The Globe and Mail: Few answers as to why young people disengaged
You know, this kind of story appears in the first week of every single election campaign, federal provincial municipal. Its because reporters don't have much else to write about, because no polls have yet been done and the platforms are just getting filled out.
But I do get tired of reading about those poor, poor 20-somethings, who are just so, so bored with politics. First, who ever gave them the impression that politics should be roses roses all the way, rave on Paul, rock on Stephen? It takes some work to read over all the platforms and consider candidate qualifications and find out where your polling station is and actually go and vote -- its not supposed to be fun, fun, fun.
And my, Im' getting grumpy already, aren't I?
That said, I must also say that MuchMusic does a terrific job of covering elections -- during the last federal election, my husband and I agreed that they had done a better job than just about any other network in covering caididates, issues, voting patterns, etc. etc. , sock puppet and all, particularly on election night.
Wednesday, May 26, 2004
The press conference
So here's the transcript of the big press conference -- it isn't even on the Washington Post website but I found the transcript on CNN.
And how is the FBI going to respond to all this chatter, this horrendous terror threat. They're going to INTERVIEW PEOPLE -- yes, the seven so-called terrorists listed at the prese conference can quake in their boots - might as well give up. As was noted at the conference, Tom Ridge wasn't there, just Ashcroft and Mueller. The reason for Ridge's absence, apparently, was so that he wouldn't have to answer any questions about why the threat level is not being raised.
QUESTION: If there's credible intelligence suggesting the United States is going to be attacked between now -- there is a plan to attack the United States between now and the election, why not raise the threat level?
ASHCROFT: We believe that the kind of activities that are engendered in this task force kind of information which is developed. (sic - and no, I don't understand it either) And the Homeland Security Council, led by Secretary Ridge, would make such a decision, and for me to try to speak for them at this time would be inappropriate.
And how is the FBI going to respond to all this chatter, this horrendous terror threat. They're going to INTERVIEW PEOPLE -- yes, the seven so-called terrorists listed at the prese conference can quake in their boots - might as well give up. As was noted at the conference, Tom Ridge wasn't there, just Ashcroft and Mueller. The reason for Ridge's absence, apparently, was so that he wouldn't have to answer any questions about why the threat level is not being raised.
QUESTION: If there's credible intelligence suggesting the United States is going to be attacked between now -- there is a plan to attack the United States between now and the election, why not raise the threat level?
ASHCROFT: We believe that the kind of activities that are engendered in this task force kind of information which is developed. (sic - and no, I don't understand it either) And the Homeland Security Council, led by Secretary Ridge, would make such a decision, and for me to try to speak for them at this time would be inappropriate.
Tuesday, May 25, 2004
The sky falls yet again
U.S. Warns Of Al Qaeda Threat This Summer Once again, a bunch of unnameable officials are saying that everyone had better watch out. Why does this remind me of the children's song -- they're here, they're there, they're everywhere. So beware!
And note the timing -- key graf: ". . . al Qaeda operatives are pleased with the change in government resulting from the March 11 terrorist bombings in Spain and may want to affect elections in the United State . . . " Yeah, sure. The terrorists want you to vote for Kerry but good Americans won't be fooled, they'll vote for Bush just to show those terrorists who's boss. And Bush will keep you safe -- he's focusing on terror again now, didn't you know.
And note the timing -- key graf: ". . . al Qaeda operatives are pleased with the change in government resulting from the March 11 terrorist bombings in Spain and may want to affect elections in the United State . . . " Yeah, sure. The terrorists want you to vote for Kerry but good Americans won't be fooled, they'll vote for Bush just to show those terrorists who's boss. And Bush will keep you safe -- he's focusing on terror again now, didn't you know.
Mea culpa from the NYT
From the Editors: The Times and Iraq "We consider the story of Iraq's weapons, and of the pattern of misinformation, to be unfinished business. And we fully intend to continue aggressive reporting aimed at setting the record straight." Well, its about time.
It is so difficult to be sultan!
Thanks to Atrios for this quote from a Washington Post story on how the Republicans are falling apart For Republicans, a House (And Senate) Divided
"It's extremely difficult to govern when you control all three branches of government." (attributed to Speaker Hastert's spokesman John Feehery)
Reminded me of the great quote in The Wind and The Lion, when the sultan complains to the American ambassador - "It is so difficult to be sultan! You Americans do not understand."
