Another Villian Executed

Under conditions of tyranny it is far easier to act than to think.
Hannah ArendtUS (German-born) historian & social philosopher (1906 - 1975)


Saddam Hussien was executed. Another Villian is gone. This gives hope to all mankind that they are safe from tyrants.

Mankind is suffering from deliusions if they think they are safe from tyrants. Hussien is not the first tyrant to be executed, nor will he be the last. There are millions of people anxious to take his place on the world stage.

All the future tyrants need is power. Power taken with a few lies, and a herd of followers who believe words, but not truths. The same horrific acts will be repeated again, and again, in another country. In any country.

The year 2006 ends with the death of one tyrant. How many future tyrants will be born in 2007? And the following years?

Bilbo Baggins

Clan Consequences

"History never repeats itself ,as most people fear. People usually repeat history."
-Divine Chikobvu

Anne Bobroff-Hajal wrote an opinion in the Christian Science Monitor on December 26, 2006 titled "Why cousin marriage matters in Iraq". Bobroff-Hajal described the purpose of cousin marriages were to promote the strength of the clan. As a result the clans are fighting each other.

It seems that people have tried to belong to a tribe or clan throughout human history. Individuals seem to look at a clan as a pack that can be used for protection. People belong to the clan because of self interest, but also there is often too much family pressure to escape the clan.

Most clans have an alpha male and an alpha female. These are the people who benefit the most from a clan. Other subordinates are in support roles, hoping to become the alphas.

Many members see the clan as community property where each member hopes to get more from the clan than they put in. This indicates clans are similar to communism where members are expect to share. People in Iraq see democracy as a threat to the clan and its benefits.

In the United States the government has become the clan. People no longer have large families. Women look to the government as their husband/protector/provider. The woman does not have to compromise or negotiate. All she does is promise her vote at each election. Even though we have a democracy where the individual is supposed to be the most important, the communist word, "equal", has become a more powerful word in the Western democracies than "individual liberty".

Tribalism has always held groups back. Democracy that is operated for the good of the group instead of the good of individual liberty, will retard progress.

Bilbo Baggins

Traditions

Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable.
H. L. Mencken


Many people will posit the United States was founded on Judea Christians values, therefore we should continue the traditions of the past. Traditions practiced by all of the tribal members reinforces the belief one is right because all in the tribe thinks the same.

People will selectively choose which traditions from the past they want to promote. Yet they will propose that because their belief is 'traditional' it should be enforced. Slavery and human sacrifice used to be traditional.

Traditions are constantly being discarded by the tides of time because they do not stand the test of reason. Reason is not the cause for the conversions, time is the cause. Each new generation has a different view of the traditions, seen through different lenses.

The Christmas tradition has come under attack lately. Some cynics see Christmas cards that cost $3.00 and only say "Merry Christmas" with a signature as a waste of time. Others say standing in line at the crowded shopping malls is more waste of time and money for a spoiled and hedonistic society. Others say Christmas is a Christian holiday and should not be forced on other religions.

Many people who pretend to like traditions when they do not are practicing social behavior. Christmas is one tradition when the tribe used to all put aside conflict and differences and be alike.

When some in the tribe refuse to go along with a tradition, it creates stress and conflict in the tribe.

Pretending to like a tradition in order to promote social harmony causes stress by the pretender when the tradition starts to loose its strength. Just because some members of the tribe do not like to stand in line at the mall does not mean those members of the tribe are a threat to the tribe. However, fear of anti social behavior too often is perceived as a threat, when is it simply a challenge to something others perceive as illogical.

Bilbo Baggins

U. S. Credibility

Force without wisdom falls of its own weight. Horace (65 BC- 8 BC), Odes

In a news conference on December 20, 2006 President Bush said, "But I also don't believe most Americans want us just to get out now," the president said. "A lot of Americans understand the consequences of defeat. Retreat would embolden radicals. It would hurt the credibility of the United States."

Mr. President, I suggest our invasion of the radicals' countries has embolden them more than if we leave them alone. Your quick success in Afghanistan emboldened you to invade Iraq. If you win in Iraq it will embolden you to invade other countries. Both invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq have been a failure.

Retreat is not the proper word for an action that should never have been. Bringing our troops home is the proper phrase.

