4/29/2007
Movie Review: Blades of Glory (**1/2; Fair to Good)
Blades of Glory stars Will Ferrell and Jon Heder (Napoleon Dynamite) as rival figure skaters who eventually join forces in order to win a gold medal. There really isn't much of a point in describing the plot any further. If you are a fan of Will Ferrell's humor, you'll find this movie provides you with a few laughs, but the flick never reaches the hilarity of Anchorman or Talladega Nights. If you want to see a comedy it might be worth a matinée ticket, or a trip to the discount theater, but if you end up waiting to see it on video or cable it will not be a big loss.
4/22/2007
News: What is Success in Iraq?
Most Americans want U.S. troops out of Iraq and for the U.S. to be victorious. Arguments over the proper course to take are usually arguments over which of these two priorities are paramount. Within this argument two additional questions present themselves. First, at what cost is victory attainable (if it is attainable). Second, what is the cost of failure? In any argument, the key is to define the terms involved, and the same applies here. So, what is victory in Iraq?
The initial objective of the war against Iraq was to remove Saddam Hussein and his Baath party from power and to eliminate any capacity that nation might have to produce and use or sell weapons of mass destruction. This initial objective has been accomplished. Saddam Hussein is dead, his party has been removed control over the government and military, and the country does not have WMD capacity (if it ever did). However, the second objective of the war is now at issue--in what condition should Iraq be left? This is the question that must be answered, and that in most minds will define what "victory" is, and whether it is attainable.
Victory in Iraq should entail a quality of life for the people living in that country that is superior to that enjoyed during the old regime, and the establishment of governmental authorities that will not support terrorism against the U.S. There are other desires that the U.S. could have, but these two objectives ensure that the U.S. is safe with regard to Iraq (the main justification of the war was that Saddam's government was an imminent threat to the US). The establishment of a democratic regime in Iraq that is friendly to the USA and provides western-style freedoms to its people (perhaps modified to allow for a small level of modification to reflect the Koran), has been the goal of the Bush administration for quite some time. This is one possible definition of victory and is the one most beneficial to U.S. interests. It is also a goal that is ambitious and difficult to obtain, given the difference in the intellectual and religious history of Iraq when compared to western democracies as well as the tribal distrust and differences between Sunni, Shiite, and Kurd.
Another possible objective is similar to the one just mentioned, except without seeking to ensure that western style freedoms are established in Iraq. This option instead states that it is sufficient if the Iraqi government keeps the peace and is strong enough to prevent the country from becoming a terrorist haven. This option helps U.S. safety, and likely leads to a better future than was likely under Saddam (a murderer and tyrant) unless a similar type ruler succeeds him in time. The big question here is whether the current regime can prevent the nation from descending into Civil War, a situation that would totally destabilize the region, provide a haven for terrorists, and if long and bloody lead to a worse situation for Iraqis than they faced under Saddam. Perhaps, if the odds of the current government succeeding can be greatly improved by maintaining troop levels for a time longer, or keeping a smaller force in the country then that would be the prudent move to make. A third possibility is to partition the country in three, which allows the Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds to each have their own nation. There are obvious difficulties in doing so, as all three groups would have to buy in to such a plan. Each faction would undoubtedly desire to get the best deal for itself, particularly with regard to Iraq's oil.
If the three options just mentioned are not obtainable at a reasonable cost in American lives and resources, or simply have a minimal chance of success, then a withdrawal should be immediate. If all other options will not make America safer or Iraq a better place, then they should not be attempted. Anything other than an immediate withdrawal only delays the inevitable and wastes lives and money.
In thinking through the various options the U.S. has, I am struck by the fact that the goal of establishing democracy in Iraq is not necessary in order to have "victory." Nor is it necessary to leave behind a nation where there is no violence. Quite simply, it is not realistic to expect that will be no strife, no bombings, no attempts by different factions to try and stir up trouble. What needs to be done is the establishment of a government and corresponding military that can keep the peace in Iraq and does not threaten America or slaughter its citizens. The option that is most likely to lead to this result is either maintaining a force in the nation for one or two more years until the government is strong enough to take over much of those functions, and then to maintain a reduced military presence in the nation for a number of years afterwards. If the government is unlikely to be able to govern effectively, then the nation should be partitioned if at all possible. Either of these two results can lead to results that would be considered a victory for the U.S. in this war.