Ah, yes, the burden of command, the lonliness of leadership, when you don't have any excuses for not being able to get things done, other than your own lack of ideas and competence. Its terrible when you cannot blame anything on anybody.
This is a problem that parliamentary systems do not have, because the Prime Minister, by definition, has to have the support of a majority of parliament. Therefore no politician can complain about government paralysis, and there are no excuses for a government not to get its legislative agenda through. It requires the Prime Minister to exert firm control over the Cabinet ministers who are bringing forward legislation, so that a coherent and achievable legislative agenda can be enacted -- in other words, in a parliamentary system the government COULD do just about anything it wants, but this doesn't mean it WILL do it all. There will still be lots and lots of things that aren't high enough priority, or are too controversial, or are too complicated to enact, or that it cannot afford to pay for. Prime ministers must ruthlessly limit what their cabinet ministers want to do and must force ministers to focus on government priorities, or they don't last very long.
In the American system, when voters frequently elect one party to the governorship or the presidency and the other party to the House or Senate, governing requires he skills of horse trading and deal making, taking another political party's good idea and getting your own party to support it, advancing your own party's good ideas by doing quid quo pros with the other guys -- these skills are seen by American politicians as the normal way of governing.
When one party faces the ususual situation of having actual control of the government and legislative agenda, like the Republicans do now, it requires a different type of governing style, one which can balance and reconcile competing interests and present a unified legislative program which meets the needs of the public and which coordinates with the tax and revenue policies through which it is financed. These are skills that many American politicians have never developed -- particularly, I dare say, today's national Republicans, who spent the last decade focusing on a narrow and rigidly ideological right-wing agenda that is unpopular, expensive, and inadequate to meet the problems faced by the Americans today. Thus we see the President introducing scattershot legislation (drug benefits, education reform) and making scattershot policy announcements (Mars, immigration, etc) with no followthrough, while the house and senate Republicans make speeches in committees about how torturing Iraqis really isn't so bad.
"It's extremely difficult to govern when you control all three branches of government." (attributed to Speaker Hastert's spokesman John Feehery)
Reminded me of the great quote in The Wind and The Lion, when the sultan complains to the American ambassador - "It is so difficult to be sultan! You Americans do not understand."
Ah, yes, the burden of command, the lonliness of leadership, when you don't have any excuses for not being able to get things done, other than your own lack of ideas and competence. Its terrible when you cannot blame anything on anybody.
This is a problem that parliamentary systems do not have, because the Prime Minister, by definition, has to have the support of a majority of parliament. Therefore no politician can complain about government paralysis, and there are no excuses for a government not to get its legislative agenda through. It requires the Prime Minister to exert firm control over the Cabinet ministers who are bringing forward legislation, so that a coherent and achievable legislative agenda can be enacted -- in other words, in a parliamentary system the government COULD do just about anything it wants, but this doesn't mean it WILL do it all. There will still be lots and lots of things that aren't high enough priority, or are too controversial, or are too complicated to enact, or that it cannot afford to pay for. Prime ministers must ruthlessly limit what their cabinet ministers want to do and must force ministers to focus on government priorities, or they don't last very long.
In the American system, when voters frequently elect one party to the governorship or the presidency and the other party to the House or Senate, governing requires he skills of horse trading and deal making, taking another political party's good idea and getting your own party to support it, advancing your own party's good ideas by doing quid quo pros with the other guys -- these skills are seen by American politicians as the normal way of governing.
When one party faces the ususual situation of having actual control of the government and legislative agenda, like the Republicans do now, it requires a different type of governing style, one which can balance and reconcile competing interests and present a unified legislative program which meets the needs of the public and which coordinates with the tax and revenue policies through which it is financed. These are skills that many American politicians have never developed -- particularly, I dare say, today's national Republicans, who spent the last decade focusing on a narrow and rigidly ideological right-wing agenda that is unpopular, expensive, and inadequate to meet the problems faced by the Americans today. Thus we see the President introducing scattershot legislation (drug benefits, education reform) and making scattershot policy announcements (Mars, immigration, etc) with no followthrough, while the house and senate Republicans make speeches in committees about how torturing Iraqis really isn't so bad.
