SHIT!!

That's the best that CNN can come up with when getting hold of a tape of president Bush's remarks that were not meant for public consumption. The lead-in on the CNN home page says "open mic catches Bush expletive." You'd think he was just sittin' around cussin' 'cuz he's a cowboy from Texas.

Well, shit howdy! Having been reprimanded myself for excessive expletives, I'm glad to hear (as I already assumed and expected) that the president is as adept as us "normal folk" at using such colorful language.

Frankly, the story here is that he is saying it like it is with regards to Syria and Hezbollah being the issue in all of this. That CNN is so curious about the use of profanity is just ludicrous. Remember, Bush is the one that used drugs in his early days and had a DUI or two to his past? To think that he would not curse when not formally addressing an audience is just silly and begs the questions of whether or not this is serious journalism from CNN. Early in the article, there's a howler of a teaser:

(Watch Bush use the 's' word during a chat with Blair -- 1:31)

Woo hoo! Let's watch Bush say SHIT!! Better yet, let's watch him take a shit and see if it stinks. CNN - the Cursing Nanny Network.

Well, I think the link above might work if you're interested. I'm not, but I sure would fuckin' like to see him start using more of them god damned curse words.

The stakes and intensity of the fighting between Israel and its enemies is getting higher. At this point, it is impossible to see how it can end with any positive developments and seems destined to only get worse. In reading a good bit, I have formed some opinions to share.

Who started it and why?

First, while Hamas, other Arabs, much of the media and anti-semites in Europe and the U.S. make it seem as if this is Israels fault - that Israel "started it" - I would argue the opposite. Hamas, in a brief attack in Israeli territory, killed a couple of Israeli soldiers and kidnapped another. Their request, not reason, was to make Israel release a thousand Palestinians from Israeli jails. Since then, those opposing Israel have suggested that the "cause" was that Israel either has the prisoners or that they won't release them. But no one has ever indicated that those prisoners haven't done anything to deserve being in that jail, nor has anyone suggested that there have been any non-violent efforts used to discuss the imprisonments. In other words, the "excuse" of the prisoners does not appear to be anything more than just the "reason of the day".

Then, Hizbollah - based in southern Lebanon - enters into the fray completely of their own volition. They were not threatened. They were basically pledging support to their "brothers". So, they go into Israeli territory kill a number of Israeli soldiers and kidnap a couple more.

So, although this is a stretch based on what some have already posited, it seems entirely possible that this episode, seemingly starting with such a small event, was a planned provocation with the intent of seeing how the new Israeli government would react as well as being prepared for a planned escalation into a real war with an opportunity to bring in Iran, already supporting Hizbollah quietly, to provide the fire power that may indeed "wipe Israel off the map" as they have already stated openly is their goal.

The Media

I think the Media has been fairly level handed in this, but I have seen a few things that I feel are slightly lopsided. The media does not seem to have taken sides in suggesting who started it - that's fine. They have, however, seemed to indicate that the Israeli's are killing civilians and targeting civilian infrastructure without much discussion of Hizbollah's attacks.

In fact, the Israelis are fighting a discriminate war in which they are targeting assets such as the airport and electrical infrastructure to limit the ability of their enemy to effectively carry out the war. Israel has been repeatedly condemned for a "disproportionate" response. I have no idea what that means. Is it disproportionate because more Arabs have died than Israelis? Is it because they have used better and more weapons? I would say, whether or not it is, that it SHOULD be disproportional. The Israelis gave Hamas plenty of opportunities to return the kidnapped soldier and they did not, so in my estimation they can use whatever power is REQUIRED to effect the release of the soldier. Further, you hear very little about the fact that Hizbollah has been firing HUNDREDS of rockets into Israel. Not just a few that the media mentions, but I have read - deep in a few news reports - that they have launched hundreds into Israel with no aim (pun intended) other than to kill and injure innocents. The fact that they have not been effective is not a reason to call the Israeli response disproportionate.

The Solution

By the way, no war is ever won by using proportionate response. Victors are victorious exactly because their efforts are disproportionate. And thus unfortunately, I do not see any solution in this mess. The Israelis will not use the means necessary to crush their enemy. The Arab nations probably do not have the firepower or will to do so (the U.S. would surely step in if the Arabs applied that much force). This will escalate and cost the lives of hundreds, maybe thousands. Infrastructure on both sides will be destroyed and make life more difficult for those that remain. While there may be a cease fire, tensions will still remain. Hamas, Hizbollah and others wanting the destruction if Israel will continue to peck away with suicide bombers and teach it to their children.

In the near term, unless one side is obliterated, this will not end. No diplomacy, no "strongly worded" U.N. resolutions will have any effect. But I do believe there is a little glimmer of hope in the longer term. Where? Iraq.

It is true - I think - that MOST Palestinians, Lebanese, Syrians and indeed Iranians would be happy to live side by side with Israel in peace. It is the minority, although a significant and loud minority that wield the power in these Arab states, that will not let this end. IF (yes, BIG IF) Iraq can become a democracy whose power is constrained by the voice of its people and can become the central power in the Arab world as a result of its free market and democracy (yes, decades away), then it is possible that democracy will spread to other surrounding states giving power to the majority that do not want war and thus peace may eventually prevail.

So, is it obliteration or democracy? Both will costs lives, but which end is preferable? If Israel is obliterated, God help the rest of the West.

I just heard that sound again. The one that is far worse than fingernails on a chalk board; the screeching of "the widening gap between the rich and poor."

That fact is always trumpeted as bad news and is used as a class warfare tactic. The fact is, however, that the the wider the gap, the better off the poor are. Those that won't believe me will cite statistics like wages are down, gas prices are up, education and healthcare, etc. They will say that the top quartile are getting richer while the bottom quartile is stagnant. They'll cite statistics about how there are poor people with no food or shelter. All true. But those are periphery arguments that have little to do with the GAP and its effect on the poor.

