Happy Thanksgiving!

Iraq and Murtha

Recently Congressman Murtha (D - Pa) called for the pullout of US troops from the Iraqi warzone over the next 6 months. This clarion call for immediate change has been met with a clear and uncompromising reaction from the administration, with everyone from Cheney to Rumsfeld going on talkshows to drive home the message that this sort of dissent and debate is unpatriotic and significantly hinders the war effort.

Of course, this would not have been big news coming from Ed Kennedy. But Murtha is a different character entirely. Known as a hawkish Democrat, Murtha served in the Marines for 37 years. He has been in the House for over 30 years, making him one of the most senior Democrats on the floor. In addition, he holds an influential post as the ranking member (and former chairman) of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee.

Backing away from the vitriolic comments of his staff, Bush said that he respects Murtha and his right to have a differing opinion, but he violently rejects the notion that pulling out of Iraq is the right course of action. He also tacitly implies that he agrees with the notion that this debate is detrimental to the war effort.

Most leaders, from both sides of the aisle, do not view an immediate troop pullout as a viable option. It would significantly increase the possibility that Muslim radicals, who have the only real national network within Iraq, would take over the government and revert Iraq to its former state. The worst case scenario would be a new Afghanistan, which we cannot allow. However, it is blatantly clear that the occupation has been mismanaged to an almost criminal degree. Report after report (excluding governmental reports) show that the Iraqi army is nowhere near our stated goals in terms of level of preparedness. As long as they cannot take over the security of the state, our troops are stuck.

The fact is that this debate is not only clearly needed, it is vital to our success. Without a public debate that allows a free exchange of ideas we lose not only our ability to make good decisions, but also our essential freedom as Americans. The contention by Cheney, Rumsfeld, and others that this debate is irresponsible is just ludicrous. Their main critique is that these allegations undermine the morale of our troops in the field, and give hope to our enemy. The harsh reality is that the morale of our troops is hurt more by a tragic lack of armor, support, and an increased insurgency presence than by any allegations made at home. As for giving hope to the enemy, it would be negligent of us to blindly continue forward without examining our strategy just because we think it might give some hope to our enemy.

Our government needs to do more, not less, in terms of transparency and accountability in this war. The Senate just passed a bill that requires the adminstration to provide quarterly updates on the progress of the Iraqi war -- I find it not only incredible that they had to pass a bill to get this done, but even more incredible that this has not been happening already. I mean, who is monitoring the progress of our billions of dollars and thousands of soldiers? Isn't that the job of Congress? What the heck did we elect these guys to do?

Murtha claims that this conflict cannot be won on the ground militarily, and that he is trying to save us from another Vietnam. While I have a deep respect for his opinion, from where I'm standing I can't see how such an immediate pullout would be effective. Six months is not enough time to get from where we are to where we need to be. However, I do think that a timeline for troop reductions is appropriate, and that we need to focus our efforts on winning hearts and minds. Most of the money allocated for reconstruction, has not been spent yet. Why not? There's certainly no lack of work to get done in that regard. Security might be a problem, but the reality is that it will always be a problem. Let's get out there and start revitalizing the cities, and revving the economy. With unemployment at well over 50%, young poor men with too much time and no clear future are easily drawn into the nets of terrorist recruiters.

And above all, we need to get the Iraqi soldiers trained faster. If that means more trainers out there, then let's send more trainers. We also have to face the possibility that it might not be possible to get the Iraqi army trained to a sufficient degree anytime in the next couple years. What do we do in that case? If that is the bottom line, I would have to regretfully agree with Murtha.

Good Night, and Good Luck.

I'm moving away from posting movie reviews and the like, but I feel compelled to give a shout out for this fine film I saw last night with Sancho and Dana. I was very impressed.

David Strathairn did an absolutely phenomenal job as Murrow, the iconic personality who defined an era and set the standard for good journalism. Kudos also go to Clooney for a great directorial job. The film was very tight (I don't think there was an extraneous second), and I really liked the reliance on original McCarthy footage. The film did oversimplify things a little bit into the classic good vs. evil paradigm, but that's completley overshadowed by the eloquence of the film.

Torture

A debate looms in the government right now of significant national importance. Senator John McCain has sponsored legislation that would ban the use of torture on detainees held by the United States. While most Americans find the idea of torture to be fairly abhorrent, many also argue that it is fully justified in the "ticking time bomb" scenario, where immediate actionable intelligence could save hundreds, thousands, or millions of innocent lives.

