OverSpill

2003-06-25T15:31:00.002-04:00

MORE T.A.T.U.

The link from Russian website Newsru (thanks to reader B.B.) shows that T.A.T.U.’s message I talked about yesterday is well and widely received. Unbelievable, but true!

2003-06-25T15:31:00.001-04:00

UPDATE ON: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

While we're celebrating this and kicking and screaming about this, Russian media reports that Mohammed is actually not even in U.S. custody yet. Pakistani officials are, apparently, speaking with Kuwaiti government first (Mohammed is originalyl from Kuwait), before deciding how to proceed.

Go figure!

2003-06-25T15:31:00.000-04:00

TODAY
Today, I have been mostly trying to effect some cosmetical changes to my blog...oh boy! It's tough to be computer illiterate and attempt to set backgrounds, create borders and most of all-colors!!! All these different colors I can chose from. Does anyone know papayawhip from cornsilk from oldlace? If you do and you're not a painter or an art student, then you're most likely a computer geek.
Well, I think I've played enough with the styles and would like to resume posting my semi-intelligent, self-indulgent & pseudo-intellectual thoughts. Anyway, I feel I can say anything for a couple of reasons:
1. Noone will read it, except for a couple of close friends I had to bribe!
2. It's MY BLOG!!
3. Blogoverse is enormous!!!

Anyway, I got a couple of things on a back burner and will throw them into that void of OverSpill soon.

2003-03-17T14:31:00.000-05:00

SAY "BUH-BYE" TO BLOGGER

I have decided to move away from Blog*Spot and get my own domain, etc. I am in the process of moving things over, but please don't hesitate to visit me at my new home: http://www.overspill.org.

I will resume regular blogging tonight and will move archives and links gradually...

2003-03-16T17:21:00.000-05:00

THE WORLD MIGHT CHANGE TOMORROW

From Azores Island summit...

(more to follow).

2003-03-15T12:46:00.000-05:00

BLOGGITY-BLOG-BLUH

Blogger's block-- all weekend!

2003-03-14T08:22:00.000-05:00

LIGHT BLOGGING DAYS

Yesterday and today will be most likely a bit light, as the markets are handing it to us...I will, however, provide an analysis of what has happened over the past few days in the evening or tomorrow morning.

2003-03-12T08:16:00.000-05:00

DON JOHNSON--A BILLIONAIRE?!

You have to read this to believe it (via Bloomberg):

Berlin, March 12 (Bloomberg) -- Don Johnson, the American star of the 1980s television series ``Miami Vice,'' is under investigation after credit notes and other securities for about $8 billion were found in the trunk of his car, German customs said. Customs officers stopped Johnson and three people a few miles into Germany on Nov. 6 when they drove over the border from Switzerland, Joerg Groener, spokesman for the Customs Investigation Department in the state of Baden-Wuerttemberg said. ``There's a reasonable suspicion that Mr. Johnson was working for others,'' Groener said. ``If everything is legal, you don't have to transport documents worth this amount in a car.'' The actor and his companions haven't been charged, Groener said. German officials informed U.S. tax and customs authorities and asked for information about the documents, Groener said. Johnson told the officers he was on his way to the Maybach plant of DaimlerChrysler AG, Groener said. It is located outside the city of Stuttgart in Baden-Wuerttemberg, bordering on Switzerland. Johnson, 53, played Sonny Crockett, one half of a detective duo who spent their time busting drug cartels in Miami. Johnson is believed to be back in the U.S., Groener said.

I think $8bn is an inconceivable amount to be had in the trunk!!!

2003-03-12T08:12:00.000-05:00

BREAKING NEWS II

CIA DENIES OBL'S CAPTURE.

I love this game.

2003-03-12T08:03:00.000-05:00

BREAKING NEWS

RUMORS ABOUND THAT OBL WAS CAPTURED IN PAKISTAN

2003-03-12T08:01:00.000-05:00

OVERSPILL NEWSWIRE

(via World Tribune)

TEL AVIV - The U.S. military has been ordered to launch a war against Iraq on March 18, an Israeli official said in a televised report. Israeli government monitor, Michael Gurdus, reported on late Tuesday that the order was relayed by U.S. Central Command to all American forces in the Persian Gulf. Gurdus told Israel's Channel 2 television that he heard the order being relayed to U.S. fighter-jet pilots and others over U.S. military radio communications he intercepted. Gurdus is regarded as the leading munications monitor in the Middle East and works for Israel radio and television. He has broken numerous stories because of his ability to intercept and understand foreign-language civilian and radio broadcasts and communications. He said the U.S. military, in its radio communications, refers to Iraq as "bad cows" and "kabab", Middle East Newsline reported.

On Monday, Israel's media reported that the United States had demanded that senior Israeli officials stop issuing predictions of when the war would erupt. Israeli defense officials have concluded that the United States plans to strike Iraq after March 17, the deadline set for Iraq to answer questions regarding its missile and weapons of mass destruction programs.

2003-03-12T07:54:00.000-05:00

STILL PLAYING TURKEY

Erdogan--a not so subtle newly appointed Turkish PM-- flat out refused yesterday to unconditionally allow US troops and ships on his country's soil:

Recep Tayyip Erdogan, head of the ruling Justice and Development Party and slated to become prime minister on Wednesday, said Ankara must first form a new government, wait for the Security Council and then complete negotiations for U.S. economic and military aid prior to a parliamentary vote. Erdogan said he could not predict when a parliamentary vote would be scheduled, Middle East Newsline reported.

Northern Iraq is in play!

2003-03-11T12:32:00.000-05:00

GUANTANAMO BAY BLUES

(via BRIDGE)

WASHINGTON (AP)--A federal appeals court Tuesday upheld a lower court ruling that the 600 suspected Taliban and al-Qaida fighters being held in the
Guantanamo Bay Naval Base have no right to hearings in U.S. courts. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the prisoners are aliens being held outside U.S. sovereign territory and therefore aren't entitled to constitutional rights such as being charged with a crime or having access to a lawyer.

The biggest victory for Bush Administrations is seen in the fact that the ruling spans accross categorizations, e.g. apparently one doesn't have to be categorized as an enemy combatant to not have the rights...

I am not a lawyer, so I don't really get that last part. The way I interpret it is that, coupled with a new Patriot Act II, one can be detained with no explanations given and no information divulged. No access to basic rights, etc. Scary...

2003-03-11T12:07:00.000-05:00

CHECK, RAISE

Looks like our ships didn't waste that time standing by the shores off Turkey in the past month or so...As Abdullah Gul, the "outgoing" Turkey PM makes headway for the Recep-- Tayyip Erdogan-- expectations of a more favorible to America vote abound. Mr. Erdogan is very much in favor of letting the American troops use Turkish soil for launching a second front against Saddam Hussein and is expected to "make changes" in the cabinet. However, after taking the office, the newly formed PM didn't rush into the opened Bush's arms, but rather asked for...mo' money, ehhem-- "more assurances" from Washington.

I guess it's back to the good ole sticks and carrots. We feed carrots ($15bn aid package to Turkey) to the good guys and show sticks (no food for N.K.? boycott of French products?) to the bad guys.

Oh, what a tangled web we weave...

2003-03-11T11:53:00.000-05:00

NUKE MUNCHERS

According to UNICEF, North Korea will run out of food supply by June. UNICEF's appeals for more food have not been successfull thus far, as contributors are reluctant to give food. The food levels are on extreme lows, as floods, droughts and famine exhausted North Korea's supply. The largest food contributor (more than half) of food supplies to NK is...America.

So, it looks like North Korean government wants to bite the hand that feeds them...again.

2003-03-11T09:04:00.000-05:00

BLOGGING MAKES THE NEWS

CNN has a piece on us...

2003-03-10T14:45:00.000-05:00

LIGHT BLOGGING

I am feeling sick at the moment, either with cold or allergies, of sorts. Got a lot to say, but too drowsy to formulate...

2003-03-10T11:15:00.000-05:00

THROWING IN THE TOWELS

Josh Marshall's explicit change of stance on war to anti has proved to be a necessary catalyst for the "fence-sitters" to finally switch into that camp. The liberal -hawks have "agonized" (as they like to say) over being pro war and have finally caved in. Kevin, Josh and Sean-Paul have now all officially changed their war stance to "opposed". It should be interesting to see the extent to which it'll change their posts. In all honesty, I think probably by not much.

2003-03-08T11:46:00.000-05:00

I LUV NY

It's a beautiful & crispy, end of winter-like day in New York today. The sun, out early as days are getting longer, is brightly lighting up the skies and building rooftops. I can still see some snow lingering out there, trying to desperately hold on to the last of of winter days, but it knows the spring is near. I can smell it in the air. I can see it in people's eyes. I can see it on some people, as the first ray of sun in New York usually means you'll see some people wearing shorts, tank tops and open toe shoes...

As I was looking outside my window a minute ago, I was suddenly overcome with sentimental, nostalgic feeling. It's the same feeling I had when I landed in NYC for the first time-- twelve years ago. I looked outside the plane window and felt that I was home. I dreamt about coming to NYC as a child, picturing myslef on the streets of the city as I was looking at the photographs taken by my uncle, who emigrated earlier. I thought of New York as America; America was New York! Now, having lived here for over a decade, essentially having lived here my whole adult life here thus far, I have a sense of belonging. This is my city! The city, which opened it's door for a Russian refugee, wearing white socks with a suit and thinking "cleenex" was the greatest invention of mankind, is my home now. I am a New Yorker! Proud and loud! No matter where I go, no matter what I see-- I always bring New York with me, I always come back to New York in my thoughts.

So, I decided to snap a photo and share it with all of you. This is New York as I see it now...home.

2003-03-08T09:24:00.000-05:00

WORST-CASE SCENARIO? I BEG TO DIFFER!

According to this NYTimes editorial, the worst-case scenario of a "deadlock" in UNSC over passing another resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq is...the "deadlock" itself:

With yesterday's barely veiled French and Russian threat to veto a war resolution, the United Nations Security Council appears to be rapidly approaching a crippling deadlock over Iraq. That would be the worst of all possible outcomes. It would lift the diplomatic pressure on Iraq to disarm and sever the few remaining restraints that have kept the Bush administration from going to war with its motley ad hoc coalition of allies.

Surely, having an amicable circle jerk over at the Council is more important that disarming Hussein, stabilizing the region and sending a clear powerfull message to all potential would be proliferators that they better think twice before embarking on the path of defiance.

2003-03-08T09:10:00.000-05:00

SADDAM'S NUCLEAR CONNECTION IS FABRICATED

Yesterday's Blix testimony before UNSC produced some worrisome facts:

A key piece of evidence linking Iraq to a nuclear weapons program appears to have been fabricated, the United Nations' chief nuclear inspector said yesterday in a report that called into question U.S. and British claims about Iraq's secret nuclear ambitions.

Documents that purportedly showed Iraqi officials shopping for uranium in Africa two years ago were deemed "not authentic" after careful scrutiny by U.N. and independent experts, Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told the U.N. Security Council.

This discovery will, surely, be detrimental to US/UK & allies effort to remove Saddam. Read about it in Washington Post or Guardian. The only difference (crucial)between the two sources is that WaPo gives a a more accurate, complete citing of Blix's testimony, where he acknowledges that even though the purchases seemed to be forged, the documents themselves were delivered to inspectors for investigation by US/UK authorities in "good faith".

2003-03-07T13:40:00.000-05:00

PRAVDA?

Here’s Russian communist Pravda’s (“truth”) ~~credible~~ report on how America has been killing Iraqis for the past decade. And a bullet point summary for those who’s got no time to waste (unlike me) for reading the whole thing:

• Viruses and mice dropped by parachute against Iraqi agriculture
• Chemical weaponry deployed by the United States of America
• Depleted Uranium has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths

2003-03-07T11:52:00.000-05:00

SEAN-PAUL ON NORTH KOREA

Have a read.

2003-03-07T10:37:00.000-05:00

BREAKING NEWS II

Now, the rumor is US is denying the capture of OBL's sons...

Zehir (from Pakistan) says Saad and Hamza were captured, the former being a potential OBL's replacement...Washington has disputed the rumors...

2003-03-07T10:14:00.000-05:00

BREAKING NEWS

Bin Laden's sons are arrested in Afghanistan.

2003-03-07T10:11:00.000-05:00

NORTH KOREA: TESTING THE WATERS

NK just announced its planning to step up its anti-ship missile testing this weekend in the Sea of Japan. US announced its plans to resume reconnaisance flights this weekend over the Sea of Japan.

Japan announced its plans to have a nice and relaxing weekend on the beach and have a little swim in the Sea of Japan.

2003-03-07T09:47:00.000-05:00

A CARAVAN CAN TRAVEL ONLY AT THE SPEED OF SLOWEST CAMEL

ABCNews.com is sayng that:

The CIA and Pakistani Army are electronically tracking the large caravan of people on foot and horseback through the rugged mountain area of Pakistan between the borders with Iran and Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden may be traveling with the caravan and may be on foot.

Postscript: I wonder whether OBL's presense there will expedite Iraq's conflict?

