Техническое совершенство

Technical excellence
User experience may vary, esp. in presense of hostile air e.g. warthog, but most tanks are just as vulnerable, plus heavy, slow and expensive. Viva Villa!

Anybody Here Seen my Good Friends Alex, Woody, Tom, and Andy?

I just look 'round,, and they're gone.

(Using Anti-war comments section as my default editor.) Justin was discussing "Paulites" v. "Palinites", in view of Walter Mead's typology of Hamiltonians, Wilsonian, Jeffersonian and Jacksonians. Briefly, Paul is a Jeffersonian and Palin a Jacksonian. A little bit of square peg, round hole, but a good rough fit. Justin discusses it as a schism within the tea party, but I don't consider Ron Paul as a TP at all and most TPrs probably don't consider him a member. It's pretty obvious that, while they have taken some of his essence and momentum and re-branded and adulterated it for their own purposes, they haven't moved him any closer to the spider's web, which is why they are trying to move the web towards him.

The consistency and integrity remain his, however selectively his ideas are cribbed. It's only important because Obama has temporarily captured the H's and W's at a time when only the Jeff's haven't been badly discredited. I predict that the eventual Rep nominee will sound very Jeffersonian, because of Ron Paul, whether he runs or not. I hope he does run, in order to maximize his message, but I wouldn't care to see him run as a sacrificial goat; a set up, without elite support, to lose against Obama and discredit Jeffersonianism as "impractical". It would be nice to think the electorate could see through the bullshit that would be piled against him. It would be nice if Santa had ever given me a dirt bike.*
*Hey, Santa, sorry I implied that you were less real than Elite Support. How about that dirt bike?

Can anyone  explain why  Judge Napolitano is featuring well-known scoundrels, e.g. Rumsfeld, Judith Miller (twice!), Bolton, Allen West (to be fair, he's not a first-tier warmonger like the others)? My first reaction is that this is somehow a rehabilitation of the neo-con stooges, but Napolitano is respectfully confrontational and their answers are, of course, ambiguous denials and evasions.

Thus my anti-thesis is that rather than making/showing the libertarian right as more accepting of the Jacksonian  jackasses, it's rather that the judge is showing them that if they behave we'll not dwell on the past and let their talking points expire. No harm, no foul?

The show itself is awesome and 100% Paulian, which is why it seems strange having these chumps on at all. Any true Scottsman would know they were liars, and we already know the lies, so what is the purpose of making me throw things at my tv? It's particularly strange that the show is even allowed to air except as a trial balloon to get as many libertarians as possible onside against Obama, especially if Obama wins, they can say it's because we were "too extreme". (after 2012, we can go back to packing sand, in any case). Luv the show; can't quite figure the angle.

Look Down, America

What to Make of Fidel?

I heard that Ann Coulter approves of Ron Paul's domestic politics but doesn't pay any attention to his views on International affairs, because she is afraid he might be convincing. I have somewhat similar reactions when I read a particularly convincing argument from someone whose view I know to be "leftist". I generally have to tell myself that although their arguments are persuasive, progressives are economically ignorant and sociologically naive; victims of emotional rhetoric and limited exposure to how real people cope with life's problems. I've been wanting to write an essay touching on these matters for some time, but afraid to take this hurdle, because the facts are that I have a very limited education (B.A. - PoliSci), was an indifferent student anyway, and because, although I love humanity in the abstract, I detest many of the individuals I actually meet, and avoid them in fact. I have even less than average exposure to human nature. Yet, somehow I persist in the notion that my views are more informed and realistic than, for instance, Noam Chomsky. I truly don't know how I can be aware my own deficiencies and remain so unshakeable in many of my beliefs. Romantic existentialism? Cognitive dissonance? Karl Pilkingtonism?

So I obviously don't strongly feel that I know more about politics and human nature than Fidel Castro, in fact, quite the opposite; he is intelligent, well-read and informed on current affairs, and although in a 50-year bubble, of sorts, having to be the Decider of Cuba and undoubtably surrounded by yes-men, he was aided by the same heuristic that I've come to use - "When in doubt, assume the Yankees are lying". Try it! It works every time. Wonder about WMD's? Colin Powell says they're real. Who killed Kennedy? The Warren commission says it wasn't the CIA. Is Goldman Sachs a bunch of crooks? Congress gave them billions. Is Libya being set up for a NATO takeover? Hillary says it isn't. Et-fucking-cetera. Pretty cool, huh? This is really the key to International affairs. "Assume the Yanks are Lying. AYL.

That's why it's so satisfying to read Fidel on Counterpunch - Oil Grab, Does Nato Plan to Occupy Libya?

"For me, what is absolutely clear is that the government of the United States is not in the least worried about peace in Libya and it will not hesitate in giving NATO the order to invade that rich country, perhaps in a matter of hours or a few short days."


The delusions of an aging dictator sympathizing with a fellow? Possibly, but then I read Daniel McCarthy on The American Conservative blog, Tiptoeing to War with Libya

Maybe naive good intentions outstrip common sense where some interventionists are concerned, but watch out: the Libyan slaughter is creating an opening for those who would have liked to stage-manage the Egyptian and Tunisian revolutions to impose some “control” on unrest in the region. A Libyan intervention will be the first step toward putting an end to all this messy indigenous rebellion, so the task of proper, American-led “democratization” can resume. Considering the interests at stake, I expect the cries for intervention to grow very loud very quickly."