First of all, pretty much everyone agrees that the crazy stuff like pulling out fingernails or using thumbscrews is abhorrent, un-American, should never be used. However, that's not what the debate is about. The real debate is about that murky gray area referred to as "cruel, inhumane, and degrading" treatment (referred to here, and in the intelligence community, as "CID"). Should we allow sleep deprivation? What about keeping someone standing for long periods of time? If they have a fear of dogs, can we put a muzzled dog in the room? How far, exactly, can we go?

McCain wants everyone in the government to use only a strict set of interrogation guidelines, which do not include those usually classified under CID. Of course, these guidelines would be classified so the enemies can't prep against them, which makes sense. The administration, particularly Cheney, wants the CIA to be exempted from those guidelines. They feel that actionable intelligence can be gained using these techniques, and that trained CIA interrogators can be trusted to execute on these appropriately (unlike what happened at Abu Ghraib). The Senate clearly agrees with McCain, passing his ammendment by a vote of 90-9.

Despite the murkiness of the debate, it's pretty clear that torture does not provide reliable intelligence. We used these techniques on al-Libi, the Al Qaeda operative who gave us the information for Colin Powell's now infamous UN speech, only to find out it the information he gave up was wrong. Israel, which probably has the most consistent recent experience with this sort of situation, has laws expressly forbidding the use of cruel and inhumane treatment, and officials say they do fine without it. However, it must be noted (as McCain often fails to do) that the Israeli law has a clause that allows "moderate physical pressure" under the "ticking time bomb" scenario.

People under torturous conditions will say anything, true or false. And we can't tell the difference until it's too late. However, what torture does do pretty reliably -and we have seen this today - is drastically erode our moral authority in the conflicts that we engage in.

One of the greatest strengths of our military is that the individuals are well trained, well equipped, and have a strong conviction that they are on the side of freedom, democracy, and morality (for lack of a better term). There are young men and women out there fighting and dying because they believe in what this country stands for, and it is completely irresponsible of this adminstration to ask them to continue to fight while taking away those ideals for which they are fighting. It is even more irresponsible for them, through this negligent behavior, to expose our troops to the increased possibility of being tortured or killed when captured by way of vengeance.

CID treatment might very well have to be used in the "ticking time bomb" scenario, but we have to make sure it's used only in those exceptional circumstances. If, based only on these rare circumstances, we allow ourselves to condone this behavior on a wider scale, it can then get out of hand and become a massive problem (see Abu Ghraib), and also it forms a "black box" of questionable actions which decisively removes us from the moral high-ground we claim to occupy.

McCain's view, as far as I can understand it, is that by outlawing this form of abuse we can make sure that it is not used on a routine or semi-routine basis by anyone. I agree with this, but I do think that the President should be allowed to used CID techniques in rare cases, subject to authorization from some sort of an oversight committee (the senate intelligence comittee comes to mind).

Elections

Democrats are jubilant as closely contested Governor races in New Jersey and Virginia went their way. Some are pointing to this as potent signs of the decline of George Bush, and the slow implosion of the Republican party.

On the contrary, both of these contests were closely fought and closely won. Neither was a landslide, and I don't think they really say anything about the political state of the union as a whole. Yes, it is clear that the populartiy of Bush is declining across the country, and the Republican party is having moments of self doubt that were not there a couple of years ago. However, one party's loss is not necessarily another party's gain, and the Democrats are only slowly getting better at seizing the momentum. Besides which, these races were won largely on local issues. State issues. As they should be.

One thing is nice to see though: the voters of both states reacted pretty strongly against negative campaigning and television ads. It seemed to hurt Kilgore more than it helped him in VA for example, and that's a welcome sign. While I know scare tactics and negative campaigning are usually very effective, they are largely morally repugnant to me.

The Pub Life

It was getting towards evening last night as we finished up a cigar and some whisky at a friend's place in Dublin. We had eaten a good dinner, and then finished it off with a peaty single malt (honestly, i've never been a big fan of the ultra-peaty whiskies) and some cuban cigars (which more than made up for the peaty whisky).

As we lounged about in the apartment debating the merits of various musical artists, I glanced at my watch and realized it was only around 10:30. The night was young, and I needed to take advantage of Dublin, so we all put on our coats and trudged down the block through the wet streets to the nearest pub. One of the amazing things about Dublin is that, no matter where you are, you're never more than a block from the nearest pub.

