Chirac’s stance continues to generate ‘results’ as is noted in this report from the Daily Telegraph:

Here’s an extract:

“Street protests against American and British military action in Iraq have escalated into attacks by Muslim youths on Jewish demonstrators, sparking fears of a new wave of anti-Semitism across France. The French government was forced to appeal for calm after protesters, some of them carrying pictures of Saddam Hussein, burnt the Israeli flag and turned on Jewish students, attacking one of them with an iron bar, during a series of anti-war rallies. Officials fear that anti-war sentiment, supported by President Jacques Chirac, may be running out of control and could ignite widespread violence. Banners at recent demonstrations have shown the Star of David intertwined with a Nazi swastika, while protesters shouted "Vive Chirac! Stop the Jews".”

To their credit, some members of the government have condemned this sort of behavior. One, apparently, has not:

“President Chirac, whose bitter opposition to the United States-led military offensive in Iraq has won him almost universal support in France, has remained silent on the attacks…”

There’s a review in today’s New York Times of ‘Terror and Liberalism’, a new book by Paul Berman that sets out to put Islamic fundamentalism into the correct totalitarian context.

As the reviewer notes:

“By putting the war on terror in this totalitarian context, Mr. Berman shows that while the differences between many of these movements are profound, so are the similarities. The totalitarian model makes it clear, too, that much of the recent discussion about the root causes of terror is as distorted as the arguments of those who once argued that the root causes of German Fascist or Soviet Communist terror were in the aggressive behavior of the democracies or even the subversive presence of the Jews. Mr. Berman's also suggests that as totalitarianism has taken on liberalism, liberalism has often too-readily succumbed, seeking to treat even its enemies as reasonable when they were not.”

Too true.

Signs of a new irregular enemy, or the perception of one, were to be seen yesterday afternoon at a position held by the marine's 5th regiment as they waited for the order to go forward. Troops captured a man alleged to be a Sudanese "jihadist" - one who had come to Iraq to fight against the US on religious grounds.

The man, looking frightened and with his hands bound behind his back, was driven away for interrogation on the bonnet of a Humvee. Marines on the scene gave few details but said he was one of two "jihadists" they had captured.

Any overlap of the invasion of Iraq and America's proclaimed war on terror would be a disturbing development, whether it was real or in the minds of the invaders.

Since I can't believe we don't have that hotel located to the nearest millimeter... I'm betting that a more accurate description would be, "Explosion 100 meters from the Palestine Hotel."

Increasingly, every time I see this mis-Information Minister in Bagdhad, I am reminded of the closing scene of "Animal House" when the Delta House has taken over the downtown area and Kevin Bacon, playing the ROTC officer, in stark contrast to the chaos going on around him keeps screaming "All is well! All is well!"

Showing footage of what David Kay thinks is a chemical weapon dispersing canister. It has Russian writing on it.

Time magazine runs a piece on great war blogs and blogs during wartime. No mention of the Corner again. They ask for suggestions of other good blogs. Maybe you could drop them a line?

Those who predicted that the Iraqi army would surrender, that the Iraqi population would welcome the coalition with open arms and that the Iraqi leadership would collapse were wrong. Unfortunately, the "effects-based" strategy embraced by the Pentagon was based on these conditions. What has transpired is a case of arrogance resulting from ignorance of the enemy.

The Iraqis, thanks to the Al Bakr Institute, have not made that mistake. And today we are paying the price.

"U.S. Tanks Come Under Fire During Three-Hour Incursion
By PATRICK E. TYLER"
You might think that the Iraqis made the incursion and surprised the US. But read the story: US tanks made it to center Baghdad and BIG NEWS were fired upon. Shouldn't the headline be: US Reaches central Baghdad Despite Resistance in 3Hour Incursion?

From a reader:

Jonah,
As a used to be occasional turned fanatic NRO reader, I have a confession to make. What does NRODT mean? Whatever it is I know it MUST be great as I see references to it constantly in The Corner. If you will please clarify what this is exactly, I am sure that I will participate, consume, purchase etc.

Many thanks,

[Name Withheld]
(A.K.A. Sheepishly Asking Question Guy)

It stands for National Review On Dead Tree. Why it caught on is a mystery.

On the question of civilian casualties, you will tell me that allied forces have not targeted at any time the Iraqi civilians?

PRIME MINISTER:

Absolutely not. Now two things I would say to you on that. The first is I would just ask people to be really cautious of these reports. Those Baghdad street market bombs for example, we are sure that the first one is not coalition forces. We are still trying to check out the second one. Yet I understand when people see the carnage and the bloodshed they feel very angry about it. But I ask people not to treat these reports as correct until they are actually proven. And the second thing is to realise yes there will be innocent civilians that are killed, but we have done everything we possibly can to minimise them, and as I say measure that against the things that people don't see, the inside of Saddam's prisons, the Shia Muslims driven from their homeland, those in the north persecuted and killed, had chemical weapons used against them. All I ask is that people have a sense of balance, and I think you will find that for most people in Iraq, and this is a judgement that will be made later, life will be better.

"I don't think I'm going way out on a limb here to assume that somewhere in that block's long line of drivers near Lake Ronkonkoma waiting for their five free gallons, were a few who weren't really that gung ho about the war but just stuck a flag in their windshield wiper to get the gasoline gratis. Unintentional or not, that's purchased patriotism. And as we are reminded every time we hear about Iraqi human shields and forced suicide bombers, purchased patriotism is one of the things we're fighting against."

An amendment to provide that none of the funds made available in the bill for reconstruction efforts in Iraq may be used to procure goods or services from any entity that includes information on a response to a Request for Proposal (RFP) that indicates that such entity is organized under the laws of France, Germany, the Russian Federation, or Syria.

From a reader:

You've given me an opening with your juxtapositioning of journalists and doctors and lawyers. I am a lawyer. I was required to complete a lengthy education and to pass a rigorous exam in order to become one. I am licensed to practice law, and if I break the ethical rules of my profession, I will be severely disciplined, and even disbarred (that is, I lose my license and thus my livelihood). Along with that responsibility, I have the power to defend my clients in certain extraordinary ways, such as refusing to give testimony where the attorney-client privilege applies and my client exercises it.

Journalists claim a version of this right and many others (for example, the right to be flown around war zones by the Pentagon and to photograph, but not help, the wounded), but if a journalist violates the journalists code of ethics, he faces nothing more than a media handwringing session, which may HELP his career (see Geraldo). All rights, no duties -- the sanctimoniousness (yes, it is a word) is breathtaking.

Rick, as I'm sure you know, it was Kipling who wrote the epitaph that is carved on the graves of unidentified British WWI dead, "A Soldier of the Great War - Known Unto God". His own son, John, was killed in that war, something that led Kipling to write the heart-breaking "Have You News of My Boy Jack":

"Have you news of my boy Jack?"
Not this tide.
"When d'you think that he'll come back?"
Not with this wind blowing, and this tide.
"Has any one else had word of him?"
Not this tide.
For what is sunk will hardly swim,
Not with this wind blowing, and this tide.

"Oh, dear, what comfort can I find?"
None this tide,
Nor any tide,
Except he did not shame his kind -
Not even with that wind blowing, and that tide.

Then hold your head up all the more,
This tide,
And every tide;
Because he was the son you bore,
And gave to that wind blowing and that tide.

From a reader:

Uh, I think the Hypocratic Oath is what Tom Daschle, Jesse Jackson et al subscribe to. You're thinking of the Hippocratic Oath.

Here it is. As Fozzy Bear used to say, wack wacka wacka.

....Some hailed Wolf Blitzer's decision to put down his microphone and join the firefighters in putting out the flames before they could ignite the fuel truck and kill hundreds of orphans.

But Bob Steele, director of the ethics program at the Poynter Institute for Media Studies, said he was uncomfortable with Blitzer's situation, now that the rescue operation is over.

"I'm hoping and trusting that he and CNN set some thresholds,'' Steele said. "I think it's problematic if this is a role that he's going to be playing on any kind of frequent basis. I don't think he should be reporting on it if he's also a participant. He can't bring appropriate journalistic independence and detachment to a story."

I didn't know him at all. I only talked to him on the phone a couple times during the Lewinsky scandal. But if he wasn't the journalist I admired most in Washington, he had to be close. Virtually, overnight he made The Atlantic and The New Republic amazing, must-read magazines. In college, I read his war reportage from the first Gulf War religiously.

Howard Kurtz' obit says Kelly was a conservative and I suppose that's right. But I never really saw him as one. Rather, I always perceived him as an old style blue collar Democrat whose B.S. detector pushed him to the right on specific issues. Whatever, his columns were tough as nails, but he always explained where he was coming from. In that I've always seen him as a role model -- there's nothing wrong with hitting the other guy hard as long as you provide a rationale for doing so and are willing to take your lumps in return. But Kelly was also an intellectually gifted man with a profound sense of decency, or at least that's the impression I always got from his work.

Of course, Kelly is not the only American to die in Iraq and the fact that Kelly's death is so heartbreaking for many of us in the journalism business is a sobering reminder, for me at least, of the real pain caused by every death in this war. Without taking anything away from the reality of those tragedies, I find the loss of Michael Kelly particularly painful because while I consider everybody in uniform to be a hero, Kelly was a real hero of mine. He was one of the really good guys, he believed in the rightness of what America is doing and in the goodness of America in general and he wasn't afraid to say so. His passing is a terrible, terrible loss.

The only current references that would indicate he survived would be references to events that were UNFORESEEABLE two weeks ago. An Apache being shot down does not fit into this category. Tragic as it was, it was quite foreseeable that an Apache helicopter would be shot down at some point, since we have huge numbers of Apaches and they operate on the front lines.

The FOX News military expert has just expressed skepticism as well. The reporter made some kind of patronizing "I know more about this than you do, General" saying that the Apache comment would have had to have been a "very lucky guess." But that's the point -- it would not have been a lucky guess. They just wait until it happens and then they play the tape.

