Take Your Medicine

A former neighbor I grew up with is a professional golf caddy. He works with a semi-well-known pro on the PGA Tour. This pro he caddies for, like any PGA golfer, is very good at the game. However, the guy has yet to win a major. At least that is true to the best of my knowledge to date. When asked what holds this pro back from clinching a major or sustaining a major winning record, he responded that the guy doesn’t take his medicine.

I am not a golfer. I did grow up with it and many in my family adore the sport. If you haven’t a clue what this medicinal reference means, simply put, if you end up in a bad spot on (or off, rather) the fairway and are left with no direct shot towards the green, you have two choices. Either you take a risky shot relying on your skill to dig your way out of a bad situation, or you take a short shot to improve your approach to the green. The latter is the conservative choice and known as “taking your medicine.” It adds a shot to your score, but insures against further catastrophe.

Many pros will rely on their experience and skill to get them out of trouble. This particular pro is among them and, in the estimation of his colleague, makes the more aggressive, poorer choice that ultimately prevents his ascension into the upper tiers of PGA success.

As a child, my Sunday mornings were for golf with Dad. Now, they are for listening to the Sunday morning talk shows. Yesterday, these made me think of the golf expression in relation to last week’s developments with the war in Iraq. It is obvious there is strong disagreement over how things are going with our nation’s efforts in the region. To my mind, all sides of the issue have kernels of truth to them. General David Petraeus gave testimony this week basically stating that while the United States’ efforts in Iraq area failing to meet the benchmarks set by our government, progress is being made and success is being achieved. Pundits and politicians can haggle exhaustively over the actual definitions of progress, success, and if the goal posts have been moved so as to give the appearance of a rosier picture for political purposes. No matter what your position, few would argue that our position is not good and could better.

Taking your medicine involves changing your perspective on your goal. It forces taking a stroke or a loss towards a better score to do, but if you take it, you’re much less likely to suffer another pitfall and larger losses. This analogy is perfect for our plight in Iraq. No one wants to lose this war. No one wants to say that our military failed. But, we have to ask the question: In order to win the *ahem* War on Terror, should we retreat, regroup and rethink our strategy in how we’ve handled our affairs thus far? It could be just the thing to do our body politic good.

No one is saying that the service men and women of the United States military have not performed well. And those that want to stay surely wish to do so because they wish to see the job to its finish. That is admirable and virtuous and what any nation would hope for in its citizens in uniform. However, it makes no sense to continue on this path if it is not the best, most effective rout to win the larger *ahem* conflict.

Nor do I advocate throwing the baby out with the bath water. We did break Iraq and it is primarily our obligation to fix it. Rather, it is our national penance. We let ourselves be convinced of a situation that never existed and, in the spirit of vengeance struck out against an obvious but incorrect target in Iraq. We need to refocus our efforts. Winning for the sake of winning isn’t enough here. Democracy is laudable but if it isn’t wholly embraced by a citizenry, as is apparent in Iraq, it is wasted blood and treasure. Simply, do what it takes to involve the international community, bolster the areas of the country that are “secure” and conduct our operations exclusively from there. This is too simple and therefore an impossibility, but so is victory and the establishment of a lasting democracy in Iraq.

So, chip out from the rock we are under (Iraq), get a better lie so we can see where we need to go (back to Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan), how far off our goal really is and what it will take to get there instead just hacking away pointlessly (Bush’s efforts), determined to get that one great shot off that will get us where we want to go (a “free and democratic” Iraq) even though we can’t see it.

Thinking About Blowback

I was cruising some of the familiar and friendly bloggosphere and read a fine passage by PK. If you follow the link, he’s talking about conservatives (namely George Will) trying to say that progressives were wrong to oppose the Iraq war despite the mistake that it really is. It’s a good read and worth the time spent.

I took the time to comment about it and got hooked on the concept of blowback. Now, if you are unfamiliar with the term, in the context that I mean to use it, it simply means the unintended consequences of actions taken. This is going to take a while, but bear with me… To broadly generalize, the United States of America meddles in the policy and sovereignty of oil producing Muslim nations. This pisses a great many of the Muslim peoples off. The culture is not inhospitable, but it is xenophobic, for lack of a better term, against outsiders. American presence is seen as imperialistic and, consequently, nationalism in the Muslim nation rises, as does religious fervor.