2003-03-07T09:30:00.000-05:00

ECONOMY TODAY

Totally unexpected report today vis-à-vis yesterday. Yesterday’s economic data came in as fully expected: non-farm productivity, unit labor costs, jobless claims, and factory orders all seemed to line up with economists’ predictions and it was largely a non-event for the markets.

In overnight trading, the dollar got hammered after Bush’s speech last night. Th “we don’t need UN’s backing” sentiment filtered through currency markets immediately and “greenback” fell to 4-year lows against “euro”. In the morning (pre-numbers) we were at about $1.1040/euro.

So, what happened today? Devastating Labor Report!

1. Unemployment Rate: 5.8%
2. Non-farm Payrolls: -308k
3. Manufacturing Payrolls: -53k
4. Avg. Hourly Earnings: 0.7%

Unemployment Rate
No surprises here. Still 8.5mm Americans are unemployed and the rate rose by a tenth of percent. This is discouraging news, especially given the breakdown:

Private employment down 321k (from up 174k last month)
Goods producing employment down 104k (from up 19k last month)
Civilian employment down 127k (from up 1,097k last month)

Non-farm Payrolls/ Manufacturing Payrolls
Some of this is attributed to reservists. Department of Defense cites about 175k being called up (BLS says it’s 150k), so that would impact the labor force. However, even after taking this conservative estimate out, the decline is enormous and is, certainly, beyond any expectations. Leading indicators signal further continued slump, which is bound to create income pressures.

Analysis

There are significant risks to US economy in falling back into recession:

• Energy prices, staying at these levels can take off 1% off GDP
• Credit tightens, as EBITDA of major industrials and manufacturers can be halved due to rising operating costs
• Rising unemployment puts strain on household income, further eroding confidence
• Consumer resilience will abate and retail sales will suffer
• Geopolitical pressures will exacerbate any economic slump and will make it hard to treat economic and political impacts as two discrete variables.

Fixed Income markets have skyrocketed post-numbers today: Eurodollar futures are up 9bp-12bp with curve steepening. Fed funds futures have implied at least “bias” change in March FOMC and 25bp cut by summer. I think once the cut happens, the bloodthirsty market will look for more. 50bp is not out of the question, although not priced in yet.
5 year UST yield dropped to 48 year! Lows.
The dollar is still bleeding and is breaking $1.1062/euro all morning (after-numbers).

2003-03-07T08:34:00.000-05:00

ECONOMY: DISASTER

We lost 308k jobs-- worse than after September 11th...(more later)

2003-03-07T08:07:00.000-05:00

THIS JUST IN

Pakistani and American agents apparently arrested 9 prominent al-Qaeda members, one of which is speculated to be either Bin Laden or his son:

Islamabad, Pakistan, March 7 (Bloomberg) -- Pakistani and U.S. agents arrested yesterday nine `prominent' members of al-Qaeda near the Pakistani border with Afghanistan, Spanish news agency Efe reported, citing unidentified members of the Pakistani security forces.Some Pakistani government officials said one of the people arrested is ``very important'' and may be Osama bin Laden or his son, and other Pakistani officials denied that information, Efe reported. Pakistani and U.S. forces have intensified their search for bin Laden along Pakistan's southwestern border with Afghanistan, the Associated Press said, citing unidentified Pakistani intelligence and military officials.The troops, acting on information from captured al-Qaeda leader Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, are searching for bin Laden and his
son Saad along a 560-kilometer (350-mile) stretch from the town of Chaman in Baluchistan province to the Iranian border, AP said, citing a Pakistani military official.

2003-03-06T21:59:00.000-05:00

GUINEA: A CHEAP ALLY

This week, Guinea has replaced Germany at the helm of UNSC. It's close ties with US and cautious ex-colonial relationship with France should buy America a cheap ($29mm in economic aid) vote...

2003-03-06T21:35:00.000-05:00

HMMM...

Guardian says the Brits built Falluja's chemical plant in Iraq:

The Falluja 2 chlorine plant, 50 miles outside Baghdad, near the Habbaniya airbase, has been pinpointed by the US as an example of a factory rebuilt by Saddam to regain his chemical warfare capability. Last month it featured in Colin Powell's dossier of reasons why the world should go to war against Iraq, which was presented to the UN security council.

Spy satellite pictures of Falluja 2 identifying it as a chemical weapons site were earlier published by the CIA, and a report by Britain's joint intelligence committee, published with Tony Blair's imprimatur last September, also focused on Falluja 2 as a rebuilt plant "formerly associated with the chemical warfare programme".

2003-03-06T21:23:00.000-05:00

CLINTON VS. DOLE DEBATE ON "60 MINTUES"

This might be an interesting program to watch. ~~Ichy and Scratchy~~ Bill and Bob will debate whether one can cut taxes and fight the war at the same time. Mkay...

2003-03-06T13:24:00.000-05:00

HOW TO GO 21ST CENTURY ON SADDAM'S ASS

This article in Slate says it all:

With war against Iraq approaching, it is well to bear in mind that "rumors I heard from people who sort of know this stuff" is the sourcing for 95 percent of speculation about what is in store. Nevertheless it seems possible to make reasonable forecasts of how an assault on Iraq might go. The air campaign is likely to be dramatically different from the Gulf War, because air weapons and tactics have evolved significantly since 1991. A land campaign, by contrast, may not differ materially from 1991. Army and Marine weapons have not changed much, although advances have been made, including new technology for what the Pentagon internally calls "network-centric warfare," a catchphrase you may hear often this spring.

This piece talks about everything from timing to tactics to using high precision guided JDAMs to anti-tank "skeet" munition. It also discusses pros/cons and differences between Kosovo, Afghanistan. I think the article is both pretty good and scary: we have a lot more of a lot letter stuff.

2003-03-06T10:39:00.000-05:00

RISK/REWARDS OF (NON)INVASION

Sean-Paul has gives his take on invading vis-à-vis not invadingrisks/rewards in this post.

I am not sure whether reward is an appropriate noun to use in this case, i.e. I can’t see how rewarding the “possible repair of US-‘old’ Europe relations” would be; or what kind of reward the “American image improves globally” point brings to us. The rewards of this scenario are a tough nut to crack. I think that the rewards of non-invasion need to be filtered through the “opportunity cost”-like risks, thereby, making the crystallization of the former much more difficult.

Semantics aside, however, I agree with most of Sean-Paul’s pros/cons and disagree with some:

Non-invasion

This scenario risks, I agree, lie in: significant loss of credibility; psychological empowering of extremists; will deal a strategically devastating blow to our interests in Middle East; destabilize the region. I also think that this scenario might jeopardize deterrence and containment of North Korea, as a logical consequence of credibility loss.

The rewards, as I mentioned, are mainly factors that will allow America to more effectively shift the focus elsewhere. However, in my opinion, this requires enormous assumption that once we retract our war bid for Iraq, the latter will seize to be an imminent threat or problem. I think this is impossible and containment of Iraq will be a huge burden as well. I also think that “better focus n war on terror” and the question of (non) invasion are two discreet and independent variables.

Invasion

In the risks portion, of course, the arguments are abundant, but nonetheless, not all of them I perceive as risks. For example, I think that all of the “image” arguments are largely irrelevant and “NATO blows up” anyway.

I see “economic consequences” as risk only maybe in the context of “US is forced to absorb the full cost of the war and reconstruction effort”. Other than that, economic risks will be more pronounced in the non-invade argument (oil prices volatility will remain and at these price levels a full percentage point in GDP might be taken off).
In the case of invasion and, arguably, quick resolution, energy prices are likely to come off.

The rewards of invasion are also self-explanatory. The only quibble I have is again semantically. In the ninth point, the use of word “imperial” assign a negative connotation, thereby undermining the reward factor itself and implying further colonization opportunities, which I disagree with.

2003-03-06T08:09:00.000-05:00

MORNING MARKET SHOCKERS

European Central Bank (ECB) lowered interest rates today by 25bp, which took dealers by surprise. The expectation was 50bp, but ECB is ECB.

Swiss National Bank (SNB) unexpectedly cut rates by 50bp and narrowed the band to 0-75bp!!! The statement didn't come out till 10min. later and euroswiss futures (normally lethargic) were propelled by 17-20bp initially and now settled at 11bp up (with front March contract up 17bp)!

U.S. Equity futures are down before the open on the back of lowe DAX, which should be ECB's lesson for dissappointing markets...

2003-03-05T16:18:00.000-05:00

THE CONSEQUANCES OF BEING LATE or GREAT MINDS THINK ALIKE

Here I was, browsing my favorite blogs, after I had a couple of free minutes to post something, as I realized that I was neither timely nor original. I've been beaten to the punch by OxBlog. What's even worse, I've late on the news by a day! So, rather than trying to wallow in my pity, I would like to rationalize it. What can I blame it on...The fact that I am working and can't get a free minute? Or that I am outweighted by 3:1 ratio? I think I could use those excuses, but that would be a blatant lie: OxBlog-ers are better and smarter. Oh, but are they better looking as well? ;-) (kidding)

So here are the timely links:
T.A.T.U post link
VILLEPIN post link

2003-03-05T15:45:00.000-05:00

T.A.T.U.: almost slipped below my radar

It's sort of funny to see how this "bubblegum duo" as New York Times called them has swept the world of pop music. I saw this lesbian couple in their original video, in Russian, which was ran over and over on NTV-- Russian Television station, that my parents subscribe to. I must admit that I was impressed. Russian pop music estrada usually imitates Western, primarily American singers' styles, songs, and even music melodies. These girls, however, had what I thought could be a "one song wonder", but worldwide. Sure enough, they're everywhere in Europe. Their single is being played on all radio stations in England, etc. and I am thinking: "pretty cool". Russians once again have been able to stake a claim on originality.

You can also imagine my surprise, when I unexpectdly saw them during Grammy's, wearing these same exact t-shirts (as above), which use "a potent Russian expletive to denounce the possible war in Iraq". Now, as I remember, the Awards show had been very closely monitored for any potentianl anti-war messages. The artists have been instructed not to use airtime for any political statements. Yet, T.A.T.U managed to make a splash. I guess sometimes it's good, when the market is not overly saturated, huh?

2003-03-05T14:50:00.000-05:00

LOOK UP IN THE SKIES...IT'S A BIRD, IT'S A PLANE, IT'S...DE VILLEPIN

An interesting article about Dominique De Villepin from WaPo, which reads almost like an ode. Here's an excerpt:

In a sense, the French should be thanking Bush. They haven't had a foreign policy success like this in years, and they seem ready to lead their own coalition of the willing in challenging U.S. policy. De Villepin suggests that Russia will join this coalition -- becoming a nation of old Europe at last. "I don't want to speak for the Russians," he says, "but I think their choice is for a multipolar world . . . and they are very attached to the idea that the U.N. should make decisions."

Washington needs the world more than it may realize, de Villepin argues. "America can't do it alone," he contends. "If America could all alone solve terrorism, stop proliferation, make peace in the Mideast, solve the problem of AIDS, then I'll sign on the bottom line."

2003-03-05T14:43:00.000-05:00

MARKET WRAP

Both Non-Manu ISM and Beige Book released today were almost a non-event:

• Non-Manufacturing ISM came in as expected at 53.9
• Beige Book offered no new insights on the state of economy:

- economic activity subdued
- geopolitical pressures
- high energy costs
- caution in hirings
- slow spending

Fixed income markets, I think reacted more to Powell's speach and are up 2-3bp on it...Equities are flat...

2003-03-05T13:47:00.000-05:00

THE EFFECTS OF CHANGING DEMOGRAPHICS

According to the published UN study on world population and migration trends, European demographics are looking anything, but boring. Matthew Lynn from Bloomberg reports:

Over the next half-century, the Continent's population is likely to change more than at any time since the mass emigration to the U.S. in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

UN’s forecast goes out to year 2050 and bases its findings off both “fertility rates” and “immigration trends”. Here’s the breakdown of countries expected to have the most impact:

• Italy: The population is estimated to dwindle down from 57mm to 44mm. Italians seem to be reluctant to have babies.
• Germany: Set to take a 4% hit population (from 82mm to 79mm)
• Spain: An almost 8% change is expected over the next 47 years.
• France: French population is expected to increase by circa 8%-9%
• Britain: There will be more of those (66mm from 58mm)

Eastern European countries seem to be in big trouble: Baltic republics’ population is expected to halve! So should populace of other recently added to EU ex-communist countries. Remember: migration plays significant role in this study, which implies certain economic forecast for the region (more on that later).

Another surprising finding from the report is that European, particularly Eastern, population is growing older. The average age by 2050 is estimated to be 50…. In France and Germany, 10% of the population is expected to be over 80 years old!

As UN is projecting the world population to actually grow by over 3bio by 2050, where is this growth coming from? And are the geopolitical and economic implications of the aforementioned changes?

Eastern and South-East Asian countries will contribute the most. The top six are: India, China, Pakistan, Nigeria, Bangladesh and Indonesia. America is seventh, with 80% growth attributed to immigrants and their families.

Economic Implications
The “cause-and-effect” relationship gets blurry when trying to understand the primary impact: are population changes the outcome of weakening regional economies or visa versa? One thing is clear—forward looking prognosis is grim:

1. Italy, Spain and Eastern European economic expansion is limited, if not halted. As EU become more and more flexible with border controls, the westward migration is bound to be massive.
2. Investing in those countries’ assets or real estate will not be profitable. However, if one is in the market to own outright—“cheap” is the buzzword.
3. Germany is in particularly peculiar situation. Double digit unemployment and budget deficit already in breach of Maastricht Treaty and growing might be a trap for the country’s economy.
4. Economic rift is likely to occur between “growing” and “contracting” European countries.

