What Now In Iraq?

We view current events through a historical lens. The Iraq quagmire predictably leads to comparisons with Viet Nam. Robert McNamara’s “eleven lessons” from Viet Nam, laid out in his book In Retrospect, offer valid insights. Perhaps more helpful then McNamara, President John Adams’ admonishments on the French revolution illustrate the inevitability of Iraqi violence. Adams’ observations (primarily in his letters to Thomas Jefferson) prove the futility of imposing democracy on Iraq. Whatever history may record as his motivation, President Bush’s foray into birthing democracy spawned not an American Revolution but a French Revolution.

Adams understood that the American Revolution was an evolutionary process, an inevitable growth in American political culture. Most enduring political, social, and economic transformations were a long process of transformation. Sudden change in government, for which society was unprepared, resulted in political extremism that reflected the regime intended to overthrow and led inevitably to despotism. Coincidentally, Secretary of State Rice, while in Paris in February 8, 2005, in her Remarks at the Institut d'Etudes Politiques de Paris, in discussing democracy observed, “The Iraqis have no tradition of it, and I expect that they will come to a conclusion that will surprise us all in how well they do it. “

Adams also saw that corrupt governments merely institutionalized social inequality. Bush, and his lack of planning for after the war, mistakenly believed that toppling Saddam ensured the rise of democracy. However, Adams reasoned that the source of corruption lay in human being’s jealousy and passion for distinction. This source of mischief in society would not go away once the corrupt government were toppled.

Finally, Adams railed against naïve assumptions that the purpose of government was to release the free expression of individual energies and opinions. This naivety, he felt, guaranteed disaster. The ultimate purpose of government was not to release individual energies but to constrain them. Donald Rumsfield’s clueless response to the looting illustrates the administration’s misunderstanding of this purpose.

The Bush Administration’s ideology unreasonably regarded the power and allure of democracy. Adams abused the French philosophers at the time for their “ideology”. To Adams, “ideology” meant a set of ideals and hopes, like democracy, that philosophers believed could be implemented merely because they could be imagined. To imagine was to believe, and to believe was to regard as possible. Promoting democracy around the world, does not mean that democracy is possible. No historical precedent exists for democracy in Iraq.

Democracy is not an inevitable or even likely outcome in Iraq. This means it is past time to confront the basic assumptions in Iraq.

“Fight terrorists their or fight them here” and “the war is the central fight on global war on terror.” This view relies in part on the misapprehension that the 9-11 attack was some kind of “Pearl Harbor” and generates comparison to World War II. Especially with Bush referring to radical Islamists as Islamo-Fascists. The Iraq war is nothing like World War II. We were not attacked by a state. Terrorism is a strategy, not a government. Our armies cannot find a battlefield.

America’s future is literally spilling onto the sand in Iraq. Our economy cannot sustain the kind of debt the war requires. The stated goal, democracy in Iraq, while worthy, is not in reach. What should we do? It is time to leave. Redeploy the military to staging areas in the Kurdish region of northern Iraq. Let the people of Iraq fight among themselves. We have proved ineffective at either making the people safer or helping the transition to democracy.

Redeployment to a safer area, where the population might actually welcome us. The Kurds benefited for some time from American protection in the no-fly zone under Saddam. From There we can not only move back into Baghdad if the Iraqis want us back, and we can keep Turkey from invading to prevent he establishment of a Kurdistan.

Pushing Whales

The President and Secretary of Defense insist that the guards’ torturing prisoners at Abu Ghraib does not reflect American values. What conceit!

As a people, we go down to the beach and push whales back to the ocean. We torture cats.

It is not the culture, so much as it is the place. A prison creates the environment for violence. Especially in a time of war. It is always necessary to hate those whom we must kill.

Our government, once again, woefully under prepared for this war. Or, the Administration lies when it claims it knew nothing of the orders that led to this torture. Which result will be more mortifying?

In July 2003, Amnesty International issued a Memorandum on Concerns Relating to Law and Order in Iraq. The Memorandum included allegations of torture and ill-treatment of Iraqi detainees by US and Coalition forces. The allegations included beatings, electric shocks, sleep deprivation, hooding, and prolonged forced standing and kneeling.

Furthermore, Major General Antonio Taguba found "systemic and illegal abuse of detainees" in the Abu Ghraib facility (Baghdad Central Confinement Facility, BCCF) between August 2003 and February 2004, and concluded that soldiers had "committed egregious acts and grave breaches of international law at Abu Ghraib/BCCF and Camp Bucca, Iraq".

Our culture has imprisoned 174,179 people in 2004 in Federal facilities alone. 70,088, or 40.3%, of these people are African Americans. (Federal Bureau of Prisons QUICK FACTS website.)