On the day the US troops first enter Baghdad proper, the Iraqis could release a tape of Saddam saying "The invaders have entered our capital today, but we will defeat them..." ...will that [prove] that Saddam is alive on that day?

Another great article from the Master is up on National Post of Canada. Here is a quote: “If the media's version of SARS -- Snotty Anti-Rumsfeld Syndrome -- has any merit, it ought surely to be of universal application. When the last five Baathists have fled Iraq and are living on welfare in Sarnia, Eric Margolis will still be assuring us that it's all part of a brilliant Saddamite strategy that has exposed the allied victory for the sham it is. Would it not be possible to apply this "healthy skepticism" towards officialdom a little more broadly? Right now the Anglo-American war's going brilliantly, the Canadian home front's a disaster: Toronto's hospitals are more overstretched than Baghdad's, and our national carrier is in worse shape than the Iraqi Air Force. Yet mysteriously the Canadian media insist it's the U.S. Government that's complacent and inept.”

Marines find intelligence bonanza.

Another piece on the Iraqi lawyer who tipped-off our guys about Pfc. Lynch, at great risk.

Could be used as a super-base.

AP NEWS ALERT 6:43 AM:

NEAR BAGHDAD, Iraq - U.S. troops find "suspicious site" with thousands of boxes of white powder, chemical warfare documents and nerve agent antidote south of Baghdad, U.S. officer says.

From Air Power guy:

This, sadly, was all too common a prank during the Vietnam conflict. It happened to our neighbor, whose F-105 pilot husband was shot down over North Vietnam.

People need to understand how this works...

This kind of notification is done in person, by a uniformed officer, who may be accompanied by a chaplain, nurse or both. Fortunately, the low casualty rate makes this more feasible (I almost used the word "easier" but that certainly isn't the right choice). Most of us have been on call for that duty in our careers (and you always are if you're a commander and you can be there yourself).

Whoever did that underscores the depths to which too many in this country will stoop to get even when decisions are made and things happen in America that they disagree with. It is repugnant, but it happens and will probably happen again, sad to say. I firmly believe there's a special place in Hell for people like that.

From a reader:

The whole thing would become moot if you just became a Mormon. Interesting fusion of Catholic and Jewish theology, and we can eat bacon without guilt.

I've always thought you'd make a great Mormon bishop.

From a reader:

Jonah,

The Iraqi Minister of information's pronouncements remind me of a line in Eric Frank Russell's novel Wasp:

"For months we have been making triumphant retreats before a demoralized enemy who is advancing in utter disorder."

Jew.

From a Father (the Catholic kind):

Dear Jonah,
I have been reading you faithfully [pun intended] and detect no anti-Catholicism whatsoever. Your critiques of my co-religionists are articulate, concise, and true. Buchanan, Moran, et al., are deserving of much harsher correction than you have offered. Keep up the excellent work. The author of the column criticizing you and other Neo-conservatives wants to stir up Catholics against you. The fact of the matter is that he would appear to be promoting some other ancient prejudice, trying to replace the hyphen with a space in "Judeo-Christian," if you ask me. Please carry on in the best tradition of Mr. Buckley with all your fellow NR and NRO writers, especially K-Lo and Derbyshire and Rod Dreher. As we Papists frequently say in Latin: Non illegitimi carborundum est.
Semper fi,

[name withheld]

For the record, my response to that silliness before was intended to communicate the fact I don't take that Ravotti guy very seriously. A few people wrote me very nice notes to say "Don't let him get you down...." Thanks, but it's really no biggie. But I also got a few emails like this which bug me:

I enjoy the corner but I think your response was weak. This is coming from someone who doesn't like Buchanan and thinks he's nuts

First, much of the criticism of Buchanan was that the people he chose to criticize were Jewish (Perle, Wolfowitz, etc). Rivotti points out that the people you criticized happened to be Catholic (Novak, Matthews, Moran and Buchanan)

Then you go on a personal tirade about how well you get along with Catholics and how you married one etc. Fine, but couldn't the same argument hold true for Buchanan? I'm sure he has plenty of Jewish friends. It's the old "Some of my best friends are ..." line.

Where did he say that you don't like Catholics? If it's wrong for Buchanan to single out Jews, it's wrong for you to single out Catholics.

So, let me just do this very quickly:

1) I was joking around.
2) The emailer and Ravotti claim I singled-out Catholics. I didn't. Ravotti cherry-picked the Catholics I criticized and then said "aha Goldberg's attacking Catholics." It's dishonest argumentation and....
3) Not true. I believe that Moran is a Methodist and I don't believe Michael Kinsley is Catholic either. But even if everybody I've ever criticized is a Catholic...
4) It doesn't matter because I have never suggested, hinted, implied, winked, or even thought that their positions derive from being Catholic. It didn't occur to me until I saw this joker's column -- which is why I thought it was so funny. Meanwhile...
5) Buchanan and Moran implicitly and explicitly suggested that Jewishness is the issue with their opponents. In other words, it is wrong to single-out Jews, or Catholics. I've done neither. This Ravotti guy did both.

At what point can we run breaking news headlines announcing there are no explosions in Baghdad?

We're not going to make too much of a habit out of this. But another reader sent me a request I couldn't help him with (because Cosmo is too good a dog to require the aid of how-to books). And since he named his dog "Captain America" (a good Marvel character, by the way) I thought maybe you guys could help him out. He's given me permission to publish his email address.
Here's the request:

Jonah, I have just resuced a terrier mix pupy (8 wks. old) from the pound. I'm 35 with four kids (11, 6, 3, & 1), who have been pleading with me to find a family dog - and we finally found the right one. With the war going on, and with my giant collection of Marvel comics from my childhood, I managed to have the kids name the dog after my favorite superhero - Captain America. People's reactions are uniformally positive. However, I need a dog lover's help - and have an offer for you. I am blessed with a wife as conservative as me, and by the the constantly thought provoking articles on NRO and NRODT. I am not blessed with an intimate knowledge of dog training. Can you please recommend the best sites, books, methods, authorities etc., for housebreaking, training, etc.? My survey of authorities has yielded contradictory results, and I just don't have any frame of reference (e.g., rolled up newspaper vs. doggie treat reinforcement). In exchange for any info. you can give, I offer my experience as a new, and recurring, dad in your efforts with your new baby. If you are already punchy with unsolicited advice, no problem. But if you need a "new baby guy," I'd love to help. Thanks for any assistance, and God bless the folks at NRO and NRODT.

Brian

I don't want to risk any US soldiers lives for a photo-op, but wouldn't it be awesome if we could get troops inside that briefing room during one of this joker's tirades.

Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf, Iraqi Minister of Information: "We have the criminal Zionist oil gang on the run! The mercenaries are being destroyed. Victory is at hand for the glorious nation of Iraq and our supreme leader Saddam Hu---"

Sgt. Williams, US Special Forces: Excuse me sir, you're going to have to come with me.

al-Sahhaf: What? Get out of here! I am speaking to the media!

Williams: I'm afraid not sir. Say goodbye.

al-Sahhaf: Lying infidel! People of the world I ask you! Do you believe me or your lying eyes?"

Williams: Sir, seriously. Shut your pie hole or we'll be forced to shut it for you.

al-Sahhaf: Okay....[whispering] could I get one of those ready-to-eat meals?

That must be where they store all the nail clippers they confiscate.

A reader writes:

Does this mean I now have to go to confession? You see I signed up for NRODT due to your well disguised anti-Catholic columns. As the usher for 5 o'clock mass at St. Louise, I hang my head. Shame on me.

According to ABC News. Still unclear when curbside check-in will resume.

NYT's Dexter Filkins is at the tip of the spear heading into Baghdad. He says the Iraqis are ecstatic about the liberation of Iraq. And, hey, on that note. If anyone knows of good quotes snickering at the idea, please send them my way.

A reader writes:

Jonah, Interestingly enough, the Times originally got it right. In this analysis from the 28th, the quote is correct. I remember the misquote from the 26th or the 27th, because I wrote an e-mail to a relative on the 27th mentioning how the quote didn't "ring clear" to me, coming as it did from our chief ground commander during hostilities. I can't remember the source, but I think it was the Washington Post. I wondered in my e-mail if it was not some sort of disinformation trap designed to draw the Iraqis out. Given the qualifier "A BIT", it is much easier to understand. However, we are now left with the mystery of how the New York Times came to run the much more inflammatory (and erroneous) version on it's front page on April 1st after having reported it correctly three days previously.

Left-wing "peace" activist Tom Cahill, fresh from weeks of acting as a so-called "human shield," expresses his 40 years of building "rage" at the United States on CNN. And who said all the angry white male haters were on the right? Best line of wackiness, paraphrasing: "I didn't see much evidence of a dictatorship there, except lots of military and lots of pictures of Saddam Hussein

This guy doesn't like me. In what might seem like a theological stretch that distorts space and time, he suggests I might dislike the Pope because I criticized Jim Moran and Chris Matthews. But you know what? He's got me pegged fair and square. I hate Catholics. Hate 'em, hate 'em, hate 'em. All that friendly banter with K-Lo? A ruse. Working for Bill Buckley's magazine? Penetrating enemy lines. My numerous comments about how this Pope is a hoss and one of the last lions of the 20th Century? Nothing but Iraqi-syle disinformation. My column saying Islam needs a Pope? Propaganda. And, of course, my decision to marry a Papist? Undercover work (no pun intended).

Declares he will not call for Jihad against America. Unfortunately, Muslims could not hear him over his hat.

A reader raises a good point, "How does this story affect our economy? The rise and fall of the DJIA seems to be a direct result of war reporting. How much could a miss-quote like this cost investors?" Maybe we should mount a class action lawsuit against the Times?

"Meanwhile, north-west of Safwan in Al Zubayr, British troops found thousands of boxes of medical supplies hidden by Saddam’s regime.

The tyrant claimed for years that sick children were dying in hospitals from a lack of medicines because of tough UN sanctions against Iraq.

