info, that "the rocket [that hit his building] was probably a 122mm. I'm certain it was though I didn't hear the whoosh. (I can now identify incoming 122mm's by their crackling whoosh.) They fired three, the other two hit relatively open areas."

by Donald Sensing, 8/29/2004 03:25:00 PM. Permalink |

Social Climbing
The Sunday Sermon

Luke 14:1, 7-14
1 On one occasion when Jesus was going to the house of a leader of the Pharisees to eat a meal on the Sabbath, they were watching him closely. 7 When he noticed how the guests chose the places of honor, he told them a parable. 8 “When you are invited by someone to a wedding banquet, do not sit down at the place of honor, in case someone more distinguished than you has been invited by your host; 9 and the host who invited both of you may come and say to you, ‘Give this person your place,’ and then in disgrace you would start to take the lowest place. 10 But when you are invited, go and sit down at the lowest place, so that when your host comes, he may say to you, ‘Friend, move up higher’; then you will be honored in the presence of all who sit at the table with you. 11 For all who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”
12 He said also to the one who had invited him, “When you give a luncheon or a dinner, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, in case they may invite you in return, and you would be repaid. 13 But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind. 14 And you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you, for you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.”

Did you hear about the minister who said he had a wonderful sermon on humility but was waiting for a large crowd before preaching it?

Humility . . . . On a visit to the Beethoven museum in Bonn, Germany, a young American student became fascinated by the piano on which Beethoven had composed some of his greatest works. She asked the museum guard if she could play a few bars on it; she accompanied the request with a lavish tip, and the guard agreed. The girl went to the piano and pecked out the opening of Moonlight Sonata . As she was leaving she said to the guard, "I suppose every pianist who comes here wants to play on that piano."

The guard shook his head. "Van Cliburn was here last year. The museum's director offered him a chance to play the piano, but he declined, saying he wasn't worthy to touch it."

Last week NBC Sports profiled American runner Maurice Greene, competing in the Olympics. His interview, taped a few weeks ago, was a sort of track-running version of Muhammed Ali talking about boxing. Maurice was absolutely certain that after the competitions in Athens, everyone would understand why he has a tattoo on one arm of a goat, standing for "Greatest Of All Time."

In the 100-meter sprint, a quiet man named Justin Gatlin, who refused most requests for interviews, beat Mo Greene, who had to settle for silver. Last night Mo ran the final leg of the four-man, 100-meter relay, losing literally by a nose to the runner from Great Britain. Mo really is a great runner, but he seems more humble now than before.

Humility is a misunderstood thing. One of the most scathing comments I ever heard was about another officer when I was in the Army: "He is a humble man, and for excellent reasons."

Jesus’ teaching about humility in this passage is not original with him; Proverbs teaches the same thing. Jesus saw the other guests at a dinner jockeying for position; they all wanted to sit at the head table. He used the occasion to teach about honor and humility.

The word used for “honor” here is the same used elsewhere for exaltation. Jesus has no problem with honor or exaltation in themselves. He pointed out though, that genuine honor does not come from oneself, but from others. And the honor most worth having comes from God alone. Someone who strides in to a formal dinner and takes the place of honor at the head table might actually deserve it, but Jesus denies we should try to make sure we always get what we think we deserve.

Paul understood this aspect of human nature when he wrote to the Christians in Philippi, “Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus, who . . . did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant. . . . he humbled himself and became obedient to death – even death on a cross! Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name. . . ” (Phil 2:5-9).

Our understanding of humility is mistaken because we define the word from Webster’s dictionary rather than the Bible. Webster's defines humility as: “not proud or haughty, not arrogant or assertive; reflecting a spirit of deference or submission; ranking low in a hierarchy or scale.” Christian humility does exclude being proud, haughty or arrogant, but Christian discipleship sometimes does call for assertiveness. After all, Jesus used a whip literally to beat some people out the temple in Jerusalem one day, a pretty assertive thing to do! His speech was sometimes so blunt that it crossed over the bounds of civil discourse. Jesus’s humility did reflect a spirit of deference or submission, but to God, not to injustice, sin or self-exalting people. Jesus’s standing in the social hierarchy of his day is unclear; scholars debate whether carpentry was at the high or low end of Jewish craftsmanship then. Even so, Christian people may in humility understand that their social standing is a tool to be used for God’s work in the world rather than a means of self-promotion.

