December 21, 2009
Exclusive: You Can’t Make This Stuff Up! (12/21/09)
The Editors
Whenever you think general incompetence by those who purport to serve by the consent of the governed can’t get any worse, think again:
“The ‘Surge’ and ‘Success,’ Part I” (DianaWest.net, 12/18/09)
This week's syndicated column is the first in a series on the impact of the Iraq "surge" strategy:
The main reason the "surge" in Afghanistan is on is because the conventional wisdom tells us the "surge" in Iraq "worked."
The problem is, the Iraq surge did not work. Yes, the U.S. military perfectly executed its share of the strategy – the restoration of some semblance of calm to blood-gushing Mesopotamian society -- but that was only Step One. The end-goal of the surge strategy, Step Two was always out of U.S. control – a fundamental flaw. Step Two was up to the Iraqis: namely, to take the opportunity afforded by U.S.-provided security (Step One) to bring about both "national reconciliation" and, as the powers-that-were further promised, the emergence of a U.S. ally in the so-called war on terror.
Step One worked. Step Two didn't. The surge, like an uncaught touchdown pass, was incomplete. The United States is now walking off the battlefield with virtually nothing to show for its blood, treasure, time and effort. In fact, another "success" like that could kill us.
Is it any wonder Americans are weary – and wary – of the ongoing war in the Middle East? Our last successful war, WWII, was fought with one goal in mind: victory. War is not pretty. We did what we needed to do to achieve that victory. We “made friends” with our foes after we’d vanquished them on the battlefield. Now? We’re too afraid of offending not only our foes, but our critics across the world, to fight effectively. A good example of this are the new Rules of Engagement (ROEs) that hamper our soldiers in the field in Afghanistan.
If we’re not in it to win, why are we in it at all?
“Ex-lawmaker convicted of rape: Name is copyrighted” (Washington Post, 12/16/09).
PIERRE, S.D. – A former South Dakota lawmaker convicted of raping his two foster daughters has sent news organizations what he claims is a copyright notice that seeks to prevent the use of his name without his consent.
A letter and an accompanying document labeled "Common Law Copyright Notice" said former state Rep. Ted Alvin Klaudt is reserving a common-law copyright of a trade name or trademark for his name. It said no one can use his name without his consent, and anyone who does would owe him $500,000.
Does FSM now owe Klaudt $500,000 for using his name in this article? If we do, we’d rather give it to his stepdaughters so they can put it toward the bills that will incur from the extensive counseling they will need to get over being raped by their stepfather. Like anyone should be concerned about his “right” to his name after being convicted for such a heinous crime…
US to Capture Cow Farts to Save the Planet (DailyFinance.com, 12/20/09). From the article:
In the future, America will harness cow farts to curb pollution and power the grid. What? It sounds like a joke, but it's actually a real promise. By 2020, dairy industry emissions will be reduced by 25%, largely by persuading dairy farmers to capture methane gas, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced at the Copenhagen climate change summit this week. Farmers will be able to buy anaerobic digesters that convert cow, errr, emissions into electricity.
Capturing cow farts. Is this one of those “shovel ready” and/or “green” jobs that we’ve been hearing so much about lately? Frankly, it sounds less appealing than being an armpit sniffer at a deodorant manufacturer. If we may suggest, Al Gore would be perfect for this job, as it involves lots of hot air.
Cow "farts" and "belches" represent significant sources of methane, a greenhouse gas which is 20 times more potent than CO2. Large dairy herds are a major source of methane. If it can be captured and used to make electricity at a reasonable cost, why not do so? You're making fun of something which is a serious problem. Methane can be successfully captured and used to create power, while providing dairy farmers with an additional source of income, the attitude of the writer notwithstanding.
posted by: joelsk44039
Monday, December 21, 2009 at 08:02 AM
joelsk44039: are you kidding? You're obviously one of the crazies promoting this ludicrous idea. Perhaps we should have mini power plants attached to each cow's butt and wire it to a nearby power grid. Go back to sleep, it's safer for us to have you there.
posted by: tnmccoy
Monday, December 21, 2009 at 02:10 PM