But yesterday soldiers of the 1st Battalion Black Watch exposed his lies after raiding a Ba’ath Party HQ. They found enough medicine for 10,000 kids, including vital antibiotics and pneumonia and tapeworm treatments, in a locked storeroom.

The supplies have now been handed to Army doctors to treat local patients properly for the first time in months."

From a reader:

Not ONE WORD in the Corner on the death overnight of Edwin "War! What is it good for? (Absolutely nuthin!)" Starr in London. J'ACCUSE!!! "Defending the French" guy.

I don't mean to harp, but this is a very big deal. That quote from William Wallace was used as the news peg for dozens of "quagmire" stories and editorials. Senior officials and commanders had to swat down and respond to those stories for days. The White House, Pentagon and CentCom briefings were marked by one-hostile question after another, based upon a feeding frenzy launched by that specific, inaccurate, quote. In turn, the domestic chatter translated into a propaganda problem overseas as it became conventional wisdom that America was getting bogged down due to the "surprising" and "heroic resistance" of the Iraqis. I'm not saying this story wouldn't have developed if Wallace had been quoted properly, but there's no disputing the quote pushed the "quagmire" to critical mass. This kind of thing matters.

For reporting "reports" from CentCom that we didn't turn the lights out in Baghdad.

Remember all of the kerfuffle about William Wallace, the commander of V Corps? He said this is a different enemy than the one we war-gamed against. The way it was reported, we were led to believe that this was a bit of stoic understatment fron a tight-lipped warrior facing an unexpectedly tough enemy. Well check out the New York Times correction from today:

A front-page article on Tuesday about criticism voiced by American military officers in Iraq over war plans omitted two words from an earlier comment by Lt. Gen. William S. Wallace, commander of V Corps. General Wallace had said (with the omission indicated by uppercasing), "The enemy we're fighting is A BIT different from the one we war-gamed against."

Sky news correspondent on Fox just pointed out that the Iraqi Misinformation Minister looks kind of stupid. After all, he just said on Iraqi TV that Coalition Forces are nowhere near Baghdad. Then, suddenly, the lights go out and the TV goes dark. Not a huge confidence-builder.

From a reader:

Listening to the Iraqi Information Minister guy’s ranting and raving reminded me of a scene from one of my favorite movies, "Plan 9 from Outer Space". In the climactic scene, the space alien invader Eros (played by Dudley Manlove) confronts the earthlings and in the course of the ensuing “discussion” screams: “Because all you of Earth are idiots!” and "You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!!!"

From Really Bad movie Guy

Surrendering Iraqis want to live in America:

Apparently, some Iraqi civilians are rushing to surrender to American troops under the false impression that they will be taken to the United States.

"We had a group like that a few days ago," says Medley. "One guy wanted to go to America, bad. He wasn't a soldier. He wanted a baseball cap. When we put him on a helicopter, he thought he was going to America — he was smiling the whole time."

reports Coalition forces are about to seize Baghdad airport. I hope the management didn't just order a whole new stack of "Saddam International Airport" signs.

"Ryan" writes:

I don't know why Mens New Daily has a link to your site or whatever you are. Your scrawl, "What's Wrong with the Arab World" is such an arrogant, ethnocentric piece of garbage it makes me want to puke. Not wanting to waste any more of my time than is necessary to illustrate your idiocy, I will keep it short. It is because of people (I mean Americans) like you that Americans are hated across the world and it is people like you who caused September 11th. Did it ever occur to you that the rest of the world might not want to grow into the ignorant, self-serving person that you and so many other Americans have devolved into? Your whole column dwells on the fact that all decisions people make are black and white or right and wrong. The U.S. is doing the right thing and everyone else is either wrong and/or uncivilized. I pity you.

Ryan

If Bruce Lee, Elvis and Osama are with Saddamin his undisclosed location.

From AFP:

US forces claiming to be 15 kilometers (nine miles) from downtown Baghdad Thursday have targeted the bunker of President Saddam Hussein, which its designer says can withstand anything short of a hit by a Hiroshima-size bomb.

Western intelligence sources say they have detected a small group of Saudi extremists trying to get into Iraq so that they can attack coalition forces there. They say they believe the men are pretending to be aid workers and that they may be hoping to cross the border from Iran. The conflict in Iraq is deeply unpopular in the Arab world and Baghdad has claimed that thousands of Arab suicide bombers are now in the country.

When I see all of these images of US and British forces dealing out the whup-ass and simultaneously providing food, water and medicdal care at great risk to a desperate people, I keep thinking about Lou from the Rodney Dangerfield classic "Back to School." Lou (played by Burt Young or "Paulie" from the Rocky movies) explains the merits of being "tough but fair." He says look at me, "I got two kids. One I put through college. The other, I put through a wall."

That's what we're doing as best as humanly possible: we're being tough, but fair.

Concert-goers jam exits after Vedder impales Bush mask.

Is what Saddam must be saying to himself right now. Special forces are trying to deliver a message to him and his boys. They're looking very hard. Again, I'm no expert. But my guess is that the soldier who "puts the cuffs" on Saddam will be in line for a promotion and a few free beers back at the base.

From the AP:

German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer said Wednesday he hoped Saddam Hussein's government would collapse quickly, marking a stark turnaround from Germany's previous opposition to regime change as a goal of the U.S.-led war.

From the British paper The Sun

BRITISH troops discovered an abandoned briefing room yesterday with a huge map of southern Iraq ... and a chair chillingly marked “chemical adviser”.

Now, I do think this is ominous. But in all fairness, I knew a dude in college who had a chair marked "chemical adviser" too. But that's a different story.

ABCNEWS' Richard Engel, who is inside the city of Baghdad, said the situation was "eerily calm," with no signs of movement from Iraqi troops or paramilitaries. Intermittent explosions could be heard from the direction of the airport, he said, although they were not heavy explosions.

The German Chancellor, Gerhard Schroeder, told parliament in Berlin on Thursday that his country hoped the war would end quickly with the fall of what he called the current Iraqi dictatorship. However, he stressed that Germany remained opposed to the war, and said Iraqi resources must remain under the control of its people.

Well, shoot Rich, you beat me to announcing that Today Is It. My thanks go to you and the whole gang here at NR. I sincerely mean it when I say this has been the best job I've ever had. It took guts for you to run the Catholic scandal coverage, but as we've seen, your faith in me and that story was vindicated. You, Jay, K-Lo and everyone have let me write about the things I really care about, and that's just about the greatest gift a journalist can be given. I'll miss you all.




And I'll miss NRO readers. I've been cleaning out my e-mail file today, and I've been pleasantly reminded of how many smart, thoughtful, kind-hearted readers we have. So many of you have helped me on stories, even if you only wrote in to say, "Good job." I don't think readers can possibly understand how much honest praise means to a writer. Thanks to those of you who supported me here, and to those of you who wrote to criticize me when I needed it. You helped too.




I'll miss New York City like I don't know what. I can't think about it now. The best years of my life were spent here. I began my marriage here, and my son was born here. I've made dear friends here, and lived through what will likely be the most important day for America in the 21st century, right here at Ground Zero. I love New York, and always will. And that's all I can say about that right now.




Starting April 10, I'll be a columnist and editorial writer at the Dallas Morning News. This is a homecoming for my family, in a way. My wife Julie is a Dallasite, and Dallas is Southern enough to feel like home for this Louisiana boy. Matthew, our little boy, loves it there, and the best reason for this move was so he can grow up knowing his grandparents and cousins. He's pretty thrilled to be getting a backyard, to be within a day's drive of the Alamo, and he's decided it's better to be where "Prezbush" is from rather than live in Derek Jeter's city. Kid's got the conscience of a conservative, ah reckon. Onward, through the fog!

Talk about bad timing. The headline over a story in the new TV Guide arriving in homes this week: "At 68, Arnett is the Comeback Kid in Iraq." Apparently, TV Guide is a bit embarrassed by the story penned by Max Robins since they have removed it from their Web site. Robins admired Arnett's "redemption" and raved that "for Arnett, the Iraq war is nothing short of a professional resurrection."

The information about an American POW still being alive is information that had been flowing to the US Marines here on almost a daily basis. Even yesterday, somebody came up to me and said, `You're a journalist, you need to know there's an American soldier who's being held in the hospital. She's being tortured. Please make sure that the people who are in charge of the US military know that she's alive.'

This happens a lot. I offer an opinion. I get lots of persuasive email telling me I'm wrong. I retract or modify my position. Then I get hit from all of the people who agree with me in the first place. I am officially out of the "decimate" business. I will await Derb's definitive answer on this question. In the meantime I offer this reader's reaction to my capitulation:

I'm with you on 'Decimate'

If it weren't for occasional fits of pedantry, we'd be lazily allowing our world-conquering language lose all its precision and fine shades of meaning.

Plus, I didn't suffer through two years of college Latin to graciously suffer peoples' blithe ignorance of the root meaning of words like this.

So fire away.

And regarding your anti-pedant correspondent:

"an army can be "annhilated" without being reduced to nothing"

Perhaps, but if the army didn't at least come pretty darned close to being reduced to nothing, the word is being used incorrectly. Saying that a Republican Guard division that was reduced by 50% has been "annhilated" would be worse than calling it "decimated". What in the heck is wrong with "halved"?

A reader writes:

"The answer to this question should be plain to you, an admirer of Burke: Leafs, because the team always has been known as such."

From a reader:

Great point about the misused "decimate". Maybe you could solve another language conundrum. Should Toronto's hockey team be called the Maple Leafs or the Maple Leaves? Big argument in the newsroom today about that. I favor the latter.

--Media Mole Guy

Be annoyed by the fact that the reporters who use "decimate" probably don't even know that it ever meant "to kill one in ten"?

Throw a dog a bone.

From another reader:

You've probably gotten other responses to your Corner post on "decimated", but I'll chime in anyway.

Technically, the reporters are off by 500 or 600 percent because their number is 5 or 6 times too low. Decimate, however, despite being from the Latin decimatus for taking the tenth part of, can also just mean to considerably destroy.

