You Have to Wake Up Early. . .

. . . To Beat A Capitalist. Profit is a great motivator of creativity.

Legal Loophole

Britain's sweeping new anti-smoking law will virtually eliminate smoking inside public places on July 1.

But the London Daily Mail reports the landlord at one Southampton pub thinks he's found a loophole — he's had his bar declared the official consulate of the tiny Caribbean island of Redonda.

He thinks his could be the only pub in all of Britain to welcome smokers — and he'd get a break on alcohol taxes to boot.

Britain's health department concedes that embassies are exempt from the rule. But the foreign office says Redonda is a territory of Antigua and Barbuda and not entitled to its own embassy.

What is this, "Surge"?

In yesterday's post, I summarized some of the metrics from the newly initiated "Operational Surge". In this post, David Kilcullen, Gen. Petraeus' Australian Chief Advisor for Counterinsurgency, provides a summary of the theory/thinking behind the "Surge" which should be proclaimed from every media outlet in the country. It deserves to be studied and dissected.

No one can read this explanation without realizing that the word "Surge" is entirely insufficient to define this strategy's complete separation from strategies of the past.

Here are a few key excerpts:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

"When we speak of "clearing" an enemy safe haven, we are not talking about destroying the enemy in it; we are talking about rescuing the population in it from enemy intimidation."

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

"The "terrain" we are clearing is human terrain, not physical terrain. It is about marginalizing al Qa’ida, Shi’a extremist militias, and the other terrorist groups from the population they prey on."

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

"The enemy needs the people to act in certain ways (sympathy, acquiescence, silence, reaction to provocation) in order to survive and further his strategy. Unless the population acts in these ways, both insurgents and terrorists will wither, and the cycle of provocation and backlash that drives the sectarian conflict in Iraq will fail."

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

"But chasing enemy cells around the countryside is not only a waste of time, it is precisely the sort of action he wants to provoke us into. That’s why AQ cells leaving an area are not the main game—they are a distraction. We played the enemy’s game for too long: not any more. Now it is time for him to play our game."

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

"The enemy may not be identifiable, but the population is. In any given area in Iraq, there are multiple threat groups but only one, or sometimes two main local population groups."

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

"casualties are up in absolute terms, but down as a proportion of troops deployed (in the fourth quarter of 2006 we had about 100,000 troops in country and casualties averaged 90 deaths a month; now we have almost 160,000 troops in country but deaths are under 120 per month, much less than a proportionate increase, which would have been around 150 a month). And last year we patrolled rarely, mainly in vehicles, and got hit almost every time we went out. Now we patrol all the time, on foot, by day and night with Iraqi units normally present as partners, and the chances of getting hit are much lower on each patrol. We are finally coming out of the "defensive crouch" with which we used to approach the environment, and it is starting to pay off."

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

"It will be a long, hard summer, with much pain and loss to come, and things could still go either way. But the population-centric approach is the beginning of a process that aims to put the overall campaign onto a sustainable long-term footing."

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

I'm so glad to have this Aussie standing with our troops!

On Principle,

CBass

Iraq Lost

I'm a contrarian at heart.

I pull for underdogs. I loved Revenge of the Nerds (hits close to home). And I see a lot of encouragement coming out of Iraq.

As you've probably heard, or read, all of the troops which form the much derided "surge" have just arrived in Iraq in the last couple of weeks. What you probably haven't heard, or read, as much is how this arrival marks the start - yes, the START of the actual surge. General Odierno refers to what has preceded as the "force buildup" and what has begun in the last week as the "offensive operations".

(I think I'll now call these phases the "Troop Surge" and the "Offensive Surge".)

In the last week, everything has changed. And what are the results? Bill Roggio, whom I highly recommend as a daily read, provides this summary of the first week in actual, operational surge:

Operation Phantom Thunder: Joint Coalition-Iraq Offensive in Baghdad Belts (Initiated June 16th)

Operation Arrowhead Ripper: Joint Coalition-Iraq Offensive in Diyala province (part of Op. Phantom Thunder)

• 59 Al Qaeda killed
• 40 Al Qaeda captured
• 28 Roadside bombs destroyed
• 12 Booby-trapped buildings secured
• 16 Weapons caches uncovered and recovered

In Mosul:

• 32 Insurgents captured
• 1 VBIED factory uncovered and secured (Vehicle-Borne Improvised Explosive Device)
• 1 IED factory uncovered and secured
• 1 storage facility for VBIED & IED bomb making materials

In Taji:

• 500-man neighborhood watch established (with reporting/alignment links to Iraqi government & forces)

Northwest of Baghdad:

• 13 Al Qaeda killed
• 15 Al Qaeda Captured

Against Sadr's Mahdi Army:

• 4 Terrorists Captured (Including 1 "leader" who is "responsible for coordinating and conducting kidnappings, death squad killings and improvised explosive device attacks".)