Geopolitical Implications
1. Slow birth rate in European countries and increasing immigration implies structural demographical changes—in all likelihood, Arabic demographical increase will filter through emigration from Arab countries to Europe.
2. As assimilation process of the aforementioned ethnicities is virtually non-existent (they’re “fifth columnists” as one of my friends put it), this brings instability to the host countries’ political arena.
3. Old alliances will be broken, as they deem irrelevant and new ones will be formed based on necessities, e.g. Italy, Spain and Eastern European (NEW EUROPE)

Postscript:
I have never done a demographical study before, nor have I any expertise in it. However, I found this newly acquired knowledge fascinating and would be interested in learning more. Any references are appreciated.

2003-03-04T19:52:00.000-05:00

A MUST READ

George F. Will from Washington Post wrote this amazing article today. I highly urge everyone to read it, please. It's called "Permission From the Powerless" and here's an excerpt:

As the world waits to see whether the United Nations will cudgel Iraq with a "second" resolution, which actually would be the 18th, President Bush weighs when, not whether, he will order an attack on Iraq that Congress authorized by much larger majorities than his father achieved on Jan. 12, 1991, authorizing the Gulf War. And the president's domestic and foreign critics, showing an amazing tolerance for cognitive dissonance, fault him simultaneously for acting as though the United States can be the world's constable -- and for allowing Iraq to divert him from the task of solving the North Korean crisis.

America has had "the most successful foreign policy of any major country" not just because of its strength but because "it has never had any objective except not to be threatened and when threatened, to remove the threat." And it "does not believe in durable coexistence with a mortal threat."

2003-03-04T19:09:00.000-05:00

INTERESTING TAKE...

...from Paul (via Centerpoint).

2003-03-04T18:50:00.000-05:00

SADDAM'S WISHES

Here's Saddam Hussein's message to Iraqis on the eve of Muslim New Year...Did anyone see the "happy new year" wishes? All he talks about is Bush, "the tyrant of this age". I wonder if it'll stick...

2003-03-04T16:29:00.000-05:00

OVERSPILL NEWS WIRE:

This just in (via Paris (AP) ):

Le Canard Enchaine quoted President Jacques Chirac as telling a small private gathering on Feb. 26 that a veto would be pointless because it wouldn't stop U.S. President George W. Bush from launching military action. "France is doing everything it can, but the problem is that it is impossible to stop Bush from pursuing his logic of war to the end," Chirac was quoted as saying by Le Canard, a satirical newspaper that is known to have well-informed sources. Le Canard also quoted Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin as privately telling a group of conservative lawmakers on Feb. 25 that "using the right of veto would be shooting the Americans in the back."

This just in (via Bloomberg--Fox News):
U.S. is sending B-1, B-52 squadrons to Guam.

2003-03-04T10:54:00.000-05:00

LIBERAL HAWKS DISCUSSION CONTINUES

David Adesnik from OxBlog has a very thorough (as always) response on "liberal hawk" discussion floating around in the Blogosphere (see here and here: I think all relevant articles are re-linked there as well).

I also would like to add some more facts that speak to Bush's dedication to "promoting democracy" in Middle East and "liberating Iraq" (in addition to the ones listed in David's article), in hopes preventing this :

1. I have written about post-war Iraq management here, where I provide some useful links, e.g. CFR and Marc Grossman.
2. Stephen J. Hadley, Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor (via CFR)
3. Bush's speach at AEI.
4. Bush's recent radio address, where he reiterates his intentions again.

In order to minimize the suffering of Iraq's people, the United States and our coalition partners stand ready to provide vital help. We will deliver medicine to the sick, and make sure that Iraq's 55,000 food distribution sites, operating with supplies from the oil-for-food program, are stocked and open as soon a possible. We are stockpiling relief supplies, such as blankets and water containers, for one million people. We are moving into place nearly three million emergency rations to feed the hungry. The United States and Great Britain are providing tens of millions of dollars to the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, and to such groups as the World Food Program and UNICEF, so they will be ready to provide emergency aid to the Iraqi people.

2003-03-03T16:47:00.000-05:00

CATCH-22

Over the past weekend Iraq destroyed 10 of the illegal Al Samoud missiles. Some see it as “proactive” move. I see it as another “strategic” move.

Iraq has once again shown its utter contempt for UNSC, which underscored the latter’s irrelevancy (and this is not my hawkish rant), by claiming that:

Iraq may stop destroying the missiles, banned because they fly farther than allowed by the United Nations, if it believes Washington is determined to go to war anyway.

Maybe it’s just me, but here’s my take on it:

Saddam has built and been in possession of illegal long-range missiles for the past 12 years. He has successfully lied to and avoided UN inspections during that period. Currently, giving in to consistent US pressure to disarm under direct threat of imminent war, Saddam has chosen to destroy the missiles. However, he demands an explicit guarantee that US will withdraw the very threat that makes disarmament possible?
In a nutshell, Saddam is telling us that seventeen UNSC resolutions are meaningless and utterly irrelevant to disarmament process.

Catch-22:
Saddam says he will disarm only if he secures a “non-attack” guarantee from US.
A threat of attack, however, is the only guarantee US has for potential disarmament.

What next?

2003-03-03T15:03:00.000-05:00

TODAY'S ECONOMY/MARKET WRAP

As the geopolitical uncertainty weights in on the consumer confidence and the economic rebound might be deferred later due to looming prospects of war in Middle East, today’s economic releases are nothing short of my expectations.

First things first: Capture of one of al-Qaeda’s leaders and alleged mastermind behind 9/11, coupled with Iraq’s destruction of 10 al-Samoud missiles over the weekend gave a strong bid in Fixed Income markets. Eurodollar futures were up 3bp-4bp.

As we eased into the pit opening, Fixed Income braced for a flurry of releases:

• Personal Income/Spending
• Construction Spending
• Manufacturing ISM

Personal Income/Spending Income grew 0.3%, which was worse than expected by the dealers (and previous moth was revised down too). Disposable income rose the same, but it marked a sixth consecutive stable increase, so it wasn’t at all disappointing. Consumption decreased by 0.1% and boosted personal savings rate to 4.3 (3.9 previously). All this suggests a somewhat healthy growth in salary and wages, but the numbers still remain suspect. As energy costs continue to come under upward pressure, the discretionary spending might very well dissipate.

I heard one economist mention that since durable spending dropped 5.4% from 7.2% in December is the first time in a decade. Although the decrease was partly driven by lack of “auto incentives”, it might be a warning sign of future slower growth.

Construction Spending rose 1.7%, which was better than 0.5% expected by dealers. Not being a very heavy market impact index, the attention was shifted towards ISM, which came out at 10am as well…

Eurodollar futures retraced few ticks and volumes were light before the numbers.

Manufacturing ISM was very disappointing. As it printed 50.5, Fixed Income took off again and were up 4bp on the day. The curve was flattening, as we digested the numbers.

Basically, ISM suggested there is no growth. Every component was weaker across the board. Prices paid went up to 65.5% from 57.5% previously. That was big! Employment fell to 42.8% from 47.6. What does it mean? Cost pressures! High oil prices are choking the market and all industrials and manufacturers are coughing up the dough for operating capacities.

As I was writing this at around 2:40pm, a flash across Bloomberg prints the following headline:

North Korean Jet fighters intercept U.S. spy plane

Fixed Income immediately takes a clue and the news propels us even higher…Now, even though trading on the back of equities all day was strong, we are up additional 3bp and total of 6bp-8bp, flattening even further.

However, this news seemed to have been hauling at us from this past weekend, where a couple of MIGs came withing few hundred feet of our plane flying over international waters. Nothing big happened, but the market had a very strong "close", nevertheless. So, to all of you- Thanks for playing!

2003-03-02T15:37:00.000-05:00

SPARRING WITH THE HEAVYWEIGHTS

I have been introduced to and became an active member of the Blogosphere in December 2002. I am a Democrat (I think). For three months now, I have watched a so-called “liberal hawk” contingent oscillate between “pro” and “against” war mode based on the flavor of the day.

If UNSC or Hans Blix provided a more or less “hawkish” sentiment, liberal hawks would grow talons. However, it wouldn’t take much for them to immediately switch to chicken feet: a very direct statement by Bush administration perceived to be “harsh”; a European country’s (France or Germany) discontent with American leadership in the “war on terror” wrapped in a “unilateralist” argument; or a disagreeable with Democrats and liberals domestic agenda Bush is pushing for.

It’s quite simple actually-- I think that “liberal hawks” suffer from this Jekyl and Hyde syndrome on a purely emotional level, as the real reason for their discontent with war bears explicitly party partisan notions. Consider this statement from Matthew Yglesias:

I feel like the main thing we liberal hawks have been agonizing about is the various process issues surrounding the more-or-less inept manner in which the Bush administration has handled the build-up for war. Another important issue, however, is that a successful war would likely empower the administration to ram even more of its appalling domestic agenda through the congress. Perhaps even more interesting, however, is the converse fact.

The “converse” would, of course, require a very realistic, almost “cynical” (as Matt puts it) answer to this question, posed by Matt to Kevin Drum of “Calpundit”, Sean-Paul of “The Agonist” and Josh of “TPM”?): Is opposing the war justified, if it’s motivated only by trying to hurt Bush’s chances of getting re-elected in 2004?

Or, conversely, I’d ask: How much personal responsibility is one willing to accept for taking a risk of jeopardizing American national security and preventing possible democratic processes around the world, while trying to undermine current administration’s credibility and play partisan party politics? Or better yet, what is the price one’s willing to pay for getting rid of Bush’s tax cut?

Kevin responds with a post and answers Matt’s question:

So if I thought that opposing the war had a chance of hurting Bush's re-election, it would probably be all the nudge I'd need to actually switch sides and oppose it. I've never thought that Saddam Hussein posed an immediate threat, so postponing war for a while would have little downside, while getting rid of Bush would have a big upside.

Wow! If that’s not a hard and cold realist’s assessment, then I don’t know what is? But only for a domestic portion of it, as this “liberal hawk” is sitting on the foreign policy fence and waiting for its domestic policy prey to materialize. Another words, being a “liberal hawk” in this sense is just having a flexible war sentiment “exit” strategy, should an opportunity present itself. Luckily, those opportunities abound, thanks to Dubya and his warmongering neocons, with their poorly chosen rhetoric, finger pointing, names calling and general lack of style.

Sean-Paul also answered the kettle call:

I'm so close to throwing the towel in on this one. Kevin pretty much has it right. Lies, arrogance, the bullying of our allies, the shifting rationales, all of which are justified by so many damn warbloggers as, 'hey, this is what nations do,' is a crock. Yeah, some nations do it. But we are America. We're supposed to be different. And this administration is tearing down an international system designed to prevent nations from acting in just this sort of way.

Granted, this has not been the smoothest war preparation and alliance building. Granted, the diplomacy tactics used now aren’t the most ethical ones. However, as Sean-Paul is a student of International Affairs and a self described subscriber to Realism’s approach to IA , I’d like to remind that one of the three foundations of thereof is that “politics is not a function of ethics, but rather, that ethics is a function of politics, and morality is the product of power.” (E.H. Carr The twenty years’ crisis 1919-1939). Nevertheless, I see that too much importance is given to Bush’s, Rumsfelds, Wolfowitz’s, etc. personalities and how they’re not…nice? Well, again, realist deals with human nature as it is, not as it should or could be. That is a key distinction between a “realist” and “idealist”.

Ideally, Bush could assemble an alliance, rally up support of all countries behind us, get UNSC to eagerly pass yet another resolution authorizing use of force and everything would go smoothly. Better yet, Saddam would go into exile and gave up. Ideally…

Morgenthau, in his “Politics among nations” points out:

“realism believes in the possibility of distinguishing in politics between truth and opinion…between what is illuminated by reason, and what is only a subjective judgment, divorced from the facts as they are and informed by prejudice and wishful thinking.”

Like I said-- I am a Democrat, but I am not a “liberal hawk”. I will not switch because of partisan party politics or because I don’t like the Bush squints his eyes and points a finger when he calls Saddam an “evildoer”. I do not support war because I am a “neocon”, nor will I switch because Bush suggested to pay for war expenses with oil. I do not support war because it’s a popular, nor will I switch for exactly the same argument.

I do not support war because strengthens current administration’s domestic sphere of influence, nor will I switch because it’ll undermine it.

Update: Prof.Drezner's similar take on the topic.

2003-03-02T12:07:00.000-05:00

GETTING READY

On February 26th, I analysed Saddam Hussein's strategies under a "game theory" framework. I outlined the tactic of "threats" and "promises" he is using to add credibility to his unconditional strategic moves. Part of the "promise" strategy, which is nothing more than a sugar coated threat was Saddam's promise not to burn the oil fields in case of war...