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) lists the following as the third definition of decimate:

3. To destroy a considerable part of; as, to decimate an army in battle; to decimate a people by disease.

I'm working on my laptop from a clever coffee place in Washington DC. The joys of wireless baby! I'd tell you where I am, but who knows what the Saudi Embassy might do with that info? If anybody knows free (and I don't mean free to steal) wireless connections in DC/VA/MD please lemme know. This is so cool.

A reader scolds:

Jonah, I love to read your stuff, but stay funny, not pedantic: in the 16 centuries since the Romans used its cognate in the way you prescribe, "decimate" has also come to mean "destruction" generally. Just as a mission can be "executed" without dying; as an army can be "annhilated" without being reduced to nothing; as an army can be "beaten" without having sticks pounded on them; etc., etc., something can be decimated by 50%.

Iraqi men, women and children are the weapons of mass destruction which George Bush and Tony Blair and their war generals are searching out to destroy. Al-Khalij - United Arab Emirates

My peeve for the day is the misuse of this word by reporters. Properly speaking, "decimate" means to kill one in ten. When reporters says we've "decimated" Republican Guard units, they're off by 40 or 50 percent.

I will be speaking at Williams College on April 9 and at Metropolitan State College in Denver on April 14 (around 1:00 PM). I believe both events are open to the public. But I have no further detaills. There will be no nudity -- by me -- at either event.

From a reader:

Jonah:

I enjoyed your "What’s Wrong with the Arab World?"

I forwarded it to the Saudi embassy in Washington and received this simply response: "Is Goldberg really that racist?"

I have e-mailed the Saudi embassy several times since September 11, 2001, and have asked fair but tough questions. Each time I have received a smart-ass and unsigned response (which I find odd for an unfit that is supposed to be practicing diplomacy). Perhaps you and some others at NR could have some fun by asking the Saudi embassy fair but sensitive questions (e.g., Why isn't the royal family upset over Syria's occupation of Lebanon?). I think your readers would find a column that includes the responses quite interesting.

Halliburton withdraws from the bidding process (they still might bid for subcontract work). My guess is that the anti-war crowd is upset by this news. It takes away a talking point they never really cared about in the first place. I mean who cares if Halliburton works on reconstruction? Aside from symbolism, there's absolutely nothing disturbing or unpleasent about the idea. The idea that we are going to war to generate work for Halliburton is vestigial Marxist nonsense.

Funny, beating up on Bob Arnot, for explaining to the audience what anyone can see from a map.

1. Centcom announced the crossing of the Tigris, and specified the location as north of Al Kut.

2. All the analysts describe the north/east bank of the Tigris as the "traditional" invasion route. Do you think the Iraqis might also know that?

3. The idea of conducting a division movement to contact down one highway is not realistic.

4. Even BG Brooks had to stifle a chuckle when he was asked about the direction the 1st MEF was moving. Sure, they COULD go south, but since Baghdad is the objective, why would they?

5. I don't recall anyone getting their knickers twisted when CNN was blasting out that the 3-7th Cav (the so called "wall of steel") was leading the advance of the 3d ID along the south bank of the Euphrates. Could it be because common sense tells us a primary mission of the division cavalry squadron is to conduct an advance guard?

It seems to me the coverage of these reports that the Baathists have been studying the incident to figure out how to fight US forces has been way off-kilter. Telling your troops to emulate an event which required lobbing troops at American soldiers like they were tennis balls at the Williams sisters would not inspire confidence. Also, telling them "it helps if you get really, really high before you attack the Americans" would not be a morale-booster either. Besides, while they were prepared American forces still didn't go into Mogadishu expecting that ambush. Imagine how much more lopsided it might have been if the Americans knew it was coming -- like they do in Iraq.

In my syndicated column on Nicholas De Genova, the Columbia University yutz, my math is off by about 900 million. A million Mogadishus would result in about a billion dead Third Worlders since more than 1,000 Somalis died in the "Black Hawk Down" incident. Also, in Monday's G-File, I gave the highest -- but still somewhat credible -- estimate of deaths in Dresden. Estimates range from over 30,000 up to 135,000. While both errors are annoying and symbolic beatings will be issued to the undeserving, neither mistake detracts significantly from my larger point(s).

"USAF Intel Guy" here again...

While this is the same type of thing that got Geraldo run out on a rail since we generally do not want the enemy to know where we are, there are times when such statements can be tactically advantageous.

Say there are reporters with 1MEF saying "We are rolling up Highway X, within striking distance of Baghdad" and you have reporters with 3ID saying "We just rolled through Karbala, and are X miles from Baghdad".

First, this will be a decisive signal to the rest of the regimes forces that we are rolling through the Republican Guards like butter. Such a signal may ultimately cause the remaining forces to capitulate.

Second, such statements can help fix the enemy in place if they do indeed intend to fight. If we can make so much noise about our strong advance from the south, it could very well cause the regime to focus entirely on that...and then perhaps not notice another assault from another direction where defenses are not so strong. This is *entirely* hypothetical since I have no insight into CENTCOM's planning..but it worked in the first Gulf War. Lots of noise in Kuwait, and here comes the 'Left Hook'

While the military has always had a tendency to control all operational information very tightly, it is finding that release of some can have very strong impact in the realm of 'Information Operations" and Psychological Operations.

Information *can* be a weapon....

In a twist right out of a Hollywood movie, U.S. intelligence may have pinpointed her exact whereabouts thanks to an Iraqi citizen - who passed a note, apparently written in English by a woman, to a Marine in the area yesterday, NBC reported.

"She's still alive. She's in room [deleted]," the note said, according to the network.

An NBC reporter also said he was approached the same day by an Iraqi who told him in English: "There's a woman in the Saddam Hospital who's an American soldier. Please make sure the people in charge know."

With respect to your reader, that was not a fair point. It is not up to individual journalists to make that call, obvious or not. It doesn't matter whether there is one road or twenty--they should shut up about locations!

There's only one route to Baghdad from Kut - all the maps on all the channels show it. It'd be a lot like saying, "I'm going to take I-94 from Chicago to Milwaukee." It's the only major route, you don't need anything but a map to figure it out. Now, if he was saying "we're heading not on the main route which everyone can see on a map between these two close cities, but on a series of these specific side roads...", well, he should get the Arnett/Rivera treatment.

Early in his first term as president, Chirac (advised apparently by Villepin) threw away the center-right majority in parliament by calling an early – and unnecessary – election in an attempt to secure an even larger majority. In the event, the Socialists won that election and for the rest of his term Chirac was hobbled by the need to cohabit with the left.

Last year Jacques was back - re-elected to the presidency for a second term. The right won the parliamentary elections that followed and Chirac seemed set, at last, for success. It looks now as if he has blown it again. He’s extraordinarily popular now, but any retreat from the position he has taken (something that is probably essential if he is to regain the initiative within the EU and, should he care to, try to repair relations with the US) and his domestic credibility will be shattered.

In the meantime, the Daily Telegraph has some stories about the France that Jacques has built.

“Anti-war marches in Paris and around France have seen the burning of British and American flags, attacks on Jews and chants in support of Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.”

“Many of the anti-war marches by teenage schoolchildren have featured violent, hateful chants against Israel and America.”

A cemetery for British war dead – vandalized.

That's Chirac’s France.

“The government has been saying with increasing frequency that there is no justification for anti-Jewish, anti-American or anti-British violence.”

That’s Chirac trying to build an alibi.

Norwegian, German and Canadian but no French.

My French bashing seems less imature and more prescient every day. (Link via Drudge).

While being distracted and annoyed(yet again) by the insanely shiny lip gloss of the FNC women, it finally occurred to me. The lip gloss is an evil plot to distract women viewers while hemlines are on the rise! Think about it, most women aren't going to notice anything beyond that damn lip gloss. In the name of "fair and balanced" reporting, I think you ought to start a campaign to have Rick Leventhal and Greg Kelly report from liberated Baghdad in shorts and tank tops(Heck I'll even make a donation to NRO if you do) to counter this evil plot!

Point of order from a "USAF Intel Guy"... 'Medina' is the 'Medina Division' of the 2nd Republican Guard Corps. 'Death Squads' are the new DoD name for the Saddam Fedayeen. Apparently 'Fedayeen' is a positive term, so DOD no longer wants to use it. 'Regime Death Squads' just rolls off the tongue... Though Medina may be a 'Death Squad' of sorts, it is not related to the irregular formerly named Fedayeen...

Rumsfeld says the war plan "is like the family budget"...? What does that mean? That they're paying for it using Master Card?

One of our well-informed readers writes to say I'm mistaken to characterize the teaching of horrible things about Jews and Christians in NYC's Muslim schools as a Wahhabist distortion:

While I greatly appreciate your willingness to expose the ugly teachings in
these NYC Muslim day schools, you ARE MISSING A CRITICAL POINT: the heinous "rules" for how Muslims are to treat and or interact with non-Muslims have NOTHING to do with "Wahhabism" per se. ALL FOUR classical schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence, as well as the separate corpus of Shi'ite jurisprudence, sacralize and make permanent the inferiority of ALL non-Muslims and ALL women. That IS the shari'a [Islamic law] as it evolved from the Qur'an, the Sunna, and their interpretation by classical Muslim scholars of
ALL ilks. "Wahhabism" is merely an offshoot of the Hanbali school of Islamic
jurisprudence (i.e., ONE of the four Sunni schools, including the Hanafi, Maliki, and Shafi'i), which did not even arise until the 18th century!

Sources tell Fox News. Reporter says the CentCom brass looks quite pleased.

Buster's on the case.

Yes, you can do it by goat or other livestock, also.

National Review Online
215 Lexington Avenue
4th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Attn: Rich Lowry

Several readers were disappointed to see that Cosmo doesn't have his own email address. Just to let you know, Cosmo is not permitted to surf the web without supervision. We learned that the hard way when 10,000 tennis balls were "unexpectedly" delivered to our house.

They must be stopped!