You said bringing our troops home would hurt the credibility of the United States. Credibility for what? Will we not be able to invade another small country? Will we not have the credibility of a bully when negotiotating with other nations? We lied to the world about WMDs in Iraq. The best way for us to gain some credibility is to say you made a strategic blunder and you hope future Presidents learn from this. To stay in this blunder you are in has the same fog of war ahead that was there before you invaded Iraq, which strategically, is why you should not have invaded, and why you should not escalate.

Others say we should stay in Iraq because of our national interest. What is our interest in the middle east? There are plenty of alternate energy sources so oil is not an interest. Besides they need our money as badly as we need their oil. We have no interest in the middle east. I do believe that Israel has been fighting their religious war for 60 years and their citizens are weary of war, so, the best thing for Israel is to have the United States fight Israel's war.

Japan and Germany wanted to be military empires using force against their neighbors. They were filled with hubris. Japan had colonies throughout the Pacific and Asia. Germany ruled much of Europe and had colonies in Africa. Both these military empires collapsed. Then what happened after their collapse? Both became economic empires by producing consumer goods instead of guns and bullets. Japan gained economic power that was envied by the world, and is copied now by China. China will become a global economic empire without having troops scattered around the world in other countries.

It is time the United States stopped trying to be both a military empire and an economic empire. Producing goods and services that will improve the lives of others around the world is how you create credibility, not by invading their countries and wreaking havoc on the lives of old people and children.

Bilbo Baggins

Successful Occupation of Japan and Germany

They wrote in the old days that it is sweet and fitting to die for one's country. But in modern war, there is nothing sweet nor fitting in your dying. You will die like a dog for no good reason. - Ernest Hemmingway

Many people point to the successful reconstruction of Japan and Germany by the U.S. after World War II as an example of what can happen in Iraq.

The successful reconstruction of those two countries happened because the rest of the world was against them. They had attacked China, Korea, Russia, India, African countries, and all of Europe. Japan and Germany had to submit to unconditional surrender. That had no more blood or money to give. Their countries were bankrupt and they had no political or financial support from any lending nations. The conquerors dominated the world financial markets.

Iraq still has plenty of blood and money to give. Their blood and money comes from many supporting countries. Unlike Japan and Germany after WW II, who had no allies or expatriates living in other countries, the Iraqi Sunnis and Shiites have a billion allies scattered around the world in many different countries.

The success in Japan and Germany is an exception to the rule. None of the other invasions by the United States has been successful. Vietnam, Korea, Cuba, Haiti, Philippines, Nicaragua, etc. All of these attempts at empire building have failed because empire building is done using force, not free trade, and benefits the conqueror, the State, by giving the State more power. The members of the proletariat, bourgeoisie, beggars, pimps, whores, and deadbeats, all benefit psychologically by deceiving themselves into thinking they are great, and safer. The empire builders seldom benefit economically.

Even after the November 2006 elections that said the electorate wanted a change in Iraq, the democratic leaders are still supporting the war in Iraq. Senator Barrack Obama an early opponent of the war, now supports a way to "win", whatever that means. Even the democrats are delusional. No tribe likes to be defeated, so no matter how flawed the strategy, or how immoral, the tribe will try desperate measures to save themselves from a humiliation and defeat they will have to live with for the rest of their lives, and the record of failure will be on future generations. This defeat makes the tribe live in fear, because defeat shows vulnerability, and no tribe wants to be vulnerable.

Bilbo Baggins

More Troops to Iraq

War would end if the dead could return. -Stanley Baldwin, statesman (1867-1947)

According to an AP report, President Bush said in a Washington Post interview for December 2006, he will send more troops to Iraq.

This action would be something to laugh at except it is fraught with peril. President Bush's past rodomontade has him in a situation where he is desperate. Superpowers always try to dragoon their opponents. Superpowers are often envied and feared, but seldom loved.

The possessor of power has never been humbled until their power has been taken away. The United States has not been humbled by a few men with simple weapons, the United States has been humiliated. War has too many unseen consequences, which is why it should be avoided. Sending more troops to Iraq is a gamble that has too poor odds.

