The Corner

The one and only.

The Latest Tweets from Team NRO . . .

Marine Fallout Iii


Mr. Goldberg,

I am writing in regard to the obnoxious Marine who sent you the note criticizing your support for President Bush and our impending invasion of Iraq. I just wanted to reiterate (since I am sure you already know) that if he is actually an officer in the US military, he represents a tiny minority of servicemen. I am in the service and do not know anyone who considers ridding this world of Saddam Hussien a less than worthy use of our nation’s military. Additionally, the degree to which this endeavor is driven by US national interest rather than anything else is so obvious that it barely even comes up as matter of conversation.

I can not say that everyone is completely enthusiastic about going to fight in Iraq. (It obviously entails separation from family, hardship, etc.)

However, those who will be doing it are quite aware that it needs to be

Keep up the good work.

Best regards,
[Name Withheld]
(aka – LCDR USNR)

Marine Fallout Ii


From the A-10 community (for what it’s worth): I flew with guys who are VERY Jewish, and I’d trust ‘em with my life (and have). This is a repulsive letter and I apologize for this putz’s outburst.

[Name withheld]
P.S. My Yiddish is a little rusty. I hope that was the correct
possessive form of “putz.”
P.P.S. I’m not Jewish


Marine Fallout I


First of a couple letters in response to the Marine’s diatribe yesterday:

I am a Captain in the Army. I will soon deploy to Kuwait. I was recently there as a liaison between the army and the marines training there. I can tell you that I have never met a single Marine or G.I. who shares the viewsof that letter writer.

Although you may not be deploying to Kuwait with us, you are making a valuable contribution. It is important for those of us who do go to know we will be fighting a just war. Your arguments help give us that peace of mind. So thanks.

Web Briefing: October 30, 2014

Sotu Preview


In a desire to address the concerns of critics who believe the “Axis of Evil” line was too provocative, the President will tonight call attention to the Coalition of Cranky-Pants. “This alliance of the world’s biggest party-poopers is harshing the mellow of the 21st century for the rest of us…” the Commander-in-Chief will declare.


Bipartisanship & Title Ix


Nro Preview


In his Tuesday NRO piece on the Blix report, Jim Robbins says of the Woodward piece: “A Washington Post report indicates that the White House is seeking ways to release more specific, sensitive information without compromising the sources and methods by which the intelligence was collected. The process is slow, but demands that the administration release such information at once and without adequate safeguards is both irresponsible and counterproductive. This is literally a life or death game for oppositionists in Iraq who may be cooperating with the United States. Furthermore, if the U.S. allows sources to be compromised, the intelligence agencies will lose not only the source in question but also any hope of recruiting new informants, who might reasonably fear being exposed and suffering the same fate.”

Last Refuge, Pt. 2


Here’s the jawdropping difference between admissions at West Point and Michigan, according to the CEO reports. If two students with equal test scores and grades applied to West Point, and the school had only one spot to award them, it would be almost twice as likely to choose a black applicant over a white one. At Michigan, however, the school would be almost 174 times more likely to choose the black applicant. The fact of the matter is that West Point and the other service academies employ racial preferences, but not nearly on the same scale as this country’s top public universities. The defenders of Michigan’s race-driven policies obscure the debate when they try to hide behind West Point.

Last Refuge


When the defenders of racial preferences find themselves on the ropes, they often point to the military–something many of them must hate to do–as an exemplar of affirmative action. That’s what the New York Times does today in a story on how racial preferences affect admissions to the service academies: “Even as the Bush administration sides with opponents of affirmative action at the University of Michigan, officials of the nation’s service academies say their own minority admissions programs are necessary to maintain both integrated student bodies and officer corps.” What the articles doesn’t supply are any actual numbers showing how much preference minority applicants receive. For that, it’s necessary to read this report from the Center for Equal Opportunity, which shows that preferences do appear to play a role in admissions–but not nearly the role they play at the University of Michigan, whose admissions process is currently under Supreme Court review. At West Point, for instance, CEO found a 100-point gap between the SAT scores of whites and blacks admitted. At Michigan, that’s the difference between whites and blacks on the verbal section alone.

Will It Be Enough For The U.N.?


Suv Campaign Backfires


I have received several e-mails today from NRO readers who bought SUVs — or are considering purchasing one over another vehicle — due to the overheated vitriol directed at SUVs by environmentalists and other do-gooders. Gregg Easterbrook’s article alone appears to be responsible for replacing a Honda with an H2. Dozens more readers have responded with personal accounts of how SUV ownership has improved their lives.