And though neocons insist that it was Sept. 11 that made the argument for war on Iraq and extremist Islam, the genesis of their war plans go back much further. America promised the world peace, freedom and liberty, but what it is doing in Iraq is nothing short of misery, horror and hypocrisy. The killing of innocent civilians in great numbers every day, all to protect a brutal terrorist like Sharon and his henchmen in Israel is shameful and disgraceful. Sharon of course is enjoying every minute of this tragedy.

From the guy somewhere North of Afghanistan:

And the last great thing about the whole exchange started by your military guy is that here are a bunch of gentlemen, some air crew, some ground pounders, some support, all who are doing the job or have done the job...some retired, some active duty...some at home and some deployed in harm's way...and all reading the corner and contributing to a discussion about the war (and in a way that is certainly more interesting and informed than many of the Hollywood and non-military anti-war crowd)...who says America isn't great?

As for A/C in the tents, or cable, or a fancy BX/PX...at the end of the day give me a phone to call my wife and newborn a couple of times a week and an internet connection to read The Corner and you have a happy airman.

Yes, you can do it by check, too:

National Review Online
215 Lexington Avenue
4th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Attn: Donations

This is what I'm talking about people!

Believe that the report of the demise of Gus Pagonis reported by the air power guy is quite premature.

Gus still is working for Sears as their head of logistics and will be the keynote speaker at the Supply Chain World-North America 2003 conference in Atlanta next week.

From my air power guy to military guy:

Well.

I think I'll take John Jumper's tack and just sort of let it slide. Or not....

Yeah, we live better in most instances, but there's a reason for that. People like to be comfortable. If I take pains to be that way, because I can, are you going to shoot me?

It also makes sense...well-rested pilots perform better in the air.

V Corps recognized this early on in Albania in 1999. The first to be elevated out of the mud in Tirana were...the Apache crews. The first to have their quarters improved the the Brown and Root engineers were...the Apache crews. I thought that was smart and I still do.

The late Gus Pagonis, may he rest in peace, the 3-star who ran the Army's logistical effort in the first Gulf War, wondered why a country that can put a man on the moon couldn't make a more concerted effort to make soldiers' lives more pleasant while in the field. Good question.

Institutional culture probably has a little to do with it but, to be fair, it's also the mission...one has to balance comfort with mission priorities and often the former takes a back seat to the latter. My hat's off to all the ground guys, Army, Marines, etc., and the Navy and Air Force guys who go with them down range (I was one, but I had NCOs and Airmen way had WAY more miserable conditions than I ever did). They're racing across inhospitable terrain, under fire and with very little sleep. The creature comforts are usually too hard to do until you stop for enough time to take care of things like that.

They're all shit-hot troops (fighter pilot term) and if I could wave a magic wand that gave them all bulletproof, air conditioned MOPP suits and martini dispensers on the back of the Bradleys I would (OK, maybe not martinis, but gatorade at least). But I can't.

That said, I wouldn't want my pilots to live any more uncomfortably than they have to...and if I had Army guys as neighbors, they'd get as much as the bennies (air conditioners, showers, cable TV, field BX/PX, whatever) as I could muster. They deserve it. They ALL deserve it. And because they do what they do without most of it, they're heroes all the more.

"Let's go and do Jihad!" This was the statement read by Iraq's Information Minister in Saddam's place. The speech also included many demands to "kill them!" Kill them here, kill them there. etc. Supposedly Saddam wrote the speech out himself but couldn't make it to the studio for taping (maybe his favorite episode of "Designing Women" was on Lifetime).

Regardless, I know I'm not a savvy military strategist or expert in these issues, but when I put myself in the place of the average Iraqi, this speech seems a bit light on the motivation front. If I was ill-equipped, hungry and tired while getting the stuffing pounded out of me by enemy A-10s and Longbow attack helicopters, hearing a speach from Ari Fleischer or Karl Rove in George Bush's place wouldn't exactly put steel in my spine.

You 'do Jihad,' Karl, I'm gonna go get me one of those Snickers bars the 10th infantry is handing out.

Tell your reader he is exactly right. My Marine drill instructor (back when I was at Officer candidate school - you know - Lou Gossett, Officer and a Gentleman - that place), was at Khe Sahn. He told us the exact same thing. Only one plane had crashed during the battle and the press had used the photo of it over, and over and over. I'm sure many other Khe Sahn veterans could confirm this story.

Jonah's daughter is facilitating this transformation into a posting machine. Just you wait until the Fair Jessica takes the wee one on a trip of some sort. JG will be MIA faster than Peter Arnett at Toby Keith concert.

He's from the future!

(please note the source)

For the record:

I was a heavy force soldier most of my career, and only saw the air force truck drivers early on when I was still falling from airplanes under bedsheets. And we can't forget the Tac Air teams that hump their rucks with dogface soldiers as well, or Navy Corpsmen who ruck up with the jarheads. We're all in it together (though North of Afghanistan guy should recognize payback when he sees it in terms of billeting!).

The real bottom line is, I love all of my warrior brethren, and wish I had five lifetimes so that I could spend one in each service (including the Coast Guard here, they're warriors too).

Whatever I say about airedales, squids, swabs, and jarheads - I'll get pugnacious with any never-served Soldier-of-Fortune wannabe who picks on 'em. All y'all can have your opinions, and can command the forces in the terms of civilian control of the military and have opinions on our competence, utility, et. al. - but if you ain't walked the walk, I ain't interested in your disrespectin' talk, that's for me and my homeys, the Musicians of Mars. I'll sooner listen to a soldier of the great war who only served loading ships in the US than I will some snot-nosed punk dweeb who finds the notions embodied in the term "Band of Brothers" a ridiculous conceit.

To the forces in the field: Good Luck, Godspeed, Good Hunting - All y'all!

But I think it's awesome so many military folks read the Corner/NRO.

It seems that every time I read one of your columns/blogs curiosity takes me to the land of the Looney Tunes. Since I was not real sure how Pinocchio father fit into you blog I Googled him and ended up finding the real cause of WWI. http://www.zayra.de/soulcom/america/blackbird2.html. I was never really sure what caused that war but it turns out it was the results of the "dark fruits of the misunderstanding of the Battle of Kosovo" in 1389. Something I would never have known without you, the web, google and assorted whack jobs.

Jonah,

I can't say I know what the conditions are in the Iraqi area of Operations but I can tell you that I am stationed (somewhere north of Afghanistan, still working Operation Enduring Freedom) on an Army post. And while we all live in similar tents now, the Army is having hard billets built that we have been told would be for Army only. The Army has cable (ok so it is just Armed Forces networks) in their tents, the AF does not. While the support aspects of the Airforce usually live it up nicely compared to the Army, Military Guy would do well to remember that the airplane operators and maintence often live right there near the forward line of battle. Of course, I can be biased since I am a C-130 pilot, and I know Military Guy acknowledged the aircrews who "fly off to bomb one day and come back the next" but he overlooks the part of the airforce that gets right down into the dirt with the troops - the Tactical Airlift and the C-130 Hercules...where else is are the soldiers going to get their bullets and beans without an Airforce 130 that is willing to fly in at 300 feet to a blacked out dirt landing zone that 4000 feet long in a combat zone? The army has it, we haul it...

But I don't feel too slighted by Military Guy, we are the low priority on the USAF list as well, probably because we are closer to more of the Army than the Air Force, something of a step-child is the joke in the community...

Your concerns regarding Syrian infiltrators are exactly why we need more troops on the ground, so that we can intercept (and, if needed, kill or capture) these bravos from Syria. I know they are gnashing their teeth at the Pentagon, and the logisitics will be a nightmare... but it's time to consider calling up the National Guard combat brigades to make ready to take on the rear echelon security jobs and get the regulars into Baghdad and on the borders.

The surest sign for me that the plan called for a very short, sharp campaign is that unlike in Desert Shield/Storm - we haven't called up any of the Guard combat units.

I don't have an inside picture, and it really could collapse quite quickly in Baghdad, but to me, prudence would initiate the call-up of a couple of the brigades. It would serve two purposes - it would show we're in it for the long haul, and it would also actually serve to help Rumsfeld in his 'Transformation' battle - i.e., that the guard heavy brigades can take up the slack in armored forces that Rumsfeld wants to slash from the active force. Shoot - the war is starting to look like a scenario you would design to test and prove the theory.

In this one, however, I think we're going to go soft and try to do this cheap, which is a mistake in my reading of history - meaning we'll be playing catch-up.

Of course, even more worrying is the idea floating about that Saddam pushed his stuff to Syria for safekeeping. That is a horse of a completely different color - and we have Chirac, Schroeder, and Blix to thank for that. If Osama is in fact the anarchist who blew up the world, amazing ain't it that the French are at the heart of the matter, again. Mincing little weasels.

This is similar to something I heard about the coverage of Khe Sahn during the Tet Offensive in Vietnam (I was only 4 yrs old at the time, so I am recalling a book or a History Channel Documentary or something along those lines). The TV news reporters doing broadcasts from Khe Sahn liked using a crashed supply plane as a backdrop for their reports. Seeing a crashed plane every night on the evening news gave the impression that they were getting swatted like flies, but in reality, it was the same one every night. Maybe one of your "Guys" knows the details more clearly, but I try to keep that in mind as I filter the war news from Iraq.

Give Cosmo a "High Paw" from me.

My Military Guy takes exception to Dave Kopel's post. I await Air Power Guy's retort.

From Dave Kopel (who I am NOT annoyed with, he's just reporting here): "...If you don't have a particular recipient for the gift, the program will send your gift to someone in the Air Force."