The initial objective of the war against Iraq was to remove Saddam Hussein and his Baath party from power and to eliminate any capacity that nation might have to produce and use or sell weapons of mass destruction. This initial objective has been accomplished. Saddam Hussein is dead, his party has been removed control over the government and military, and the country does not have WMD capacity (if it ever did). However, the second objective of the war is now at issue--in what condition should Iraq be left? This is the question that must be answered, and that in most minds will define what "victory" is, and whether it is attainable.
Victory in Iraq should entail a quality of life for the people living in that country that is superior to that enjoyed during the old regime, and the establishment of governmental authorities that will not support terrorism against the U.S. There are other desires that the U.S. could have, but these two objectives ensure that the U.S. is safe with regard to Iraq (the main justification of the war was that Saddam's government was an imminent threat to the US). The establishment of a democratic regime in Iraq that is friendly to the USA and provides western-style freedoms to its people (perhaps modified to allow for a small level of modification to reflect the Koran), has been the goal of the Bush administration for quite some time. This is one possible definition of victory and is the one most beneficial to U.S. interests. It is also a goal that is ambitious and difficult to obtain, given the difference in the intellectual and religious history of Iraq when compared to western democracies as well as the tribal distrust and differences between Sunni, Shiite, and Kurd.
Another possible objective is similar to the one just mentioned, except without seeking to ensure that western style freedoms are established in Iraq. This option instead states that it is sufficient if the Iraqi government keeps the peace and is strong enough to prevent the country from becoming a terrorist haven. This option helps U.S. safety, and likely leads to a better future than was likely under Saddam (a murderer and tyrant) unless a similar type ruler succeeds him in time. The big question here is whether the current regime can prevent the nation from descending into Civil War, a situation that would totally destabilize the region, provide a haven for terrorists, and if long and bloody lead to a worse situation for Iraqis than they faced under Saddam. Perhaps, if the odds of the current government succeeding can be greatly improved by maintaining troop levels for a time longer, or keeping a smaller force in the country then that would be the prudent move to make. A third possibility is to partition the country in three, which allows the Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds to each have their own nation. There are obvious difficulties in doing so, as all three groups would have to buy in to such a plan. Each faction would undoubtedly desire to get the best deal for itself, particularly with regard to Iraq's oil.
If the three options just mentioned are not obtainable at a reasonable cost in American lives and resources, or simply have a minimal chance of success, then a withdrawal should be immediate. If all other options will not make America safer or Iraq a better place, then they should not be attempted. Anything other than an immediate withdrawal only delays the inevitable and wastes lives and money.
In thinking through the various options the U.S. has, I am struck by the fact that the goal of establishing democracy in Iraq is not necessary in order to have "victory." Nor is it necessary to leave behind a nation where there is no violence. Quite simply, it is not realistic to expect that will be no strife, no bombings, no attempts by different factions to try and stir up trouble. What needs to be done is the establishment of a government and corresponding military that can keep the peace in Iraq and does not threaten America or slaughter its citizens. The option that is most likely to lead to this result is either maintaining a force in the nation for one or two more years until the government is strong enough to take over much of those functions, and then to maintain a reduced military presence in the nation for a number of years afterwards. If the government is unlikely to be able to govern effectively, then the nation should be partitioned if at all possible. Either of these two results can lead to results that would be considered a victory for the U.S. in this war.