The fact is that the gap today IS wider than ever before in the U.S., and it is also a fact that our poor today are the best off they have ever been. I'm not saying they are living in the lap of luxury. Poor people indeed have it hard - whether by circumstance or their own doing - but the GAP did not cause it and rich people getting richer was NOT at the expense of the poor. That is what capitalism has done for us. The PIE is getting bigger and while there are more and more "rich" people, it is not at anyone's expense and you could argue that it benefits the poor as those rich people do the things which help the poor - create jobs, engage in philanthropy, pay taxes, etc.

Those that have socialist inclinations argue that that wealth should be redistributed and everyone could live a "better" life. But that argument assumes that the economic output will continue to keep pace in a world where the fruits of your labor are given to those that can't or won't work for themselves. I'm sorry, but like it or not, if we relied on the generosity of hard workers to support the non-workers, we will all become poor. Capitalism works for everyone because human nature is to work for one's self first. It is by that tinge of "greed" that the rich do things that make them more rich and thus unwittingly create opportunities for those less wealthy.

As an example (and yes, I'm loathe to anecdotal evidence, but here goes), I recall my friend's parents in the 70's making in the range of $60k per year. A very good living at the time. They had a nice house and nice cars, went on decent vacations and had lots of the latest "gadgets." My income is probably not that different, once adjusted for inflation, than those friends of mine, but I would argue that my standard of living is much higher. I have a much bigger house, my cars are nicer, we go on really nice vacations once or twice a year, are kids have all the latest games, we have 6 TVs (one is 55"), 3 computers, and on and on (and no, I'm not "in debt up to my eyeballs" - in fact, not at all other than my house and 1 of our two cars). How is this possible? Because capitalism doesn't just make our lives better by increasing our incomes, it also increases our buying power by making more, better stuff more affordable as well as creating creative opportunities to make it easier (e.g. credit). Yeah, I know: healthcare, education, gas. But there will always be examples of a few things getting more expensive, but the fact is that overall our buying power is much stronger than in the past.

So, hurray for the GAP! It means we are all rising in prosperity!

Aggression seems to be picking up the pace in the Middle East - specifically between Israel and their enemies. I haven't ever put enough thought or research onto which side I made fervently take and this will not make a stand. Clearly, the right side of the blogosphere is clearly in the Israeli corner. My GUT only seems to tell me that Israel was created by the U.N. and the surrounding Arab nations have not ever recognized or accepted it and in fact greeted it with aggression from day one.

I have heard mostly the Israeli side I suppose. I must have formed my impression in part from how the media portrays it, but to hear the blogosphere on the right, the media is always Israel bashing. Well over the last couple of years, I have heard a little more of both sides. The Palestinians, and other Arabs that support Palestine, are always of the mind that Israel occupied their land beyond the original U.N. borders. They say that Israelis make it impossible for Palestinians to live. The Israelis suggest that these actions are necessary to improve their safety from current and past aggression. The Palestinians accuse Israel of aggression and killing innocents. The Israelis say they use their military for specific targets and admit that civilian casualties do occur.

But the most overwhelming evidence for me, thus far because I have a lot to learn about this conflict, is that regardless of who started it, it appears to me that Israel is doing the retaliating and Palestine the aggression. Sure, every time a suicide bomb went off, they said it was "for" this or that. But so to did the recent terrorists in Iraq that killed the American soldiers claiming it was revenge for the recent rape and murder allegations against another U.S. soldier. While that act was deplorable, we all know that it wasn't revenge, it was just the reason of the day. That is what I hear in the Palestinian justifications.

Further, I am a little more sympathetic to the targeted strikes of the Israelis which may unfortunately kill civilians at times, but the pains they take - similar to the Americans - to avoid civilian casualties is at least evident. Meanwhile the Palestinians send children strapped with bombs on buses and into pizza parlors to kill and maim as many civilians as possible. They teach their children that martyrdom is honorable. Are these the actions of a state that you could support? The Palestinians argue that that is there only recourse since they lack the military muscle, but I would argue that they are getting support for their actions from regional military powers that quietly support their actions: Saddam paying suicide bomber families, Iran, Syria, etc.

Until I hear something more convincing, I can't help but to side with the Israelis. Either way, however, the escalation is serious and with Iran's current activities as well as the events in Iraq, you have to wonder what may happen in the entire region in the very near future. I think it will continue to escalate unless someone, like the U.S. steps up and puts a stop to it in some way.  Frankly, I think the U.S. is the only entity that could diffuse it before it became all out war. I think countries like Iran welcome it. The U.N. is useless and will do no more than write "strongly worded condemnations". Oh MY!

While I can't say I would like a full scale war there, I fear that diffusing it will only allow it to continue to simmer. What is the solution when neither side wants to give an inch? Will there ever be peace in our lifetime? The next? I am not hopeful.

Yes, the Gray Lady is at it again. The title of this one "In Big Shift, U.S. to Follow Geneva Treaty for Detainees"

The article, which is based on a Pentagon memo, does not support that title at all. In fact, the memo asserts that the U.S. is already following the convention for all policies and should continue to do so, except for the portion of the Supreme Court ruling which relates to the Tribunals. In the case of the tribunals, it would be hard to say there has been a shift as there has been no answer yet except to cancel the scheduled trials and await changes from Congress or the President on how to proceed.

But, I can't take credit for finding the article, nor can I fisk it quite so well as these guys:

Big Lizards: Article 3 & Powerline: "Some Big Shift"

Fun stuff. Enjoy!