Jesus was humble but he was not always nice, not by conventional meaning. Christlike humility does not mean being shy, compliant or eager to please, Jesus was none of those things. Jesus’s humility sprang from being filled with a sense of divine purpose and mission to be about the work of God in the world in spite of being fiercely opposed by powerful people who eventually killed him. Humility for Jesus did not mean doubting his own power or hesitating to speak out for right and justice. What distinguished Jesus humility was his knowledge that his greatness was less in him than through him; that he could not do or be anything else than God made him.

Today like then, following Christ can mean being the target of those who exalt themselves. Discipleship can mean being subjected to smear campaigns, poison letters or being ground up in the rumor mill – but these things happened to Jesus, too. The humble can endure such things because, said New Testament scholar R. Alan Culpepper, “humility is a quality of life open to persons who know that their worth is not measured by recognition from their peers but by the certainty that God has accepted them.”

A fundamental way societies are ordered is by who eats with whom. People around the world usually associate with people like themselves. Status often is paramount. Social climbing, power grabbing and the jealous guarding of one’s privileges or position are unfortunately routine.

Jesus said that for his followers those values are reversed: “For all who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.” The one-upmanship games and mutual back scratching or back stabbing ways of the world could have no place in a new order of relationships founded upon Christ, who ate with sinners, tax collectors, prostitutes and other low-lifes, and who died strung up between two thieves.

Jesus emphasized this rejection of worldly standards by the ending he put to the teaching: "when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind" because they cannot return the invitation. In so doing, he said, we will be "will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.” In the verses immediately following today's passage, Jesus told of a man who invited some neighbors to a grand banquet, but the neighbors offered transparent excuses to turn him down.

So the man sent his servants to go into the streets and back alleys of the city and bring back the poor, the crippled, the blind and the lame. Socially, it’s a big step down for the host. He could have just given the banquet for his servants, who were a better class of people than the poor, the crippled, the blind and the lame. At least, the servants would have known which fork to use first and which wine went with which course. But the outcasts the servants bring to the banquet know none of the social graces that would make them fit in at the dinner table. They’ll show up and take a seat without believing they have a rightful place at the table.

And they’ll be right. These poor and marginalized people have done nothing to earn a place at the host’s banquet. It’s not possible that they could earn it. The host invited them because, well, because that’s what he wanted to do. In Christ's standards, who was humble - the poor people invited to the feast or the wealthy man who hosted it? I would argue that it was the host who was humble because he set aside worldly standards of social class and proper company to embrace the people whom Jesus called, "the least of these, my brethren."

Alan Culpepper wrote, “Those who live by kingdom standards and values now will not only bear witness to the kingdom but also will be rewarded in ‘the resurrection of the righteous.’ Righteousness, not social position or the esteem of others, should be our goal.” God is not interested in where we put our place tag on the tables of life. “Instead, God looks to see that we have practiced the generosity and inclusiveness of the kingdom in our daily social relationships.” The old order offers merely the reward of social position. The new order of relationships brings the reward of God’s favor.

Yet Jesus' call to humility is not merely a personal one. The church itself should mirror Christlike humility in its mission and ministry. Consider the passage from Hebrews:

... show hospitality to strangers ... Remember those who are in prison, as though you were in prison with them; those who are being tortured, as though you yourselves were being tortured.

Keep your lives free from the love of money, and be content with what you have ... .

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever. Through him, then, let us continually offer a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that confess his name. Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God.

Generosity, ministry, sacrifice, praise, doing good that pleases God – Christian virtues obviously, but might we also consider them acts of humility? For they do not exalt ourselves, but our God and the ones God loves.