America doesn’t pay attention to this because its primary concern, its agenda, is to pursue, secure and maintain its interests. The benefit is primary, but the possible detriment to the citizenry is seemingly a distant peripheral. So, smaller groups of people in these Muslim nations get rich as Croesus and run an oppressive style of government that are counter to the culture and wishes of its populace. But this doesn’t matter to America because the goods are being delivered at a favorable price and American citizens can enjoy the highest standard of living the planet have ever witnessed. Cake is abundant and edible as well for the U.S.A.

This status quo goes on for more than 50 years. Five decades plus of profit, opulence, entitlement, oppression and consequential resentment go by. The reaction of the oppressed and/or nationalistic peoples of the Muslim nations grow more intolerant. A figurehead with great wealth rises up and taps into the xenophobic zeitgeist and vows to attack the infidel and reclaim the land that “God” gave them. This guy isn’t necessarily right, but his attitudes are a direct product of implemented policies by his and our countries. Vows to take action are made by him and an infectiously growing number of his supporters.

In keeping with the cultural and religious values of his people, this figurehead operates within the precepts of his religion and his religion’s laws. He is extremely open and clear about goals and objectives. He makes no attempts to hide these or the reasons he pursues them. America takes note. They see this danger, but don’t regard it as a viable threat despite knowing the players and having full knowledge about the extent of their training because earlier American interests warranted us training and supplying them. Hubris maintains arrogance and nothing changes save for closer monitoring of the situation. The American public remain blissfully ignorant.

Jihad is staring America in the face and little is done. A strike is made at the U.S. An unsuccessful but jarring bombing of the WTC crosses the American consciousness. Later, a U.S. naval vessel is hit successfully by suicide bombers and American service men and women die. The sitting President Clinton won’t tolerate the slap given and orders a strike on a target where the figurehead, Osama bin Laden, is reported to be. The intelligence is faulty and a factory is hit, killing many innocents. Ire towards the United States grows in the Muslim world. Jihad is emboldened.

President Clinton favors the use of force to curtail bin Laden’s efforts to strike the U.S. This intention is hampered by a military unwilling to commit. With this conflict of interest, other avenues are not sought to head off the danger that faces America. That is to say that the policies and relationships that have fattened America to its current state of opulence at the expense of other nations that have created dangerous ire are not modified in the slightest because of the desire to maintain the status quo. Lack of sustainability is a fact, but not one anybody chooses to face yet. The wind has decidedly changed but no one can or will take heed of what is blowing our way.

Administrations change and America is now under Bush. A chief executive who was not popularly elected but appointed by the judicial branch. A man who has never left the country and has zero foreign policy experience that willingly chooses to surround himself with people who, for the most part, ascribe to some of the scariest foreign policy ideas this nation has ever known. Then, whilst floundering through the infancy of the G.W. Bush presidency, America gets hit with the world assault/crime ever perpetrated by a foreign power. Nearly 3,000 people lose their lives in a matter of a few hours.

Within 24 hours, we know a great deal and are making plans for retaliation. Afghanistan in our sights, promises are made to capture and/or kill those responsible for attacking us. No one questions why we were hit. No one asks about how this happened beyond the procedural steps made to conduct the attack and the who’s and how’s of its creation and implementation. With blame firmly placed and public sentiment solidly behind the action, retaliation is swift and devastating. It was clearly justified and, for Osama bin Laden’s part, totally expected.

The Taliban falls and some terrorists are captured and/or killed, but not bin Laden. The primary goal is not accomplished, nor will it be. The promise remains unfulfilled and the threat is still present and arguably stronger that it was at the time of the fall of the Twin Towers. All that is given to the American people is the promise that bin Laden will be brought to justice and that the security of America is the primary job and goal of our government. It wasn’t before then?

The jihad against the U.S.A. has been going on for years. America only now fully engages it. Too bad its second leg, Iraq, was the wrong place entirely with no hope of a positive outcome. Still, no one demands a full answer to the obvious question. Why has all this happened? The question has been continually preempted by Bush and his administration with a palatable answer. “They hate our freedom.” This is surely not wrong, but it is also not the right answer. Hating our freedom is peripheral. It is not what caused all this. If they just hated our freedom, you would see more flag burning and effigy hanging. No one asks themselves rationally, what would make people want to kill themselves and thousands of others in a hateful act like 9/11? For someone to offer the rational answer of “our freedom” is folly and the epitome of myopic thinking.