Grand Total:

• 72 Killed
• 91 Captured
• 28 Bombs & 12 Booby-trapped buildings deactivated
• 16 Weapon Caches secured
• 2 Bomb factories closed

American Losses: about 30.

Iraqi Civilian Losses: I don't have the data yet.

So, the war's lost Mr. Reid????

Important Note: I don't relish the thought on anyone dieing or want to fixate upon gratuitous, unnecessary violence. Of course, I also don't see this operation as being "unnecessary". I certainly don't see these Al Qaeda, insurgent and terrorist enemies as being open to verbal persuasion, olive branches of friendship or any other non-violent restraint short of supernaturally changed hearts.

And this doesn't even begin to address the absolute inhumanity these beasts are ravaging upon the Iraqi populace. Included in the week's findings, a house used for torture - complete with drills, knives and a blood-drenched floor.

On Principle,

CBass

With Friends Like These

I'm a realist. The Iranian government, like the US government has a responsibility to seek the legitimate interests of its nation. To the extent they do this, let's chat it up. When those legitimate interests violently cross ours, however, it may be time for other activities under heaven .

A quick look at the "legitimate" interests of Iran:

• Caught Red Handed Aiding the Taliban in Afghanistan
• Caught Red Handed Aiding Insurgents in Iraq

• Caught Red Handed Smuggling Nuclear Materials Across Europe
  

• Planning, Funding and Directing Special Forces-styled Attacks Against US Troops
• Repetitive Attack and Kidnapping of Other Armed Forces
  
• Funding Hezbollah in the Oppression of Lebanon
  
• Funding Hamas in Fomenting Palestinian Civil War
  

In earlier posts, I lamented the the execution of post-war Iraq and the larger continued degradation of our military strength. It's hard to miss that Iran makes a perfect example of the dangers of discounting the need for a strong military option - in the appropriate sphere of context.


In this context, let's consider the drumbeat of support for the findings of the Iraq Study Group which has started anew. Among the much trumpeted findings was the recommendation for the US to engage Iran and Syria in "talks" regarding Iraq - Iran, a rational regime with only the best interests of it's neighbors at heart.




Ok, stopped laughing? Go ahead, take your time.


Look, I'm willing to pretty much talk to anyone, but not with the end expectation that a regime like Iran will magically drop its ambitions, hold our hands and sing songs of peace for the united and prosperous Iraqi people.


Its seems I must march to a different drummer on this song.


On Principle,
CBass

Death, Deterrents and Dignity

As a logical being, meaning as a Constitutional conservative, I'm a bit incredulous toward anyone purporting to disavow the deterrent nature of the Death Penalty - fairly, quickly and predictably applied. Addressing the "quick" and "predictable" aspects of this equation require a comprehensive review & reform of the American legal system. Addressing the question of "fairness" in the Death Penalty, however, is another mater.

There are two root reasons for implementing and supporting the death as a "fair" penalty for murder:

1. Deterrence
2. Dignity

Deterrence:

Most opponents to the Death Penalty with whom I've spoken (ok, argued) claim that the Death Penalty can't act as an effective deterrence because would be murders either commit their crimes in the heat of a passionate moment or through the type of conniving common only among those who don't think they'll get caught. In either case, they argue, the Death Penalty can't pose an onerous, logical impediment - no matter how quickly and predictably applied. Those who aren't thinking or don't think they'll get caught equally won't be deterred by a dispassionate legal framework.

The error of this reasoning, in my mind, is pretty self-apparent. First, the Death Penalty is not a punishment meted out simply for murder. The Death Penalty is a separate jury consideration AFTER someone has been found guilty of murder. It is the ultimate punishment only for crimes uniquely deserving. Thus, run of the mill, crime of passion murders don't normally merit this verdict. Second, there is nothing unfair about giving punishment to someone too so arrogant to both assume they should take human life AND that their cleverness is beyond comprehension.

Third, these two arguments lead to the absurd claim that there can be NO deterrence from punishment for someone who either isn't thinking or who thinks they won't fall under judgment. As I said, this is simply absurd. We punish offenders because to not punish would be unfair to the victims. If there must be unfairness, I would rather it be against a convicted offender, not an innocent victim.

"If we execute murderers and there is in fact no deterrent effect, we have killed a bunch of murderers. If we fail to execute murderers, and doing so would in fact have deterred other murders, we have allowed the killing of a bunch of innocent victims. I would much rather risk the former. This, to me, is not a tough call."

