Articles which have caught my interest. Mostly Israel stuff and other nubbins from the ongoing holy war.

 
The Horrorshows Return

Sigh. I had hoped to dedicate this space to last night's Maccabi Haifa - Man United match (we got beat, but at least we got two goals off). Unfortunately, events have a way of overtaking you here and I'm not up to writing about anything light.

We had just begun to feel a modicum of relief in the last few weeks. We had a run of nearly 40 days where no one got killed in a terrorist attack. However, the terrorism is back, with some attacks yesterday and the bus bombing this morning in Tel Aviv.

Sadly enough, you get used to these things when you live around here. Back in the Spring, when the violence was at its highest, the suicide bombings eventually became a sort of unpleasant background noise. You didn't have time to digest the one before the next one came along. This latest one bums me out more than usual. I don't know if it's because we haven't had any violence in a while or whether the attack was a little closer to home than usual.

In any case, the looming war with Iraq, the water crisis with Lebanon, Jews vs. Blacks in the Democratic Party, and all them other issues I was thinking of writing about can wait until next week.

Let's all try to have a happy holiday, despite everything.

posted at 3:39 PM

 
Iraq, again

Well, it looks like this thing will probably take a little longer than planned. Was there anyone out there who didn't expect Saddam to say "OK, come on in" and then start playing cat and mouse? (Slate's Will Saletan has a nice little analysis of the fraud behind Saddam's concessions to the UN).

All of which puts Dubya in a temporary pickle. Fools like Anan may take (and have repeatedly taken) Saddam at his word. Unfortunately, this little ruse is probably enough to get Russia and China, both of whom have vested interests in Iraq's Big Man, to oppose actions. However, it shouldn't be long before Hussein starts giving the UN guys the runaround, enough at least to provide an excuse to go in and topple him.

Tom Friedman's column in today's NY Times goes against the main argument put out for toppling Saddam, i.e. the danger of his getting nukes. He does, however, argue in favor of toppling Saddam on the grounds that the U.S. needs to bring democracy to Iraq and the region.

Personally, I don't care which excuse you use. Go get the guy.
posted at 4:56 PM

 
The Roots of European Appeasement

It seems like we're back in 1928.

Something to think about next time you listen to that naive fool Kofi Anan spout off about how wonderful it is that the UN has provided Saddam with skirts to hide behind. Again.
posted at 5:14 PM

 
Sharon: Intifada Coulda Been Avoided by a Tougher Stance

The PM makes what on the face of it is a pretty good point. If Israel had responded to Palestinian violations of the Oslo Accords with the kind of resolve and force it's showing now much, much earlier it is quite possible that the situation would never have deteriorated into the kind of quasi-war we have going right now. Specifically, we should have gone in with an Operation Determined Path after the terror attacks in early '96.

Unfortunately, if we look back at what the situation was back then, it becomes clear that Israel conceptually would not have been willing to reoccupy any part of the Territories. Even if we had been, the world would have screamed bloody murder. It's only in a post-Dolphinarium, post-Passover, post-Karinne A reality that Israel and part of the rest of the world understands who we're up against.
posted at 5:12 PM

 
In This Week's 'Duh' Department

'Mass immigration from U.S. unlikely'
posted at 5:05 PM

 
Friedman sez: We're winning

"Never forget: We are winning. The terrorists and the rogues do not have the power to dislodge our world, or reverse the broad positive trends. Only we, the trendsetters, can do that — by acting in ways that would upset the trend toward peace, disrupt global markets and put the democracies at odds with one another. Do that, and we really would create a dangerous world — a world where the best Western ideals would be mismanaged and the country most important for sustaining those ideals — America — despised, weakened or discredited."

posted at 7:59 AM

 
Slate sez: Take 'em to Court

I must be in a grouchy mood this pre-Yom Kippur morning, but this piece got under my craw.

I think I've been gone too long, but this endless paranoid fascination with the DOJ seems naive, very pre-9/11. Lithwick's main fear seems to be the expansion of DOJ activity during a war, certainly more than her fear of terrorism. So she argues that the criminal justice system is the proper way to effect a conclusion with regards to cases of terrorism. She cites a list of terrorist conspiracies which ended up in the courts.

All well and good, except for the fact that most of these cases were handled after the terrorist incident occurred (such as the first WTC bombings, and Oklahoma City which she doesn't mention) or else came to an effective conclusion years after the event (Lockerbie) and only then because Libya gave up the terrorists under threat of massive bombardment. What are you going to do with future attacks being planned overseas? Get an injunction against the terrorists?

The most revealing quote comes at the kicker: "No one war will pre-empt all future attacks either."

Yes, but a series of ongoing wars should do the trick nicely.
posted at 7:15 AM