Victory in Iraq - Afghanistan

I like the Japanese and I like the Germans. There is much to be admired about the people of both these great nations. Yet, I spent much of my youth nurturing an inflexible hatred for both the Japs and the Krauts. Why the change?

Because of my age, I, thankfully, entered the military too late to experience combat in World War Two, but I spent much time with combat veterans. From them I learned that war is a brutal business. From them I learned that marble monuments and marching bands are not an accurate depiction of war. One writer of the time suggested that to build a war memorial we should dig a huge pit into which every veteran could defecate and vomit until it rotted and stunk and offended everyone for miles around.

But, I also learned from the combat veterans that war is sometimes the only way to bring justice to oppressed peoples... in those instances where injustice is supported by huge and powerful armies. And, I learned the concept that, once in a war, the only acceptable conclusion is complete victory. That is what was achieved in World War Two.

Now, people are debating what we should consider to be success (it is politically incorrect to use the word victory) in Iraq or in Afghanistan. Ken Blackwell, in a column titled "Arab Spring and Islamist Fall" (available at http://townhall.com/columnists/kenblackwell/2011/10/30/arab_spring_islamist_fall), explains it well:

We should be proud of what we accomplished in Japan and Germany, both of which nations are mainstays today of the world economy and, with some salient exceptions (e.g. Germany’s persecution of homeschoolers) models of democratic legitimacy. We de-militarized and de-Nazified these vanquished regimes. We forced changes in their constitutions and in their educational systems. We shaped their economies.

We attempted no such changes in Iraq, Afghanistan, or in any of the other countries in the forever turbulent Mideast. That is why, tragically, any claims of hope and change in this region—especially when based on American dollars—are fatally flawed. We are building our houses upon sand.

I see it as like police caught a man robbing a bank, took back the loot, and let the robber go. The paradigm of World War Two would be to mete out justice in a way that would both prevent further mischief on the part of this robber and scare the pants off anyone else thinking of robbing a bank.  

Accidentally effective commercials

For years, I've made a living producing broadcast (radio and TV) commercials.Sometimes you work very hard and come up with a failure. Sometimes you produce a great one by accident.

Years ago I was making TV commercials for a large, retail furniture dealer. Most of our advertising budget targeted the big sellers: living room, dining room and bedroom furniture.

My client also sold grandfather clocks. But, so few grandfather clocks were sold, we never wanted to spend money on a commercial to feature them. Then, in one commercial promoting living room furniture, we showed a picture of a living room which, coincidentally, included a grandfather clock. Most of the response was for the living room furniture. But to our surprise, we also received a number of inquiries about grandfather clocks.

In future commercials, we often included a picture of the featured furniture item, but with a grandfather clock in the background. We never mentioned grandfather clocks, never gave a price, but my client continued to do a small but steady business in grandfather clocks.

Republican Presidential Candidate Herman Cain has made an internet commercial which shows one of his staffers smoking a cigarette. Nothing is said for or against smoking, but the guy looks right into the camera and takes a drag. Guess what? Many cigarette smokers are now Cain supporters!

Smokers pay exorbitant taxes on their tobacco products. This tax revenue is used for many beneficial programs, including health care for children. Yet, smokers are almost universally vilified. Smoking is banned in more and more places. Some companies will not employ a smoker. Smokers feel they are treated unfairly.

Now comes an ad for Herman Cain. It says nothing directly, but seems to say that the Cain campaign does not agree with the barrage of anti-smoking propaganda. Many smokers now feel there is someone on their side.

Accidentally, or on purpose, that commercial is brilliant, because it is effective!

Will the real crook please stand up?

The First Amendment spells out our right "to petition the government for a redress of grievances". But, if, for example, you run a small business that operates in several Midwestern states, how do you do that?

If you have enough spare cash, you may employ one of the many professionals who know exactly how to do that. That would be a lobbyist. These professional petitioners use many tools to advance the petitions of their clients - including money. One of the uses of that money is making campaign contributions to politicians whose voting record generally favors their client's cause.

So far, so good. Nothing in the First Amendment prohibits that. Today, however, President Obama triumphantly declared that his re-election campaign would accept not a dime in contributions from lobbyists! Isn't that a violation of the First Amendment?

Obama and like-minded politicians want us to believe  they are above corruption. But it isn't the petitioner who is potentially corrupt... the corruption comes when the politician  makes policy decisions in direct repayment for the petitioner's constitutionally permitted political contribution.

In Defense of Herman Cain

Candidate Cain declared himself to be Pro Life, anti-abortion, no exceptions. Then he permitted some exceptions. Some are screaming.