The policy of sending more troops to try an salvage a bad policy reflects on the mind of the crowd. The United States crowd sees a bad situation in Iraq, but they cannot imagine themselves being defeated, even if their fight is unjust. Former President Bush said when he kicked Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait, "This will exorcise the ghost of Vietnam". Pride, a deadly sin, will cause the American crowd to sink further into a morass, a morass that will lead to more desperation, death, debt, and destruction. The American crowd is afraid to have to live with the shame of another Vietnam.

We have what is called a voluntary military. This means the people voluntarily join, but then they are highly paid, so we have a mercenary army. They will soon stop fighting if the risk reward ratio has too much risk. Thousands of foreign nationals are promised expedited hearings to U. S. Citizenship if they join the United States Army. Still the dangers in Iraq a sergeant faces making $50,000 per year, will allow him to make four times that as a private security guard in Iraq. The free market will tell the Army personnel their risks are not being rewarded. So even with a voluntary army, the frontline troops will be the first ones who see the futility of an unnecessary war, and they will start to rebel. Their morale will plummet, and the psychopaths at home will have no gladiators to cheer for.

Update, 5/1/2010. The frontline troops have not revolted because their pay and benefits, the new GI Bill, have all improved. Risk and rewards.

Bilbo Baggins

5,000 Years of Middle East History

A newspaper in New Hampshire said: "The Southern Confederacy will not employ our ships or buy our goods. What is our shipping without it? We must not let the South go."


http://www.mapsofwar.com/images/EMPIRE17.swf

The above link is to an interactive map presenting the longest running show in history, five thousand years of trying to conquer the Middle East. Will the show last another 5,000 years? Who will be the latest conqueror, only to be driven out like the rest?

Other parts of the world have seen attempts in the past to build empires. All past empires based on occupation of others' territories have failed.

Much of the conflict in the early history was before Christianity, Judaism, Islam and oil. So what were men fighting for then? Women. Men fight for women. Would men raise armies and kill each other if there were no women, and men had no sex drive to procreate, and men did not need money to buy and provide for women? I suspect some men would lay around in the sun, some would hunt for food, some would explore science, and some would create beautiful art.

The link above also has a history of Unites States wars. Most of them were outside the original 13 colonies and the later expanded borders. There was always an excuse for another war.

The war in Iraq has many excuses. One is to redeem the reputation of the military lost in Vietnam. Members of the tribe bathe themselves in glory, at someone else's expense. Pick your excuse, but the war in Iraq has nothing to do with defending the United States. Neither did most of the past wars the United States entered.

Bilbo Baggins

Toppling Regimes

On December 12, 2006, the Wall Street Journal published an opinion by Robert Tracinski of TIADaily.com. Tracinski wrote, "Since Iran and Syria are the most important source of the chaos in Iraq, then we need to topple those regimes."

Wait a minute! Did we not say if we topple Saddam Hussein and put in a democratic government the middle east will be stable, peaceful and prosperous? And look what a Hell that policy created. Now Mr. Tracinski and the War Street Journal want to topple two more regimes and create two more Hells! After that will they want to topple the regime in Venezuela just because Hugo Chavez does not like President Bush or whoever is the next president? Mr. Tracinski and others who believe we can just pick other people's leaders are like a child that believes in fairy tales. How would Mr. Tracinski feel if the government of Venezuela picked our leaders. We seem to have better relations with those large countries whose leaders we cannot pick.

Mr. Tracinski and those who love war are like a humanitarian with a guillotine. "Most of the harm in the world is done by good people, and not by accident, lapse, or omission. It is the result of their deliberate actions, long persevered in, which they hold to be motivated by high ideals toward virtuous ends." Isabel Patterson "The God of the Machine", 1943
http://www.fee.org/publications/the-freeman/article.asp?aid=38

We have alienated people of many small countries because we placed in power puppet governments that are friendly to the United States. This has often caused resentment by the proletariat and poor, leading to revolutions, because the leaders of those countries were paid by the U. S. indirectly through protection or foreign trade. We helped protect and install the Saudi and Kuwait rulers and watched as they provided us with access to their country's oil while they lived in riches beyond one's wildest dreams, as their people lived in poverty. Now their people want a change. The Saudi rulers want to protect their life styles from the Shiites so they said if the United States pulls out of Iraq the Saudis will help the Sunnis in Iraq.