Since 1990, the United States has executed 19 people for crimes committed as juveniles, despite the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The ICCPR prohibits execution of minors. Only the United States and Somalia refuse to ratify the ICCPR.

Deputy Rumsfield apologized. He also accepted responsibility. This implies accountability. Will he face any consequence? Not likely.

Time for a regime change at home.

Bush Fiddles While The Planet Burns

Critics of the Bush Administration, and more recently anyone not willfully ignorant due to partisanship, have been testing the waters of history. Will this President Bush be considered the worst president ever, or merely the worst of the presidents who made a second term? The analysis generally catalogues cronyism, corruption, ineptitude, and war mongering. The glaringly missing pieces of course are Climate Change and China, which may be properly considered of a piece. Bush, Cheney, and the neo-cons turned the heat to boil the pot that is the Middle East, and our economy’s dependence on burning carbons.

Critics of the Bush Administration, and more recently anyone not willfully ignorant due to partisanship, have been testing the waters of history. Will this President Bush be considered the worst president ever, or merely the worst of the presidents who made a second term? The analysis generally catalogues cronyism, corruption, ineptitude, and war mongering. The glaringly missing pieces of course are Climate Change and China, which may be properly considered of a piece. Bush, Cheney, and the neo-cons turned the heat to boil the pot that is the Middle East, and our economy’s dependence on burning carbons. The road to peace lies not through Jerusalem, Tehran, or Baghdad. The road to peace lies in green energy. The billions in wealth and lives we bled into the sands in the Middle east could have gone a long way toward a new energy paradigm.

As we focused on the distractions caused by the rising tide of Muslim extremism, the Chinese have simultaneously blown the restraints off heavy metal air pollution and charged far into the lead in alternative energy production. China remains relatively poor in natural resources; utilizing coal at rates that will rapidly make it the world’s leader in pollution and environmental degradation. At the same time, US News recently reported that China has become a world leader in renewable energy. “A new Renewable Energy Law took effect January 1, and the government announced a goal of having 10 percent of the country's gross energy consumption be renewable by 2020--a huge increase from the current 1 percent. Renewable energies such as wind, solar, and biofuels are expected to grow into a $100 billion market over the next 15 years in China, making it a global powerhouse in renewables.” By Bay Fang 6/12/06. China seems serous, in June Beijing hosted the 2nd Annual China Power & Alternative Energy Summit. China also seems to be investing heavily in solar energy production, especially in Mongolia and Tibet.

At home, the Supreme Court and the Environmental Protection Agency have been following company line. The EPA refuses to admit any authority over regulating carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act. The Administration position not only refuses to grant authority, but also refuses to exercise authority even if it could. Over simplified, their theory they espouse being that the legislation does not specify carbon dioxide as a pollutant. However, several former EPA heads told the Supreme Court that the law intended some elasticity in the face of new and unforeseen conditions. The bench position will probably end up deciding that the plaintiffs do not have standing to sue in the first place without demonstrable harm beyond abstract theories of “climate change.”

While Bush fiddles in the Middle East the world burns carbon. Historically, our forays into nation building will be viewed as the death throes of the petroleum economy. Now America needs leaders to emerge who will focus attention and resources into ending our dependence on burning carbon. The answer does not mean switching to other carbon fuels. This only ends oil dependence. The answer must be more imaginative. Lets spend those billions not in a “war against terror” or other distracting slogans. It may already be too late.

The road to peace lies not through Jerusalem, Tehran, or Baghdad. The road to peace lies in green energy. The billions in wealth and lives we bled into the sands in the Middle east could have gone a long way toward a new energy paradigm.

As we focused on the distractions caused by the rising tide of Muslim extremism, the Chinese have simultaneously blown the restraints off heavy metal air pollution and charged far into the lead in alternative energy production. China remains relatively poor in natural resources; utilizing coal at rates that will rapidly make it the world’s leader in pollution and environmental degradation. At the same time, US News recently reported that China has become a world leader in renewable energy. “A new Renewable Energy Law took effect January 1, and the government announced a goal of having 10 percent of the country's gross energy consumption be renewable by 2020--a huge increase from the current 1 percent. Renewable energies such as wind, solar, and biofuels are expected to grow into a $100 billion market over the next 15 years in China, making it a global powerhouse in renewables.” By Bay Fang 6/12/06. China seems serous, in June Beijing hosted the 2nd Annual China Power & Alternative Energy Summit. China also seems to be investing heavily in solar energy production, especially in Mongolia and Tibet.

At home, the Supreme Court and the Environmental Protection Agency have been following company line. The EPA refuses to admit any authority over regulating carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act. The Administration position not only refuses to grant authority, but also refuses to exercise authority even if it could. Over simplified, their theory they espouse being that the legislation does not specify carbon dioxide as a pollutant. However, several former EPA heads told the Supreme Court that the law intended some elasticity in the face of new and unforeseen conditions. The bench position will probably end up deciding that the plaintiffs do not have standing to sue in the first place without demonstrable harm beyond abstract theories of “climate change.”