In June 1945, a month after Germany surrendered, General Dwight D. Eisenhower, commander of the great allied armies in Europe, was made a citizen of the City of London, a rare honor even for an English subject to receive. The award was made by the Lord Mayor of London, at Guildhall, attended by Winston Churchill, King George VI, Queen Elizabeth, the British Imperial General Staff, and hundreds of diplomats and dignitaries. In the second paragraph of his acceptance speech, Eisenhower said,

Humility must always be the portion of any man who receives acclaim earned in blood of his followers and sacrifices of his friends.

Saint Paul reminded the Christians in Corinth, "You were bought with a price," the life of Jesus. We also might do well to remember that all glory save God's glory is fleeting, and remain humble with the cross always in mind.

by Donald Sensing, 8/29/2004 07:21:00 AM. Permalink |

The Case for Kerry
Last week I issued an invitation and challenge to supporters of John Kerry for president to make a case for his candidacy that didn't rely merely on anti-Bush rhetoric. In other words, what is the positive case for Kerry?

I received two entries, one from Scott Forbes and the other from Jospeh Marshall, faithful readers and commenters both. Both met the terms of the invitation, but only one can be pronounced "winner."

Overall, I have to give the olive wreath to Scott. As I stated in the invitation, his essay is published unexpurgated, unedited and unabridged below, without additional commentary from me. As an aside, it is purely coincidental that this morning's deadline coincided with the publication on the WSJ's site of, "Bush's defeat would be good for the GOP."

After the RNC has adjourned, I will issue a similar invitation for Bush supporters, then puts permalinks to both essays in the left-hand column of the site until election day.

The Case for Kerry
by Scott Forbes

In the past several months I've spoken or written to hundreds of Americans about the upcoming election, and registered hundreds more to request their absentee ballots. Many have already made up their minds, but some are still on the bubble: They have serious doubts about both Kerry and Bush, and are trying to weigh their options.

There are plenty of sources out there (credible and otherwise) making the case against either candidate… and we all have first-hand knowledge of Bush's performance in office, so a discussion of his merits is more reminder than introduction. That leaves only the case for John Kerry — the case that says Kerry will not only be better than Bush: He'll be a good, strong, capable leader by any measure.

The War on Terror

Of all the doubts I've heard about Kerry, the one I hear most from swing voters is less about the candidate and more about Democrats in general: Some people don't trust any Democrat to lead the nation in war. For these voters, the anti-war activists in Kerry's camp are a cause for deep suspicion — as are Kerry's credentials as a Vietnam War opponent, in spite of his decorated service record. If I can trust Kerry to fight the terrorists, these people say, I can vote for him. But how can I be sure that Kerry will walk the talk?

Well, one reason why John Kerry's combat record is under so much scrutiny (and why so much effort is being made to tarnish it) is because it shows how Kerry behaves under fire: He turns toward the enemy and attacks. What Kerry did on a Swift boat isn't proof of what he'll do in the Oval Office, and some of our finest wartime presidents were men who never saw battle… but Kerry's valor in the face of death speaks volumes about his instincts and his character. In Vietnam, John Kerry believed in taking the fight to the enemy — and he did.

In the Senate John Kerry made his mark as an investigator, rather than as an author of legislation: Instead of giving us Kerry Scholars or Kerry IRAs, John Kerry used the Senate's oversight powers to shine a light in dark places. In a three-year investigation from 1988 to 1991, in spite of attempts to block him by powerful interests on both sides of the aisle, Kerry was responsible for bringing down the global terrorist financing network that was a forerunner to today's Al Qaeda. Ten years before anyone else in Washington paid notice to shadowy networks of international terrorist financiers, Kerry was shutting down the bank where Osama kept his money.

John Kerry's plan for winning the war on terror is a comprehensive long-term strategy that uses all the tools at our disposal: From strengthening our military to reforming our intelligence capabilities, from expanding Nunn-Lugar to effectively preparing for post-combat operations, Kerry's plan for ending the terrorist threat is thorough and compelling.

