Mission Impossible: Bar Set Too High for Iraq?

Finally, President George W. Bush has set goals and a definition of "victory" in Iraq. The White House recently released the President's "Strategy for Victory in Iraq" on their website. I haven't read the whole thing, but there's a nice little executive summary on the link. I might just print out the whole thing and use it for toilet reading or a bedtime story.

The executive summary shows a noble, almost humanitarian exercise from President Bush, and almost impossible mission to accomplish for the United States. I highly doubt that the United States itself can achieve within our own country what the President is outlining for Iraq.

I know what you are thinking. This is a plan for Iraq. Yes, it is. But, substitute Iraq in the executive summary with United States and see that in many of the goal statements, there is at least one point that even we in the United States have not accomplished in our almost 225 years of existence. How are we going to be able to accomplish these goals in a country that has lived thousands of years as a completely different culture and society than our own?

I think it is the intention, be it conscious or not, that the President will have this war persist in perpetuity. Yes, this is a time to start praying, if you haven't already done so already (if 9/11 didn't wake your spiritual senses, arouse them now). The Middle East has historically been a hot bed for unrest, and now our country thinks it can change all that by war, with little to no recourse or negative repercussions.

I think this Iraq War was originally played out to us as a quick war, just like the war on terror, we'd be in and out and it would hardly change our lifestyle and very few lives would be lost. Remember the 1990s Gulf War? Yeah, I'm thinking that when congress issued that blank war check to the President, that it would be just like the Gulf War. If you even just read this executive summary, you will see that the mission is not simple nor easy to accomplish.

The President wants to change the lifestyle and mindset of a people who have never collectively considered such a change. Changing someone else's mind is difficult to impossible, especially when they have been raised and conditioned to think otherwise. Now, we think that a war with all its violence and terror can change these people's minds to think more kind and considerate to each other, put aside their differences and live harmoniously? Get real.

War was not the answer from day one. We didn't need war to get Saddam Hussein out of power (that could have been accomplished covertly, by working with and empowering the Iraqi people to overthrow Saddam themselves, thus giving themselves hope that they themselves could rebuild their country on their own). We don't need continued war to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people (unless we just want to upset the rest of the Iraqis who weren't upset at us before). We need to change our strategy from war to peace with Iraq. Work with the citizens of Iraq, not war with them.

Let them build their country. Sure they may just build another country that hates the United States, but I think that will happen regardless now that we have ticked them off with our violent war strategy.

Let's consider some history for a perspective. So, what were the perimeters with World War II? How was victory defined and accomplished for World War II? When did rebuilding begin, before or after victory was achieved? If you think back in history, we have achieved victory by removing Saddam Hussein from his leadership position, just as victory was achieved in the European theater by the demise of Adolf Hitler. Rebuilding Germany did not happen during the war. (Oh, I could bring up Grandpappy Prescott Bush's involvement in WWII, but maybe later.)

Yes, I know that we are trying to defeat terrorism. Psst. We will never defeat terrorism with violence. War defeats humanity. The only winners in war are the war businesses. Time is lost, kindness is lost, innocence is forever lost in time. The hearts of all who are involved in war are permanently scarred, and the ability to love is extinquished. War breeds all things hateful.

Read about CNN's email responses on the Iraq plan. What do you think of President Bush's Iraqi victory plan?

Blog Nog

The holidays are fast approaching! Are you ready? Nah? Me, neither.

Make some Blog Nog this year and get in the mood for the holidays! This is enough to serve a small party, or to over-indulge a party of one or two.

BLOG NOG
12 Egg Yolks, whipped
1 pound Granulated Sugar
1 quart Whole Milk
1 quart heavy cream, lightly whipped
12 Egg Whites, lightly whipped
1 cup Spiced Rum
1/2 cup Your Choice:
Scotch Whiskey (salute Scotch Tape, mighty conquerer of Sony's copy protected CDs
http://informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=174400748" target="_blank">)
Bourbon (remember Katrina)
Vodka (commemorate the new Russian Black Sea pipeline), or
Brandy (honor the tradition of spinning proper-ganda)

Beat egg yolks in a large mixing bowl and set aside.
In a saucepan over low heat, stir in whole milk and sugar.
Take the saucepan off the heat, and slowly pour mixture into eggs in the large mixing bowl, stirring constantly.
Put mixture back into saucepan and cook on low heat, stirring constantly and making sure it doesn't boil, until thickened.

Remove from heat and cool, then stir in vanilla, rum and your choice of liquor.
Chill 3-4 hours in refridgerator.

Make a heavenly cream by folding the lightly whipped heavy cream and egg whites together, then fold the heavenly cream in with the chilled mixture.
Serve Blog Nog cold and garnish with freshly ground nutmeg.

Pick Our Battles: Potter Pokes

Funny when you're trying to find something else online and wind up finding something that pertains to something that it is not intended... (See link in title.)

My mom listens to Christian radio quite a lot, religiously, I would say. And when Harry Potter came out, and then the Christian hype that it would make children Satan-worshippers, my mom heard it on Christian radio. And, you know Christian radio only espouses the truth.

