Posts

In retrospect, I blame California Democrats for the recall disaster. I think that they thought what I thought initially, which is that the recall was a Republican power grab. I mean, Darrell Issa (a particularly annoying Republican) funded the whole thing out of his own pocket. They fought the recall on that ground, saying that people ought to fight the recall because it was anti-democratic. All the big Democrats stayed out of the race and in fact tried to prop up Gray Davis. The truth, though, was that Davis was recalled because he’s despised by most people in California. This really clicked for me about a week ago. When the petition for recall was completed, I was vehemently against the recall, but a few days ago I can honestly say I really didn’t care whether Davis was recalled, because in the few times I had seen him on TV he had annoyed me so much that I couldn’t really support him. It seems like Democrats should have better understood the effect that Davis has on people, accepted that the recall really was about people hating Davis and not Republicans thwarting Democracy, and put up a real candidate in the recall election. ...

Last night I finished Six Days of War, by Michael Oren. A friend and I had a conversation about the Middle East one day, and out of the kindness of his heart, he ordered the book for me. The book covers Israel’s 1967 war with Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, and like any good history book, it does a masterful job of describing not only the key events (the six days of the war itself) but the context in which they occurred. My writings here on the past may seem as though I’m anti-Israel (at least that’s what some Israelis who have written to me tell me), but in reality, I actually hold Israel in high esteem as a state. It’s just that I expect more from them than I do from their neighbors because they have an educated populace and live in a liberal democracy. The book confirms that Israel’s basic level of decency as a nation far exceeds that of its enemies, a fact that escapes partisans against Israel. The Israeli government and individual citizens of Israel have committed barbaric and cruel acts, but they treat their enemies (and friends) with far more respect than do their Arab neighbors. Based on my reading of the book, Israel’s greatest sin at the time was a desire for territorial expansion. The great sin of the Arabs was being driven by a perverse hatred of Jews and Israel. Overall, I found the book incredibly educational. I had never before understood the struggles among Arab countries for precedence that dragged them all toward war, nor did I understand how the larger context of the Cold War contributed to encouraging the conflict and preventing a reasonable settlement in its aftermath. The other thing that stood out is just how grim Israel’s odds were of winning. Had the Arab armies not been so incompetently led and had cooperation among the countries involved in the war not been so low (they lied to each other constantly about how they were doing), Israel would never have won in the way that they did. These days we’re used to thinking of the United States and Israel as having a huge technological advantage over their usual enemies, but in 1967 that was not true at all. In most cases the Arab armies had the same (or superior) equipment – the difference was that superior training and leadership won out. The most important advantage the Israelis had, though, was accountability. The war showed just how costly dishonesty and denial can be. The Arab armies consistently made awful decisions because nobody told the truth. ...

Bruce Rolston has a nice rundown on why at this point no argument whatsoever can be made that there was anything to the uranium in Africa story. Keep this in mind when people say that Joseph Wilson was too much of an anti-war (or pro-Arab) partisan to investigate uranium sales from Niger.

Via Zimran Ahmed, this link to An Open Letter to Paul Krugman, in which he takes Paul Krugman to task for the way he often argues the issues: Do you see any differences between those two types of arguments? I see differences, and to me they are important. Type C arguments are about the consequences of policies. Type M arguments are about the alleged motives of individuals who advocate policies. His point hits close to home for me. One thing is that type M arguments are useful when you’re preaching to the converted, whereas type C arguments are useful for debating the issues with people who don’t necessarily agree with you. I try not to make or link to pieces that rely on type M, but I’m sure I fail (probably all the time). Anyway, it’s something to keep in mind. By the way, Arnold Kling has a weblog. So you can see whether he lives up to his C over M expectations. ...

I’ve talked a lot about how the administration treated our spy, Valerie Plame, but the case of enemy spies at our base in Guantanamo Bay has gotten less coverage than I’d expect. Phil Carter explains how the three spies endangered national security and why the death penalty would be an appropriate punishment for the two that are subject two it. To me, the big question in terms of appropriate punishment is one of intent. If these men acted in the way that they did to thwart our efforts to extract information from our captives (or worse, were collecting information for a foreign government), then a much more severe punishment is in order than if they just felt sympathy for the detainees and tried to help them. Carter’s article was interesting to me because I am more inclined to give the alleged spies the benefit of the doubt, and I appreciate hearing the other side. ...

The Washington Post has the first hand account (via Dangerousmeta) of an exiled Iraqi who returned to Baghdad this summer to visit family. (Oddly, the writer is an editor for USA Today, I wonder why they didn’t pick up her piece.) At the end of the piece, she describes how after she left her family’s house was raided in the middle of the night following up on a tip that Saddam had been there. Salam Pax reported in August that his family’s home had been raided by Americans as well, and that the soldiers stole his father’s liquor. I wonder how many homes have been raided overall – it sure seems like I read about a lot of these home invasions. ...

Josh Marshall’s site has been redesigned. Actually, the site looks the same but it appears to be running Movable Type under the covers, has an RSS feed, and has archives for individual items.

Saudi Arabia is probably one of the least understood countries in the world, which is peculiar given its strategic importance. Before September 11, 2001, it was widely known to most people as “where the oil is.” Now it’s probably more widely known as “where the terrorists come from.” This month, National Geographic has a great article on Saudi culture and the recent history of the country. The full article isn’t online, but I’d recommend seeking it out. ...

The Washington Post has a full-blown profile of Valerie Plame today. She refused to be interviewed for the article, but her husband and some friends and associates filled in the details. Here are the details of her CIA career: Plame underwent training at "The Farm," as the facility near Williamsburg, Va., is known to its graduates. As part of her courses, the new spy was taken hostage and taught how to reduce messages to microdots. She became expert at firing an AK-47. She learned to blow up cars and drive under fire -- all to see if she could handle the rigors of being an undercover case officer in the CIA's Directorate of Operations, or DO. Fellow graduates recall that off-hours included a trip to the movies to watch the Dan Aykroyd parody "Spies Like Us." Plame also learned how to recruit foreign nationals to serve as spies, and how to hunt others and evade those who would hunt her – some who might look as harmless as she herself does now as a mom with a model’s poise and shoulder-length blond hair. ...

I’m somewhat concerned that the new Do Not Call list isn’t going to help with the overall telemarketing traffic to any great degree. Despite the fact that putting yourself on the Do Not Call list exempts you from commercial telemarketing, there are a number of categories of solicitation that are still allowed even if you’re on the list. Clearly with lots of people on the Do Not Call list, the overall demand for telemarketing services will be going down, which one would expect to lower the fees charged by the direct marketing firms for their services. . That means that the people in the exempted categories will be able to afford more telemarketing for the same number of dollars that they were already spending, and it probably means that the direct marketing firms are going to be pitching their services to people in the exempted categories more aggressively than ever. Here’s the list of exempted types of calls (from the consumer FAQ: ...