And, perhaps most importantly of all, John Kerry understands that our key to victory in the fight against terrorists is to defeat the enemy's ideas. Kerry's war on terror will do more than just roll the boulder uphill: His most powerful weapons will be fundamental American principles of democracy, human rights and the rule of law. And, Kerry's election will deprive the terrorists of the strongest weapons they have: From the tortures at Abu Ghraib to the nepotism and cronyism of our hand-picked Iraqi government, America's case for democracy has been compromised by actions that run counter to our democratic principles. By making a break with these un-American policies, John Kerry restores our ability to fight the terrorists on all fronts — to not only defeat today's terrorists, but to stop would-be sympathizers from turning into new recruits.

The War in Iraq

Thirty years ago the pundits said "only Nixon could go to China" — today only John Kerry can win the peace in Iraq. Kerry changes the political dimensions of the conflict in ways that Bush cannot: As a Democratic president, Kerry can change the world's perception of Iraq, from being viewed as an essentially American struggle to being accepted as a global peacekeeping challenge.

Kerry and the Democrats have a legacy of using America's military might to achieve humanitarian goals. From Somalia to Kosovo, the Democrats sent American troops in harm's way not for short-term strategic reasons, but in altruistic, multinational efforts to stabilize countries and prevent ethnic strife. For what we need right now in Iraq, the Democrats have a stronger hand politically (and a more seasoned foreign policy team) to achieve it.

The Bush administration has stated a goal of maintaining America's military dominance, and supported the view that our military should only be used to pursue our own strategic interests. By choosing and openly declaring these values, the Republicans have lost a degree of freedom: Their appeals to other, more idealistic values are perceived through a cynical filter. Fairly or unfairly, charges that America's interest in Iraq is strategic and selfish stick to the Republicans. The Democrats are largely immune to these attacks, and can make a far stronger appeal to idealism when seeking support for U.S. peacekeeping in Iraq.

In principle, a Democrat should have been able to open relations with Communist China as easily as a Republican. In practice, only Nixon could go to China — and only Kerry can win the peace in Iraq.

Deficits, Taxes, and the Economy

My favorite bird in Washington, the deficit hawk, has been kicked out of the nest by a flock of cuckoos. The cuckoos pretend to be deficit hawks, until they take office — and then they bribe the people with their own money. Or, rather, they bribe us with our children's money, since our kids will inherit the deficits we accrue.


Sources: Congressional Budget Office (1990-2003), Congressional Budget Office (2004 projection), Citizens for Tax Justice, Friends
Committee on National Legislation.

I think even staunch conservatives will concede what kind of bird George Bush has been, so the question is whether John Kerry will be a responsible steward or another cuckoo. And the irony here is that Kerry has already shown his colors on that score… and he's paid a fairly high price for taking the fiscally responsible road.

Back in September 2003, President Bush requested an additional $87 billion in supplemental appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan — funding for a post-war reconstruction effort that administration officials had promised would be paid for by the Iraqis. At the time, I blogged:

I would stand up and cheer right now if anyone in Congress demanded fiscal accountability in response to Bush's request for another $87 billion in Iraq reconstruction money. If any member of either party insists that Bush either raise taxes or cut spending by $87 billion, I'll be a fan for life.

…and John Kerry took me at my word. He co-sponsored an amendment to the appropriations bill that suspended $87 billion in tax breaks for the wealthiest one percent of Americans, instead of forcing our children to foot the bill; the amendment was defeated, on a largely party-line vote, and then Kerry voted against the bill that financed Iraq's reconstruction with deficit spending.

In the world of dirty gotcha-game campaigning, Kerry has taken a lot of heat for that vote: First it was used as an allegation that he didn't support the troops — and then, when he pointed out the amendment he co-sponsored, that was used to accuse him of flip-flopping. But the truth of the matter is that Kerry proposed and supported an alternative to deficit spending.

You can argue, if you wish, that Kerry and the other Democrats only oppose deficit spending when Republicans are in favor of it — but ultimately that's an argument in favor of electing Kerry. If you think it's important to tame the deficit, and you believe deficit reduction only happens when one party has the White House and the other has control of Congress, then the only way to achieve your goal this year is to put John Kerry in the White House.