Monday, May 24, 2004
The grandfather joke
Bob Herbert's newest column The New York Times > Opinion > Did Somebody Say War?:
There's a terrible sense of dread filtering across America at the moment and it's not simply because of the continuing fear of terrorism and the fact that the nation is at war. It's more frightening than that. It grows out of the suspicion that we all may be passengers in a vehicle that has made a radically wrong turn and is barreling along a dark road, with its headlights off and with someone behind the wheel who may not know how to drive.
For some odd reason, this reminds me of the grandfather joke "When I die, I want to be sleeping peacefully like my grandfather, not screaming in terror like his passengers."
There's a terrible sense of dread filtering across America at the moment and it's not simply because of the continuing fear of terrorism and the fact that the nation is at war. It's more frightening than that. It grows out of the suspicion that we all may be passengers in a vehicle that has made a radically wrong turn and is barreling along a dark road, with its headlights off and with someone behind the wheel who may not know how to drive.
For some odd reason, this reminds me of the grandfather joke "When I die, I want to be sleeping peacefully like my grandfather, not screaming in terror like his passengers."
Sunday, May 23, 2004
And they're off!
Martin makes it official: Canada votes on June 28
Its hard to avoid the horserace analogies, but I hope we will be able to do so this time. Portraying elections as horseraces is a vivid image which becomes habitual -- Martin's in the lead but Harper is preathing down his neck. Now Layton makes his move but may have moved too soon, etc. etc. -- and it has a certain applicability in our relatively short political campaigns.
But if elections are horseraces then what are the voters? Just spectators? We have, of course, much more stake in the election outcome than do racetrack bettors. I know the national media focus is always on "who's winning" and voters are interested too, but of much more relevance than national opinion polls is to keep up with what is happening in individual ridings. The Globe has what looks to be a pretty good Election page set up, which I have bookmarked.
Personally, I think I am intending to vote Liberal in this election, for the first time in about 20 years, because I think Martin is going to make a difference in how Parliament and government functions, and I think he expects voters to be grownups, too, with a variety of positions and beliefs on a variety of issues, instead of treating us like blissfully-ignorant sheep, knee-jerk robots or loud-mouthed protesters, the attitude that Chretien and the other party leaders seem to have about Canadians.
Its hard to avoid the horserace analogies, but I hope we will be able to do so this time. Portraying elections as horseraces is a vivid image which becomes habitual -- Martin's in the lead but Harper is preathing down his neck. Now Layton makes his move but may have moved too soon, etc. etc. -- and it has a certain applicability in our relatively short political campaigns.
But if elections are horseraces then what are the voters? Just spectators? We have, of course, much more stake in the election outcome than do racetrack bettors. I know the national media focus is always on "who's winning" and voters are interested too, but of much more relevance than national opinion polls is to keep up with what is happening in individual ridings. The Globe has what looks to be a pretty good Election page set up, which I have bookmarked.
Personally, I think I am intending to vote Liberal in this election, for the first time in about 20 years, because I think Martin is going to make a difference in how Parliament and government functions, and I think he expects voters to be grownups, too, with a variety of positions and beliefs on a variety of issues, instead of treating us like blissfully-ignorant sheep, knee-jerk robots or loud-mouthed protesters, the attitude that Chretien and the other party leaders seem to have about Canadians.
People of Mass Destruction
Paul Krugman's latest column The Search for P.M.D.'s asks about the suicide bombers in Iraq. He notes several aspects that I have wondered about, too -- who are these young men who are so willing, so eager to die? What are they doing it for? Who are they doing it for? And what do they hope to accomplish? Nobody seems to know. There's no apparent organization to which they belong, no one seeks credit for their acts, there seems to be no apparent knowledge of who they are or what their families think of what they have done. Krugman writes ". . . these people are utter nihilists . . . The people running the suicide operations in Iraq, whether they are working independently or are just one organization, don't even claim credit, let alone make any demands." Krugman concludes " They just want to ensure that America fails to produce anything decent in Iraq and they are ready to sacrifice all Iraqis for that end."
But I am not so sure their goals are that strategic or comprehensible. The only thing I can compare it to is the monks who set themselves on fire in south Vietnam and the kamicaze pilots during WWII. In both these cases, their goal was primarily religious, a demonstration to their God of the purity of their faith contrasted with the corruptness of the earthly regime they were fighting.
Such intensity of religious feeling makes these tactics impossible to stop by "secular" means. Now the FBI is warning that suicide bombers might attack in the United States. Its such a useless warning -- police are supposed to keep an eye out for "people wearing bulky overcoats in the heat of summer, people with electric wires sticking out of their clothing, or people smelling of chemicals" but what are Americans supposed to do if such a person is spotted -- run screaming for the exits?