Every attack on the United States of America by Islamic jihadists has been made because America, through its foreign policy and support of some governments over others, has meddled, oppressed and violated the peoples and sovereignty of other countries in some fashion or another. For a nation that espouses the virtues of liberty and freedom, our diplomatic and commercial interests are, at their cores, completely counter to those ideologies. America’s actions are out of step with the ideals by which it was founded and that incongruity is now costing the people of the United States of America blood and treasure over and above what the American citizenry are willing to pay. Is this current war worth all of that?

Again, the crux of it is blowback. Americans are used to a certain lifestyle. In order to sustain that lifestyle, interests and resources are needed. Those needs are fulfilled through rather entrenched policy and actions taken to secure interests in places (i.e. Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, etc…) that we are not entirely welcome. If you want the shirt off of someone’s back and take it without their consent or fair compensation, expect resentment and a kick to somewhere that will hurt.

With or without our consent, the United States made this situation. So, rather than bickering who is for or against the war, concentrate on accurately identifying the problems. Instead of questioning who supports what and who’s right or wrong in their support and when that was, realize that there is a simple choice to be made. Either endure the blowback of our unsustainable policies as part of the price of maintaining an imperial style republic or change the policies of this nation so as not to oppress foreign peoples and work towards making this nation a self sufficient and continuing example of what our Constitution mandates: a more perfect union that truly establishes justice, insures domestic tranquility, provides for the common defense, promotes the general welfare and secures the blessings of liberty to not only ourselves, but others, and the attainment of a mutual posterity.

Bush's Faith and My Way Back Machine (Retro Post 2)

I thought the time would come when I could quote myself and behold! Here it is! Well, not really. It is more of a reprint. But not an entire reprint. Just some segments relevant to our, apparently delusional, President. I heard about it on a podcast from Democracy Now! yesterday that was a few days old. Then, I see it again in this article from the BBC Americas.

Quotes from the Chief:

God would tell me, George, go and fight those terrorists in Afghanistan. And I did, and then God would tell me, George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq... And I did.

And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East. And by God I'm gonna do it.

Belief is a dangerous thing and I have written about it before. Here are some bits from “The Streets Will Flow With the Blood of the Believers” that I wrote way back on 9/17/2004. Que the Way Back Machine *chimes and bells sound, vision gets wavy, words come back into focus*

...There is a little something that all the founding fathers agreed on in setting up our country called the separation of church and state.

We mention this separation not to infer that the church and our government have linked up and are now running the country in concert. That step has been skipped. Something more insipid has happened. Unless you have been in a coma or been high for the last 3+ years (the latter we would not blame you for), you will well know that the current president is a Christian. Born again. He is a true believer in the lord and savior, Jesus Christ. He is one of a great and growing many in this country that will trust in God to provide and guide the way. To have faith despite whatever harrowing circumstances may come. What is even more frightening is that W. thinks and has said that he truly believes that the lord above put him in office. Great. We have another word to describe him. Fundamentalist.

There is another believer out there who is also a leader of a ridiculously strong, organized group who seems to have trickled off the news cycle more than he should have. Who can say Osama bin Laden? He too is a fundamentalist.

Getting back to the believer in the office of the Chief Executive… Part of the reason the country is where it is today is because Bush believes certain things. He believes that Saddam was a threat. He believes Democracy is the best form of government. He believes that he is the right guy for the job. He believes. He takes it on faith…

…Education is failing all over the US. Bush insists that, nay, believes that No Child Left Behind is working despite heaps of evidence and testament telling otherwise. Math and sciences are being pushed over reading and writing. That promotes better accountants and chemists, but it doesn’t encourage free, intelligent thinking. But that works for the party of Bush just fine. …

Despite their insistence to the contrary, we are losing the War on Terror. The Bush administration has done everything bin Laden had hoped for and more. The Muslim world has been in disarray for hundreds of years, but bin Laden cracked the nut on getting Islam’s act together. If Islam is threatened, Muslims unite despite their differences. Jihad, the defensive kind, is a powerful underlying current of Islam and bin Laden is very aware of it and adept at using it. Islamists don’t hate us for who we are and what we believe. They may not like us, or our system, but that isn’t the crux. What is the crux is that U.S. policy appears to be, and in many respects is, a form of imperialist colonialism that is hurting the world, most pointedly the Islamic world. Cheap oil anyone? Nothing brings people together more than a common, easily identifiable enemy. Israel, oil and the support of repressive regimes, i.e. the House of Saud, are why we are the focus of Muslim enmity.