John Kerry's plan to restore fiscal responsibility cuts taxes for 98 percent of Americans, restores the PAYGO rule for revenue and spending bills, and supports an innovative strategy to end corporate welfare as we know it. Kerry's team of economic advisors includes former Treasury secretary Robert Rubin and billionaire investor Warren Buffett; in matters of economics, job creation, and fiscal policy, Kerry's credentials are impeccable.

Conclusion

I've run out of space, and I haven't even touched on Kerry's plans for energy independence, homeland security, health care, the environment, and countless other issues where John Kerry offers a compelling vision for our country. Kerry is more than just the Anybody in "Anybody But Bush" — he's a capable, talented leader, with good ideas about how to face the issues and challenges of our time. I believe John Kerry should be our next President, and that a vote for him is more than just a vote against Bush: It's a vote for a better future, and for a stronger America.

sorry this is so late in the day getting online - my internet service has been out for much of the day.

by Donald Sensing, 8/28/2004 06:30:00 PM. Permalink |

Spotty connectivity
My internet connection is spotty this afternoon, with no email service. Hopefully it will improve soon.

by Donald Sensing, 8/28/2004 03:59:00 PM. Permalink |

New York Times embraces McCarthyism
Best of the Web Today reports,

The New York Times' Stephen Holden reviews "Bush's Brain," a hostile documentary about White House adviser Karl Rove. Holden thinks the movie makes a persuasive case against Rove:

Although few if any of the movie's allegations of unethical behavior by Mr. Rove can be proved, the dirty tricks laid at his doorstep, mostly by association, add up to a pattern of contemptuous disregard for the truth and the arrogant pushing of legal limits without technically breaking the law. [emphasis added]

Guilt by association was the tactic that demogogue Sen. Joe McCarthy used to ruin reputations and get people fired without cause in the early 1950s.

So now the Times is a far-right persecutor of persons against whom it admits it has no evidence? I guess so.

by Donald Sensing, 8/27/2004 07:59:00 PM. Permalink |

Don't forget Fallujah
With Najaf at least temporarily quiet, it's easy to forget that Fallujah is still lawless:

The city is now without any coalition influence other than our fires. The local militia that was created as a solution to the April fighting has become a defensive army that is in collusion with the insurgents. The police are complicit with the enemy and the city is literally run by terrorists. The Iraqi National Guard battalion commander that was killed was Lt Col Sulaiman Hamad Ftikan. We knew him as Sulaiman. He was the closest thing to a true patriot and leader we have found who is actually from the local Fallujah area. He was kidnapped and murdered because he had finally gotten his battalion to stand up to the criminals and insurgents who have had their run of the city all these months. Of course his murder was not merciful. He was tortured and beaten to death. He was so disfigured by the torture that his friends could not bear to look at his body - this from a people who have seen their share of death and torture. There are still at least two soldiers missing that were kidnapped with Sulaiman and more good men are taken every day.

The city has continued to be an epicenter of terror and instability.

Fallujah is actually more intractable than Najaf. Ayatollah Sistani has little or no influence among the insurgents there, as he did in Najaf. It is a Baathist holdout, heavily populated by foreign jihadis. Fallujah is the most important base if anti-government and anti-American terrorists. Yet the bad guys are a minority of the people there.

It would seem that the only chance of true resolution of the "Fallujah problem" will be to finish these guys once and for all. The difference between now and April is that the majority of Iraqis that we meet ask us to enter the city. They are tired of the lawless [] that exists inside the city and are literally willing to have us rubble it to save it. I know it sounds strange but it is the reality here.

As long as Allawi's government leaves Fallujah festering, it will be SINO - sovereign in name only. The city must be pacified and government control established.

by Donald Sensing, 8/27/2004 04:21:00 PM. Permalink |

Kerry's racist remarks (?)
During his 1971 testimony to the Senate's Fulbright Committee, John Kerry said,

For a lot of these guys, particularly and these are the most significant numbers of people who saw combat in Vietnam --your minority groups . . . the one thing they have been taught how to do as one of them said very well, he said this at hearings before congress he said "you know I learned how to do two things while I was in the army one was to be an accountant and I can’t get a job as an accountant in this country, and the other thing I was taught how to do was kill." And I think that all of these men have a intense capacity for violence.