I've mentioned how much I love Counterpunch, even though I seriously disagree with almost every one of their writers (except Paul Craig Roberts who is sui generis) in most respects. I also happen to agree with Stanislov Mishin at Mat Rodina about 99% of the time who is a reactionary Orthodox Russian and likely a KGB mouthpiece. It is so strange and a little exciting that I can agree with so many different thinkers from all points on the political continuum, and it's a constant reminder that almost everything I know is wrong. The internet has opened my eyes; almost nothing is "true" but the path is clear if one knows the mantra - Assume the Yanks are Lying. and the Brits, Israelis, Europe, probably Japan and all the other "Yanks".  It's a western disease, really; Sun-Tsu makes lying a high good, with the unspoken idea that one knows the actual truth, but the Brits perfected it and Americans have made it an art-form by not only internalizing but instinctualizing it. Apparently actually believing the totality of lies makes it's own reality, like Wile E. Coyote walking on air until he looks down. Look down, America.

"I Can't Believe this has Actually Happened"

I'm watching AlJazeera live about an hour since Mubarak's announcement - the crowds are going nuts.  Most common description of the celebration is "indescribable". Congratulations to the Egyptians and may Amon-Ra grant that their revolution is not turned on it's head like so many others. Now comes the difficult part of freedom.


I'm somewhat optimistic over quotes I've heard that Egyptians believe that they have triumphed not just over Mubarak, but the the entire international conspiracy behind him. "We got rid of Mubarak, but now is the time to get rid of the Mubarak dictatorship!" May the whole world come to see clearly what is revealed when the curtain is pulled down. I'm not really optimistic, but hopeful that the Egyptians' well-earned cynicism about the  "International Community" will see them to a better future. 

The First Neocon

From Taki's Top Drawer, World War II in one sentence -

"The “good war” resulted in approximately fifty million fatalities worldwide, left Europe a starved and blasted continent, destroyed the far-flung British and French empires, brought the Soviets into Europe’s heart for more than forty years, and handed China over to Mao Tse-tung."


http://takimag.com/article/churchill_more_myth_than_legend

In Defense of Call of Duty, Modern Warfare

It's not surprising to see a Russia Today article that draws a parallel with the deadly suicide bombing at Moscow's Domodedovo airport and the fictional attack on the airport in C.O.D.M.W. I'm not aware if the Russian media is as hysterical and irrational as the American media (although I doubt that it could be as bad), but if this had happened in the U.S. terror and hysteria and calls for hearings and legislation to crack down on violent video games would be deafening. I would also not be writing this, because there is absolutely no reason to try to talk sense when the soccer moms go on one of their periodic rampages of fear and loathing, such as after the recent shooting of a Congresswoman in Arizona. Americans will always wave the bloody shirt if there is any remote chance of scoring political points against their opponents.

I don't know if Russian politics are more mature because of their exposure to the truly horrifying realities of the 20th century as opposed to most American's virtual and vicarious exposure, but that's the way it seems. (I'm also surprised and impressed that the Russian authorities are compensating the victims. In the U.S., victims are useful as props in the demonization of politically unpopular third parties, then ignored along with the actual perpetrators if the victims/perps don't fit neatly into the messianic narrative.) If there is no political angle, even the worst catastrophes are taken in stride. In America, shit doesn't "just happen". Someone must be blamed, and generally not the actual perps, but those evil and irrational haters who encouraged them.

The point, if I can allow myself to get to it, is that there is no connection between the "No Russian" mission in the video game, which is the player trying to embed himself within a group of Russian Nationalists employing a "false flag" attack on civilians that will be blamed on "muslim terrorists", and the real life suicide bombing of Domodedevo. (At least, I hope not). The player is not encouraged or required to shoot any civilians and in fact is trained in an earlier mission to avoid collateral killing and friendly fire. The reason the game is so popular is that it combines extremely realistic graphics and story lines with a pretty sophisticated geopolitical outlook and surprisingly clever plotting including double agents and rogue generals. I should probably mention that it's much more than I require in a video game, as I just like to shoot and blow shit up. Also, I can barely complete it on normal difficulty, so to be honest, I suck. The take-away is, War is Hell, and no player is motivated towards actual violence or killing civilians. But don't tell the soccer moms, the fear's the only thing that makes their lives interesting.

Why this Redneck will Always Honor Dr. King

Beyond Vietnam -- A Time to Break Silence

Delivered 4 April 1967, Riverside Church, New York City

"And some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak. And we must rejoice as well, for surely this is the first time in our nation's history that a significant number of its religious leaders have chosen to move beyond the prophesying of smooth patriotism to the high grounds of a firm dissent based upon the mandates of conscience and the reading of history. Perhaps a new spirit is rising among us. If it is, let us trace its movements and pray that our own inner being may be sensitive to its guidance, for we are deeply in need of a new way beyond the darkness that seems so close around us."


I was 17 when he gave this speech and almost completely oblivious to the civil rights struggle. Although I had lived in the deep south when my dad was in the Army it was as remote from my suburban world as was Africa, or indeed, Washington D.C. (We used to joke in Arlington that the Potomac was the widest river in the world...) and poverty was only something my parents recalled from the thirties. I'm sure Dr. King's concern for young white suburban jerks was almost as remote, but his reaching out beyond his world caught me up and showed me for the first time the distance between what I had been taught, in school and in church, and the reality of America in the world. Vietnam chewed up a lot of my cohort and would have taken many more without Dr. King. Talk about standing athwart history and yelling "Stop!"

I am more embarrassed than ashamed of the casual racism of my youth, because I know it was out of ignorance, and I do know the difference between that and real hatred that I would come to see later. I always detested sports, but one of my first  heros was Muhammed Ali, who put into words ("I ain't got no quarrel with them Viet Congs") that even I could grasp, what Dr. King was saying so eloquently that was lost my younger self. Later I would learn about Paul Robeson's lonely struggle against the hidden side of the world I took for granted, and Malcolm X speaking reality to black men, but really to all men who want to be truly free. Everyone owes thanks to the brave men and women of the Civil Rights Movement. Like it or not, fellow crackers,  Black History IS American History.