While Bush fiddles in the Middle East the world burns carbon. Historically, our forays into nation building will be viewed as the death throes of the petroleum economy. Now America needs leaders to emerge who will focus attention and resources into ending our dependence on burning carbon. The answer does not mean switching to other carbon fuels. This only ends oil dependence. The answer must be more imaginative. Lets spend those billions not in a “war against terror” or other distracting slogans. It may already be too late.

The Fall of Baghdad

History will record an astounding number of “Bushisms”. Among the most memorable so far include "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job," and “Bring ‘em on.” The President has begun anther that my hunt him more and result in greater misery for America and the Middle East. The President and his representatives dismissed the idea of withdrawing from Iraq in anticipation of the Iraq Study Group report. On December 5, 2006, after meeting with Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, the president angrily asserted, "This business about graceful exit just simply has no realism to it at all."

Bush, I am sure, never intended the bold truth of the statement. I think he meant to say that he did not intend to leave Iraq until, as he puts it, the job gets done. As time passes there really is no graceful exit from Iraq. Our exit will be bloody, painful, and devastating or the entire world, whenever we finally leave.

Too bad that the president refuses to consider the “graceful exit” that America’s elder statesmen have presented him with the Iraq Study Group Report. Bush does not seem to realize what political cover the group offers. Truly surprising from a White House that sees every issue from a "political" angle.

The exit will come. Americans old enough remember watching the CIA Air America helicopter evacuate people from the roof of our embassy in Saigon. An image seared into our national psyche. We tend to view that scene as the end of the Viet Nam war.

But for an untold number of Vietnamese, some estimates nearing one million, the aftermath of the American departure meant “reeducation” and death. Military planners under the code name “Frequent Wind” managed to evacuate a minuscule number of indigenous personnel along with the US staff in Saigon.

I hope that American planners include accounting for the Iraqis that have visibly supported our troops. The translators, workers, and local leaders who have actively taken up our cause will surly die in a precipitous American withdrawal. The anarchy in Iraq does not even seem as controlled as the fall of Saigon. At least in Viet Nam there were “sides” in the Viet Cong, the North Vietnamese and the Republic of Vietnam.

Kansas School Board Outlaws Gravity!

The Kansas Board of Education challenges the theory of evolution with Intelligent Design. Let’s have them look at other disputed science “theories”. For example, gravity: the force of attraction between massive particles.

Aristotle asserted that objects of different masses must fall at different rates. Later Galileo proved that all masses fall at the same rate.

As early as 1687 Newton described a theory of universal gravitation:

"Every object in the Universe attracts every other object with a force directed along the line of centers of mass for the two objects. This force is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the separation between the centers of mass of the two objects."

After publication, Newton remained unsatisfied with his mathematics. He could not explain the source of the gravitational pull, only it’s mechanism. He believed that that there were "causes hitherto unknown" that were fundamental to all the "phenomena of nature". Science still studies these fundamental phenomena. Although hypotheses flourish, the definitive answer eludes us.

Einstein demonstrated a fundamental flaw in Newton’s theory. Newton's theory requires instantaneous transmission of gravitational force, which violates Einstein's theory of special relativity which places an upper limit—the speed of light in vacuum—on the velocity at which signals can be transmitted.

Einstein's 1915 General Relativity theory of gravitation solved some problems with Newton's theory. General relativity states that the presence of mass, energy, and momentum causes spacetime to become curved. Curvature causes the paths that objects in inertial motion follow to "deviate" or change direction over time. This deviation appears to us as an acceleration towards massive objects (Newton’s gravity). In general relativity however, this acceleration is actually inertial motion. So objects in a gravitational field seem to fall at the same rate due to their being in inertial motion while the observer is the one being accelerated.

More recently, in theoretical physics, the Brans-Dicke theory of gravitation competes with Einstein's theory of general relativity, an equivalence-principle violating modification of general relativity inspired by Paul Dirac's large numbers hypothesis and Mach's principle.

As can be easily understood, the status of general relativity remains in flux. On the one hand, it is a highly successful model of gravitation and cosmology which has passed every test so far, both observationally and experimentally. It is therefore almost universally accepted by the scientific community.

On the other hand, general relativity conflicts with quantum mechanics. So at the same time as it is accepted, there may well be something beyond Einstein's theory yet to be found.

Why not God? I propose that science teachers in Kansas take the Board to a very high school building roof and remind them that the “theory” of gravity remains disputed. Propose the alternative theory of God’s eternal love and compassion. Experiment by jumping from the building. Thus, demonstrating the constructive power of faith in overcoming the difficulty of understanding science. Or maybe just another sticker on the science book that states that “God is still at work.”