Wednesday, November 24, 2004

Lets Appoint a Committee to Study It.

There's an old saying in rural America: You don't fatten a calf by weighing it. Similarly, you don't halt a species decline by counting its numbers. There is a ntable mania, worldwide it seems, among scientists to document the numbers and range of various species of animals. In 2000 for example, in San Francisco, the keynote speaker at the State of the (San Francisco) Bay conference noted that ninety per cent of the fish and other aquatic species in the bay were either in steep decline, or had disappeared entirely. Her proposal - "We need to get funding for projects to study this problem." Revealing, I believe, her principal aim. Money, to wit. If the good doctor (PhD; not a real doctor) gave a hoot about the problem, she would probably have suggested something else; like not diverting all the freshwater flows from the bay, or stemming the flow of industrial waste into the bay. These seem to me to be relatively modest and fairly obvious steps to take. We are hearing similar calls now at the meeting of the World Conservation Union, being held this week in Bangkok. At the same time that ministers in the Thai government are decrying the "waste" of water being allowed to flow into the sea instead of being diverted to dry areas (most of the nation at the moment) to grow rice for export. Exported at a price that makes middlemen rich while increasing the debt of the farmers who sell at a loss. Sorry, I digress again. To resume: However, it is well understood among scientists as well as politicians that a solved problem receives no funding. A study in the hand is far preferable to remediating action.
Thus we find, not to our surprose, that legions of "concerned scientists", possessed of mortgages, credit card debt, and an addiction to regular meals, display a marked tendency to wish to weigh the calf rather than to actually do the necessary things to fatten it.
Just to establish that I'm not totally cynical, I do acknowledge two things. One, that it is indeed important to study these isssues, which are not simple at all, and two, that there are a lot of people who are calling for action, and even some people who are simply acting.
Good for them!

Saturday, November 20, 2004

Not the Great Satan After All...

I have thought for a while that the United States has been, not the Great Satan, but rather the Great Hypocrite. How has it come to make sense that the U.S.A., with its thousands of nuclear (pronounced nookyoular) weapons, and its huge stockpiles of chemical and biological agents, can tell North Korea such weaponry is forbidden to it? Especially considering the United States has used its weaponry (Hiroshima, Nagasaki), and sold it to others to use (Saddam Hussein, e.g., against Iran). If North Korea does this, its called "proliferation"; as in "Non-Proliferation Treaty". I guess when the U.S. does it, it's called self-defense or something.
But I've begun to see all this in a somewhat different light.
Consider: North Korea last invaded a foreign country (well, South Korea isn't really so foreign, really) in 1949. Since the armistice North Korea (henceforward to be referred to as DPRK) has devoted most of its efforts to oppressing its own citizens. And face it, a nuclear bomb is not really suited to that sort of thing. Too much collateral damage, to say nothing of the public relations nightmare! So, why then does DPRK believe it needs all this fancy hardware? Are they afraid the United States might attack them?
In that span of fifty five years, come to think of it, the United States has attacked approximately a dozen foreign countries, some of them more than once. I say approximately because I may have overlooked a banana republic or two. We invade those countries so frequently it's hard to remember if this invasion is new or merely a continuation of a previous attack. I also omit to mention the various coups instigated by the CIA. Overthrowing a foreign government we don't approve of and replacing it with a government we end up also not liking. Like Manuel Noriega, or Shah Reza Pahlavi.
With all this military activity, it's pretty easy to see the United States really does need more lethal weaponry than DPRK, or Iran, or, well, than anybody. Good thing we have all that stuff. Although President Eisenhower warned against it, his successor presidents fearlessly increased the "defense" budget 'til the United States now posesses more megatonnage than the rest of humanity combined. And as we have seen, the current president isn't afraid to use his military. In fact, in the new, 1984-ish, all-war-all-the-time environment it seems likely we will need to at least brandish our WMD, to make sure everybody understands our commitment to freedom and democracy. Demonsrated by frequent mouthing of the now-empty shibboleth "free and open elections".
In a sidebar, I really do feel obligated to note the self-referential irony of George W. Bush lecturing Vladimir Putin on the dangers of attempting to concentrate too much power in the presidency.
I sometimes wish I could just do cartoons, because words fail me; but I can visualize some wonderful pictures. Fortunately we are blessed with some puckish genius political cartoonists. Some of them have links here, over on the left side.

Thursday, November 11, 2004

Tony Blair...

Is such a sniveler!
He is now complaining that "thousands of men are entering Iraq illegally to fight." Well, yes, Mr. Blair! You should know that very well. You sent thousands of them there yourself. Not a single one of those British soldiers has a valid Iraqi visa, I'll wager. The United Nations says they're in Iraq illegally. So now you're complaining that the people you sent your fellow countrymen to Iraq to fight --- are going to Iraq to fight your soldiers! Shouldn't you rejoice? Saves you the transportation costs to send your troops to the next country you're planning to bring democracy and freeedom to.

Or is it that you actually believed your Commander in Chief George W. Bush when he told you that Ahmad Chalabi's mythical friendly Iraqis would smile and bestrew your path with flowers? I notice you only began to complain when your troops were ordered away from their sinecure in the south and into the actual battle zone. Perhaps it's time to reflect on the down side of being America's Best Friend.

Wednesday, November 10, 2004

I haven't been posting for a few days...

because The People Have Spoken... And pretty much left me speechless. Not unlike many others I know. You know, it's kind of odd, but when the local citizens make comments regarding the mental (or emotional) characteristics of the Average American Voter - comments not unlike the ones I make - I get resentful. Why this should be, when I agree with them, is strange. Perhaps it's because I worry that they are including me in their evaluation of that Average American Voter. I wish to state here that while I may look like an Average American Voter, I am not, in fact, an Average American Voter. You'll just have to take my word for this.

Tomorrow is Veterans Day in the United States. Formerly Armistice Day. Memorializing the end of the Great War in 1918. An odd phrase, but I suppose politicians everywhere are in search of a great war to fight. Helps the resume, you know.
We celebrate Vets Day by listening to politicians extoll the excessive virtues of "those who served their country so nobly and so willingly". And not so willingly, if you remember the time when we still had a conscript army. I myself have not been able to discover any special nobility among those who served in the military. Like those who didn't spend time in uniform, the ex-military (and those now in the military) number among them saints and sinners, virtuous and, ummm, less-than-virtuous. Some of the worst people I've ever met I met while in the Navy. And some of the best, I suppose. I really wasn't paying much attention at the time. I just wanted out.
Except for November 11 one's veteranhood or lack of same is pretty much ignored by everyone. The only other occasion for singling out our wonderfully virtuous veterans is when the congress gets itself into a bidding war for their votes. Then various GI Bills and VA Bills get passed. After a while the funding for whatever program gets cut, and the veterans are returned to the pool of ornery citizens.
But on November 11, just for that one day, I, and millions like me, are extolled as being significantly better than the rest of you. Those who served are catered to by those who ducked out. I wonder if tomorrow George Bush and Dick Cheney will pay tribute to John Kerry?
On November 12 we can all go back to whatever passes for normal these days.