The pub was warm, friendly, and quite full. Now I've only been here under a week, but a night has yet to come when I do not go out to the pub in the evening. I'm willing to grant that this tendency towards the pub life grows partly out of my desire to experience Guiness in it's unadulterated state, and partly out of the perception that this is what I should be doing in Dublin, but to be honest I really enjoy the pub atmosphere. I can see why there are pubs everywhere, and they're always full (yes, even on a sunday night!).

The concept of the local pub is so different from your average American bar that they should not even be in the same league. About the only similarity is that they both serve alcohol over a counter. Pubs are warmly lit, have lots of comfy seating, and are often filled with people relaxing over a pint of beer. Hard alcohol is rarely served, with the exception of Jamesons whisky. People frequent the same pubs, so the clientele all know each other.

More to the point, it's the social friendly environment that draws people to the pubs. Many don't drink if they don't feel like it. You'll often see families in the pub eating a late informal dinner. Nobody is out to pick up girls/guys, the air is relaxed, and striking up a conversation with other people is normal and you rarely look for ulterior motives.

I tell you, it's so refreshing. It's great.

Of course, there's a downside to all this. Drinking is endemic here (although i did meet a nice irish girl the other day who does not drink!), and the pubs have to stop serving at 11:30 on weeknights so that people can get to work on time the next day.

Nevertheless, I certainly would not mind a smattering of this pub life in dear old SF, which really does not have enough of this. I'm tired of going to bars where I have to elbow three people and stand in line to get an overpriced drink, go hoarse trying to talk to friends over the blaring music, and getting drinks spilled on me due to the dim lighting.

No my friends, it's the pub life for me.

dEUS

They're a rock band from Belgium, pretty popular in Europe but non-existent in the US.

I started listening to them when I was studying abroad in Spain in those crazy college days, and I began to really enjoy their music, but I found that it's impossible to get their music outside of Europe. God bless Amazon.com, through which I have been able to continue to purchase and listen to this great music. I'm not quite sure what genre it falls under. It's a little like indie rock, but heavier. I've been wanting to see these guys in concert for a long time.

And Friday night I checked another box on my "To Do" list for this decade. I few from SF to Dublin (Ireland) on Friday morning, and caught dEUS in concert on Friday night. The music was great and the performance was really good. Great use of lighting, and a good set list. The opening act was a little wierd, but who cares.

The venue is supposed to be one of the larger ones in Dublin, but it was only the size of the Fillmore (except with a bigger balcony), which in my book is almost exactly right. Fairly small, and I was up front so I had a good view of the band, and had my eardrums nearly blown out by their speakers. Man, those guys can make some noise. They have a new CD out, so some of the songs were brand new to me -- I have to go buy that CD later this week. I also managed to by a T-shirt (grossly overpriced at 20 euros, but whatever).

The rest of my weekend in Dublin flew by. There was much drinking of Guiness pints, a couple of good dinners, a tour of the Kilmainhem prison, and more. So far, so good.

Dublin Ho!

Tomorrow I catch a flight to Dublin, where I'll be spending all of next week. While this is a business trip, I hope to get out and really look around the city and country. I was last there a couple of years ago, but did not take the opportunity to really visit around, other than the Guiness brewery, which is kind of a given.

The prison is one of the places I plan on visiting -- I've heard its great. I've also heard the city bus tour is really good, and since the city is small it makes several rotations, so have time to get on or get off whenever and wherever you want and as a result it almost pays for itself in how much it saves on cab fare for a day of sightseeing. I'd also like to get out and see the countryside a little, but I don't know how much time I'll have for that.

Random side note: I really like prison tours. I don't know why. I think you can tell a lot about the society and also the history of a society by not only the types of criminals they have, but also which ones are considered famous both past and present, and how they are/were treated. For example, although de Tocqueville is really known for his insights into the state of the American society and the underpinnings of our government, the official reason for his tour (and his primary interest) was studying the American prison system. Especially in Ireland it should be interesting, since they've lived under some pretty odd and oppressive rules (and rulers) in the past.

While in Dublin I'll also be going to a dEUS concert with the Raging Capitalist. They're a great rock band, and I'm looking forward to seeing them on tour. Since they're Belgian and not really popular in the US (even though they sing in english), they don't ever tour over here.