What? Defaults to the Airedales!?! The guys who live in air conditioned tents? Who wave at their officers when they go off to war? The officers who come back to the O'Club and a nice, air conditioned tent (or to their regular home in England and Missouri)? Gimme a break here!
Don't get me wrong - I tolerate the Air Force, they're generally pretty useful, you just have to learn to duck when they're around, 'cuz sometimes their target id is a little fuzzy...
Since 3rd ID and 15th MEU don't have PX's with them, how about defaults to those logistics guys who are pushing all the stuff forward, running the gauntlet, as it were?
The AIR FORCE! Oh for pity's sake. Those guys are getting better than the Marines at good press. Sheesh!
There is one exception I will make for the Air Force - the family members of the air crew who leave home to fly off to bomb one day and come home the next. Those families have a stress that is daily and immediate in a way not like anyone elses... except those families who are watching TV and see their loved one in the middle of a fire fight, but even that is only once, not a near daily fear of 'will daddy come home tonight?'

There has been commentary about the coverage being narrow and missing the big picture. The other thing (for me), is the repetition of a single event (like the downed Apache helicopter). I’ve heard it Sunday, Monday on Internet and TV, and now on Tuesday in my local paper. Those who may not pay close attention may think that there have been 10 Apache’s shot down. I have to clarify my mind to eliminate the impression that this was more than one event.

In my recent Encyclical I pointed out that foremost among the threats to peace was not only the stockpiling of atomic weapons, but a manipulation of the very notion of peace itself for the purposes of self-interested parties. In this regard I stated: 'The technical means at the disposal of modern society conceal within themselves not only the possibility of self-destruction through military conflict, but also the possibility of a ‘peaceful’ subjugation of individuals, of environments, of entire societies and of nations, that for one reason or another might prove inconvenient for those who possess the necessary means and are ready to use them without scruple. An instance is the continued existence of torture, systematically used by authority as a means of domination and political oppression and practised by subordinates with impunity." Thus there can be no peace where the dignity of human individuals is denied. For wherever we find the domination by one person over another in the latter’s choice of destiny or rightful access to the truth, there we will already discover the seeds of a bitter resentment or deep-seated animosity. Yes, guaranteeing freedom is an essential part of working for peace.

... I also affirmed that Iraqi liberation can only be effected by the Iraqi people themselves, both by resisting and defeating the U.S. invasion as well as overthrowing a regime whose brutality was long sustained by none other than the U.S. Such an anti-colonial struggle for self-determination might involve a million Mogadishus now but would ultimately have to become something more like another Vietnam. Vietnam was a stunning defeat for U.S. imperialism; as such, it was also a victory for the cause of human self-determination.

Is this a tirade against "anything and everything American"? Far from it. First, I hasten to remind you that "American" refers to all of the Americas, not merely to the United States, as U.S. imperial chauvinism would have it. More importantly, my rejection of U.S. nationalism is an appeal to liberate our own political imaginations such that we might usher in a radically different world in which we will not remain the prisoners of U.S. global domination.

"We're in bad-guy country," Col. John Pomfret said, surveying this newly captured piece of Iraqi territory. "I like it."

As a Muslim American, I am appalled and astonished, not at the racism and utter disrespect you hold towards Arabs and Muslims in general, but at the fact that the mainstream media has accepted many of National Review's extremist Neo-cons as legitamate and viable sources of discussion, including yourself(Wolf Blitzer's pen pal). It is a tragedy that "editors" like yourself can make such inflammatory titles like "Are the Arabs really this stupid?" and pretend to have the answers while voiding an entire people of their self-respect, and right to feel what any of us would feel if 50 of our own would die from a foreign army. Since I know where you are coming from, just imagine if 50+ Jews died in a cafe by a Palestinian "homicide" bomber(as you would prefer calling them), I would love to see your reaction to an article entitled, "Are the Jews really this stupid", an article which criticized Israeli outcries for their lack of knowledge as to how to stop the bombers(end occupation). But I guess thats the difference between people like you and people like me. You have no ounce of human compassion or bone of objectivity in you. Maybe thats why the National Review hired you.

Our carriers loom off his coast. Our bombers fill his skies. And brave, skilled men with stealthy tread Prepare his grim surprise. Grant, and Sherman, Patton, Greene Have taught us to make war. We now pick up their legacy And free the world once more.

Here’s some good news about the liberation of at least one Basra suburb. What’s more, British troops were apparently well received in the wake of this operation, which was named, naturally, after James Bond. One surprise? The Royal Marines had arrived expecting to hand out provisions, only to find that the locals wanted to give them food.

The reputation of English cuisine has obviously traveled a long, long way.

Jonah, one of the schools mentioned in that article, The al-Noor School, was at the center of a hand-wringing report on the 11:00 news last week here in NYC. The ABC affiliate did a piece on how the students at the school are worried that people will be mean to them now that America is at war with an Arab country. Good for the Daily News for going beyond the usual guilt-ridden, see-no-evil attitudes of the American media.

I have here on my desk a couple of books I bought two weeks ago on a shopping trip to Islamic bookstores here in Brooklyn. Here's what one of them, "Legal Rulings of Importance to New Muslims," says about a Muslim's responsibility to non-Muslims:

There can be no brotherhood between Muslims and Christians, ever. ...So itis not permissible for a Muslim to describe a disbeliever -- whatever form of disbelief he has, whether Christianity, Judaism, Magianism, or atheism -- as a brother, ever. So beware, O brother, from this expression. ...It befits you to avoid constant mixing with non-Muslims, because constant mixing with them will obliterate the attitude of vigil and care for [Islam] from your heart, and may possibly lead you to love them.

I have here another book, "Jihad in the Qu'ran and Sunna," which sternly advises all Muslims that Allah has commanded them never to give up fighting Jews, Christians and non-Muslims, until they have converted or subdued.

Both these books come from a Saudi publishing house. Of course there are Muslims who don't agree with these teachings, but one can hardly be blamed for wondering just how widely this Wahhabi lunacy is embraced among Muslims here. As Sheikh Kabbani, the leader of American Sufis has testified, up to 80 percent of the mosques in the United States are under the leadership of Wahhabi imams. Will Wahhabism become normative for American Islam? Too many of our media are more concerned with doing stories about whether or not someone is going to give Muslims a dirty look, rather than looking into what Muslim institutions in this country actually proclaim and teach to children.

Muslim schools in New York use textbooks which teach awful stuff about Jews and Christians.

From the-editor-of-techcentralstation.com-guy: it's worth pointing out in that Robert Burns AP piece in the WaPo on the women and kids being killed that the second graf starts "Two other civilians were wounded in the incident.." The key word there is 'other'. That's quite a liberty for Burns to take, it seems to me. We don't know if any of these people were 'civilians' in any meaningful sense. How do we know that Uday and his thugs didn't force them to drive through so they'd get shot at by US troops and serve as 'martyrs'? We know for a fact that they're forcing people to fight US troops they don't want to. Are they still 'civilians' then?

The Arabic writing on the rugs reads "with America" "against America." The ugly guy "with America" is eating the McDonalds and cheering the bombing. The guy "against America" with the nargileh is cheering the Iraqi officer menacing the American POW.

I've gotten a few emails from readers upset that NRO praised Moynihan in several obits. I can understand why some -- if not many -- conservatives had problems with Moynihan as a Senator. He voted liberal in order to keep his New York seat even when his votes ran against the spirit, if not the text, of his work as an intellectual. That's fair criticism. But Moynihan was also a brilliant intellectual and statesman and a thoroughly decent man. Regardless, if you think National Review Online is straying from conservative orthodoxy in some way by saluting this man upon the occassion of his death, I would simply note that we are hardly alone. See today's column by Robert Novak, or last Friday's columns by George Will and Michael Barone (in the WSJ).

"Advisors split as War Unfolds, One Faction Hopes Bush Notes ‘Bum Advice,’” reads a piece in today’s Washington Post. What’s going on, of course, is those opposed to President Bush’s policy in Iraq are doing their very best to undermine the president’s advisors working in the offices of Cheney and Rumsfeld and to pump up their status as seasoned foreign policy hands. One “former [Republican] party official” is quoted as saying that “Powell won’t pick up the fight and won’t represent State Department professionals who are appalled by what is about to happen.”

State Department “professionals” -- Well, let’s take a look at the track record of these “professionals.” Saddam invades Kuwait after a State “professional” tells him that the US doesn’t really have much of an opinion on his dispute with Kuwait. Saddam invades and the “professionals” at State push sanctions over force to contain Saddam. Once war commences, State “professionals” support the limited war aim of kicking Iraq out of Kuwait and that’s it. Then, after the war, the US encourages a Shiite revolt against Saddam but the US, on advice of many “professionals” at State, does nothing and tens of thousands Shiites are slaughtered by Saddam’s henchmen. You see, State “professionals” wanted stability over freedom and to that end constructed a containment policy to box in Saddam after he crushed the revolt in the south. As part of this containment, large US forces were stationed on the Arabian peninsula, which, in turn, poured more and more fuel onto the fire of bin ladenism. You get the picture. Over the years, the “professionals” at State have made a huge mess in the Middle East by peddling out lots of bum advice to other US government officials. And, incidentally, we’re paying the price today because of the advice of State “professionals” in 1991. These quotes come from two pieces (Warily, Iraqis Get Acquainted With Marines,” “US Troops Meet Iraqis Peacefully”) in today’s New York Times.

“‘If the Americans want to get rid of Saddam, that’s O.K. with me,’ he [Khalid Juwad] said. ‘The only thing that would bother me is if they don’t finish the job. Then Saddam will come back, like he did in 1991.’”

“’Don’t make the mistake of 1991,’ said a man in the crowd named Hussein, sidling up to an American. ‘People blame the USA because they prevent the uprising of 1991 and let Saddam kill people. There are 60 people gone from this town, and until today their families do not know whether they are in jail or not.’”

A reader writes:

In a two-part episode called "Dreamland" in the sixth season of the
X-Files, a gentleman who worked at Area 51 revealed (?) that Saddam
Hussein WAS in fact an American agent. He was supposedly a guy from New
Jersey, though I forget the name they gave him.

Trenton makes, Iraq takes.

Man, did y'all see Peter Arnett's mea maxima culpa on the Today Show this morning? I don't know if I've ever seen anything like it. He basically said he was a spent sack of journalistic offal who betrayed the trust of his employer and his American viewers. He groveled like nobody's business. It was one of the most humiliating things I've ever seen on TV. Couldn't have happened to a more deserving journalist. He's radioactive now, and will be lucky to get work as a weekend anchor on the UPN affiliate in Bugtussle, Arkansas.