4/21/2007
Pop Culture: BP's New Commercial is in My Head
BP has some new animated commercials out with an infectious little musical ditty that is in my head now. These commercials are REALLY effective, I have noticed them immediately with the interesting look, and the "sey hey" jingle they are using is actually enjoyable and not irritating, like so many commercial jingles. I'm guessing this will be one of the more popular commercial series in a long time. I'm posting a few of their commercials here. The first one has the kids--pause it when you see the dashboard instruments and check out the various gauges as it's pretty funny.
And here are some outtakes from the commercial...
And here are some outtakes from the commercial...
4/16/2007
Nature: Knut Update
Unfortunately, Knut is not feeling well these days. There is not an indication that the health concerns are serious, but let's hope the little guy--born December 5, 2006--will pull through.
UPDATE: Apparently, Knut is just teething, so it appears all will be well.
UPDATE: Apparently, Knut is just teething, so it appears all will be well.
4/15/2007
Misc: Krystal Hall of Fame
Those who get to know me eventually find out about my love of Krystal. Those little burgers are just delicious, as are the chili cheese pup mini-hot dogs. My buddy Brent and I joke that Krystal is the "nectar of the gods." Well, although I do drive up to Valdosta, GA a few times a year with Brent to get Krystal, and always try to stop off either in Live Oak, FL or Jacksonville, FL to pay homage on trips back home, I must admit that I don't quite measure up to this fellow in dedication. Jay Barr of Cape Coral apparently flies to Orlando every couple of weeks to pick up a box of Krystal burgers and then flies home. For this, he has been inducted into the Krystal Hall of Fame (click on the statue). Quite frankly, though I don't measure up to Jay in effort made to obtain Krystal, I do believe that I merit consideration for this august honor, as I have driven many miles in order to enjoy Krystal. However, winning the award isn't my focus, just the chance to eat Krystal food is honor enough.
Humor: Heading to Paris
With a hat tip to Bill Simmons of espn.com, here is a funny weblink. Head over to Google Maps and check the directions from New York, NY to Paris, France. In particular, check out step 23. You will also find similar directions for New York, NY to Berlin, Germany.
Sports: Delmon Young Will Be Baseball's Next Great Young Player
The Tampa Bay Devil Rays have never been associated with excellence. Since their inaugural season in 1998, the Rays have finished last each year other than 2004 when they finished 4th in the 5 team A.L. East with the best record in team history at 71-91. However, the Rays are showing some signs of being competitive thanks to talented young hitters such as Carl Crawford, Rocco Baldelli, and B.J. Upton; Japanese import Akinori Iwamura; and young star pitcher Scott Kazmir. However, the best player of this group is going to be Delmon Young--the 1st overall draft pick in 2003 and younger brother of longtime longtime Tiger and now Washington National Dimitri Young. Delmon Young hit .317 late last year when he was called up from the minors to get a bit of experience, and his performance has only gotten stronger this year as he is hitting .342 with 3 HR and 10 RBI through 12 games. Young has an incredible balanced swing that is most comparable to 2-time MVP and future Hall of Famer Frank Thomas. He generates great power to all fields, has incredible balance, and his bat stays level and in the strike zone longer than most players one sees. The only question with Young is his attitude--he was suspended for over a month in the minor leagues last year for throwing a bat at an umpire. However, he's been quiet so far this year, and has been making only positive news. Check out this game tying homer (check the video on 4.6.2007), where he waits on a 95 mph fastball from B.J. Ryan, takes a smooth controlled swing, and lines it out to right field to tie the game in the bottom of the 9th (the Rays would go on to win). The Rays terrible relief pitching and mediocre starting pitching will prevent a winning season this year, but with Delmon Young leading the way don't be surprised if they win a few more games this year. And if they can get some pitching in the future--watch out.
4/11/2007
Don Imus' Mistake
Radio talk-show host Don Imus has been all over the news lately after calling members of the Rutgers womens basketball team "nappy headed ho's." That Imus shouldn't have said the remark is obvious. That the women he insulted and their friends and families would be upset is unsurprising, as is the fact that he is paying a price for his remark. MSNBC just canceled the simulcast of his morning program, and he will never again have the access to politicians and news makers that he once enjoyed. There has been plenty of commentary about the race and women related issues surrounding this event, with very little left unsaid.