Mr. Bush is clearly not a student of history. If he had ever done his own homework, perhaps his decisions, the ones he claims he can make better than any other contender for the Presidency, would have been a bit more informed. But instead, he didn’t. He let other people guide his choices. He took it on faith. He believed, and still believes, that the dog is still wagging its tail. For future reference, Sun Tzu would have been a good start. The “Know Your Enemy” bit would help a lot.

Now, to cover some tail feathers, we offer this caveat: Religion isn’t to blame. Hubris, ignorance, idealism and/or fundamentalism are. Faith is a good thing if it gets you through a tough day. Your belief in a god is not a bad thing if it nourishes you and those around you in a positive way. Faith that guides you counter to what common sense and facts dictate is not so much faith as fundamentalism. The beauty of Democracy is that it, unlike fundamentalist belief regardless of denomination, is flexible. However, stretch it too far and it can break. We are near a breaking point now. Florida in November will be where that match gets lit. But that is another rant altogether.

Basically, everything has been wrong from step one since September 11, 2001. We missed a colossal opportunity to make a good thing out of tragedy by accepting the compassion of the world, but the faith and faith-enabled ideology of our current leaders carried the day and look where we are now. America has played its cards all wrong. Osama has proven he is smarter than Bush. We are one or two moves away from check, perhaps even check mate and Cheney is spouting that if we make the wrong choice, America will get hit again. Guess what? We are going to get hit no matter what unless some serious changes happen in U.S. policy. When that happens, the streets will flow with the blood of the believers who put, and possibly keep, Bush in office. What is truly sad is that others who know better will suffer equally if not more so.

To read the original post in its entirety, click here.

Its not so good to know that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

Retro Post 1

Just to get some of my old bits onto this site... Some points are still salient. Enjoy.

11/10/2004
Dark Cloud Over America: Day 9 (the faint silver lining)

The rats are leaving the ship! Is the ship that is federal American government half full or half empty with water to herald the retreat? Asscroft handed in a multi-page letter of resignation to the Shrub and is headed for the hills. Clearly dillusional, he actually had the temerity to say "The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved." Too many bare breasted statues in Washington for his weak little heart to take, more likely. Others are following suit. We will see who we get stuck with next.

Then we see this cartoon... Can we say Pat Oliphant rocks? We agree with his take on the situation completely. Here's the thing: Our current system of government, albeit tilted a direction that we don't like at present, is one that was literally hundreds of years in the making. Take some ancient Greece and Roman Empire, a hearty cup full of Magna Carta, add a healthy pinch of Enlightenment thinkers, maybe sprinkle a little Martin Luther in there and slide that concoction into a Dutch oven circa 1600's to early 1700's and let it cook up to 1776. Glaze with a U.S. Constitution and garnish with some Jefferson, Franklin and Washington and you have yourself a phat democracy! Best enjoyed with some John Quincy Adams on the side.

To extend this metaphor train obnoxiously further... If you have ever made bread, you know it takes time and patients. Lots of effort, too. That is democracy for you. America seems to be trying to pawn off a cheap, Wonderbread version on Iraq and Afghanistan. The world knows we have ourselves some delicious Tuscan whole wheat over here, so why would anyone settle for Wonderbread?

We fear the loaf of U.S. democracy either has mold or is growing stale.

More to the point, a democracy is learned and earned, not bestowed. We have a system of government that commands appreciation because of the well documented history of blood, sweat and tears that went into creating it. It is that context and history that only (most) Americans and like established democracies can appreciate. The world of Islam has no comparable history and little impetus to try to get their communal psyche geared to that perspective. (Though they do have plenty of blood spilled, you have to admit. Thank you Crusades!) All that and we are blowing up everything of theirs in the name of democracy and security.