Echoing my concerns about Hussein's promises and assurances and drawing a parallel to "scorched earth" strategy used by Stalin in WWII as well is Aydeh Rashed, the deputy chairman of Kuwait Oil Co.'s emergency operations committee (via Bloomberg, February 28th):

Rashed wrinkles his face at the prospect of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein igniting any portion of the 112 billion barrels of oil and 110 trillion cubic feet of natural gas percolating beneath his soil, the second-largest proven oil reserves in the world behind Saudi Arabia. Although Hussein told the U.S. television network CBS that he will not destroy Iraq's energy wealth during any armed conflict with the almost 100,000 U.S. and British troops now massed along the frontier, Rashed warns that ``only an army of fools'' would trust the vow. ``Saddam has done it before and will do it again,'' Rashed cautions. ``Do not believe his promises.''

The article is quite long, but very insightful and conveys the preparadness of our forces for every possible contingency, such as biologicl or chemical contamination; cluster bombs; well fires, etc.

2003-03-02T09:57:00.000-05:00

CAPTURED: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed

Wow! This is major:

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who has been on the run for a decade, was turned over to US custody and taken to an undisclosed location outside the country within hours of his capture, Pakistani officials say.
The 37-year-old Kuwaiti was arrested with two other men in a joint Pakistani-CIA operation in a pre-dawn raid in Rawalpindi, near the capital Islamabad.

This dude is high up on the al-Qaeda food chain, with 1993 WTC bombing and few other anti-Amercian terrorist acts under his belt.

2003-03-02T09:42:00.000-05:00

GIMME A BREAK

The Observer printed the meme which, I am fairly confident, is going to get lots of liberal, VRWC believers' panties in a bunch. Personally, I have absolutely no faith in the aforementioned media source. The Observer's propensity to print "all the news unfit to print" rivals Holywood tabloids and it hardly qualifies as a credible source.

The article is an alleged document leaked exclusively(?) to The Observer and it's a to secret NSA document authorizing spying on UNSC memebrs, except for US and UK. There's also another link in the article, which took me to another article, where the editors describe how they called Frank Koza's (NSA's Chief of Staff, who allegedly wrote the memo) office, got hung up on, etc. Few things that I found really odd in both the memo and editorial:

...the whole gamut of information that could give US policymakers an edge in obtaining results favourable to US goals or to head off surprises

• the use of ou vis-a-vis o in the word "favourable".
• the leaking of the top secret document from a top secret agency to The Observer no less-- the least credible British publication. This is bound to be a non-event (except for Blogosphere's blinded by the left, anti-Bush conspiracy theorists).
• Consider this statement from the aforementioned article (emphasis added):

The disclosures were made in a memorandum written by a top official at the National Security Agency - the US body which intercepts communications around the world - and circulated to both senior agents in his organisation and to a friendly foreign intelligence agency asking for its input.

Looks like NSA is just doing its job, same thing they're supposed to be doing: spies are supposed to be spying, no?

I don't want to get off on a jingoistic rant and beat my chest till it's "red, white and blue", but seriously: Who can be so naive about current diplomacy, as to think that it's done over a cup of tea and a biscuit? It seems that, all of a sudden, age old tactics used by every remotely intelligent intelligence agency is getting heat, but only if it's American? C'mon people, wake up and smell the gun powder!

2003-02-28T21:06:00.000-05:00

A MUST READ

Charles Krauthammer does it again in this great piece:

France is not doing this to contain Iraq -- France spent the entire 1990s weakening sanctions and eviscerating the inspections regime as a way to end the containment of Iraq. France is doing this to contain the United States. As I wrote last week, France sees the opportunity to position itself as the leader of a bloc of former great powers challenging American supremacy.

That is a serious challenge. It requires a serious response. We need to demonstrate that there is a price to be paid for undermining the United States on a matter of supreme national interest.

First, as soon as the dust settles in Iraq, we should push for an expansion of the Security Council -- with India and Japan as new permanent members -- to dilute France's disproportionate and anachronistic influence.

Second, there should be no role for France in Iraq, either during the war, should France change its mind, or after it. No peacekeeping. No oil contracts. And France should be last in line for loan repayment, after Russia. Russia, after all, simply has opposed our policy. It did not try to mobilize the world against us.

Third, we should begin laying the foundation for a new alliance to replace the now obsolete Cold War alliances. Its nucleus should be the "coalition of the willing" now forming around us. No need to abolish NATO. The grotesque performance of France, Germany and Belgium in blocking aid to Turkey marks the end of NATO's useful life. Like the United Nations, it will simply wither of its own irrelevance.

Love it! Every word and every thought!

2003-02-28T14:02:00.000-05:00

Haven't written anything in 2 days, been busy with some personal matters. Also, heavy workload has bugged me down. Will resume if not tonight, then on Saturday.

2003-02-26T13:58:00.000-05:00

SADDAM'S STRATEGIES

Couple of days ago, I discussed some alternatives Saddam might have and/or exercise with respect to resolving the looming crisis. I mentioned that both exile option and voluntary disarmament option would not be Saddam's dominant strategies. I also talked about another matter--potential burning of oil fields in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. This move would render most of oil dependant economies severely punished and could potentially wreak havoc on the third world economies.

Today, as I am looking at Saddam's inteview with CBS News, I see that the the options I discussed and concerns I voiced were, in fact, valid:

1. Saddam flatly refused to go in exile, saying that "we [read:himself] will die in this country and we maintain our honor".
2. He also rejected (but it was mentioned!) a possibility of burning the oil fields: "Iraq does not burn its wealth and it does not destroy its dams."

Based on the aforementioned it's apparent Saddam is anything, but dumb. According to pure "game theory", he is rightly pursuing the dominant strategy. He purposefully limits his alternatives, which is a classic strategic move, a la Stalin's "Scorched Earth" , where the latter ordered everything on the path of Nazis to be destroyed, rather than fall into Hitler's spoils. As Saddam's options diminish and he is presumably backed against the wall, his dominant strategy gets reinforced by timely and effective mix of:

• Threats:
- that a great deal of American soldiers will die (implying use of non-conventional weapons by Iraq)
- that Arab Street will rise against Americans and Westerners, etc.

• Promises:
- that he will ot destroy the oil fields (although he puts the thought of it out)
- acknowledging that his arsenal includes long range missiles (but denying they breach UN inspectors' claim of being >150km--with only 98km being a UNSC set limit)
- aluding to the fact he IS working on the alternative peacefull disarmament with Russia

Both methods pursue the same goal and differ only in that one is former a negative reinforcement threat and latter-- a positive one. Accordinly, a threat must be credible. Judging by Saddam's resilient defiance of UNSC resolutions for 12 years and his military and negotiating acumen developed by years of being a terrorist and a wartime President, I do not hesitate to acknowledge his credibility. No matter what happens, so far Saddam is playing his cards correctly.

2003-02-25T22:18:00.000-05:00

HOMEWORK

Sean-Paul from The Agonist had a very good post on America's alleged growing unilateralism. It'll be my homework to understand the issues better.

Will report soon.

2003-02-25T11:50:00.000-05:00

Not sure what the future brings? Keep buying houses?!

This seems to be the message received from today’s economic releases (see previous post "Today's economic releases"). For better or worse it was a mixed bag: lower confidence and higher home sales? Ironically, the underlying logic is inline with how consumers evaluate their wealth. Since most of the consumers treat their houses as personal piggy banks, in time of declining asset prices and economic sluggishness, homes are perceived as better investments. But is it true? Yes and No.

On average, stocks have outperformed all other investment vehicles available to investors, including housing. Therefore, the stock prices would have a greater wealth effect impact, than housing. That’s a “no”. However, over short periods of economic contraction, houses will outperform. That’s a “yes”, but here’s a curveball:

Do you buy a house live in? or as purely speculative transaction?

According to The Economist research of housing prices for 1980-2001 (via The Motley Fool):

The results were that U.S. residential real estate from 1980-2001 returned a nominal 158% and a real (inflation-adjusted) 20%. That's a nominal compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 5.11% and real of -- gulp! -- 0.87%. Let's line this up with the S&P 500 over the same period:
1980-2001 Housing S&P 500 (w/o div.)
Total return 185.00% 961.40%
CAGR 5.11% 11.09%

These averages strongly suggest that investors would have been far better off investing in stocks than housing for the last 21 years, and that's not even allowing that we buy houses sort of "on margin" -- paying huge amounts of interest on loans for years.

I guess this is something to chew on, while digesting the numbers (no pun intended).

2003-02-25T11:20:00.000-05:00

TODAY'S ECONOMIC RELEASES

Consumer Confidence: 64 (vs. 76.5 expected)
Conference Board index plunged in February to 64 points. All index components were worse off. The index produced lowest numbers since late 1993. Forward expectations are grim as well.
Economists are saying that the low levels of confidence usually correspond to “zero consumption” growth. However, “buying” indications haven’t been affected as much, especially in housing (see below).

Existing Home Sales: 6.09mm (vs. 5.80mm expected)
Strong housing numbers today showed that current interest rates environment and low mortgage rates still offer lucrative deals to homebuyers. An impressive 3% increase from last month (which was slightly revised down) sets yet another record in home sales America-wide, with a small exception in Midwest.

The strength of housing market has continues for a third moth, which in my book constitutes a trend. Even though this trend shows real vigor of the market, it’s unlikely to be sustained over longer period of time. The following factors, in my opinion, will weight high on the housing market:
• Declining confidence: job losses, evaporating pensions, increased deficit
• Geopolitical concerns: Iraq, North Korea and Atlantic Alliance rift
• Rising energy prices: oil and gas
• Declining asset wealth: due to tumbling stock markets
• Economic recovery: higher rates to put pressure on home prices

(more analysis to follow)

2003-02-24T15:39:00.000-05:00

HUSSEIN VS. BUSH: CELEBRITY DEATHMATCH

From the newswire:

NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has challenged President George W. Bush to a live international television and radio debate about the possibility of looming military action, CBS News reported on its Web Site Monday. Saddam made the comments in an interview with CBS's Dan Rather. Saddam also flatly denied that Iraq's al-Samoud missiles are in violation of U.N. mandates and indicated he doesn't intend to destroy them or pledge to destroy them as demanded by chief UN weapons inspector Hans Blix, CBS News reported.

I see few problems with this statement, which might stem from translation:

1. Why would Saddam want to debate a possibility (vs. necessity of military action with a person who threatens to carry that action out? Is it a dare?
2. Saddam has just flatly defied UNSC Chief Inspector and declared his refusal to disarm! Now what?

UPDATE: Ari Fleischer answers my questions:
1. " This is not about a debate. This is about disarmament and complying with the world's instructions that Iraq disarm."
2. " [Saddam] is not facing reality on the issue of the al-Samoud missiles, why would his other statements have credibility? "

2003-02-24T12:46:00.000-05:00

ANOTHER ARGUMENT FOR IRAQ INVASION

Okay, so here we have yet another argument for invading Iraq, this time dressed up to address the secular global economic downturn we're in. The article in TimeOnline, written by Nicholas Boles argues that if we don't invade Iraq, Saddam might hit the oil fields of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia:

Iraq is in a unique position to threaten the world’s access to oil. At present, Saudi Arabia accounts for 15 per cent of global oil production and Iraq and Kuwait together account for 7 per cent. Virtually all the Saudi oilfields (and the whole of Kuwait) are within the range of Iraq’s missiles. A single well-aimed nuclear warhead could wipe out 75-95 per cent of all Saudi oil production. So, up to 22 per cent of global oil supplies would be under direct threat if President Saddam Hussein acquired the nuclear weapons he spent most of the 1980s trying to build.

This in turn, as argued by Mr. Boles, will set a chain of horrific events, largely exterminating Third World Countries, bringing OECD members to the brink of economic destruction, etc. All of this is predicated on the notion that the price of oil will get and stay very high, and countries dependant on fossil fuel will suffer mercilessly.

Now, this logic is both true and fallacious at the same time. It's true, because if Saddam get s his hands on nuclear weapons or is not disarmed from his existing arsenal, it's only a matter of time before he makes a credible threat to his neighbors. At thispoint, of course, he will be able to deter the West (much like the North Korean debacle) and will control the economic well-being of all oil dependant states. It's fallacious, since the imminency of Saddam's threat is more long-term, rather than a short-term (whle he is under so much scrutiny, he won't be able to lift a finger without setting off an alarm). This means, that having present, but not carried out threat of war currently is damaging global economy more than Saddam could have in the same timeframe, e.g. the prices of oil are at decade highest, they are substantially higher than pre- and post- Gulf War. This, coupled with tugh existing economic conditions, shrinking output worldwide and rising prices (driven by higher energy costs) is making the 1970s stagflation so ever more likely.

I guess the slogan "Blood for Oil" is a double-edge sword. What do YOU think?

2003-02-24T09:59:00.000-05:00

LIGHT BLOGGING TODAY...

...due to heavy workload. Will post few times during the day, though. Consider this an open thread: what would you like to see me write about?

2003-02-23T16:38:00.000-05:00

THE DAY OF THE DEFENDER

Historically, in USSR, February 23rd was holiday--The Day of the Soviet Red Army and Naval Fleet. Nowadays, it's still a holiday, but it's called The Day of the Fatherland's Defender.