Minorities with an "intense capacity for violence," eh? This strikes me as a racist kind of remark. WHat do you think? Leave a comment!

by Donald Sensing, 8/27/2004 04:04:00 PM. Permalink |

Orkin man to Fallujah!
Iraqi Sheik Mahdi Saleh Al-Sumide'i, who participated in the battle of Falluja, told an interviewer that the Americans were defeated in Fallujah because spiders larger than a chair saved the city.

This spider also had thin black hair. If this hair touches the human body, within a short period of time the body becomes black or blue, and then there is an explosion in the blood cells in the human body - and the person dies.

I saw on another blog a long time ago a photo of a very large, dead spider being held for the camera by some Marines near Fallujah. It was, as spiders go, pretty huge, but it wasn't close to chair size and it wasn't covered with toxic black hair. Anyone know where this shot was? Leave the link in a comment and I'll repost it here.

Update: Thanks to KevinM in a comment for the link to this photo.

by Donald Sensing, 8/27/2004 03:16:00 PM. Permalink |

USA round ball drops third game


The US Olympic basketball team now has to try for a bronze medal after falling to Argentina 89-81. USA will play either Lithuania or Italy.

USA continued its lackluster, lethargic play and during the final minute, trailing by 10, declined to foul Argentina to stop the clock and perhaps get the ball back after a free throw.

Just before the last quarter, one the the US players told an NBC sportscaster that they would win if the officials would just turn them loose and let them play.

When the players are already blaming the refs before the game is near over, you know you've got a problem.

Update: Michael King has some messages:

Message to the USOC: Go back to collegiate players -- they are hungry, and are able to play ball with the rest of the world without turning their game into a joke.

Message to NBA Commissioner David Stern (who was at the game): Congratulations. You've turned the US national basketball team into a joke and laughing stock.

Yep. Michael also points out why Kerry just lost the voters in "the entire northeast corner of Wisconsin" when he visited Green Bay, Wis. Hint: it has something to do with the "frozen tundra."

by Donald Sensing, 8/27/2004 02:53:00 PM. Permalink |

A question for President Bush
Writing along the same line as I did about efforts by both Bush and Kerry to silence 527 Committee's speech, Jacob Sullum has a question for the prez:

Bush said he was "disappointed that for the first...six months of this year, 527s were just pouring tons of money—billionaires writing checks." And what, exactly, is wrong with billionaires writing checks, aside from the fact that the checks were not made out to Republicans?

Actually, Kerry can answer that question. While Bush is trying to shut down all 527s, Kerry just wants to shut down the very small number of pro-Republican ones, and leaved the large number of pro-Dem 527s alone.

by Donald Sensing, 8/27/2004 02:46:00 PM. Permalink |

Packages of medals
The post-Vietnam revolution in ethical affairs is paying big dividends

Vietnam veteran Larry Heineman writes in the New York Times,

The plain fact is that in Vietnam medals were handed out like popcorn, right down to the Good Conduct Medal and the Rifle Sharpshooter Badge, particularly among career-minded officers and NCO's. Ticket-punching lifers, we called them with all the derision that the phrase implies; they seemed more interested in tending their precious careers than anything else.

I was commissioned into the Army in 1977, a few years after the Vietnam war ended, so I have no way of evaluating Heineman's claim firsthand.

But I did personally hear a three-star Army general, also a Vietnam veteran, say that the Army handed out "packages" of medals for officers who served in Vietnam, and which medals were in a package depended on the officer's rank and duty position. This statement occurred at an award ceremony at the Pentagon when I was stationed there. I don't remember the LTG's name, but he was serving as the Director of the Army Staff at the time (I was there 1990-1993). The LTG made it clear he didn't think it was altogether a good thing, but neither was it altogether bad.

Near the end of the Vietnam war, the Army's chief of staff charged The Inspector General (TIG) to investigate the moral character the officer corps; did Duty, Honor Country really mean anything any more? The shock of the My Lai Massacre was the straw that broke the camel's back, leading to this investigation, which began in the early 1970s. But the Army's senior generals realized that My Lai was a tragic result of a deeper illness within the officer corps as a whole, including its senior leaders.