One aspect of the slur that has not been discussed is the near inevitability that Don Imus would do something like this. In reading about Mr. Imus, it is clear that part of his shtick for many years has been to insult people who are in the news using juvenile name-calling. It's part of what has made him popular--when you refer to some politician as a "fat moron" you can be sure that at least half your audience is going to have some sympathy with that viewpoint. When you continually insult people, it becomes a pattern of life, and insults immediately spring to mind when noticing people. Mr. Imus has indiscriminately spoken thousands of nasty insults over the years, and his equal opportunity nastiness has gotten him a reputation for being "entertaining" and "fair." That, and his admittedly talented ability to interview, has made him a wealthy man. With our culture becoming increasingly coarse, things have escalated to where on a news program you have a couple of guys who think it is OK to refer to people as whores--probably because on TV and in popular music you can hear a woman being called a any number of expletives and it is celebrated. Well, Mr. Imus, as Spike Lee put it "went to the well once too often" and insulted a group of young women as a bunch of whores. When a person engages in sinful (an old religious word, admittedly) and indecent behavior in the same way over and over, it dulls the senses (one's conscience and ability to make wise decisions) with regard to that particular behavior and eventually the behavior is outwardly destructive. After decades of acting in this matter in his professional life, it was inevitable that Don Imus' judgment would grow increasingly worse over time, his behavior would escalate, and he would do something like this.
In the end, I hope that Mr. Imus and the Rutgers basketball players have a heart-to-heart meeting and that he offers sincere apologies and shows true contrition. And I hope that if this happens, the Rutgers players are able to forgive Mr. Imus and put this episode behind them--other than the lessons they hopefully are learning about enduring insults with dignity and grace and forgiving those who with sincerity of heart ask for compassion and absolution.
One aspect of the slur that has not been discussed is the near inevitability that Don Imus would do something like this. In reading about Mr. Imus, it is clear that part of his shtick for many years has been to insult people who are in the news using juvenile name-calling. It's part of what has made him popular--when you refer to some politician as a "fat moron" you can be sure that at least half your audience is going to have some sympathy with that viewpoint. When you continually insult people, it becomes a pattern of life, and insults immediately spring to mind when noticing people. Mr. Imus has indiscriminately spoken thousands of nasty insults over the years, and his equal opportunity nastiness has gotten him a reputation for being "entertaining" and "fair." That, and his admittedly talented ability to interview, has made him a wealthy man. With our culture becoming increasingly coarse, things have escalated to where on a news program you have a couple of guys who think it is OK to refer to people as whores--probably because on TV and in popular music you can hear a woman being called a any number of expletives and it is celebrated. Well, Mr. Imus, as Spike Lee put it "went to the well once too often" and insulted a group of young women as a bunch of whores. When a person engages in sinful (an old religious word, admittedly) and indecent behavior in the same way over and over, it dulls the senses (one's conscience and ability to make wise decisions) with regard to that particular behavior and eventually the behavior is outwardly destructive. After decades of acting in this matter in his professional life, it was inevitable that Don Imus' judgment would grow increasingly worse over time, his behavior would escalate, and he would do something like this.
In the end, I hope that Mr. Imus and the Rutgers basketball players have a heart-to-heart meeting and that he offers sincere apologies and shows true contrition. And I hope that if this happens, the Rutgers players are able to forgive Mr. Imus and put this episode behind them--other than the lessons they hopefully are learning about enduring insults with dignity and grace and forgiving those who with sincerity of heart ask for compassion and absolution.
4/10/2007
Video: Knut
Here he is, the pride of Berlin--Knut the polar bear! Clearly Knut is a cute little guy. I hope that he is able to mate with a female polar bear in a couple of years and have a son, for then, we will have the greatest polar bear ever...
Knut's son.
Okay, enjoy the cuteness...
Knut's son.
Okay, enjoy the cuteness...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)