When I was in school this used to be an equivalent of Valentine's...Girls would give presents to guys they liked, made us feel good and proud and grown up. Then, on March 8th, on International Woman's Day, we would reciprocate and girls would feel like ladies. It was nice and innocent...until I came of age and learnt which end was up in the Soviet Union. Romance lost its power and I NEVER referred to this day as a holiday for almost two decades.

Now, however, after having lived in the States for 12 years, I lost all my teenage inhibitions and pent up anger at the Soviets (I think). Since it's the day of the motherland defender, I am going to pretend the meaning transcends the borders, idelologies and causes.

I would like to take this opportunity to extend greetings to all American troops stationed in the Middle East, ready to face the evil in the name of MY personal security.

God bless and be safe!

2003-02-22T18:04:00.000-05:00

SOCIALIST MEME

Arrest of USF Professor Sami Al-Arian on the charges of operating a global terrorist organization, Islamic Jihad, unleashed a fury of slander from International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI). Now, for those of you who might wonder what ICFI is—go visit the site they operate: WSWS (World Socialist Web Site). I shudder every time I load the site, but the language they use alone is worth the time to comb through this propaganda. But I digress.

While the arrest is made on 50-count indictment, alleging that

” He [Al-Arian] and seven other men…[were] operating a criminal racketeering enterprise since 1984 that supported Palestinian Islamic Jihad. They are also charged with conspiracy to kill and maim people abroad; conspiracy to provide material support to the group; extortion; perjury; mail and wire fraud; obstruction of justice; and attempt to procure citizenship or naturalization unlawfully to help terrorists.”

the Editorial Board of WSWS thinks that

”The indictment and arrest February 20 of University of South Florida (USF) Professor Sami Amin Al-Arian and three other men on terrorist conspiracy charges is an outrageous attempt to railroad individuals to prison because of their political opposition to the murderous policies of the Israeli government and Washington’s complicity in the repression of the Palestinian people. ”

The article rambles on an on, so you’ll just have to read it to understand why I “shudder” at the sheer language.

2003-02-22T10:56:00.000-05:00

IRAQ DISARMED: WHEN? HOW? WHO?

Sean-Paul over at The Agonist has incisively listed 6 normative considerations for jus ad bellum, i.e. principles that govern decision on whether to go to war.

I am fairly confident even if one has read, understood and answered items 1 through 4, #5 would be a bit trickier to digest. I know it was for me…Have we, as a country or the world, exhausted all peaceful measures to disarm Saddam? Is it time to finally give up on idealistic notion that a regional dictator of Saddam’s caliber would give up his power and ideology just because his position of power is threatened?

To get through this hurdle, perhaps it’s worth considering this: how much value does a mass murderer inflicting genocide on his neighbors and constituents, a veteran terrorist and an experienced WMD propagator assign to his life or the lives of his people? (See above for a hint).

Still a big debatable, a tad ambiguous? One other way to approach it is to assume Saddam is a rational actor, someone who will go after the winning strategy. The choices are scarce:

1. Exile
2. Voluntary disarmament
3. Involuntary disarmament

Let’s review them closer:

Exile—weak, losing strategy: Where do you go if you’re a power hungry, 35- year dictatorial rule veteran? And what do you do there? What sort of legacy do you leave behind?

Clearly, Saddam has neither a will to go into exile nor any plausible strategy to do it successfully (after all, he doesn’t get a “no assassination” guarantee from either his enemies or the “host country”, which after all has to harbor Hussein!)

Voluntary disarmament—weak, losing strategy: In this case “voluntary” disarmament bears the same consequences as “involuntary”, but doesn’t allow to inflict pain on Saddam’s enemy-Western coalition forces: Saddam loses power, gets removed from office, possibly tried as war criminal in ICC tribunal, etc. All of downside of losing a war, with none of upside in seeing enemy painted “red”? Unlikely.

Clearly, Saddam has no incentive “to disarm”. Also, disarming will effectively show that he successfully defied UNSC resolutions and avoided inspections for 12 years.

While Iraq has no clear deadline to disarm, the fine line between “disarm” and “be disarmed” is going to get increasingly more blurred.

Involuntary disarmament
In Saddam’s twisted mind, this is “double or nothing” strategy. It’s also the strongest one he’s got: he knows it’s inevitable that he will lose power, but at least he’ll go down as a “hero”, a victim of “imperialistic aggression”, a martyr and example to all red revolutionaries to come, etc. etc. etc.

He also knows that he can inflict some damage on western powers coalition, both militarily and economically. Maybe he’s even banking on longer- term ideological damage, since he can capitalize on the current “anti-war” sentiment, which is already causing a rift in alliance.

So as we now think we know what Saddam will do, how do we act? As responsible actors, ethical entities and simply selfish egoists—couldn’t we just give Saddam a CLEAR, SHORT deadline and then act decisively? Most likely it’ll be the same old story, but maybe not. In either case, we’ll get enough proof to rationalize our actions. So here’s without further ado:

UNITED NATIONS, Feb. 21 -- The chief U.N. weapons inspector ordered Iraq today to begin destroying its Al Samoud 2 missiles and associated equipment by March 1, setting up a major test of whether Iraqi President Saddam Hussein intends to disarm or face a war for openly defying a U.N. order.

As the events unfold within the next two weeks or so, with another resolution draft on the table before UNSC and the latter’s recent (remains to be seen) determination to put an end to this “cat and mouse” chase, hopefully that item #5 will seize being a moral hurdle for the hawks, chicken hawks, fence sitters, and doves, because #6--Reasonable hopes of success—is sure as hell a “no-brainer”.

Update: Read this post by Matthew Yglesias, where he cites Le Monde's article related to the WaPo's piece I quoted above. It shows how critical it is to read between lines.

2003-02-21T14:14:00.000-05:00

"..volunteering as a shield seemed to speed the visa process."

Link via NYTimes. Ridiculous!

2003-02-21T10:46:00.000-05:00

HOLY SMOKES...in NYC

Breaking News: (via REUTERS)

A propane barge exploded off New York's Staten Island on Friday, fire officials said. The explosion in the waterway known as Arthur Kill between Staten Island and New Jersey sent plumes of black smoke and flames into the sky.

I can see the smokes from the window of my apartment...more on it as the news develops.

UPDATE: As I am looking at the thick, black smoke rising up about a 1,000 feet in the air and slowly drifting to the east, towards Long Island/Queens, I can't help but feel a sudden deja-vu. This nagging feeling creeps up on me and I realize that I've seen this before...9/11. Despite the fact these two events are totally discrete and opposite in nature, I get a flashback to the time when I was standing in awe and disbelief, watching the twin towers imploding mere 10 blocks away. The sounds of sirens outside and honking cars definitely resemble the environment of 2 years ago; phones are out and I can't reach my girlfriend's family (they live in Staten Island)...very creepy.

I will report later, as I think environmental concerns will take precedent pretty soon, as the air and water contamination will be important to watch.

UPDATE 2:This picture (link via The Agonist) could quite possiblY surpass its irony and become a truism, as the imminent war preparations, Venezuela strike, Nigerian uncertainties, and now the blast at the major NYC oil refinery propelled oil prices upward by a dollar. This comes (as if there's any good time for a tragedy like that) in the worst possible times. My heart goes out to the brave NYC firefighters, who have to endure the burden the most. My main concern is the air and water quality in New York is, however. First it was 9/11 and now this...really very, very sad. I am not even going to get on the "city budget" rant now...

Note: The explostion has just been confirmed to have happened on the Mobil barge, whch contained about a 100,000 of unleaded gasoline...

2003-02-20T19:58:00.000-05:00

HITCHENS ON ANTI-WAR PROTESTS

I wrote about anti-war "peace" rallies before here and here. I expressed my views that the protesters were largely manipulated by pseudo-Communist, pro-Socialist elements which organized the protests. The organizers seemed to push their own propaganda and anti-American sentiment under the pretext of anti-imperialistic, anti-war rallies.

But don't have to take my word for it-- read this article from The Mirror by Christopher Hitchens, I wanted it to rain on their parade. Here's an excerpt:

There are not enough words in any idiom to describe the shame and the disgrace of this.

I went to the last such "peace" demonstration in Hyde Park last autumn and found it was pretty easy to distinguish between the two main tendencies.

These were:

(1) Those who knew what they were doing and

(2) Those who did not.

Among the first tendency - the animating and organising force - were an easily-recognisable bunch of clapped-out pseudo-Marxists who, deep in their hearts, have a nostalgia for the days of the one-party State and who secretly regard Saddam as an anti-imperialist.

They were assisted by an impressive number of fundamentalist Muslims, who mouth the gibberish slogans of holy war but who don't give a damn for the suffering inflicted by Saddam on their co-religionists.

A more gruesome political alliance I have never seen.

Then came the sincere, fuddled stage-army of the good - people who think that a remark such as "peace is better than war" is an argument in itself. Their latest cry is that "inspections" should be given "more time". I am always impressed by sweet people who are evidence-proof.

Now, run this against my posts and you will see that one doesn't have to be a journalist to "see" the dubious nature of these events.

2003-02-20T17:55:00.000-05:00

CAN YOU SAY: STAGFLATION (Part II) with a little POLITICKING

In my economic update from last week, I expressed concerns about Industrial Production numbers, as they indicated arguably unsustainable growth. I was alerted by the release and wrote that it might be “flagging” something not so good. Sure enough, the first batch of freshly squeezed econojuice in the morning today was bitter. On to the second installment…

N.B. I noted in my earlier post that 4Q’02 GDP could get a significant revision because of the data, but the economists predict that ue to upward revisions to consumer spending, inventories and construction it might not be that bad. …We’ll see.

Philly Fed 2.3
Wow! Talking about a smack in the face…markets expected the diffusion index to come in around 10-11 barely a quarter, at best.
Every component in the survey has decreased: new orders, shipments, delivery times, and inventories…everything went down. Except, of course, prices paid. So, what does it mean? Slimmer profit margins and still weak demand-that’s’ what! Apparently, businesses are either stalling or are really unsure about the future of our economy. The survey this month included some special questions about geopolitical uncertainties and respondents signaled that 40% adverse impact on hiring, etc. is directly affected by the aforementioned concerns.

Oil & Gas Inventories
A very supportive for oil prices report:
• oil inventories are down
• refinery utilization is up

Report proved to be a strong “bid” for oil prices and it propelled crude above $37. Additional factors that weigh in significantly are, of course: Venezuela (the strike continues, arrests are made, output is nowhere near pre-strike levels, inventories are 50mm barrels below 1 year ago), Nigeria (oil cargo monitoring personnel walked out and some work stoppage was reported, but unclear what the impact is, if any), and Iraq.

Politicking
The war is most likely to start in mid-March. Here’s why:

• Bush is trying to work another UNSC resolution
• US is pulling in more troops to the region
• Climate for troops: the best weather is in March, circa 70 degrees
• Oil futures exhibit complete “backwardation” *

* Each preceding month’s futures contract is more expensive than the following month.

2003-02-20T14:02:00.000-05:00

MEMO ON THE MARGIN

According to CBSNews, a patriotic North Carolina restaurateur, owner of Cubbie's, does not serve "french fries". Instead, her serves-- "freedom fries". Here's a lowdown:

BEAUFORT, N.C. — You can get fries with your burger at a restaurant here, but just don't ask for french fries.
Neal Rowland, the owner of Cubbie's, now only sells his fried potato strips as "freedom fries" — a decision that comes as Americans watch French officials back away from support for possible war in Iraq.

"Because of Cubbie's support for our troops, we no longer serve french fries. We now serve freedom fries," says a sign in the restaurant's window.

Rowland said his intent is not to slight the French people, but to take a patriotic stance to show his support for the United States and the actions of President Bush.

"It's our way of showing our patriotic pride," he said, noting that his business has a lot of local military troops as customers.

Rowland said the switch from french fries to freedom fries came to mind after a conversation about World War I when anti-German sentiment prompted Americans to rename German foods like sauerkraut and frankfurter to liberty cabbage and hot dog.

I dont know about you, but I have just learned two things from this:

1. As we load up on "freedom" fries, it's helpful to note that according to National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 68% of Americans are overweight and/or obese. So, maybe afterall, there is such thing as "too much" freedom?
2. After 12 years of living in the US, I finally learnt the origins of the word "hot dog".

2003-02-20T10:38:00.000-05:00

CHIRAC SPEAKS AGAIN

Is Jacques Chirac insane? Highly unlikely! Does he make any sense? Absolutely not!

In his interview with Time Magazine Paris bureau, French President Chirac once again showed his utter ignorance and complete denial about Iraq disarmament and the ~~irrelevant~~ role UNSC plays in it.

It's up to the inspectors to decide [ed. what would justify war]. We gave them our confidence. They were given a mission, and we trust them. If we have to give them greater means, we'll do so. It's up to them to come before the Security Council and say, "We won. It's over. There are no more weapons of mass destruction," or "It's impossible for us to fulfill our mission. We're coming up against Iraqi ill will and impediments."

“We won”??? I think that Chirac is under illusion he is fighting the war with Hussein already by himself, through UN inspectors. And as to the second part of his gobbledygook- maybe something is getting lost in the translation into French at the UNSC or, maybe, 12 years of inspections is merely a siesta for the ill-fated French hypocrite, so can anyone please tell him that:

1. It HAS been impossible for inspectors to fulfill their mission
2. They DID come up against Iraqi “ill will and impediment”

For Christ sake, man, wake the hell up!?!?

