Open thread Sunday *UPDATED*
Bookworm on Nov 15 2009 at 12:11 pm | Filed under: Open Threads
The race is on to see whether the Motrin kicks in first or my back goes out first. No sitting at the computer for me right now, at least for several hours. I’m alternating between flat on my back and moving around to ease the spasms. I’m betting on the Motrin, of course, but am not currently a happy camper. I can’t even blame this one on age either. It is, instead, a genetic legacy from my Dad, and has plagued me for decades.
UPDATE: Motrin is a wonderful thing. I think it’s winning.
Related posts:
Email This Post To A Friend
20 Responses to “Open thread Sunday *UPDATED*”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
My thought experiment for the day:
I somehow get myself back into shape and enlist in the Army. I’m shipped to Afghanistan along with quite a few others. Now, me getting myself back into shape will never happen in THIS Universe, so we are talking about an alternative Universe… where the Fort Hood shootings didn’t happen.
I’m in Afghanistan and deployed to the front. We’re in two man teams, and we’ve dug our foxholes and we’re settling in. The enemy is on the move, expected to attack in a wave within the hour.
I and my compatriot finish off our MREs. ”I think the Taliban will be here within the hour,” I say to him.
“Yes… they will,” he replies.
“My first firefight,” I muse.
“Mine as well. I plan to strike a mighty blow,” he responds.
I stick out my hand and say my name. After a moment, he takes it and shakes it. I grin. ”Yeah, baby! DEATH TO THE ENEMY!” I say.
He gets a strange, faraway look in his eye and touches the muzzle of his rifle almost reverently, and looks at me out of the corner of his eye. He glances at the other two nearby foxholes, as if measuring the distance. ”A mighty blow,” he murmurs almost silently. Then he turns to me and smiles a calm, clear, serene smile. ”Hassan is my name,” he says. ”I can promise you, this firefight will be… most interesting.”
I am an Aleve user on rare occasion. Since I take no meds whatsoever, the Aleve has the same effect on me as morphine and knocks me out.
Fighting a back problem is challenging. I hardily recommend changing pillows every two years. At this point, I own one small U-shape, one very large U-shape, one firm, one medium…one foam, regular sized, king sized, one down – you get the drift here – this house is geared for a pillow fight to the death. The root of the problem may be genetic (certainly not age) but I am convinced that bad back days can be allievated with the right pillows under your head and knees.
Oh, I forgot since this is an open thread … I have a thought on the Ft. Hood murders.
It’s residual thinking leftover from the Clinton approach to gay men/women in the military.
Don’t ask – Don’t tell.
Aleve works well for me, too. I hope you feel better soon!
To a certain extent, Sadie, I think you’re right. There are penalties for “intolerance”, and while I’m not entirely certain of the timeline, I estimate he had only a couple of years left before he’d be eligible to retire. My guess is that they thought that they’d be rid of him by then. Instead, they probably gave him a deadline to complete his mission. Don’t ask don’t tell was their modus operandi.
One should not tolerate an enemy within your ranks. Our problem, of course, is trying to figure out exactly which ones are the enemy, and which are not. He made it pretty obvious – they were fools for not ousting him. He might have pulled the same thing somewhere else, but at least the Army couldn’t be accused of dereliction of duty – which imo they can be at this point.
By the way – I think that may apply to the GOP as well. The left is expert in infiltrating politically active organizations – what’s to say they haven’t been active in the GOP as well – moderating, selecting the less vigorous opponents, compromising…till there really isn’t much difference between the parties. We _say_ there is, because those of us who are still Republican by party are members by virtue of what the party is supposed to be – but isn’t. If the leaders talk a good position but then don’t hold to those positions when it comes to legislation, I say believe what they _do_, not what they say. Never forget – the NYT thought McCain would make a great Republican candidate – and then we chose him! If your political opponent thinks your guy is a great choice for your leader…something stinks. At least it stinks when the basic approaches are theoretically so far apart. Makes you wonder if they really are.
Actions speak louder than words.
The thought crossed my mind regarding not only the GOP. Between the moderate libs and moderate conservatives (however, you want to describe them) neither are 100% committed to the party line (however fuzzy it is and gets). They’re all looking to keep their jobs and why not, they designed perfect perks for themselves and an excellent retirement plan and they really don’t have to perform at a very high level (like pleasing their employers – US).
Maybe, they should all declare themselves independents and we can vote for the candidate that best represents our interests. At the moment, I don’t think much of any of them. Their number one interest is in the first person, I, I, I, me me me – they never really approach the topic at hand and ask, What do YOU want and certainly not after they’re elected.
As a post script to Don’t Ask, Don’t tell. This does not apply to the Jews in the military, who are often cross examined about their loyalties. Cause we all know there are so many Jewhadists that pose a present danger (yeah, I am being very snarky) because I am so very angry and tired of history repeating itself in another form and place.