It's time for the United States to stop meddling in other peoples' governments. The Sunnis and Shiites will stop fighting only after they have satisfied their blood letting. This is what happened in Europe in World War One when ten million white Christian men died for no justifiable reason. The war ended in exhaustion. Sadly, the war in Islam will end the same way.

Bilbo Baggins

Real Wars are Never Simple

"Time makes more converts than reason." Tom Paine, Common Sense



>Real wars are never simple,<

Which is why they should not be started without just cause.

>critizing from the peanut gallery is.<

Now citizens' dissent is called the "peanut gallery"! Your umbrage towards our basic right to dissent shows the impuissance of your position.

> it is also arrogant to assume they could do a better job of it, as the Left seems to insist.>

A better job of invading other countries? Who assumes that? Only the Neo Warriors disagree on strategy. The left, 126 democrats, voted against the resolution to topple Hussein. Asking them to do a better job of "it" is like asking the victim to help in their own murder.

The neo warrior Jay Garner was on C-Span saying the invasion of Iraq was just because we thought Saddam Hussein was bad to the Iraqi people. The neo warriors belief that they can change the middle east is thaumaturgy. Changing Iraq was a fatuous goal. They went into Iraq with complete nescience. Garner is what Isabel Patterson referred to as the humanitarians who kill in order to do good. Garner is convinced we are good and Hussein is bad, so no matter how many people we kill our motives are justified. As Patterson writes in her "God of the Machine", a chapter titled "The Humanitarian With the Guillotine", "Most of the harm in the world is done by good people, and not by accident, lapse, or omission. It is the result of their deliberate actions, long persevered in, which they hold to be motivated by high ideals toward virtuous ends."

These humanitarians like Jay Garner will use any canard, any myth, any chimera to liberate their conscience of the need to kill others. They behave in a puerile fashion while living in a sadomasochism world. A world where the ultimate sport is war. Their emoluments come at the expense of the sufferings of others.

The war in Iraq is just another act on the world stage where "The Folly of War" is the longest running performance in history. The next act will have different players, but the plot never changes.

Human behavior has been the same for a thousand generations. Some people's lives are like a roller coaster, up and down. Other lives are like an escalator, moving upward. Some lives are like a moving sidewalk. Then there are the lives of the warriors, like a Merry go Round, round and round they go, always seeing the same death, debt and destruction.

People who use force as a means to an end never understand that force is community property and can be used against them. It is a specious argument that force can be used for good. Each side then can use force on the other, claiming they are doing good. The hubris displayed by dominant groups today is a path to defeat. It only takes one dissident with a match to wreak havoc on a population. Theodore Kaczynski was a unabomber who was not caught for 15 years. John Allen Muhammad, the sniper in the Washington, D. C. area, kept millions of people terrified so they did not want to leave their homes. When States operate using force and violence as their means to grow and gain power, they will meet resistance, always.

I don't believe the hysteria delivered by the neo warriors that 20 or 30 years from now the Muslims will take over Europe and eventually rule the world. The greatest political event of the past 50 years, the collapse of the Soviet Union, was not predicted. Reason will not change radical Muslims, but time will. New generations of young people will seek a new path and identity. Predicting the future is a pastime for charlatans who collect a fee from the gullible and naive.

Bilbo Baggins

Appeasement

Power always thinks it has a great soul and vast views beyond the comprehension of the weak; and that it is doing God's service when it is violating all his laws. -John Adams, 2nd US president (1735-1826)


Appeasement is a word used to describe Neville Chamberlain's treaty with Hitler in 1938. The war lovers use this term to describe the horror that awaits the United States if the U. S. negotiates with "terrorists" countries like Iran and Syria. The war lovers seem to say that negotiations can only be done between friends.

What would have happened if Woodrow Wilson and the allies would have "appeased" the Germans before World War One?

The world gone mad would not have killed ten million young men. There would not have been a cause for Hitler to take power.

What would have happened if Abraham Lincoln would have "appeased" the southern states who wanted independence?

There would have been no war that killed 2% of the population, mostly young men. And slavery would have ended as it did in other countries.

What would have happened if the United States had "appeased" the North Vietnamese and let them unite their country, as later happened?

There would have been 58,000 less United States young men killed and thousands less maimed. There would not have been 3.4 million Vietnamese killed.

What would have happened if the United States, in the finally days of World War Two, had "appeased" the Japanese and let them keep their Emperor, (as they did in the finally surrender) before dropping weapons of mass destruction?