Undoubtedly, Chirac is losing it, as is evident from the following statement:

…if Saddam Hussein would only vanish, it would without a doubt be the biggest favor he could do for his people and for the world.

Vanish??? I think Jacques’s been eating too much of them french fries, I see…Sure, Saddam, an all around nice and understanding guy, would like to do the world a favor. In fact, I am sure he’s packing as I’m writing this little rant.

In any case, what else would you expect from the French leader, other than a dose of Chiracrisy…

2003-02-20T10:00:00.000-05:00

CAN YOU SAY: STAGFLATION (Part I)

Today is not going to be an easy day to digest for the markets. We have the flurry of economic data coming out and the first batch isn’t looking too good. Slower growth and higher prices spell “cite>stagflation:

Trade Gap - $44.2bn
December trade widened in the worst possible way, with imports rising $2.1bn and exports falling $2.1bn. What does it mean? Well, maybe our economy is growing a tad faster than our trade partners. Is it good? Not really, because gap widening suggests a probable downward revision to Q4’02 GDP.
Big portion of imports gains can be attributed to volatile and extremely high energy, namely oil and gas, prices. An interesting, but economically significant detail: US’ exports to France have dropped.

PPI
Producer prices surged in January a more than expected 1.6%. Much of it, of course, is energy driven, as oil prices are at their highest levels in a decade. But even ex-food/energy prices increase of 0.9% was beyond expectations.

Jobless Claims 402,000 (up 21,000)
Since this is a weekly number and volatile at that, a spike in nation’s unemployment might be largely written-off to “weather” and “holiday” factors. The number is largely an estimate, so some numbers are forecasted.

2003-02-19T22:24:00.000-05:00

THE AGONIST: THOUGHTFUL, GLOBAL, TIMELY

As always, Sean-Paul delivers. A great analysis of Chirac-Hussein relationship.

2003-02-19T14:52:00.000-05:00

BREAKING NEWS FROM THE WIRE: PLANE CARRYING 250PPL CRASHES IN SOUTHERN IRAN

...more to follow.

UPDATE: All 270 passengers are presumed to be dead, as the Russian-made Antonov crashed today in Iran. Most of the passengers were Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Iranian hard-liner elite crew, "the defenders of Islamic regime in Iraq". They were allegedly on a very important secret mission...Their most recent "very important secret mission" was renewing fatwa on Salman Rushdie last week (see my post here).

2003-02-19T12:16:00.000-05:00

IRAQ: POST-WAR MANAGEMENT

Today’s Opinion Journal featured an article Iraq for the Iraqis by Ahmad Chalabi, leader of Iraqi National Congress (INC). In it, Mr. Chalabi argues that even though Iraqi people, government opposition in particular, are praying for US led “deliverance” from oppression, ”proposed U.S. occupation and military administration of Iraq is unworkable and unwise.” The concerns voiced by Chalabi are:

• loss of essential decision making power to occupying powers;
• loss of sovereignty due to transition of power to unqualified US personnel;
• residual authority for current Saddam’s bureaucrats;

Mr. Chalabi also warned of potential rift in the US-Iraq relationship, should military administration be pursued and concluded his op-ed with the following statement:

” The truth is, there is more to the liberation of Iraq than battlefield victory or the removal of Saddam and his top-tier cadre of torturers. The transition to democracy--the task of exorcising Saddam's ghosts from the Iraqi psyche and society--can only be achieved through self-empowerment and a full return of sovereignty to the people. This is our job, not that of a foreign officer. We are a proud nation, not a vanquished one. We are allies of the U.S. and we welcome Americans as liberators. But we must be full participants in the process of administering our country and shaping its future.”

Analysis
The arguments presented by Mr. Chalabi are consistent with his rhetoric from last December, when he advanced his candidacy to head up the post-liberation government. However, this structure of “government in exile” isn’t effective and was largely dismissed by American administration. The dismissal, however, is not a reflection on capabilities of any government opposition organizations, but simply a logical, rational approach to post-dictatorship country management.

Iraq has been mismanaged for 35 years, ever since the Baathist control of the country. Iraq’s resources have been depleted to serve military expansionist ambitions of Saddam Hussein. Iraq’s commercial and industrial infrastructures- neglected and destroyed. In order to ensure successful democratic future, these infrastructures (governmental, industrial and commercial) must be rebuilt. This is no easy task, as secure and stable interim government must be in place beforehand. Country must be stabilized. That is why an interim military administration have to be implemented.

Conclusion
The following three stages of post-war Iraq management are being discussed (from Marc Grossman, Under Secretary for Political Affairs Testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Washington, DC February 11, 2003):

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Stabilization, where an interim Coalition military administration will focus on security, stability and order; laying the groundwork for stage 2.
2. Transition, where authority is progressively given to Iraqi institutions as part of the development of a democratic Iraq.
3. Transformation, after Iraqis have drafted, debated and approved a new, democratic constitution and held free and fair elections, the only way for any future Iraqi government to be truly legitimate.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is also great work by the Council on Foreign Relations, titled Guiding Principles for U.S. Post-Conflict Policy in Iraq, where long-term vision of post-Saddam Iraq is outlined.

A common vision that threads through all of the aforementioned documents and speeches is a vision that shows there’s a great deal of consideration given to empowering Iraqis to establish a free, democratic, self-governed, prosperous, independent nation.

2003-02-18T19:24:00.000-05:00

SOME COMMENTS FROM THE PEANUT GALLERY

Jimmy Carter, Nobel Peace Prize winner, former President and currently a joke of a politician was interviewed by The Mirror, a self-proclaimed "Britain's brightest tabloid newspaper." Jimmy said:

"We want Saddam Hussein to disarm but we want to achieve this through peaceful means."

I just love when people use an action verb "disarm" with something as vague and ambigous as "peaceful means" in the same sentence. Let's see now:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
dis·arm--
• To divest of a weapon or weapons.
• To deprive of the means of attack or defense; render harmless.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, which part of the aforementioned definition would entail peaceful means? Why isn't this sort of obscure statement ever backed up by tangible suggestions on how to peacefully divest and deprive Saddam from his weapons? Oh wait, I know: We can always step up the embargo and strengthen the economic blockade. That ought to teach Saddam a lesson, as well as increase their GDP per capita (less people with same output).
But the following pearl of wisdom is truly worthy of this Idiotarian Supreme and takes the cake. Carter said this about Saddam:

"He obviously has the capability and desire to build prohibited weapons and probably has some hidden in his country."

And so our "hero for doveish Democrats, frequently denouncing wars and conflict whenever they flare"admitted not only that it is obvious Hussein has the desire and capability to proliferate, but Carter also acknowledged Hussein's non-compliance with UNSC resolutions 660, 661,...& 1441. The statement also gives an answer to anyone who is still questioning whether a substantial case for military attack was made by US administration, doesn't it?

Come to think of it-- I am starting to like Jimmy Carter. I'd like to see him speak more often defending "doves" case against war. It makes Rumsfeld's and Powell's jobs so much easier. By the way, the article is a "must read".

2003-02-18T12:05:00.000-05:00

CHIRACRISY

Yesterday, at the emergency EU summit in Brussels, French President Jackques Chirac showed his true colors (mainly yellow) by blasting the new candidates for EU membership for their support of US. In what appeared to be the most un-diplomatic "father-like" rude scolding, Chirac chided their behavior as "childish" and said:

"It is not really responsible behavior. It is not well brought-up behavior. They missed a good opportunity to keep quiet...[]..If they wanted to diminish their chances of joining Europe they could not have found a better way."

Even though President Chirac reminded Bulgaria and Romania that their position is "especially delicate", since their sluggish economies deferred EU entry until 2007, his blackmail effort proved to be futile. What's interesting is that France would use such political doublestandard, while its' kicking and screaming that America is "bullying" everyone both politically and economically. It seems, however, French government has no problems with using political and economical blackmail to weaker east-european countries.

It must have come as total shock to Chirac (to elicit aforementioned statements) that his Machiavellian ploy to gain more international power was impotent. Moreover, when he realized he couldn't put a chokehold Bulgaria & Co. it signaled that France's regional powers are diminishing as well. There was one phrase Chirac used, in particular, that I think illustrates France's mentality and approach to politics very well:

" When you're in the family you have more rights than when you're knocking on the door."

I guess it's getting dark and cold in the EU. I just wish I could ask one question of French President Chirac (a 2003 Nobel Peace Price nominee): In the family of a wider International Comminity, guess who appears to be standing outside, looking in?

2003-02-18T09:54:00.000-05:00

SOUTH KOREA SUBWAY TRAGEDY

134 people killed and over 100 missing in the subway explosion of a souterhn Korean city Taegu. A madman is said to start a blaze, by throing what appeared to be an ignited cartoon of mikl into the subway carriage. Innocent and simple enough, but here's the impact:

'If you ignite a flammable liquid like gasoline inside a closed space, what you'll get is something very close to an explosion,'' he said.''There would have been hardly any time to escape.''

I live in NYC. If any of you have ever been up here and taken a tube, you know it's a scary thought to even imagine how easy it would have been to do something like that here...God forbid!

2003-02-17T14:05:00.000-05:00

VIVA LA RESISTANCE?

As if in unison, French President Jacques Chirac delivered a statement similar to the one we have heard from Villepin few weeks back, that "would oppose any effort to draft a new U.N. resolution to explicitly authorize war against Iraq at this time." Germany's Fischer, however, reiterated that germany will not stnd in the way of EU and will not rule out military action, although it would have to be a measure of last resort.

I am preparing a larger piece on European politics, so stay tuined...

2003-02-17T11:22:00.000-05:00

TOPSY TURVY WORLD OF POLITICS

In her recent inteview with Meet the Press this Sunday, Condoleezza Rice aluded to the fact that even though it is not necessary, another UNSC resolution could be sought, prior to any military action in Iraq. Ms. Rice, therefore, has softened administration's rhetoric on complete and utter irrelevance of UN, a rhetoric mostly asserted by SOD Donald Rumsfeld.

Colin Powell also ensured that his comments last Friday contained a more respectful reference to UNSC. Secretary of State reaffirmed the administration's intent to work closely and consult with the Council regarding a "second resolution" regarding Iraq, should the latter be recalcitrant.

...And Villepin said he wouldn't rule out the use of military force and also kinda, sorta agrees Iraq is in breach...

2003-02-17T11:15:00.000-05:00

The Boston Globe:

Study shows US blacks trailing
Immigrants from Africa, Caribbean found to fare better

Despite being new to the country, black immigrants have significantly higher household incomes and a lower unemployment rate than US-born blacks, according to a new study likely to intensify debate about the nature of racial discrimination in the United States.

The study, done at the State University of New York at Albany, finds that the median household income for immigrants from Africa and the West Indies in 2000 was about $7,000 higher than that of African-Americans, whose median household income is $33,500 - one of the lowest of any ethnic group in the United States.

2003-02-17T08:57:00.000-05:00

NATO ALIGNS OVER TURKEY

After a long toilsome month, NATO allies have finally reached an agreement to send defensive military aid to Turkey.

Alliance solidarity has prevailed," Lord Robertson said on Sunday. "We have been able collectively to overcome the impasse."

France, who distanced itself from NATO military structure in the 60s was not part of the decision making body. With France out of the way, 18 other allies on the defense planning committee were unanimous, including Germany and Belgium. Agreement language was carefully drafted to acknowledge the necessity of diplomatic measures to resolve current showdown in Iraq and reaffirming that Turkey's plea is satisfied as purely defensive mechanism, in case the war with its southern neighbor breaks out.

The emphasis on working with NATO's more judicial peacekeeping sibling--UN--was strategically made in light of today's EU emergency summit with Kofi Annan in Brussels. Mr. Annan was quotes saying that "the inspection will not go indefinitely", however failing to provide a solid timeline. UNSC, inept of enforcing its own decisions, has acknowledged that it might have to pass yet another resolution, if/when Iraq is proved to be in material breach of Security Council's 17th resolution (1441). I wouldn't have any high hopes for Council's resolve, since ambiguity and vagueness in the language will prevail, much like in 1441. For example, 1441 neither endorses/authorises the use use of force (if Iraq is ddemed to be in material breach) nor rules it out. UNSC's commitment to disarm Iraq does not really go beyond demagogical discussions. Condoleezza Rice, in her interview with Meet the Press yesterday, have summarized this attitute quite eloquently:

"Any time you have a situation in which you are calling for more time rather than calling for Iraq to immediately comply" with U.N. disarmament resolutions, Rice said, "it plays into the hands" of Hussein...[] We need to remind everybody that tyrants don't respond to any kind of appeasement," she said. "Tyrants respond to toughness. And that was true in the 1930s and 1940s when we failed to respond to tyranny and it is true today."

Ms. Rice has reaffirmed US' intent to keep intense pressure on Saddam to disarm and mentioned that he has "weeks, not months" to do so.