It would be better to talk to Muslim religious leaders, at a high and sustained level, about how this kind of fanaticism can be dealt with -- though considering the track record of the FBI (Waco, Ruby Ridge) and the Bush administration (some of whom seem to be actually trying to turn this into a religious war of Judaeo-Christians against Islam) this may not be a very realistic suggestion.
UPDATE -- maybe they really do want a religious war - read this article by Sydney Blumenthal about General Boykin.
But I am not so sure their goals are that strategic or comprehensible. The only thing I can compare it to is the monks who set themselves on fire in south Vietnam and the kamicaze pilots during WWII. In both these cases, their goal was primarily religious, a demonstration to their God of the purity of their faith contrasted with the corruptness of the earthly regime they were fighting.
Such intensity of religious feeling makes these tactics impossible to stop by "secular" means. Now the FBI is warning that suicide bombers might attack in the United States. Its such a useless warning -- police are supposed to keep an eye out for "people wearing bulky overcoats in the heat of summer, people with electric wires sticking out of their clothing, or people smelling of chemicals" but what are Americans supposed to do if such a person is spotted -- run screaming for the exits?
It would be better to talk to Muslim religious leaders, at a high and sustained level, about how this kind of fanaticism can be dealt with -- though considering the track record of the FBI (Waco, Ruby Ridge) and the Bush administration (some of whom seem to be actually trying to turn this into a religious war of Judaeo-Christians against Islam) this may not be a very realistic suggestion.
UPDATE -- maybe they really do want a religious war - read this article by Sydney Blumenthal about General Boykin.
Friday, May 21, 2004
Chalabi, master spy?
Agency: Chalabi group was front for Iran
" . . . one of the most sophisticated and successful intelligence operations in history . . . " Well, I should say. In 70 years of trying, did the KGB ever in its wildest dreams think it could trick the United States into going to war against another country, at a cost of 500 killed, 10,000 wounded, $200 billion?
If this is true, if the Bush and Blair administrations really were played for such fools by the Iranians, then Bush, Cheney and Blair will likely have no choice except to resign. I think that means the Secretary of State (Powell?) would become president, but I'm not sure.
" . . . one of the most sophisticated and successful intelligence operations in history . . . " Well, I should say. In 70 years of trying, did the KGB ever in its wildest dreams think it could trick the United States into going to war against another country, at a cost of 500 killed, 10,000 wounded, $200 billion?
If this is true, if the Bush and Blair administrations really were played for such fools by the Iranians, then Bush, Cheney and Blair will likely have no choice except to resign. I think that means the Secretary of State (Powell?) would become president, but I'm not sure.
Thursday, May 20, 2004
The List
Oh, those goofy Americans, always kidding around! AP reports on the newest security toy U.S. database contractor gave authorities names of 120,000 'likely terrorists' There's this new database, see, that can easily and cheaply pick out a terrorist at a hundred paces, just by filling in a few facts - age, gender, ethnicity, credit history, complaints from the neighbours, places you go and people you see, and all that, and hey presto, you get The List of everyone who's likely a terrorist.
But of course, they're not actually USING The List, they say, so there isn't anything to worry about here -- and if, by chance, they ever did actually use The List, well, it would only be used by trained, professional investigators, so really there's no problem -- they're just having a little fun with it, so don't worry, be happy. Its not as though anyone would ABUSE such The List, after all, like by filling in any false data, any data that hadn't been checked rigorously by a trained professional, so there's no need for alarm.
And of course any truly innocent person would easily be able to prove their innocence in spite of how suspicious it would be if their name did came up on The List . . . of course, if their name kept on coming up on The List again and again, well, that might be a little more suspicious, even if they do SAY its just someone else with the same name . . . or if they maybe LOOK a little shifty-eyed or if their neighbours THINK they act funny, like maybe if they're not friendly enough, or maybe too friendly, well, that's suspicious . . . or if they CAN'T prove they are innocent and that it's all a big mistake, well, that's REALLY suspicious . . . so maybe then we should arrest them anyway, and send all of them to this big camp, where they can do all sorts of useful work and they only have to stay there until they can prove how innocent they are, just to make sure the rest of us will always be safe. . .