There would have been thousands fewer innocent women and children killed by the WMD dropped by the United States on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

What would have happened if President Kennedy did not "appease" the Russians by removing U. S. missiles from Turkey during the Cuban Missile Crisis?

We can only imagine the horror if President Kennedy did not negotiate with the enemy. Maybe it is time we realize the horror that awaits us if we refuse to negotiate with our enemies.

Bilbo Baggins

A Strong Defense

"Time makes more converts than reason." Tom Paine

There are strong supporters of President Bush because they think he is strong on defense. No matter how much they disagree with his other policies they support him because of their fear of terrorism. Their fear of an invasion or nuclear attack by some third rate nation that does not have a navy is risible.

I think President Bush is not strong on defense, but, is strong on offense. In an Orwellian world some would say that invading and posting troops in other countries is defensive. This foreign policy tends to create more enemies than friends so how can this be called a strong defense? Would U. S. citizens like it if troops from Iran or Canada were posted in the U. S. to force U. S. citizens to conform to Iranian values? Of course not. U. S. citizens would resist and the occupying army would refer to the U. S resistors as insurgents.

A recent news story said that five years after 9/11 the counter terrorism unit of the FBI only gave 2 hours of training of Arabic culture to new FBI agents. That time has recently been increased to 12 hours. Top leaders in the counter terrorism unit of the FBI could not tell the difference in Sunni and Shia religions, nor could they say there was a link between 9/11 and the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, nor could they tell who was Osama Bin Laden's spiritual leader. This lack of knowledge about the enemy simply shows the arrogance and hubris that goes with being a superpower. This attitude shows we have enough force to wipe you off the map with our WMDs so there is no need to find a way to negotiate with you.

Instead of meddling and stationing troops in other countries the defense department should defend America first, not other countries. We spend more per capita on defense than any other country, yet the odds of us being attacked by terrorists are greater than any other western country. The same IEDs that are built in Iraq by poorly equipped insurgents will be going off in the United States in the future. Some of these IEDs will be built by disgruntled copycat terrorists. So much for being strong of defense.

After four years in Iraq that has consumed death, debt and destruction, the Iraq Study Group has recommended,- surprise - diplomacy! So much for defense. No matter how often leaders are encouraged to negotiate, leaders who have a big ego and a big army make poor negotiators. They prefer force, the procedure that gives meaning to so many lives. The recommendations of the Iraq Study Group is a palliative for a dying Iraq policy.

Bilbo Baggins

Sharia Law

There is much talk by the Preachers of Fear about how oppressive Sharia law is. The fear mongers talk as if Islamic leaders want to impose Sharia law on to the rest of the world.

Sharia law is complex and has many interpretations among Muslims groups. It has been followed for centuries. If Glen Beck or Newt Gingrich were born Muslim they would be claiming that Muslim traditions are threatened by man made laws of the west.

Whether Muslim, Christian or Jew, each wants their laws to be based on the Koran, Torah or Bible.

For centuries the west had many laws that were based on the bible. One such law was the Blue Laws, which prohibited work on Sunday. The preachers wanted to make sure the workers would attend church to make their donations.

Another biblical law was that slavery was acceptable. This was proclaimed by southern preachers to insure the wealthy plantations owners who were sitting in the front pews would make a donation.

Just because we have man made laws does not mean they are just. Look at the O. J. Simpson verdict. Lately there have been many men released from prison because DNA showed they were innocent. Many of these black men went to prison on false charges or misidentification by a white witness. Many black men were hung in the south on a simple accusation of a white female. Men in the west serve more prison time than women for the same crime. Family courts in the west deprive fathers of their natural rights to their children.

Bastiat wrote "The Law" is a tool for legal plunder. In the west the laws are so numerous they have less to do about protecting life and property than they do about creating jobs for the police, judges, and others in the criminals industry. Our laws are about different groups trying to impose their views on others groups. Our laws are written by special interest groups. Whatever is the social topic of the day there are those who want to legislate that topic. Trial lawyers reap the benefits of our complex law industry.

All groups believe their way is the best way. They believe it so strongly they want to impose their values on others, even if force is required.

A simple law will work for all groups; "Do no harm to any person or their property."

Bilbo Baggins