2003-02-16T15:59:00.000-05:00

FRENCH FRIES

" In France up to 400,000 people, many carrying posters denouncing US President Bush as a "warmonger" and chanting anti-American slogans, marched through Paris and 50 other cities. Gerald Lenoir, 41, of Berkley, California, said he came to Paris, where 100,000 marched, specifically to demonstrate alongside the French. "I am here to protest my government's aggression against Iraq," he said. "Iraq does not pose a security threat to the States and there are no links with al-Qa'ida."

Above citation is what one could almost exclusively see, had one read numerous recounts of anti-war protests taking place in Europe. However, the real nature of their protest is just...well, I am not sure if there is one. As you can clearly see in the photo (via Alisa), which is just a sample of what could be seen at those ~~sharades~~ parades, it's all the same bullshit propaganda fueled by a pro-PaleoNazi, anti-semitic european sentiment. The protests reek of the same hypocrisy, avoidance and blame shifting as the Syria's speech past friday at the UNSC, where they used Iraqi disarmament conference to push their own agenda of their beef with Israel...disquisting. France also has become so entrenched in her interfaith politicking and so engrossed in her pro-muslim stance due to depenedancy on middle eastern oil, that it has forgotten what's best for her.

If French are such humanitarians, then why don't they look at their African backyard (Ivory Coast), where they allow for slaughter of thousands and misplacement of hundeds of thousands? Standing knee deep in merde and watching...that's a new policy for France- a policy of benign neglect. After the ill brokered by French peace deal, Ivory Coast is in shambles. The ex-colonial power troops are standing on sidelines, as their number one priority is evacutation of some 15,000 French nationals, while the onslaught is slowly brewing. Although having promised to support the democratically elected President Laurent Gbagbo, France has backed down in the face of rebelling northern Ivory Coast muslims...see the pattern? But not Iraq, though! France takes a stance on IraqI It takes stance so arrogant, that it's risking the rift with all it's NATO, UN, and EU friends and allies...

Unquestionably, France is willing to defend it's positions, even though it's foregoing it's best interests, because:

• it's protecting it's own ass from a potential civil unrest from its large muslim minority it cannot control;
• it's diverting International Community's attention from the atrocities it is indirectly permitting in their own backyard;
• of it's rudimentary belief that it can till counterweight US in the matters of world affairs;

France's positions is clear! It is just as clear that it cannot be trusted. It is just as clear that the Old Europe label sticks! Wake up and smell the french fries!

2003-02-16T14:22:00.000-05:00

God bless the Italians.

Reuters
Rome Mayor Snubs Aziz After Anti-Israel Comment

"I'm writing to inform you that I find myself obliged to cancel our meeting," Veltroni wrote, according to a copy of the letter sent to Reuters.

"The reason is because of your refusal to answer a question posed to you by an Israeli journalist at a news conference held at the Foreign Press Association (on Friday)," it continued.

"Rome, Mr. deputy prime minister, has always had absolute respect for dialogue and the civil exchange of ideas, not to mention, obviously, freedom of opinion and free access to information," the center-left mayor wrote.

"I cannot accept that a public figure like yourself, the representative of another country, can set a veto and discriminate against someone, denying them the right to express themselves, no matter what position they may represent."

2003-02-16T11:07:00.000-05:00

NO BULL-GARIA

France, in it’s bid to create opposition to America and latter’s allies, is using political blackmail against other European countries which expressed their support for US. This just in from Telegraph:

”…Bulgaria has vowed to resist French attempts to bully it into withdrawing support for America's plans to disarm Iraq. Last week the French ambassador to Sofia warned Bulgaria that its pro-American stance could jeopardize its efforts to join the European Union.

"Bulgaria has to consider carefully where its long-term interests lie," Jean Loup Kuhn-Delforge said last week. "When people live in Europe they should express solidarity and think European-style.”

Well, isn’t it a great use of “sticks” and “carrots”? I just have one question: What exactly is “European-style” thinking? That wouldn’t, by any chance, be “a short memory cowardly appeasement” style?

I cannot believe that French can be so dumb, as to still act only when they feel a blade to their throats. Hasn’t history taught them anything at all? Nevertheless, it’s great to see that not all European countries are in denial of what’s really happening here:

”Solomon Pasi, Bulgaria's foreign minister, condemned the French as neo-appeasers. "We all remember the hesitancy of the Allies, who weren't sure whether to attack Hitler. They could have prevented so much," he said.
"We're in a situation where we have a moral imperative to act and act now.”

2003-02-15T19:12:00.000-05:00

Silly lefties:

On a more serious note. Check these pics out!

2003-02-15T13:37:00.000-05:00

Washington Post

Anti-War Protesters Hold Global Rallies

Over 2 Million Gather in Cities Around the World to Protest Iraq War

More than two million protesters joined forces around the globe on Saturday to deliver a blunt message to President Bush -- "Give peace a chance and do not rush into war against Iraq."

12 years is some "rush into war" .

At least half a million people marched through the British capital in the biggest peace demonstration in British political history.

Were there any protests when Saddam invaded Kuwait? Are there any protests regarding Syria's occupation of Lebanon? Were there protests when King of Jordan slaughtered 20,000 palestinians in a matter of days? So vicious was the Jordanian offensive that many guerrillas forded the Jordan to surrender to the Israelis rather than fall into the hands of Hussein's security forces. . Any protests around europe about slavery in Sudan? One would think that with all the brain power in Europe they would have avoided the two World Wars.

Am I deflecting from the issue at hand? Not at all. I am showing the lack of consistency and thus lack of integrity by the "anti-war" types when it comes to conflicts and "pursuit" of justice. .

. ...carnival-like atmosphere...

Graying pensioners to dreadlocked teenagers marched side-by-side in a carnival-like atmosphere.

Many go to these protests for social reasons. When there's a festive crowd of people walking through your city carrying colorful banners and balloons while chanting idealistic slogans and singing - you don't want to be left out. You feel like you are making a difference by being a part of it all. Sounds pretty good, doesn't it? You don't need to get into minor details like facts and get familiar with the conflict at hand. You just need to join the crowd - maximum activism - minimum effort. The merit of your argument is judged by the number of people in the crowd (never mind the much greater numbers who stayed at home) .

As one British "activist" who planned to travel to Baghdad put it - "I thought it would be hard when we got to Baghdad, but I had no idea the trip would be this awful. I thought the journey would be one long party."
All you need to know is: war is bad and peace is good, and protesting the war is a party.

How can you argue with these gems (all from the same article) like

...one woman protesting in Paris said: "The Americans were stressed by September 11 and now they are going completely overboard."

Over 3,000 of your fellow citizens dying,Al Qaeda trying to get weapons of mass destruction with intension of using them against us, Saddam hiding his WMD for the past 12 years, etc. is kind of stressful. Can't argue with that.

Germans waved banners like:

No Blood for Oil. Sounds pretty fair. I wouldn't want to pay with blood for oil. Can't argue with that either, except that we actually pay money for oil.

Make Love Not War. Excellent advice. Perhaps Europeans didn't make enough love in 1939-1945?

War? No Thanks!. Sounds pretty reasonable. If somebody offered me war, I would be like No Thanks!, too.

In Sofia - Bulgarian capital - one banner read I look at Bush but see Hitler. Perhaps the person(s) carrying that banner need to be reminded that Faced with choosing between military confrontation with Germany and accession to the Axis powers, the monarch and his government had Bulgaria join the fascist bloc on 1 March 1941..

"The whole world is against this war. Only one person wants it," said Muslim teenager Bilqees Gamieldien in Cape Town. Does he mean Osama? (Bet his IQ is Cape Town temperature.)

The article mentions a few more, but you get the drift.

Also, check out Dima's post on anti war protests

2003-02-15T10:32:00.000-05:00

The Washington Times
Bin Laden son, al Qaeda terrorists spotted in Iran

U.S. intelligence agencies say Osama bin Laden's oldest son, Sad, is in Iran along with other senior al Qaeda terrorists, as Iranian military forces have been placed on their highest state of alert in anticipation of a U.S. attack on Iraq, according to intelligence officials

Don't we have a fatwa of our own against the guy?

2003-02-14T23:01:00.000-05:00

SAY WHAT?

After 14 years of silence, Iranian clerics decreed that fatwa issued against Salman Rushdie by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini is still irrevocable and valid. Now, that Rushdie lives in NYC, should I expect to see Revolutionary Guards swarming the street of Big Apple, hunting for Salman? (link)

2003-02-14T17:51:00.000-05:00

UNSC- Unbelievably Numbskulled Shortsighted Cretins

Although Colin Powell wasn't mincing words today after the Blix's report to UNSC, he couldn't get through to the dense members of the Security Council. France wanted to have more inspections, more reports, and more extensions; Villepin said:

"The option of inspections has not been taken to an end."

An end? When is the end? What is an end? Eighteen UNSC resolutions and 12 years later, Saddam is "running circles" around UN, laughing in its face, and saying "ne-ne, ne-ne-ne...", with his thumb pressed against his nose and pinky extended. The demagogical, beaurocratical nature of UN is harmfull not only to the disarmament process, but also to the worldwide peace process. Allowing for possibility of more inspections, hinting on viability of more resolutions, and wasting time trying to increase the number of inspectors (rather than enforce compliance), UNSC not only missed the boat in the pivotal role it could have played in the crisis; moreover, it had totally undermined whatver was left of its credibility by allowing itself to be manipulated by Saddam Hussein and likes.

In the former Soviet Union, workers of plants and factories with hazardous materials or environment hazardous to their health recieved a daily ration--payok--of a glass of milk. Powell deserves an intravenous injection of millk for a day, after appearing before the Council. Here is an excerpt from his speech. So simple, so eloquent, so incandescent, and yet...so incomprehensible by the members of Security Council:

I commend the inspectors. I thank they for what they are doing. But at the same time, I have to keep coming back to the point that the inspectors have repeatedly made, and they've made it again here this morning, they've been making it for the last 11-plus years: What we need is not more inspections, what we need is not more immediate access, what we need is immediate, active, unconditional, full cooperation on the part of Iraq. What we need is for Iraq to disarm.

Resolution 1441 was not about inspections. Let me say that again. Resolution 1441 was not about inspections. Resolution 1441 was about the disarmament of Iraq.

I don't know, just don't know how much more lucid it can get.

2003-02-14T15:26:00.000-05:00

IRRELEVANT RELEVANCE

Terry over at The Storm asked a question the other day:

"If the US withdraws from the UN, or, if the UN becomes irrelevant, what will the world put in its place?"

I fired back with the "comment" asking Terry why he thought UN was relevant in the first place, anyway? Here's what I got back:

I think that the current global system isn't working. Obviously, the US is the most powerful pole, with smaller powers competing. It's that competition that seems to be tearing the UN apart---it's not just Europe's fault, we've got a part in it.

Terry,
Here's some of my previous thoughts on UN...what do you think of UN now?

2003-02-14T12:22:00.000-05:00

In respone to the Agonist's Letter To France And Germany

Naively, Sean-Paul thinks that France/Germany's policy towards Iraq is driven by their personal dislike of Bush. He starts of with:

I do not like our president. He is a jerk. He is rude. He is undiplomatic, brazen and arrogant..
Thus, he wastes no time to build a premise - legitimizing France/Germany's dislike for our President. In fact, further in the article, he writes:

...Put your dislike and mistrust of George W. Bush aside for I do not believe that you Mr. Chirac, or you Mr. Schroeder want to be on the wrong side of history... and ...it is time to put your justified dislike of Mr. Bush aside...

And gently reassures them: ...remember that Mr. Bush will not be president forever.

What is this salty discharge in my eyes? Pass the Kleenex...

There are two fallacies here. One is logical, and the other is factual.

1. Logical

If we were to agree with Sean Paul that Bush is indeed " rude", "undiplomatic", "brazen", and "arrogant" and that's what drives France/Germany's oppositon to the war... Then wouldn't Jacques Chirac and Gerhard Schröder be the ones who are "undiplomatic", "brazen", and "arrogant" for basing their foreign policy on their personal dislike of our President?

2. Factual

It is obvious (at least to me) that France/Germany are not basing their opposition to the war on their personal dislike for Bush. Let's look at the facts.

Khidhir Hamza is a former director (of 20 years) of Iraq's nuclear-weapons program. He also happened to write an excellent piece in the Wall Street Journal (Tuesday, February 11, 2003 ).
According to him:

...France, Germany, and to a degree, Russia , are opposed to U.S. military action in Iraq mainly because they maintain lucrative trade deals with Baghdad, many of which are arms-related.

Example of France's profiteering:

In the two decades before the Gulf War, I played a role in Iraq's efforts to acquire major technologies from friendly states. In 1974, I headed an Iraqi delegation to France to purchase a nuclear reactor. It was a 40-megawatt research reactor that our sources in the IAEA told us should cost no more than $50 million. But the French deal ended up costing Baghdad more than $200 million. The French-controlled Habbania Resort project cost Baghdad a whopping $750 million, and with the same huge profit margin. With these kinds of deals coming their way, is it any surprise that the French are so desperate to save Saddam's regime?