The Holocaustification of Iraq


Let’s assume a few things for a moment. There’s a war. We win quickly. With the exception of a few Tikriti thugs and diehards, the Iraqis take to the streets in jubilation. In the following months the full extent of Saddam’s regime is revealed. Victims of torture and rape and murder appear nightly to give testimony on American TV. Videotapes of the mass slaughter of Kurds and Shiites are unearthed. Everything Saddam’s detractors and demonizers said about the guy are proved true.

Now if all of that happens, my guess is that history will very quickly re-write the war on Iraq as a humanitarian effort. In much the same way that World War Two has been — wrongly — boiled down into a war to the end the Holocaust and the Civil War has been neatly summarized as purely a war to free the slaves, the liberation of Iraq will be seen in hindsight as a profoundly moral act. I think this scares quite a few opponents of the war for good and bad reasons. Surely, Germany will look like it never learned the lessons of its own history. The Germans sat idly by through the genocides of Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. The evidence of Saddam’s slaughters will seem just as obvious in hindsight and those who did nothing will look shameful for it. I also think some domestic opponents of war understand this implicitly and are desperate for that morality tale not to be told. Isolationists of the far right and far left have do not like American morality informing foreign policy. The Lefties don’t like it because they don’t think America is moral. The ones on the far right think America is so moral it shouldn’t poisoned by outside influences, entangling alliances etc. Either way, a successful war which goes down in the history books as a moral triumph will be very difficult for them to counter. I’m not asserting that all opponents of the war suffer from bad faith, I’m sure most of them legitimately believe toppling Saddam is a bad idea. I think they’re very wrong. But, I can’t shake the feeling that, say, Edward Said or Bob Novak might feel more than a tinge of disappointment if the airwaves were filled with jubilation over the alleviation of mass suffering in Iraq, the elevation of Bush to the role of Liberator and a general consensus that the US did the only moral thing. I could be wrong.

Zakaria On Iraq


He has a terrific column running through some of the effects of the country’s liberation. I esp. like the remarks about OPEC. I think breaking it should be an undeclared war aim, but many pro-liberation pundits (and Colin Powell) have been closing the door on that because they’re thinking about oil as a strictly economic, rather than geopolitical, issue.

Missed This


George Will in Newsweek: “In his speech last week at a Roe v. Wade celebration—a pandering festival attended by all the aspirants—[Howard] Dean said he is running because “I don’t like extremism.” Then he said that unless Bush is defeated, ‘Next thing, girls won’t be able to go to school in America. You watch.’”

I Forgot to Mention...


The stupidity of that Title IX thing in the Times is compounded by the fact that the Williams sisters didn’t go to college. And so Title IX had nothing to do with their success.

“a Very Powful Tool”


For about the last year, about ten times a day, I get an email with this subject header. I know it’s a virus generated email, but I’ve made my peace with that. What drives me nuts is that “powful” is missing the “er.” It just seems to me that if you were going to create a virus which was going to generate billions of emails all around the world, you’d at least get the spelling right. It drives me batty.



In the Iraq debate, that’s a word that’s chiefly been used by critics of the Bush administration’s policy and rhetoric. But again and again this morning I found myself thinking that Hans Blix’s statement was full of bluster. Because he has the low-key delivery of a bureaucrat, people might miss this aspect of his report to the UN. He kept saying that Iraq would face “serious” consequences if it did not cooperate more actively. Like what? If the Iraqi regime doesn’t shape up, what’s Blix going to do to it? Extend the inspections another two months?

The Danger At The Museum




More on Britain’s lunatic asylum policy. Neither Tony Blair nor his government emerge with any credit from this mess. When are they going to fix it?

The Kinds We Attract


Why do so many extremists seem to be able to find safe haven in the UK? This article gives part of the answer. As the writer notes, the British asylum system is a “terrorist’s social service.”

Oh, Canada!


The national missile defense system we’re currently building would be made more effective if we were allowed to place a particular kind of radar in the Canadian arctic. The Canadians have not yet granted permission, because they opposed the Bush administration’s decision to withdraw from the ABM Treaty. Now there’s a question of whether Canada can remain a full partner at NORAD. Lots of people don’t realize this, but NORAD is a binational project, and there’s a Canadian flag flying alongside Old Glory at the entrance to Cheyenne Mountain in Colorado Springs. So this week there are discussions about whether the Canadians will participate in a missile defense system that will have the capability of defending all of North America, not just the United States. If they don’t do their share, though, are we obligated to blow up a North Korean missile aimed at Vancouver? We’d do it, of course. But can’t you imagine the outrage if we didn’t?


Sign up for free NRO e-mails today:

NRO Polls on LockerDome

Subscribe to National Review