John McAdams - Marquette University/Department of Political Science, on deterrence

We also punish offenders because common sense informs us that the specter of punishment does deter some crime. The obviousness of this can be seen in the following example:

Understanding that isolated crimes of passion rarely face Death Penalty treatment, the example to consider is the diabolically thoughtful murder. Such a murder is someone full of angst enough to be consumed by hate. This person could take their own life or they can lash out to take that of someone else. Why don't they just kill themselves to surely end it all? Obviously, they either value their own life, their own death is a matter of fear or they perversely thrill on the adrenalin rush. In these cases, the Death Penalty is a fair deterrent and equal punishment.

Dignity:

The above perspective is entirely conditioned upon this much deeper principle: Through death, a murderer commits the ultimate offense against human dignity and by extension, against the dignity of human society as a whole. If we value human life as being of ultimate value, then to snuff out that life is an ultimate offense. Ultimate offenses demand ultimate punishment. Ending the offender's life is that punishment. In our system, this punishment is leveraged through a double finding of guilt and is administered with layered measures to seek painlessness and dignity for the guilty. We do this because just as the victim's life is of dignity, so to is that of the offender. That's why our system doesn't bow to the fringe elements fomenting for pain and torture to be executed upon the guiltily as payment for their ultimate offense.

The beauty and dignity of every human is the seeming trump card in this debate.

Yes, the "seeming" trump card.

For, just as I'm a Constitutional Conservative, I am also someone who wants to pursue the path of Christ. In this, I am unnerved by the stream of investigations, reports and lobbying efforts which are uncovering and freeing numerous folks who were formerly convicted of murder, found deserving of the Death Penalty and later determined to be innocent. If the Death Penalty is "fair" because of the way it honors and balances the dignity of humanity, what do we say when it unjustly, and unfairly takes innocent life?

I don't know.

Is there a way to honor the dignity of the victim, protect the dignity of society through deterrence and still honor the dignity of the accused inn light of a court system which largely gets it right, but sometimes does mistakenly condemn the innocent along indignant lines of class, race or even looks?

More thoughts to come. . .

On Principle,

CBass

A Left Leaning Lilt?

(Click on the above picture to enlarge it)

Notice how one editor simply states the facts:
Who: "President" (his formal title) "Bush" (His given name)
What: "Vetoes" "Bill"

The other editor:
Who: "Bush" (Formal, respectful title is eschewed)
What: "Vetoes" "Popular" "Bill" (By cutting respectful title, space is gained for editorial perspective)

I found this perfect juxtaposition of two headlines (see above) in my personalized iGoogle homepage. I think it perfectly depicts an example of how a liberal bent in the editorial room almost unknowingly influences media. Multiply this by hundreds of stories a day being heralded through a myriad of media sources and suddenly we are happily carried along by the buoying drumbeat of a liberal cadence.


I'm not one to find a "Liberal Bias" behind every bush. But to torture an old saying: that doesn't mean there isn't some liberal bias behind some bushes - especially if that bush is President Bush.


I'm not a Bush fan on all fronts (Where's the fence?, So, still sticking by that war strategy?, You actually signed McCain-Fiengold???). But he is President, he was freely elected (TWICE), was elected with more votes than any other President in US history, was the first President in decades to be elected with a majority of popular votes at all, has executed his office with dignity. Perhaps he is due just a modicum of respect prior to potshotting him with a hidden agenda and headlined opinion.

On Principle,
CBass

Savanna Update

And here's the long awaited update on Savanna:

We took her to Children's Hospital on Monday for a full complement of Barium tests. Upon arriving, the nurse warned us that Savanna would absolutely cry, scream and holler during the Barium intake and initial fluoroscope tests.

Nope.

Savanna loved the Barium (she asked for more during one of the breaks in testing), laid still and was obedient during the tests (3 hrs of testing total, though with numerous breaks) and absolutely LOVED the purple hospital gown (a beautiful purple number with open back - I'm sure we can get you one too).

In fact, the only tears came when we cruelly forced her to separate from the gown for the trip home. . .

The results have been researched and . . .

there are no narrowing or "kinks" in her intestinal track. This is WONDERFUL news, but it does leave the Dr's in a continued state of puzzlement.

At this point, we will leave her on a reduced dose of laxative to ensure no further blockages set in. We will stuff her full of high calorie foods and see the Docs again in one month. If she gains weight and shows some other positive signs, we will continue on this regimen for the indefinite future (possibly the next few years). If she doesn't gain weight, it may be time to escalate to a pediatric gastroenterologist for more testing (probably invasive testing).

We can't thank you enough for your prayers, love, support and shows of concern. We are encouraged by our current state and look forward to more positive reports in the future. If you feel so led during this next month, please keep Savanna in your prayers.

Many, many thanks!

The Basses