By the way, anybody know if Geraldo really has been booted? Boy, that'd be a daisy-cutter to his ego. He's been such a grandstander (as usual). He's so full of himself. I can't stand to watch him.

But your umpteenth hundred entreaty to subscribe to NRODT just succeeded. Don't ask me why? I don't know. But then again, I don't know why I didn't subscribe years ago. Just wanted to let you know.

From a reader:

good article online today. usually, i read NRO just to rile myself up at the sight of conservative warmongering. but this article was very thoughtful, if obviously arrogant and insulting in tone. i mean, you're right on almost all counts. but i suppose if an arab were to read it, he or she would get really, really pissed off. and they would get rightfully angry...and that leads me to my only serious critique of the piece: If you acknowledge that money, power, and security are not, in fact, the goals of Arab polity or society, then calling them stupid for ignoring your warnings is mistaken. That is, they're stupid only if we apply our beliefs about what their goals *should* be. But like you said, they aren't acting or thinking on the basis of even a comparable rationale. What they're doing does not appear inconsistent with their goals, which, though i can hardly tell, do not appear to be economic growth or security. the intelligence of this choice *is* a matter for debate, but it is a much larger debate than you have introduced here. although i try to keep my american ego in check, it seems to me that it's a region of the world with a really bad case of sour grapes, and they've sworn off the 'western' goals of money, power, etc. in an attempt to seem as though it's not what they're really after in the first place. i think it might be, but their assertion of power comes in different forms, e.g. spiritual conquest in the case of fundamentalists. nietzsche had a lot to say about this, in conjunction largely with a theory about how judeo-christian morality took root...i think it applies just as powerfully in the arab world. take care, and please try not to be so insulting in your articles. people like me would be more likely to agree with you. but good reasoning seldom compensates for grating style. this was a rare case, [name withheld]

Jonah, Daniel Pipes wrote a book about the role paranoia and conspiracy theory plays in Arab political thinking. I've not read it, but I'm eager to. I've told this story before, but every time I hear Arabs in the Middle East ranting like loons on TV. Three years ago, walking the road to Bethlehem, I met a Catholic priest from America. He had been serving in an Arab church for a decade. He told me he loved his people, but he didn't understand them. He couldn't believe how emotional they were, and how they allowed themselves to be ruled by conspiracy theory. The priest said that recently, Yassir Arafat had done something of which they didn't approve, and the whole parish was buzzing with the news that Arafat was a closet Jew. As far as his people were concerned, the priest said, this was established fact.

"Next week, they'll believe something completely the opposite, and won't even notice the contradiction," the priest said. He went on to explain how he's seen cynical Arab political leaders use this to exploit people. He told me how Arafat and his top people were robbing the people blind, but they get away with it by playing on people's willingness to believe a Jewish conspiracy is behind everything bad that ever happens to them. I could tell it really bothered this cleric, who obviously cared about his parishioners, but had no idea how to help people so willing to believe in superstition.

Last week, I read an account of an Iraqi soldier who had been captured in fighting, and was quoted saying that given all the misery and defeat Saddam has brought on Iraq, Saddam must surely be an American agent. It sounds like a sarcastic joke, but I bet the poor bastard meant it.

Passing along a heads-up: last Saturday's South Park episode dealt with fetal stem-cell research and Christopher Reeve. As usual, the show went to outrageous lengths, but I was amazed that the general message seemed to be that sacrificing fetuses for research is wrong.

I share the blame. The fair Jessica has left me in charge of all creatures great and small here and between the Disney-movie-in-the-making that Cosmo & Lucy amount to and another project I'm working on (Shhhhh), I haven't had much time for Cornering. But, I did get my column in and up before 9:00 AM, so I should get some slack. The persistent absence of other, unnamed, NROniks is another issue entirely.

A Catholic priest friend of mine passed on an e-mail alert he got from his bishop, warning priests of the diocese about a new scam going around. Seems that there's a con man going around to Catholic parishes bidding on carpentry jobs and suchlike. The man, who allegedly uses the name "Joseph Dimetro," does the work, then he tries to charge the parish significantly more than was agreed on. If the priest balks, the con artist, who travels with a small boy, threatens to lodge child molestation accusations against the cleric, which, of course, could destroy the priest's career.

Turns out that my priest friend had gotten a call from "Joseph Dimetro" just last week, looking for work. Too bad the alert from the chancery didn't arrive a little bit sooner; authorities might have been able to arrest this grifter. Clerical readers should keep an eye out for him. It's useful for the rest of us to keep in mind that there are dirtbags like this going around, trying to use people's justified concern and anxiety over the sex-abuse scandal to make money by threatening to ruin the lives of innocent priests.

From my Middle East Guy in re today's column:

Jonah,

It's worse than you think. I suspect you haven't read Ajami's "Dream Palace of the Arabs" (which I think I've recommended) in which he patiently, sadly demonstrates that much of what passes for political thought among Arab _élites_ is almost literally delusional. To use an American example suggested by reading John McWhorter's books recently, Arab conspiratorialism might be analogous to some of the myths that America's black community has constructed in the past thirty years or so: Racism is everywhere; Whitey will never let us succeed; Most blacks are poor and confined to the slums; Only a few superstars escape the horrors of ghetto life.

In Arab culture, not only are these pernicious untruths "on the street," but they're reinforced, fed, and to some extent subscribed to by regimes who, if they aren't totalitarian in the Soviet sense (like Syria or Iraq), certainly do not admit anything approaching free inquiry, press, etc. (These are our "moderate" friends, Jordan, Egypt, Kuwait, etc.)

I don't think there's another part of the world so caught up in wacky conspiracy theories as the Middle East. Turkey is an exception, though it does seep in there a bit, too. But the Turks are generally more empirical and self-critical. Most of the Middle East, from North Africa to Pakistan, tends to put stuff from the fever swamps on the state-censored front page. It's going to be a long, hard row to hoe if we want to engage "hearts and minds." And I'm increasingly skeptical
about the possibility (or desirability) of democracy in the short term.

If we just declare victory and set up a quickie election mechanism, I think Iraq might have a stable shelf life of ten years (plus or minus five). Democracies favor the views of the _demos_. And the Arab _demos_ has been nurtured on lies and grievances at least since Nasser.

And freedom may not cure it. Again, to return to the (very imperfect) analogy of black America, it has only been since the late sixties, early seventies that cultural despair and separatism have come to the fore. In other words, just when the most serious legal and political handicaps were removed, people took refuge in increasingly unrealistic, but psychologically comforting victimology and myth-making.

But perhaps I woke up on the gloomy side of the bed this morning.

From a reader:

I'm just wondering- there have been something like 12 missiles fired at Kuwait. I believe that the US military staging areas are north of Kuwait City a sizeable distance. Since some of those missiles are landing on Kuwait City itself, shouldn't we consider that Iraq has declared war on Kuwait? No one seems to have mentioned this possibility, and seems to take it for granted that Kuwait City is being bombed by Iraq. And, considering then that Iraq (a.k.a. Saddam) has declared war on Kuwait, it seems to me that provides further justification for this war.

This is a request without deadline. Any time you see a prominent liberal refer to conservatives or Republicans as "fascists" or "Nazis" (or Hitlerite, Brown Shirts etc) I'd like to hear about it. Anti-war protestors, letters to the editor, obscure blogs and other below the radar venues aren't that helpful. But Democratic Party officials, politicians, intellectuals in elite magazines, newspapers or interviews: these are the things I want. Those of you who've read or remember my "Springtime for Slanderers" column will understand what I'm looking for. Old quotes are useful too. I just need as much attribution as possible (date, place, link if possible, etc). Any help you can provide would be much appreciated. One request:pleaseput "fascist quote" or "Nazi quote" in the subject header.

Two things come to mind about this Arnett business. First, I'm kicking myself because a reader from the Gulf who watches Arab TV told me about Arnett's interview in general terms before news broke here and I didn't follow-up.

Second, I really like NBC's initial defense. In a statement, NBC said: "Peter Arnett and his crew have risked their lives to bring the American people up-to-date, straightforward information on what is happening in and around Baghdad. His impromptu interview with Iraqi TV was done as a professional courtesy and was similar to other interviews he has done with media outlets from around the world." [Emphasis mine]

Hmmmm. Am I the only one a bit perplexed by this? Does/did NBC really believe that "Iraqi TV" is simply another "media outlet"? The criticism of Arnett from the media criticism crowd has focused on Arnett's bad judgement. But that is a known quantity. NBC's judgement is an open question. In their about-face statement NBC said today "It was wrong for Mr. Arnett to grant an interview to state-controlled Iraqi TV, especially at a time of war. And it was wrong for him to discuss his personal observations and opinions in that interview." The statement was issued by Allison Gollust, the same woman who on Sunday described Arnett's comments as a professional courtesy. One wonders, however, If Arnett had given an uncontroversial interview, would NBC stand by its "professional courtesy" stance?

Tom Rosenstiel, who runs the Project for Excellence in Journalism, tells Howard Kurtz , "this is even more alarming or damaging for him. . . . Blurring the line between reporter and actor in the drama invites that same confusion and maybe even makes it worse." Well, what about blurring the line between a Goebbelsesque propaganda outfit and a credible "media outlet"? Is Iraqi TV -- owned by Saddam Hussein's family -- just another "professional" outfit? Arnett apologized this morning, explaining why it was a mistake. It would be nice if NBC explained itself similarly.

That's the question for today's Goldberg File.Already written, already up. How do you like them apples?

Here's another reason why the press coverage of the war switched so suddenly the Sunday before last. As I'm so fond of noting, Edumund Burke once said that example is the school of mankind and they will learn at no other. The press has only a few examples of wars in its memory banks. There's World War Two, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf War and the airwar in the former Yugoslavia. Alas, the Korean War really is the forgotten war. And, when you boil it down, the press really thinks only Vietnam and the Gulf War are pertinent. These two examples are prisms through which they judge this war. So once we reached what they perceived to be a tipping point in this war, when it seemed to them to be less like a Gulf War II and more like a Vietnam II they simply appropriated the relevant language.