Not only TIG was studying the officer corps. A study by the U.S. Army War College, Study on Military Professionalism, reported,

A scenario that was repeatedly described in seminar sessions and narrative responses [to questionnaires] includes an ambitious, transitory commander . . . engulfed in producing statistical results, fearful of personal failure, too busy to talk with or listen to his subordinates, and determined to submit acceptably optimistic reports which reflect faultless completion of a variety of tasks at the expense of the sweat and frustration of his subordinates.

To make it worse, the officers reporting these habits were students at the War College itself, senior field-grade officers, extremely experienced, from whom the next generation of generals would be selected.

In fact, the Army's problems were so severe that one of the War College study's authors, Col. Mike Malone, told me in 1981 that "Duty, honor, country," had been in real danger of being displaced by "Me, my [posterior] and my career."

What is often overlooked in analyzing the officer corps' ethical vacuum of the time is that its roots predate the Vietnam war. IMO (and that of many others) the soil from which ethical corruption grew was an official "Zero Defects Program" instituted Army-wide in the early 1960s (1962 comes to mind specifically).

An outcome of systems-analysis management, the ZDP literally assumed that the Army could be and must be mistake free. Unlike Total Quality Management (which also had a brief Army heyday in the 1990s), ZDP did not allow for acceptable variances from a standard - perfection was the only acceptable outcome. Soon junior officers understood that perfection was the only acceptable thing to report as well. By the time the Vietnam war was well along,

The divergence of opinion on the source of the Army's leadership problems was symbolic of a general breakdown of communication between junior and senior officers which had deep negative effects on the officer corps. Junior officers came to feel that their superiors had little interest in their opinions or their welfare. Senior officers demanded loyalty from their subordinates to the point of subservience but paid them little respect in return. Consumed with impressing their own superiors in order to move on up the promotion ladder, officers focused on their own careers to the detriment of their subordinates. Frequently superior officers treated their subordinates as tools to be used to assist the superior officer in assembling an impressive six month record of accomplishment during his command tour, then discarded. [link, p. 17]

So you can imagine how the officers were treating the enlisted ranks.

In response to these blunt reports, the chief of staff. Gen. William Westmoreland, began a series of reforms that were expanded and continued long after he retired. The Army's next major test, 1991's Gulf War, proved that the reforms were deep, effective and pervasive throughout all ranks. I would emphasize as well that eliminating the draft was a key event in restoring the Army's professionalism, a fact that Col. Malone came grudgingly to accept.

This post is long enough, so I won't detail all those reforms, but I emphasize that as important as technology, reworking the Army's schools, funding and advanced training have been to making the Army the pre-eminent force in the world (see here), the most important revolution was ethical and moral. Duty honor, country really did return to the fore as the guidon of the officer corps. For a few years of my service in the '80s, there was a lot of discussion about drawing up a formal code of conduct for the officer corps. Fortunately, after fairly service-wide debate and a number of draft codes floated here and there, this idea was abandoned and we stuck with the ancient code of the US Military Academy: And officer does not lie, cheat or steal or tolerate those who do.

by Donald Sensing, 8/27/2004 02:39:00 PM. Permalink |

Who pays what taxes
The Detroit News made some charts from data supplied by the Congressional Budget Office that are very interesting in revealing how the income-tax burden is distributed among income groups, before and after the Bush tax cuts kicked in. Really eye opening.

by Donald Sensing, 8/27/2004 11:31:00 AM. Permalink |

Muslims for Bush
They are here.

by Donald Sensing, 8/26/2004 10:47:00 PM. Permalink |

Najaf rebellion over - reports
News reports say that Moqtada al-Sadr has accepted all the terms laid down by the Iraqi government, suggested and brokered by Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. The rebel "Mehdi army" has until 10 a.m. Friday to lay down its arms and vacate the Imam Ali mosque. Al-Sadr will not be apprehended, but will in fact have "broad latitude to carry on in public life."