Like most pro-lifers, I believe all abortions should be illegal. We suspect that most abortions are for someone's convenience! We say a woman has the (legally protected) right to refuse sex. The right to follow the so-called "rhythm method" to avoid pregnancy. The right to use a medical or a physical contraceptive. The right to demand her partner use a contraceptive. But we believe that if she bypasses all those "rights" and becomes pregnant, she does not have the right to kill the unborn child.

Even if she is denied all those rights and is impregnated by force, we civilized types tend to imagine every fetus (regardless of the context of the act that produced it) to be a viable infant who could possibly grow to become another Steve Jobs.. or, at minimum, a healthy, productive Mom or Dad. 

Realistic? Of course not.

Most allow for exceptions "for the mother's health", but often we envision that position as some abortion provider stretching facts. I am reminded of a story from Africa, wherein a very young girl was impregnated. When the fetus developed it was too large for her tiny body. Her internal organs were literally torn apart The unborn infant died but she could not deliver because of its size. Miraculously she made it to a clinic where her life was saved. She became an advocate for women's rights and worked in prenatal care for poor African women.

Okay, that is truly a case where abortion could have been declared "for the mother's health". But, what if all abortions were illegal? If that female child had aborted her fetus, should we have then thrown the little girl in jail?

There are always exceptions... not in principle... but in reality; except of course in politics, where, if statements are not artfully made they will be used to vilify you.

Illegal Immigration. My Take.

Growing up on farms in Missouri and Kansas, I loved the outdoors and wildlife. I especially liked doves. There, we had only mourning doves, named I suppose, for their mournful call. As a boy, I learned to imitate their call.

When I moved to the Southwest, I discovered three species of doves. The mourning dove; the white-winged dove which looks like a mourning dove but has snow white primary feathers on the edge of each wing (a stylish touch) and a call that sounds somewhat like a rooster crowing; also we have the Inca dove - about half the size of a mourning dove. Incas display a more reddish-brown color. We see at least one dove in our yard every day.

To our delight, an occasional covey of Gambel's quail also visited our yard. They are a wonderful bird, but like all quail, Gambels are easily spooked. In hope of attracting more quail and of making them less fearful, I bought some bird seed and spread it on the bare ground.

To my surprise, after spreading seed, the ground was soon covered with a mass of doves. All three species at times. Yes, quail would show up, but if they were a little late the seed would all have been devoured by the many doves.

I still like doves... but these doves were getting all the birdseed. Is that the dove's fault? And what should I do? Kill all the doves? (Against the law, for starters.) Put up a fence? (That would also keep the quail out.)

Then I discovered bird seed blocks... bird seed mixed with some kind of adhesive material (looks like a molasses mix) that enables the vendor to form seed into a solid cube, about ten inches on a side.

Interestingly, the quail seem to have a stronger beak and readily pick individual seeds from the bock. Doves find it more difficult to feed from the blocks. Problem solved. A bird seed block lasts for several weeks. Quail now feed several times a day. We still have doves, but only one or two at a time.

Yeah, an occasional feral cat also shows up and I grant them no quarter.

Living close to the Mexican border and a frequent visitor to Mexico, I find the Mexicans to be delightful people. But when they come to our country in numbers that overwhelm our hospitals and other social services, it is not so delightful. Who is at fault?

Just as my spreading an abundance of free birdseed to attract quail created an invasion of doves, the U.S. government's abundance of free services for the "needy" has attracted large numbers of illegal immigrants... mostly good people looking for some relief from grinding poverty.

Like feral cats, the criminal element must be dealt with. But for the vast majority of immigrants, it seems that cutting back on the free stuff would seem better than fences, and other punitive actions.

Just my opinion.

Home Grown

The press calls him "The American Cleric". While I have doubts about the veracity of the cleric part, there is no doubt that Anwar Al-Alawki was American... born here in my adopted home town of Las Cruces, NM - probably in the same hospital where my granddaughter was born.

No one in Las Cruces today was proud of Al-Awlaki... but there is more to the story that does make us a little proud

The Physical Science Laboratory at New Mexico State University, in cooperation with the U.S. Military at White Sands Missile Range here, develops and tests Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Their UAV Test Site is near our airport.

White Sands is the birthplace of America's missile program and is where the Hellfire Missile first delivered hell and fire to a target.

Down the road in El Paso, TX, my friends Jeff and Ruthie are proud parents of a drone pilot, who has been on assignment in Afghanistan flying drones to deliver Hellfires to Taliban bigwigs in Afghanistan and Pakistan. As you can see, his "Control room" is mobile. His current assignment is a secret, but a good guess would be somewhere within striking distance of Yemen.

So, perhaps the world will forgive us for birthing a terrorist-to-be, when they learn that we also birthed at least part of the technology that has put the drones in the air; and we first tested the Hellfires that arm the drones.

Now, how cool is it that one of our locals may have been flying the drone over Yemen that delivered the Hellfire (and damnation) to Anwar Al-Alawki?

What a country!