But of course, they're not actually USING The List, they say, so there isn't anything to worry about here -- and if, by chance, they ever did actually use The List, well, it would only be used by trained, professional investigators, so really there's no problem -- they're just having a little fun with it, so don't worry, be happy. Its not as though anyone would ABUSE such The List, after all, like by filling in any false data, any data that hadn't been checked rigorously by a trained professional, so there's no need for alarm.
And of course any truly innocent person would easily be able to prove their innocence in spite of how suspicious it would be if their name did came up on The List . . . of course, if their name kept on coming up on The List again and again, well, that might be a little more suspicious, even if they do SAY its just someone else with the same name . . . or if they maybe LOOK a little shifty-eyed or if their neighbours THINK they act funny, like maybe if they're not friendly enough, or maybe too friendly, well, that's suspicious . . . or if they CAN'T prove they are innocent and that it's all a big mistake, well, that's REALLY suspicious . . . so maybe then we should arrest them anyway, and send all of them to this big camp, where they can do all sorts of useful work and they only have to stay there until they can prove how innocent they are, just to make sure the rest of us will always be safe. . .
Call for resignations
Wow -- I have never seen such an article before -- Salon.com | A call to conscience
Former diplomat Roger Morris says American foreign service officers should resign rather than serve the Bush administration any longer.
You serve the worst foreign policy regime by far in the history of the republic. The havoc you feel inside government has inflicted unprecedented damage on national interests and security. As never before since the United States stepped onto the world stage, we have flouted treaties and alliances, alienated friends, multiplied enemies, lost respect and credibility on every continent. You see this every day. And again, whatever your politics, those of you who have served other presidents know this is an unparalleled bipartisan disaster. In its militant hubris and folly, the Bush administration has undone the statesmanship of every government before it, and broken faith with every presidency, Democratic and Republican (even that of Bush I), over the past half century. In Afghanistan, where we once held the promise of a new ideal, we have resumed our old alliance with warlords and drug dealers, waging punitive expeditions and propping up puppets in yet another seamy chapter of the 'Great Game,' presuming to conquer the unconquerable. In Iraq . . . we are living a foreign policy nightmare, locked in a cycle of violence and seething, spreading hatred continued at incalculable cost, escaped only with hazardous humiliation abroad and bitter divisions at home. Debacle is complete.
I have worked off and on in the civil service for the last 30 years, for both NDP and Social Credit governments. Having worked for Social Credit, I know how soul-destroying it is to work for people who do not respect the work done by the civil service -- ultimately, this attitude disrespects the public on whose behalf you are working.
Former diplomat Roger Morris says American foreign service officers should resign rather than serve the Bush administration any longer.
You serve the worst foreign policy regime by far in the history of the republic. The havoc you feel inside government has inflicted unprecedented damage on national interests and security. As never before since the United States stepped onto the world stage, we have flouted treaties and alliances, alienated friends, multiplied enemies, lost respect and credibility on every continent. You see this every day. And again, whatever your politics, those of you who have served other presidents know this is an unparalleled bipartisan disaster. In its militant hubris and folly, the Bush administration has undone the statesmanship of every government before it, and broken faith with every presidency, Democratic and Republican (even that of Bush I), over the past half century. In Afghanistan, where we once held the promise of a new ideal, we have resumed our old alliance with warlords and drug dealers, waging punitive expeditions and propping up puppets in yet another seamy chapter of the 'Great Game,' presuming to conquer the unconquerable. In Iraq . . . we are living a foreign policy nightmare, locked in a cycle of violence and seething, spreading hatred continued at incalculable cost, escaped only with hazardous humiliation abroad and bitter divisions at home. Debacle is complete.
I have worked off and on in the civil service for the last 30 years, for both NDP and Social Credit governments. Having worked for Social Credit, I know how soul-destroying it is to work for people who do not respect the work done by the civil service -- ultimately, this attitude disrespects the public on whose behalf you are working.
More awful photos from the Shank
Videos Amplify Picture of Violence (washingtonpost.com)
I wonder if the subtext for "Camp Redemption" is actually "The Shawshank Redemption" (Stephen King's novella about a totally corrupt and brutal prison nicknamed The Shank.)>
I wonder if the subtext for "Camp Redemption" is actually "The Shawshank Redemption" (Stephen King's novella about a totally corrupt and brutal prison nicknamed The Shank.)>
Wednesday, May 19, 2004
I see gay people
When you see those great Boston photos of the incredible couples, with their proud parents and laughing children, it will make everyone realize that gay people are just people, like everyone else only happier.