Of course, this war still bears a closer resemblance to the first Gulf War than it does to Vietnam. But that doesn't matter much to the press. Once this war stopped meeting their expectations, they simply switched vocabularies. Now, the press is going through the difficult process of discovering this is a new kind of war.

It’s still, sadly, the same story in Iraq, as this piece from the London Times reveals. Here’s an extract:

"Dr Mohammed, the hospital director, greets us in his cottage in the compound grounds. He has a poster of Saddam on the wall, next to a photograph of his daughter, who is with his wife and family in besieged Basra. “Nobody is taking their pictures of Saddam down yet because we don’t know if he is finished and we don’t know if the British and Americans will stay,” he smiles wearily. “All the Iraqi people hope to get rid of this regime. But most of us are afraid that what happened in 1991 will happen again. “That’s why we don’t trust you, you let us down before. That is why people do not want to talk. We hope that this is the liberation of Iraq, but we do not know.""

You say, "MSNBC just lost a whole bunch of viewers: Peter Arnett praised the ministry of disinformation, among other things, on Saddam TV." In order for this to be true, MSNBC would first have to have had a whole bunch of viewers.

The logical thing is to implement the Arab Defense Agreement. According to this agreement, if an Arab country is invaded, the rest of the Arab countries should defend it. Instead of implementing this agreement, there were those who facilitated the aggression, while neighboring countries refused to do so.

...Lebanon was under Israeli occupation, up to its capital, but we did not consider that a disaster. Why? Because it was very clear that there are ways to resist. The problem is not the occupation, but how people deal with it. The most significant indicator that there is no disaster in Iraq is the fact that there is no exodus [of refugees]. The first lesson that the Iraqi citizen had learned is that displacement and leaving [home] last forever. Therefore the solution is resistance. This was the first lesson learned from Lebanon, and after that from the Intifada. There is no disaster, because there is no exodus. The problem is not the occupation, but whether the people are willing to resist it or not... Today, the Iraqi citizen sees that America is coming and wants to occupy his country and kill him, and he is willing to experience for himself what happened in Palestine... I believe that the situation will be much harder for the Americans and the British."

The people I spoke with at Umm Qasr said they were happy about the removal of Saddam, as he had held them in terror for years. They took me to see the local Baath Party headquarters. They told me that many bad things happened there and that most of those picked up in the middle of the night and taken to that building were never seen again.

I entered the building and walked around. I couldn’t help noticing the excitement in the people’s voices as they pointed out the bullet holes and the charred remains of where the building burned.

That was when I first got the sense that these people were really eager to see Saddam and Baath gone.

I asked several what they thought of the US/UK plan to remove Saddam. They told me: “Now that they have started to remove him, they cannot stop. If they do, then we are all as good as dead. He still has informants in Umm Qasr and he knows who is against him and who isn’t.”

When asked about what they think of this war, most Iraqis said that they were against the loss of innocent life and the destruction of their cities, but they seemed adamant about the removal of Saddam.

A reader helpfully reminds me that Spanish is not the second-most spoken language in the world. Mandarin Chinese has 800 million native speakers. I meant to say that Spanish is the second most-spoken Western language.

Another reader says I misspelled "Quebecoix;" it's actually "Quebecois."

Thanks for keeping me honest!

NBC said in a statement that "Peter Arnett and his crew have risked their lives to bring the American people up-to-date, straight-forward information on what is happening in and around Baghdad." The network said Mr. Arnett's "impromptu interview with Iraqi TV was done as a professional courtesy and was similar to other interviews he has done with media outlets from around the world. His remarks were analytical in nature and were not intended to be anything more."

"This is our way of showing solidarity with the people of Iraq, " said Shalah. Shallah said the bombing was a "gift to the heroic Iraqi people" and that Islamic Jihad had sent volunteers for suicide missions to Baghdad.

Broadcasting on the anti-war demonstrations, an excited young lady told a reporter that they are standing up for "peace in Palestine, justice in Palestine, and the self-determination of the Iraqi people."
Don't that beat all . . .

In response to my syndicated column about media coverage:

Mr. Goldberg,

Well said about the war coverage. I'm writing this in the middle of a nice sandstorm.

I'm pretty insulated from most of the news coverage out here. Frankly, Marines only watch Fox News anyhow. Nevertheless, I've received multiple e-mails from concerned friends and family asking me if I'm OK and their concern that things were not going very well. You essentially said, more eloquently, what I repeatedly tell them: We're on the skirts of Baghdad in 5 days. We've secured the southern oil fields and we've gotten across the Euphrates and Tigris with bridges intact! We expected much worse.

I have been personally affected by the deaths and casulties of fellow Marines. It is much more tactile out here among them. It is particularly hard when I learned of friends and Marines that worked for me that are evacuated for injuries. We don't want to lose anybody but I keep reminding myself and my Marines that the losses are to be expected. We've lost less than a platoon's worth of people - they've lost a whole Corps! I can count on my hands the number of tanks and aircraft that we've lost and only a few were actual combat losses. Every time I learn that the Marines are heavily engaged, I remind myself that it means that the Iraqis are being decimated in the process. We will not fail.

The successes the Iraqis have achieved are largely non-conventional. They are acting in the most cowardly and animalistic fashion. Were we to stoop to their level of depravity we could certainly protect ourselves from their limited successes. We are more noble and our consciences cannot withstand indiscriminate slaughter in contrast to the adherents of the "religion of peace." Nevertheless, while the capture of a dozen or so POW's and the public display of dead bodies does little to affect our combat power, it has had its affect in deflating the early euphoria created that this might be a complete rout and maybe Saddam is dead after all. I have to admit that I, and many others, had to come down fromt that same high as we wanted this to end quickly and with little bloodshed. The American public is also naturally worried about its sons & husbands (as my mom and wife are).

I remind my friends and family, as you have reminded many, to focus on the successes and that this regime could come tumbling down like a deck of cards very quickly. Whether this goes another few days or weeks, however, none of us out here doubt the outcome. You want to have doubt and uncertainty about the outcome for your side? Try putting yourself in the shoes of an Iraqi soldier that just found out he's going up against the I Marine Expeditionary Force.

Semper Fi,
Maj. [Name withheld]

From my other military guy who shall henceforth be known as "Air Power guy":

Jonah,

Just to add a little to your Military Guy's response to the decoy and concealment issue, the Serbs weren't the only ones learning lessons in the air war over Serbia.

I tried a little experiment with two sergeants, a TACSAT radio and a frequency to one of the JSTARS crews. We found what we were looking for (self-propelled rocket launchers and towed artillery on the Kosovo/Albanian border no one could pinpoint) using good old teamwork. We radioed the coordinates of the holes they were hiding in to the CAOC (Combined Air Operations Center) in Vicenza and would have had a pretty good go of it. By the way, they were firing the tubes (conventional arty) at night then pulling them back into house cellars before daybreak.

The bad news was, some (not in the CAOC) wanted to do more "target area analysis" that completely negated what was our on-the-fly solution to the attack pilot's Holy Grail: true time-critical targeting (see it and shoot it within minutes).

End of experiment.

We could have gone USAF-to-USAF and just recommended missions on our own but that would have not been right. Before we could make a case up the Joint chain for it, the Serbs threw in the towel.

I just hope the kids that we did this with in Albania are in the 3rd ID TOC (Tactical Operations Center) and whispering in their ALOs' ears about this sort of exploitation of assets in new and undocumented ways. I'm confident they are. If there is one thing that drives our traditional adversaries crazy, it's our ability, when confronted with a problem, to make stuff up.

The Soviets, especially, hated that.

What your Military Guy didn't mention, and I'm sure he was aware of it but he can only say so much in an email (unlike me), was that even when we knew we had 'em, the ROE forbade an attack because we couldn't physically see the target, even though we knew it was there. This led to some pretty interesting CAOC-to-pilot conversations but, in the end, everybody complied...there was never a hint of a question about that (at least not that I could see) because they were (and are) real professionals.

One more thing. You don't have to kill something to neutralize it. No, we didn't find all the SA-6s in Serbia, but we didn't have to. The ones that weren't found were (obviously) hiding, but that's fine. If they're hiding because we've got F-16CJs with HARMs that will be ALL OVER their a**es the minute they start to emit, they're useless. (Yes, you can launch optically, but that's a degraded mode.) In short, we will have achieved the same effect as a missile through their command van--they SAMs are no good and we will retain air superiority, if not supremacy, at the places and times of our choosing. They can hide, and spoof, and shuck and jive but when they try to do something for real with anything remotely resembling conventional forces and sophisticated systems, it's gonna make Cosmo's squirrel chasing look tame...they'll regret it, a lot. So I wouldn't worry too much about them husbanding their resources for The Big One in Baghdad--we're looking forward to them trying.

If this sounds like bragging, I do not meant it to--I am confident, at least on the air side, that we have the means to quickly and effectively suppress significant resistance, no matter how much they managed to hide so far. The biggest enemy is complacency. And bad luck is what you get flight pay for.

The Maximum Leader of the Fedayeen Chirac says France should come up with its own version of CNN to combat the influence of worldwide broadcasters from the Anglosphere (i.e., CNN and the BBC). He wants the channel to broadcast around the world, eventually. First of all, it's very French indeed to decide the way to create an international broadcast news service ex nihilo is by government fiat. But never mind that; Chirac's got a much bigger problem: Fewer and fewer people speak French. English is by far and away the most popular language in the world, with about 2 billion speakers (350 million of them have it as a first language). Then comes Spanish, with 450 million speakers. Only 130 million speak French, perhaps the world's most beautiful language, but one falling further and further behind in influence.

Still, I'm sure the Quebecoix, the Walloons and the Monegasques will appreciate the gesture.