True story time: A group of Spanish conquistadors approached a peaceful tribe of pueblo Indians and the conquistador leader, in his native tongue, decreed to the Indians standing before him that they had about a minute to convert to Christianity or they would all be put to the sword in the name of God and whichever Spanish Monarch was reigning at the time. There was no effort to translate or learn about the people they were addressing. Just the decree. The conquistadors slaughtered the entire community. Substitute Christianity for democracy and modify the rhetoric and this appears quite familiar, doesn't it?

Who would have thought Iraq and the old American west would have so much in common?

posted by A. L. Deviant at 1:19 PM

AP Errors or Bush Freudians?

Am I reading this correctly? Look at the third paragraph. The AP quotes President Bush as saying ''We'll complete our work in Afghanistan and Iran,'' Bush said. ''An immediate withdrawal of our troops in Iraq, or the broader Middle East, as some have called for, would only embolden the terrorists and create a staging ground to launch more attacks against America and free nations.'' Color me confused.

Do we have troops in Iran? Have I been so pummeled by bad news and executive buffoonery that I somehow missed the invasion or Iran? Or, is it the more likely case that President Bush was riffing and merely gave over to verbal diarrhea and let some secret chicken out of the coop.

Do we have diplomatic engagement with Iran over the nuclear issue? I thought so. Are they a viable threat to the United States? I thought not. In fact, wasn’t it just determined that Iran was, at least technologically, years away from being able to attain nuclear weapons? ... Yes, the last time I checked, for whatever that is worth.

Good lord this is upsetting.

Bush goes on to say that as long as he is President, “we will stay, we will fight and we will win the war on terrorism.” Well, that settles that. Now my fears are somewhat more confirmed than they already were. Comparisons to the Vietnam War are all too common when referring to the situation in Iraq. However, I would think that this statement by the only chief executive of this nation to be installed by the Supreme Court and not the people of the United States portends of the analogy being applied to the War on Terrorism in general.

Vietnam was not winnable. You know why. For those who are raising a quizzical eyebrow, dig this. Vietnam had a centuries long history of invasion, subjugation and colonialization by bunch of different countries, China and France being the biggest offenders. When America came in, the Vietnamese just saw them as another colonialist invading power. It had nothing to do with politics or ideology for them. It was about sovereignty and stopping the violation of their land. Communism was just an organizational tool. The US was fighting something stronger than them. They were fighting an idea and resentment that was hundreds of years old. The Vietnamese would have fought to the last child if they had to. Nothing could have broken that resolve.

Once again, we are involved in a conflict in part of the world where we do not (at least our President doesn’t) fully understand the general perceptions and ethos of the culture we are trying to “save” and democratize. This may seem like pulling dirt out of history’s dustbin, but the Crusades are still very present in the minds of many Arabs. So, once again, you have an invader stomping in and telling them how its going to be. It won’t fly. I will eat my hat if democracy sticks in Iraq.

And Bush is thinking about Iran?

Does the Arab world hate the infidel? Sure. Is that xenophobic, wrong and generally stupid? To us, sure. To them, heck no. We can thank the British, Spanish and Christianity in general for that. We, the United States of America, one of the younger nations on the world stage, march over to the fertile crescent and silk road lands, like true sophomores and think we can fix stuff, mold them in our democratic image? We can’t even get a President properly elected.

The same rules don’t apply in this war game. When people are willing to strap bombs to their chest to get us out, that’s a sign that we don’t belong. When the rules of the game are that different for the two teams playing, that strongly suggests that the game can’t be won. Our President’s myopia is costing us precious lives, truckloads of money and more good will than we can ever recoup. George W. Bush’s choices have written a check that no matter how big of an ass he may be, that ass cannot cash.

You can't kill an idea or attitude with a gun. Just a person. And, as their blood spreads, so does their idea.

BTW, I thought Maureen Dowd was good today.

Robertson & American Empire

We may have a new candidate for douche bag of the week. Maybe, depending on how I feel by the end of this entry, we’ll have a douche bag of the month!

Here is a guy famous for some pretty top-notch comedy in the world of public discourse. With winners like suggesting that the State Department be blown up with a nuclear device and saying that feminism encourages women to "kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians." You knew the guy was bound to have another ripe zinger further down the line. Yesterday, he hit us with it!