We'll see.

by Donald Sensing, 8/26/2004 10:38:00 PM. Permalink |

Coffee flavor charting
Gillies Coffee Co. is the oldest roaster in the United States, founded in 1840. It has a very comprehensive selection of both roasted and unroasted (green) coffees, and its prices look quite reasonable to me.

Here it has a page grading about four dozen coffees according to flavor, body, appearance, aroma and aftertaste. Very useful!

by Donald Sensing, 8/26/2004 10:05:00 PM. Permalink |

The Kerry Supporter Challenge - Deadline is Saturday!
So far I have received only one entry to my invitation and challenge to supporters of John Kerry for president. The deadline is Saturday, so start pushing those pixels!

by Donald Sensing, 8/26/2004 09:03:00 PM. Permalink |

Congrats to Andrew Olmsted
Army armor officer Andrew Olmsted's blog is one I visit fairly frequently and have cited a number of times.

Today his SiteMeter visitors count hit 100K, "not too bad for a hobby," he says. Congrats!

by Donald Sensing, 8/26/2004 08:50:00 PM. Permalink |

Kerry's connections to pro-Dem 527s
Nope, nothing to see here, just move along, nothing to see here.

Well, actually, there's plenty.

Just three 527s have sucked up 83 percent of total contributions of all money donated to national 527s. They are Joint Victory Campaign 2004, America Coming Together, and MoveOn.org, all pro-Kerry. What is the money share of conservative 527s, including those supporting Bush's reelection? Well, just click here for a good look.

by Donald Sensing, 8/26/2004 08:38:00 PM. Permalink |

The Marines' mission made simple
Col. C. A. Tucker, commanding RCT-7 in Iraq, writes,

I was asked by a young Marine yesterday to encapsulate our tasks in a few words. My response: Provide a bulwark against the instruments of terror to allow the rule of law to take root; train the Iraqi Security Forces to do what we are doing now and kill anyone who has a problem with that; accomplish all three of those tasks without harming a single innocent Iraqi and without a single Marine in this RCT losing his moral compass. We continue to march forward on those tasks. Given time that success will be complete.

Emphasis original. The colonel is obviously a man of few words and much action. Deb at Marine Corps Moms says her son left yesterday morning to join RCT-7 in Iraq. We wish him Godspeed, success and a safe return!

BTW, what does RCT stand for in Marine talk? Regimental Combat Team?

by Donald Sensing, 8/26/2004 06:05:00 PM. Permalink |

Bush aims to crush dissent
Then White House announced today that President Bush's campaign organization would go to court to seek injunctions against Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth and all other 527 Committees airing partisan political ads.

The White House said the president made the commitment to [Republican Senator John] McCain in a telephone call from Air Force One, hoping to head off a public confrontation when the Arizona Republican and Vietnam veteran campaigns with Bush next week.

The Bush campaign said it, rather than the White House, would file a lawsuit in federal court to try to force the Federal Election Commission to crack down on the ads.

McCain has harshly criticized SBVT for its anti-Kerry ads and has several times called on Bush to renounce them. (Funny, though, I don't recall McCain finding fault with the anti-Bush virulence of Fahrenheit 9/11 or MoveOn.org, which have attacked Bush in extremely vitriolic terms, nor has he called on Kerry to renounce them. McCain=political hypocrite? O perish the thought, it's John McCain! But these groups and their products are McCain's own spawn.)

According to White House spokesman Scott McClellan, "The president condemns all the ads and activity by these shadowy groups."

Got that? Shadowy!

First Amendment? We don't need no stinkin' First Amendment! Remember, you heard this here first.

by Donald Sensing, 8/26/2004 04:17:00 PM. Permalink |

Mass killings in Najaf
Shiite marchers targeted by terrorists, hit in police crossfire; truce reputed near

Authorities still hope that Najaf can be saved from greater destruction, but tempers are hot in Najaf where marchers were fired on by terrorists, then some were hit by police bullets as police tried to return fire. Seventy-four are reported dead.

The marchers were heeding a call by revered Shiite Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani to demonstrate against rebel cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, whose self-styled "Mehdi army" has occupied the Imam Ali mosque for many weeks.

But most respondents - <a href="http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID;=