There’s a reason they call it, Righteous Indignation - because it is right/correct
>>This does not apply to the Jews in the military, who are often cross examined about their loyalties.>>
Really??? that’s news to me. I’m not saying it isn’t true – the army now isn’t the same army it was when my husband was active duty, nor that of when my father was active duty. In those days, the fact that someone was Jewish was of no particular importance – except around the holidays, when it was understood that non-Jews would take the duty on Yom Kippur, and Jews would take the duty for Christmas. Other than that, I never heard any discussion about it.
Your statement surprises me. Assuming you have good information, it’s also inexcusable, imo.
A big reason for our back pains, I suspect, is that we spend way too much time at our keyboards rather than exercising.
It’s certainly not due to any of us bowing, that’s for sure!
I don’t have any problem “bowing” to my Japanese associates as a sign of respect. In the Orient, the “proper” bow is a sign of respect done in place of a handshake (which is considered “dirty”). However, the proper way to bow is not to bow lower than the bow of the subject in question, with your eyes meeting their eyes at all times. Obama’s bow was, in Japanese terms, that of a servant to its master.
Sheesh! Once more, our President comes across like a high school sophomoric idiot. So much for improving our stature in the world.
There’s a difference between a bow and folding yourself in half.
Once more, our President comes across like a high school sophomoric idiot.
That’s been my impression also.
I found a link to a series of articles on Afghanistan and it’s history.
This is a struggle that began in 1709.
From those events, one learns, the main antagonists – the Pashtuns – are not insurgents in the classic sense. They are a separatist movement, seeking to restore the boundaries of their ancient territory, the modern name for which is Pashtunistan, encompassing areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Our problem is that we have not fully understood that, traditionally, the very term Afghan is used to describe the Pashtun, who have a recognisable identity going back as far as 330 BC, if not before. The polyglot ethnic mix which encompasses the modern Afghanistan is a geographical construct rather than a nation.
Within that, though, is another separate and hugely important (and largely unrecognised) dynamic – the rivalry between the Pashtuns themselves, centred around the two main tribal groups, the Durranis and the Ghilzai. The modern history of Afghanistan is largely an account of the battle for power between two great dynasties, with the story effectively starting in 1709 and continuing to the present day.
http://defenceoftherealm.blogspot.com/2009/11/fighting-talk.html
Go to the home page for three other articles.
Suek #5 said,
> One should not tolerate an enemy within your ranks. Our problem, of course, is trying to figure out exactly which ones are the enemy, and which are not. He made it pretty obvious – they were fools for not ousting him. He might have pulled the same thing somewhere else, but at least the Army couldn’t be accused of dereliction of duty – which imo they can be at this point.
I think part of the problem is that we – our leadership – refuse to make distinctions between good and bad Islam. They have bought into the mantra, expressed by leading Islamic voices in America that people like Hassan “do not represent Islam”. Sure they do. Absolutely they do. It would be more honest for them to admit that there is a struggle within Islam between those who will murder and subjugate and enslave the non-Muslim, and those who would not. One wonders why they will not say that.
But worse, one wonders why WE cannot say it.
Once we admit that, then I think it becomes clear what our military must do. It must pass a directive that states that any soldier is absolutely forbidden to write or communicate in any manner with a person who advocates the murder of Americans, or the violent overthrow of the government of America, or the slaughter of American soldiers. If a solider is found to be in such communication – as was Hassan with the imam of the 9-11 hijackers – they will be investigated for potential treason. Period. You don’t even have to mention “hardline Islam” or “jihadist Islam”. Being in contact with such a person is sufficient cause to open the investigation.
In fact, I’d like to see the debate surrounding the introduction of such a law that would apply to all of us. Freedom of speech… yes. Freedom of treason… no. It’s clearer how to apply it within the military… not so clear if it could apply more generally as a law covering free citizens. Not sure how I’d vote it, in fact. I know in the face of a tyrannical, despotic U.S. Government, I’d take up arms against it – but I guess that *would* in fact be treason, wouldn’t it? My God-given right to resist. (As it was Hassan’s “God-given” right to resist, and OUR right to detect him and throw him in jail for treason for a very, very, very long time. And fourteen murdered people would be alive today.)
In any case, I’d sure love to see the debate.
The movie ’2012′ opened to worldwide big box office this weekend. Here’s a report. The last sentence is troubling.
Yet this weekend’s great numbers for2012 prove once again the irrelevance of movie critics and bad buzz (only 36% positive reviews on Rotten Tomatoes) and the effectiveness of early and relentless marketing. Not to mention everyone’s seemingly insatiable appetite for world annhilation especially when it targets iconic landmarks. ”Really, how many times can you get away with destroying the White House? Nice touch taking out the Vatican, though, even with the Pontiff on the balcony,” snarked a rival studio exec to me. (But when Emmerich proposed demolishing a sacred Muslim shrine, his colleagues freaked out about a possible fatwa — and the idea was dropped.)
So, Emmerich destroyed MANY Western iconic landmarks in titillating special effects sequences, including the iconic Christ statue on the mountain in, I believe, Argentina, and also the Vatican. Not one single frame, not one shot, of Islamic destruction was allowed.