When I happened upon this article on the web, I had to chuckle when I read it, because there were way too many undertones of other misgivings we hear so much as of late about terrorism and the Iraq war.

I'm not saying that everything we hear about terrorism and Iraq is parody (just most everything I hear), but that as Christians we need to pick our battles. And pick them wisely. Too often, we think that if we don't do something about it, some person under our watch will be damned to hell. Don't you think that our Christian God is too weak to do anything. Because he isn't.

God wants us to be vigilant to him, not to our enemies. Whenever we become more vigilant to our enemies (evil Harry Potter magic, or terrorism, or WMDs, or militant factions), the more we have turned our back on God (we can't think of both hatred and love at the same time). God will take care of our enemies, we just need to give our care to God.

So, what am I saying? We shouldn't fight terrorism? No, not exactly. As Christians, maybe we should fight terrorism the way God wants us to fight it... with God's love, not with selfish revenge. God will take care of the rest.

By the way, in this post Jen has been replaced by some spirit that actually thinks clearly and coherently, and values love above and beyond all else. I'm sure Jen will need to comment on her spirit's writing, so that she can retain her earthly desire to poke at things she really doesn't need to, unless it's for a laugh or two.

Do It My Way, Danes!

In many ways, Denmark is trying to stand out as a unique supporter to the United State's efforts to battle terrorism, as they have supplied troops to fight in Iraq practically since day one of US President Bush's crusade to get Sadam Hussein and render the Mesopotamian area a hell hole.

Now, the US is demanding that Denmark cut the cable on Roj TV and Mesopotamia TV, both networks broadcast from Denmark's capital city of Copenhagen and are run by the PKK, acknowledged terrorist organizations by both the US and Denmark. Don't you love it when we tell other countries how to govern? I'm sure we get that from other countries all the time.

Banning terrorist broadcasts here in the US is all a part of the war on terror. Really, its about people who have no regard for others and wish to add to their numbers and show them how to kill other people, and doing so through our public airwaves. I don't know about you, but I kind of like the fact that we protect our public airwaves from people who just want to use them to kill us. But, how far could this go?

Well, remember that rap cop killer song? Wasn't that banned from the airwaves? Don't we ban certain words from the airwaves? These may seem benign, but really there's a lot of mean music out there that have violent undertones. There's a lot of violence in many of the Arnold Schwarzenegger movies, so should Arnold be banned from the airwaves? There's the fine line and what crosses it and what doesn't. I think they use the benefit of the doubt sometimes.

But if the group is labeled terrorist, then the benefit of the doubt should be tossed out the window? What if they don't break any laws when they broadcast? What if they are only showing programs and movies similar to the violent ones made by Schwarzenegger and others that we in the US tolerate as entertainment? What if the group really isn't a terrorist group at all, and it only intends to bring to light and correct some of the misunderstandings, myths, and fallacies that may prevail in our society? What if the government is claiming they are terrorists and banning them to limit their freedoms that they ought to have, just to shut them up?

Denmark's Premier Anders Fogh Rasmussen is now caught in a bind. Rasmussen, who has apparently touted a libertarian stance, could hinder advancements in freedom of press if he bans these terrorist TV stations. However, this would be in keeping with his position to help the US in the war on terror.

So, what's it going to be, Denmark? You with US, or against US? Remember what we did to France...

(Psst. Who's the terrorist organizations here? I can't remember what that word "terrorist" means anymore.)

Substantial Penalty for Early Withdrawal?

Ok, ok... What are we talking about here? All this talk about a pullout, makes me wonder what task we are talking about here. Kind of reminds me of adolescent love gone too far. Well, if you don't want to get the girl pregnant and you didn't use protection, well, I think that is the best you can do.

(Ummm... Click on the Title for the link to the article.)

Oh, ok. That pullout. I don't think the two situations are that different. I think the Democrats think that we can still pullout now and hopefully deal with fewer repercussions of the Iraqi War for doing so. I think the Republicans think that well, heck, if we've already done the deed, then we might as well stay and enjoy it some more, 'cause it ain't gonna get any better than this. You see the analogy so far?

If we hadn't gotten so pushy and taken it to third base, then decided we need to hit a homerun with Iraq, we wouldn't be in this mess today. One side feels that to make the situation better is to cut our losses now and get out. The other side feels this is the best situation and we should just ease the seat back and enjoy the ride. One side is wearing nerdy glasses and felt lucky just to even be in your presence, while the other wafts of strong cologne and arrogance as he confidently says it's all going to be ok, let me make you feel good (while Van Halen's "Panama" pumps from his car stereo--1984, that was a great album, btw).

Then, there's the banker type who wants to threaten you with "substantial penalties for early withdrawal," when you know darn well that to keep the money in his bank would cost you considerably more than that 'substantial penalty' he's threatening you with. Ok, I know that doesn't follow the other analogy at all. But, it also makes sense in some odd way, too.