One point made by PFLAG is that knowing someone who is gay is a critical component to changing prejudiced attitudes. Now with the Boston photos, like with the San Fransisco photos before this, millions of people are seeing openly gay people at their best, and maybe for the first time. And realizing they are not weird, odd, or the least bit dangerous -- in fact, Martha, they look just like us! In fact, maybe they're even happier than we were when we got married! I think these happy photos will make a difference.
Liberal Oasis's article Don't Worry, Get Married sums up the political impact of some of the anti-gay ballot initiatives this fall, which may not be what the anti-gay politicians anticipated -- ". . . just because the Bushies may be behind these under-the-radar moves, doesn't mean they are going to work. LO previously noted that Ohio's GOP Gov. -- who probably has a better feel for his state than Rove -- signaled that he didn't think the issue was politically beneficial, when jobs are of paramount concern. Now, Sunday's NY Times reported that even the Christian Right leadership is dumbfounded at the giant yawn they're getting 'from the pews'. 'Our side is basically asleep right now,' Matt Daniels, founder of the Alliance for Marriage, which helped draft the proposed amendment, said in an interview last week. The Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, said 'I don't see any traction. The calls aren't coming in and I am not sure why.' Let's review: emphasizing opposition to gay marriage alienates the swing, and bores the base. So relax and bask in the glory of this week's historic marriages, free of fear of a November backlash."
If anything, maybe the backlash will come the other way, when people start to question why anti-gay politicians are trying to demonize such nice, normal gay people.
One point made by PFLAG is that knowing someone who is gay is a critical component to changing prejudiced attitudes. Now with the Boston photos, like with the San Fransisco photos before this, millions of people are seeing openly gay people at their best, and maybe for the first time. And realizing they are not weird, odd, or the least bit dangerous -- in fact, Martha, they look just like us! In fact, maybe they're even happier than we were when we got married! I think these happy photos will make a difference.
Liberal Oasis's article Don't Worry, Get Married sums up the political impact of some of the anti-gay ballot initiatives this fall, which may not be what the anti-gay politicians anticipated -- ". . . just because the Bushies may be behind these under-the-radar moves, doesn't mean they are going to work. LO previously noted that Ohio's GOP Gov. -- who probably has a better feel for his state than Rove -- signaled that he didn't think the issue was politically beneficial, when jobs are of paramount concern. Now, Sunday's NY Times reported that even the Christian Right leadership is dumbfounded at the giant yawn they're getting 'from the pews'. 'Our side is basically asleep right now,' Matt Daniels, founder of the Alliance for Marriage, which helped draft the proposed amendment, said in an interview last week. The Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition, said 'I don't see any traction. The calls aren't coming in and I am not sure why.' Let's review: emphasizing opposition to gay marriage alienates the swing, and bores the base. So relax and bask in the glory of this week's historic marriages, free of fear of a November backlash."
If anything, maybe the backlash will come the other way, when people start to question why anti-gay politicians are trying to demonize such nice, normal gay people.
He's ba-a-a-ak!
Yahoo! News - Johnson Tosses Perfect Game Vs. Braves
Great to see Randy Johnson back in his old form again. Sometimes I wonder at how lucky I have been in the last ten years to have seen the greatest athletes who ever played in their sport -- people like Tiger Woods, Wayne Gretzky, Randy Johnson -- its a great time to be a fan.
Great to see Randy Johnson back in his old form again. Sometimes I wonder at how lucky I have been in the last ten years to have seen the greatest athletes who ever played in their sport -- people like Tiger Woods, Wayne Gretzky, Randy Johnson -- its a great time to be a fan.
Tuesday, May 18, 2004
Pulling back from the heart of darkness
Great story about what really happened in Fallouja -- Deadly April Battle Became a Turning Point for Fallouja This LA Times story tells how the Marines saved Fallouja, and themselves, from disaster. Key paragraph "With a potential bloodbath looming, Marine leaders adopted a mantra: "We don't want to turn Fallouja into Dresden" . . . Three days after that April 26 firefight, the remarkable deal was cut: The Marine leadership made a pact with the ex-generals. The Marines pulled out, violence ceased, further carnage was averted, and both sides declared victory."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)