This man of god, founder of the Christian Coalition, has called for our US government to facilitate the assassination of Hugo Chavez. This sounds mighty un-Christian to me. Granted that Chavez is a bit of a blow-hard ass, but to pop a cap in him seems a bit steep. Furthermore, the basis for the statement, a fear of Robertson’s that Venezuela may become "a launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism" is so rife with fallacies that I am not sure I can list them all here.

First, this country doesn’t need or want another Joseph McCarthy. Communism is a non-issue. People saw that it failed in Russia and they see how miserable people in Cuba are. (I’m am not going to touch China.) Communism is the least of our worries. For all intents and purposes, it is a red herring. And, Pat’s memory for history seems a bit foggy. Back in the 80’s, the Reagan Administration supported the Mujuhadin, a.k.a. Islamic fundamentalists, a.k.a. al Queda, to fight the Russian Communists. Thanks Ronnie! Islam has no love of Communism. It can be reasonably argued (unlike most of what Massah Robertson says) that Islam and Communism are completely incompatible. The annoying and sad thing is that lots of people believe Pat is truly doing the Lord’s work, is a good American and bummed that his Presidential bid failed.

The more unnerving thing is that the U.S., to a large degree, is where it is for thinking just like Mr. Robertson. It is because of America’s meddling nature that Islamists hate us and Hugo Chavez has ample fuel to spout off about how bad we are. We have supported regimes that oppress their peoples (remember Vietnam? How about Saudi Arabia?) We have stuck our nose where it did not belong because we want to protect our interests. Someone notable (please, if you know, tell me who, specifically) said that this, our current state of affairs, i.e. Iraq, Afghanistan, world enmity, is the price of empire. Is it worth it?

In the afore linked article, Patsy gets to the heart of it all in saying "You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it," Robertson said. "It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war ... and I don't think any oil shipments will stop." Its all about the oil.

As long as we are fat, secure and happy, who cares who we have to kill? Tens of thousands of Iraqis? No problem! So what if the environment is completely screwed. I’ve go my Hummer H2, my plasma screen, a well oiled semi-automatic with armor piercing bullets and more food in my fridge than 3/4 of the world sees in month. So what if our cars are screwing up the environment and creating rising tides that are displacing 20,000 island residents of Bangladesh? Just gimme the oil! We’ve got what we want. Nothing else matters.

I think Agent Smith hit the nail on the head.

Where is American self reliance? Where is Yankee ingenuity and a can do attitude? Where is the American Dream and the notion of sacrificing for the cause? Have we become an empire by default? Is this the fate of every republic? Lastly, communism clearly wasn’t sustainable. Can we follow the signs and determine if a democracy is sustainable?

Sorry for the drama. So, yeah. Pat Robertson is definitely douche bag of the month.

Uninformed Musings

Gaza. My gut tells me that the action of Israel handing it over to Palestine is a good thing. I cannot fathom what it might be like to lose one's home because the government says you have to, but one just has to head on over to Prospect Heights, Brooklyn (a.k.a. Ratnerville) to get the crux of that.

Religion does not resonate with me too much. I get that the Jewish world thinks that God wants them to have that land. Palestinians think the same way, but Jehova's name is Allah and after World War 2, the world community wrenched it away from them. So, why aren't these two sides seeing the similarities? Both faiths want their women to be modest. Both cultures have unique but similar dietary restrictions. Both peoples have been displaced.

It did sort of please me that Sharon called the guy who started shooting Palestinians a terrorist. A spade, after all, is a spade. Now, to play with fuel and matches... Why do we care? Why do we pay so much attention to this as opposed to the Sudan or Rwanda or Chechnya? Or *gasp* Afghanistan?

Yes America has a lot of Jews. Ok. Fine. But that aside, our allegiances to Israel don't make a great deal of sense. I say this for strictly economic reasons. We get nothing from Israel. No natural resources, no real product, no viable or lucrative trade. Israel has been a festering burr in the saddle of the US for decades. Yes there is money for arms deals, but that is a micro-sector relative to the world economy. And I hate guns. Talk about breeding bad karma.

At the end of the day, who is any man or woman to say they know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, the mind and will of god? Are we all not human and, therefore, fallible? The Jews in Gaza... rather, leaving Gaza, need to shut up and deal. And the Palestinians need to pipe down and be humble and thankful that they have gotten this far.