Dhimmitude for the West, as usual. Bow, Westerners, bow.
You could try to claim that the movie is made for Westerners, and so it was only showing Western landmarks. But Emmerich has always taken a “World” viewpoint, and this movie opened worldwide. That argument holds as much water as apologist claims that Major Hassan, the Fort Hood murder spree murderer of fourteen, was not engaged in a jihadist attack.
Dhimmitude for the West. As usual. Bow, Westerners. Bow very low. Humble yourselves. Take your cue from Obama.
With Obama’s Indecision Afghanistan going one I was reminded of a quote from the movie “In Harm’s Way”
Admiral Nimitz: Indecision is a virus that can run through an army and destroy it’s will to win. Or even to survive.
2012 – I am not surprised that Hollywood took a ‘bow’. The film should win an Oscar for lack of courage and conviction.
Mike Devx
For the script writer in you….
http://www.thenoseonyourface.com/military/chris-matthews-interviews-nadal-malik-hasan-from-hospital-bed/
>>It would be more honest for them to admit that there is a struggle within Islam between those who will murder and subjugate and enslave the non-Muslim, and those who would not. One wonders why they will not say that.>>
What evidence that there is a struggle within islam?
I think of it more as those who reject the basic tenets of islam, while still retaining the cultural heritage. Atheists who still celebrate Christmas, for example. They leave their country of origin to get away from the coercivness of islam, and then find that it follows them here – and they fear not supporting it. Not following islam can get you cut off from your cultural community, which is difficult when you’re already in a foreign country. It means you have to really cut yourself off from your heritage, and that’s pretty tough for most people.
suek #18,
I guess I am a bit of a moral relativist on this one, because I do believe that *every* religion goes through phases of reformation and fundamentalism, just as civilizations fluctuate between shades of liberalism and conservatism. So I do not count myself as one of those who think that Islam itself is necessarily utterly in opposition to all of the values that we hold dear in this country. I think it is *possible* that followers of Islam can simply choose to conveniently ignore those parts of the “source material” that they find objectionable.
It certainly is possible to find highly objectionable material in the Old Testament. We have chosen, in the last few centuries (more and more as we approach the present day), to simply ignore that objectionable content.
But I CERTAINLY am not saying that every religion is equivalent, in any way. I do believe that Islam has unique difficulties, because it does express control over every aspect of its believers’ lives. Christianity and Judaism were *never* that way. That makes of Islam a religion for which it is much more difficult to reconcile with modern concepts of freedom, individual responsibility, love of country, patriotism, respect for the rights of all… etc. Islam definitely has worse problems than Christianity ever has had. Ever. But is it completely unsalvagable? I don’t think so.
Of course, when you have a country such as Saudi Arabia, with vast financial resources, pouring those resources everywhere across the globe into efforts to create fundamentalist Wahhabi Islam movements everywhere, deeply hostile to liberty and freedom, then you have a situation that is destined to become untenable. The fundamentalist, jihadist Wahhabi movement that the Saudis are exporting *everywhere*, including with powerful effect into the USA itself, is a huge problem that we are not addressing. Do you have to attack all of Islam in order to shut down the Wahhabi movement and others like it? I’d rather see us focus our efforts on the worst offenders. Which means kicking the Saudis as hard as we can, right where it hurts the most. But we don’t.
If it were up to me, I’d go after the Wahhabists in every single mosque across this country and apply every mode and manner of pressure that I could THINK OF to shut them down. The cries of prejudice would be loud and fierce, and would be met by stony silence and resolve on my part. Every Wahhabist imam would be deported. Every piece of Wahhabist literature I could find, confiscated. Every mosque that persisted in such fundamentalist doctrine, closed and its doors nailed shut. Because that particular brand of Islam is clearly dedicated to the destruction of America and is hostile in every way to our values. Until we can see that truth, we’ll remain victims of its constantly-spreading hostile influence. We don’t allow human sacrifice; we don’t allow animal sacrifice; there are any number of religious *practices* we don’t allow in this country. Yet religions that in other countries are BASED on animal sacrifice are practiced here. Any prohibited activity is simply sneakily performed in the shadows. Let’s push Wahhabism into the shadows, into the basements and backroom subterfuge mosques, where it belongs. Let’s make IT be dhimmi to US.
It is the greatest irony, but not tragedy, that those who voted for Obama did so for many reasons: one of them being that they thought Bush was breaking the US military.
The reason why it is not a tragedy is because they don’t yet realize that they voted the destruction of the military with their vote for Obama. So… it isn’t a tragedy because the arrogant idiots haven’t suffered personally for it.
They have not suffered. They have not paid the price. But they will with the blood of all those they have ever cared for come the piper. And in the end, they will realize that it was they who caused it all. Then and only then shall it be a stupendous and entertaining tragedy.
I said that 1000 dead terrorists would not be enough for one person that died on Flight 93. My expectation is not different when I witness internal saboteurs of America, aided and abetted by, not Islamic fanatics, but by greedy and selfish Americans.