Germany's profiteering:

Germany was the hub of Iraq's military purchases in the 1980s. Our commercial attaché, Ali Abdul Mutalib, was allocated billions of dollars to spend each year on German military industry imports . These imports included many proscribed technologies with the German government looking the other way. In 1989, German engineer Karl Schaab sold us classified technology to build and operate the centrifuges we needed for our uranium-enrichment program. German authorities have since found Mr. Schaab guilty of selling nuclear secrets, but because the technology was considered "dual use" he was fined only $32,000 and given five years probation.
Meanwhile, other German firms have provided Iraq with the technology it needs to make missile parts. Mr. Blix's recent finding that Iraq is trying to enlarge the diameter of its missiles to a size capable of delivering nuclear weapons would not be feasible without this technology transfer.

Russia's profiteering:

Russia has long been a major supplier of conventional armaments to Iraq--yet again at exorbitant prices. Even the Kalashnikov rifles used by the Iraqi forces are sold to Iraq at several times the price of comparable guns sold by other suppliers.

Saddam's policy of squandering Iraq's resources by paying outrageous prices to friendly states seems to be paying off.

As you see, these 3 countries go way back. I am not even mentioning their oil projects with Iraq.

This particular statement (by Sean Paul) - For years the Europeans have criticized America for supporting human rights abusers, and autocratic regimes that you have said we shouldn't support. Do not become hypocrites. - delegates moral authority to the "Europeans". I am assuming that Russia doesn't fall into that category. During the Soviet times they have supported every dictator out there (not to mention that they themselves were not a democracy). As for after... There are a number of oustanding issues over there - freedom of press, human rights abuses in Chechnya, etc. So, I guess this statement is not applicable to them.

Does Sean Paul mean France? Well... Arabs know that they have no better friend in Europe then France. Oh, by the way - all arab states are ruled by dictators. No moral authority there, either.

Germany would not take part in such a conflict even if a United Nations mandate supported the idea. - so their call for international consensus/negotiations/etc is hardly sincere.

2003-02-14T10:55:00.000-05:00

TODAY’S ECONOMY NUMBERS

We have seen eight months of steady inventories increase. Today was no exception, as inventories beat street’s expectations and rose by 0.6% in December. The biggest driver was wholesale sector, which sprung by 0.8%. Now, even though the absolute number is signaling businesses expect some pick-up in economic environment, one of the components of the report is “loaded”. As the sales numbers have been somewhat sluggish in the past months, inventory buildup has grown faster than sales. The inventory/sales ratio is at 1.37 and, although it was steady over the past 6 months, illustrates that demand is still not matching the supply of goods. This is not an indication of a “slowing” demand as we have seen in the beginning of this recession, but a noteworthy “flag” to notice when thinking about just how robust the recovery is/will be.

Other economic indicators published today were: Industrial Production and Consumer Sentiment.

Industrial Production: Even though month-to-month growth in IP was nearly double the consensus (0.7%) and is a sharp increase from last month’s negative 0.4%, most of it came from large auto production. The number would have been essentially flat to December & January, if autos were excluded. This growth isn’t sustainable and manufacturing was weak. Ironically, at these levels of inventories, even if (hypothetically speaking) demand were to weaken even further, it wouldn’t decrease production. So, the downside is much smaller, than the upside (if demand significantly picks up). Capacity utilization levels are very low (they’re close to 1975 lows and are close to the absolute lows of the early 80s), but as new orders improve, so does the demand.

Consumer Sentiment: Despite treading above the cyclical low of 1992, the present conditions fell to 95.2 (2 pts). The overall sentiment fell to lowest in decade levels (79.2). Continuing increase in oil prices, shaky employment, weak equity markets and, most importantly, geopolitical uncertainty weights heavily on consumers outlook for the future.

Fixed Income markets haven’t had a chance to absorb the info yet and are selling off heavily into Hans Blix speech (more on that later).

2003-02-13T22:35:00.000-05:00

IDENTITY CRISIS or HOW "LOTR" MADE AHMED CWAZY

Ahmed Yassin, Hamas' spiritual leader, called on all moslems to attack Americans and Westerners, when imminent war with Iraq starts. From WorldTribune:

Hamas has led pro-Saddam rallies in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The Palestinian Authority has allowed the demonstrations, which included the burning of British, Israeli and U.S. flags.

Yassin, isolated in the West Bank, was quoted saying that "...Hamas does not target the killing civilians. We in Hamas do not go out to kill civilians...". So, are we to conclude that Hamas waged jihad on America and UK and treats those countries' nationals as army combatants? Yassin was also seen running around on the streets screaming: "I am The Great Sarumon! Repent, sinners!"

2003-02-13T22:12:00.000-05:00

HOLLYWOOD IDIOTARIAN WRAP-UP

Who better to summarize Allah-wood's idiocy and piss off the "left" than...Ann Coulter. In her latest FrontPage Magazine article "Casting-Couch Bolsheviks" Ann ripped a "new asshole" to pretty much every Tinseltown cretin from Kate "drug wafer" Moss to George "Cloo-less" Clooney. Enjoy it, have a laugh...I know I did. (more...)

2003-02-13T18:16:00.000-05:00

CREDIT GIVEN WHEN CREDIT IS DUE

George Paine of Warblogging has a very informative piece on recent reports that North Korea (DPRK) has an "untested" missile that might be able to reach the western US. These developments highlight the evergrowing necessity of a coherent strategy of containment from our administration. North Korea is a volatile player capable of interfering with imminent war in Iraq.

The fact is that this is a disturbing development and suggests that the DPRK is deadly serious about enhancing its nuclear deterrent ability.

George raises a question on how to remove North Korea's deterrnet capabilities and offers a suggestion:

The United States should make it its goal to deploy an umbrella of M-THEL, Airborne Laser and Aegis-equipped warship protection around the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to take the edge off North Korea's artillery and nuclear deterrent. Such an umbrella would serve as an adequate ballistic missile defense system (see Is National Missile Defense a Fraud?) and should be capable of saving Seoul from the onslaught of North Korean artillery. Once we have done this we will be in a superb position to negotiate with the North to end its nuclear program and soften its stance towards reunification and domestic issues.

Now, go read it yourselves.

2003-02-13T11:40:00.000-05:00

THE DAY AFTER...?

Council on Foreign Relations held another interesting debate on February 5th, called “IRAQ: The war”. It started with Stephen Walt’s and Bill Kristol’s opinions and was followed by two rebuttals (John Mearsheimer, Max Boot). Although, it was interesting debate (read it), it didn’t offer any new insights. Moreover, no speaker touched upon a post-war Iraq maintenance.

I think it’s a given fact we will wage an offensive against Saddam, barring he goes in exile. It’s peculiar to see, nevertheless, people still discussing “pros” and “cons” of this war, given we are already on the brink of it. What I would have liked to see is the debate on how do we democratize Iraq or Middle East. More specifically, I would like to see a plan with tangible arguments. Some of it has already been addressed by CFR. However, the administration hasn’t done nearly enough on it. People are not proactive in their majority, so expecting every John Doe to surf the web for “foreign policy” links is stupid.

I believe that anti-war sentiment would have substantially decreased, had people been given more of “big picture” of the democratic future Middle East, rather than recycled hawkish sentiments and “looped” talk of WMD. The public has no vision (other than that fed to it by the media) of the future in Middle East. It thrives on the current sentiment, which is: Saddam is bad; he’s got weapons; he’s a dictator and a threat; we want to liberate Iraq.
Well, all of this is “fine and dandy”: Doves can go and read Ken Pollack’s The threatening storm, or just read up on “strategies of containment” and draw conclusions from there; Hawks are already on board for war. But that is only a small part of the larger issue with this “war on terror”. I seriously doubt whether we’re equipped to handle guerilla warfare directed against us for prolonged period of time (unless, of course, we apply “a head for an eye” response). That means removing Saddam isn’t a panacea for curing “evil” in the world.

From what I see and hear people say, a lot of skeptics and “fence sitters” are concerned with either moral/ethical reasons of going to war or with financial implications of war (possibly prolonged one) on economy and spending.

Those are very valid concerns and deserve to be addressed and explained to general public. Not everyone holds a Ph.D. in economics and understands the budget. Not everyone realizes the differences and costs of ’91 Gulf War II vs. prolonged engagement, associated with peacekeeping, security, etc. (for example, a 2 months engagement might cost upwards of $200bn and maintaining troops in the region could be another $50bn a year).

Europeans, in particular, view American (administration) attitude as “go in, bomb, and get out- the rest doesn’t matter”. Europe historically has performed post-engagement peacekeeping function, so they feel that the burden will fall on their shoulders again. Not seeing compelling war arguments I the first place, how can they be expected to buy into joining US post-war?

I am very concerned that sluggish support for this administration both domestically and abroad has a lot to do with poor rhetoric from our Administration with respect to ‘future” plans in Middle East. I think it undermines the importance of removing Saddam, liberating the people of Iraq, and establishing democracy in the Middle East.

The strategy of post-war Iraq development needs to be made clear to the public as soon as possible, preferably before the military engagement.

UPDATE: Ohhh, the drawbacks of having a full-time job interfering with blogging...here's a USAToday article outlining Washington's plans on post-war Iraq to be ran by US general:

The plan calls for a U.S. general to be in overall charge for at least two years. An Iraqi council that would include former senior statesmen would provide advice on a transition to a more representative form of government, U.S. and Iraqi sources say...

...With war possibly weeks away, the Bush administration is making public its most detailed vision yet for post-Saddam Iraq, in part to deflect criticism that it has few concrete plans for what to do after an invasion. Though some elements have leaked in recent months, Powell is the most senior administration official to publicly discuss the plan.

2003-02-13T11:17:00.000-05:00

...Affirmative Action...(responding to Terry's post)

Terry seems outraged that MIT drops a policy for minorities . In his words:

This is one topic that I'll entertain no argument over. I feel strongly about it. You can clutter my comments all you want and email me all you want. I'm closing my ears and not listening...

...this is because all those who oppose affirmative action to me, they just sound like a whiny bunch of white men who for some reason are bitter that they aren't included in something that helps minorities and oh yea...WOMEN white and black.
That's my position. I'm gonna have to be stubborn as a mule on this one. I'm not listening to the opposition, cause I'm tired of hearing their tired old arguments.

Since Terry decided that he won't entertain this topic any further, I'll just wait till he posts on or complains about racial profiling. Then I'll call him a hypocrite. Liberals have this term that they think is clever and they just looooooove to use it - DWB - driving while black. How about a new one - AWW - applying while white? NBA is predominently black - will Terry support Affirmative Action when it comes to sports? Doubt it.
As for the "whiny bunch of white men" comment... It's more likely that the whiny ones are those who demand preferential treatment and say things like "I'm closing my ears and not listening...". Obviously, Terry doesn't feel that strong about his argument since he can't argue its merits.

Last and not least, here's the Income of Households by Race and Hispanic
Origin Using 1997-1999 3-Year-Average Medians:

White 41,591

Black 26,608

Asian and Pacific
Islander: 48,614

Holy cow, batman! Look at that. An average Asian household earns more then a white one? How is that possible? If you listen to whiny babies who cry about needing preferential treatment you'ld think it impossible to succeed in America if you are not white, and yet...

More facts to chew on:

Over 67% of the foreign-born black population assessed their health as being excellent or very good. This was significantly greater than the 52% of their U.S.-born counterparts....

Fifty-seven percent of foreign-born black families had a household income above $20,000, compared with the 45% of their U.S.-born counterparts.

In addition, foreign-born black populations were more likely to be currently employed; 64% of foreign-born black persons, as compared to 57% of native-born black persons.

The above shows what those who live in immigrant communities already know - foreign born blacks don't have a victimhood stigma and thus are doing better then their american born counter parts.

2003-02-13T09:44:00.000-05:00

Associated Press
New bin Laden Tape Claimed in Britain

A British-based Islamic news agency said Thursday it has a new audio recording of Osama bin Laden (news - web sites) in which he predicts he will die as "a martyr" this year in an attack against his enemies.

Die as "a martyr" in an attack against his enemies? Bull! Here's what I think:

1) He is dead. We haven't seen him on video since we bombed the hell out of Taliban/Al Qaeda in the mountains of Afghanistan. Who ever is covering up his death with these "new" audio tapes realizes that this charade can not go on forever. Therefore, bin Laden needs to "die".

2) bin Laden is alive, but very sick. It's no secret that Osama has (or if #1 is true - had) severe kidney problems. Last year, in fact, US intelligence received reports that Osama bin Laden received a kidney transplant in February, 2002.. There was also a report that "the kidney disease had begun to affect bin Laden’s liver and associates were trying to obtain a dialysis machine to stabilize his condition. ". He did not look well in his last videos. According to Dr.Gupta's (CNN's medical correspondent) analysis:

...notice that he has what some doctors refer to as sort of a frosting over of his features -- his sort of grayness of beard, his paleness of skin, very gaunt sort of features. A lot of times people associate this with chronic illness...

He's also not moving his arms... He never moved his left arm at all. The reason that might be important is because people who have had a stroke -- and certainly people are at increased risk of stroke if they also have kidney failure -- he may have had a stroke and therefore is not moving his left side

So if he is alive (which I doubt) - he might have other reasons (then martyrdom) for dying "this year".

2003-02-12T23:42:00.000-05:00

Dennis Miller on Donahue (MSNBC)

Dennis is great, as always. Phil... Well, let's just say that if brains were taxed - he would get a rebate.

2003-02-12T18:01:00.000-05:00