Appeasement Impossible

Watching the happenings in the middle east is like watching a game of whack-a-mole.  One monster gets beaten down only to have another pop up.  Actually, maybe it's because of the poppies!  It certainly must be the official crop of Islamic terrorists.  What else could explain their attitude toward women and children other than ample consumption of the mind bending drugs derived from the poppies?

Of course, they could also be insecure bullies who find women and children the easiest to target in order to satisfy some inner blood lust.

The latest mole raising it's ugly head is the Taliban again.  This time they plan to withhold polio vaccines in North Waziristan (Pakistan) as payback for our drone attacks.  Pakistan, Afghanistan and Nigeria are the only three countries where polio is still endemic.  So hit where it hurts.  The kids!

I've often thought we need to learn to think like the enemy in order to defeat them, but how, other than becoming freaked out addicts ourselves?  I have no idea.  Even if stoned I doubt their thinking would make sense to us.

Oh, I know, they're trying to intimidate us by threatening defenseless children.  The article suggests that it won't; the attacks will continue.  Just as they will in Afghanistan.  We won't suffer.  The Taliban won't suffer.  What do the kids matter?

The reasoning is that the drone attacks are turning the population into mental cases and that's worse than polio.  Gee,  I wonder if the kids with polio will buy into that theory.  Or will they be plied with opium until they quiet down.

It goes to show that the millions of dollars we've put toward eradicating polio world wide isn't nearly as important as the millions that go into their pockets.  It makes little sense to me for them to allow the endemic to continue for it will surely cut into the population of their children from where they would normally be recruiting future support.  Then again, I haven't even had a glass of wine today so I haven't a clue as to how their logic works.

The consequences of ill thought out wars never ceases to amaze me.  I see no way of appeasing people who think the way these people do.  Most societies look at their children as their future.  These people look only to themselves.  How do you combat that?

UN Observers: Do They See No Evil?

Have you ever wondered what the purpose of UN observers is?  Headlines today announce they are suspending their activities in Syria. They can't fulfill their mission with conditions such as they are.  Just what exactly is their mission?  All I've seen is their entering war zones during lulls in the fighting and giving casualty reports.

I don't understand it.  Here are representatives of an organization of which two members have consistently vetoed any plan for aid to the civilians caught in the middle of the civil war.  We know from the news government forces have been slaughtering civilians for over a year now.  Do we need little blue helmets running around telling us what they cannot do?  They cannot raise arms against either side.  They merely - observe.

There seems something ludicrous about  this observing and reporting of a war.  They are not the media whose job it is to report the action.  It costs a great deal to have them there and puts those who try to protect them at great risk - as well as themselves.

 If these observations were to find a way to end the fighting I could understand.  If these observations were to find a way to protect the women and children I could understand.  We're told it is a supervision mission .  Just what exactly is that?  Are they supposed to referee and take points away when one oversteps the rules?   Tsk tsk.  It's insane!

Would the Syrians be better served if the UN observers would spend their time trying to end the war or at least level the playing field rather than adding to the chaos by just being there?  Of course, but they are powerless to do so. Would we all be better served if the UN would spend it's time restructuring itself so Russia and China don't have the veto power they now enjoy?  Or disband altogether since they are beyond usefulness unless posturing is considered useful.

 A war can't be supervised by a third party. Especially one with no voice, no authority.  To do something, observe, for the sake of looking like you're doing something when you really aren't is an insult to those who could really use some help.

Big Brother's Bigger Brother

Awhile ago I had a reader warn me that I was probably being watched because of the things I write.  If so it is a monumental waste of time for those watching for I'm just stating opinions of an elderly woman who has issues with the direction in which the country is being taken.  There are a lot of us doing the same thing.  Watching me would indicate paranoia of the highest degree.  Not that I don't think the government is paranoid!

While I don't know if or how often I'm being observed, the Brits have a whole different problem.   They have unveiled a plan to log details  of every web site you visit, every text you send, every e-mail and every letter you send and every call you make.  Wow!  What can the return on such an effort possibly be?

It was also stated that if you're worried about it you are probably a criminal or a conspiracy theorist.  Conspiracy theorist?  Just because every single aspect of my personal life is being logged and kept for a year and it's being done by the government?  How could anyone possibly think that?

The promise not to read content means that someone, authorized or not, probably will.  Talk about an entire population of paranoids!  The only question is who is paranoid about what.

I'm thinking about cost now.  Do they really have this technology and if not how much will it cost to develop?  How many people will it take to run it?  And again, how much will the country benefit?  Especially if they're not going to look at content?  What key words are they are going to use to search the data base when they deem necessary?  I would think any computer whiz worth his or her salt would figure out that one.

Here my last several posts have been complaining about drones and cattle and their effect on our water supply.  This makes that effort look like child's play.  I was worried about my privacy one time when I read about efforts to monitor the well being of the elderly in their own homes.  Cameras everywhere including the bathroom.  But this.  This takes away the last visage of privacy known to man.  You can't go outside for the drones may see you.  If you play computer games, snicker at the handicapped or bully the kid next door, Big Brother will have it on file.  Everything no matter how seemingly inconsequential to us.  Will it be to them?

I think the spontaneity of life, that which makes it worth living, is about to be snuffed out for surely if the Brits do this we will soon follow.   What's next?  They'll be reading our thoughts before we even have them.  But until then, oh yeah,  will I be thinking thoughts!

Karzai Has A Point

Now there's thought I never thought I'd have!  After listening to the stories on the news at noon about the numbers of children being tortured, yes, tortured, and killed in Syria, it brought to mind Karzai and his demands.

Once again Karzai has taken coalition forces to task for attacks on civilian enclaves.  It seems to be a weekly occurrence.  He complains so often I have to think there is something to it.  We attack and kill a targeted terrorist. Hopefully. Unfortunately the strike usually includes women and children.  Karzai complains.  We apologize.  And do it all over again.  What a way to fight a war.

I've been of the mind that war is war and there will be civilian casualties.  It's the nature of the beast.  But break down the word civilian and the whole scenario changes.  Women and children, non combatant men, the elderly.  The latest, last week, was 18. Many women.  Many children.

I don't like Mr. Karzai.  I don't believe he's an honest partner in our war against Islamic extremists and he's greedy.  On the other hand, he's tired of seeing innocent people, his people, slaughtered in the quest for often just a single individual.  So he wants all bombing of Afghan cities, towns and villages banned.  Even if coalition forces are under attack.  I see where he's coming from.  When they are shooting at us, we're all the enemy.  When we shoot at them, only scant intelligence tells us at whom we're shooting.  Sometimes the targeted person is present and sometimes not but people always get killed and it's obviously not necessarily the target.

Another argument for capturing the enemy rather than merely blowing them away.  Intelligence.  Of course a boots on the ground shooting war puts our troops in harms way and is far more difficult than using drones and other means of air attack.  It would be a good time to re-evaluate the war wouldn't it?  Are our troops and their women and children, any of their civilians, worth the end?  What is the end?  As of now it won't be victory, merely withdrawal.  If I had the money to bet, I'd bet the Taliban and al Qaeda will be out in full force before our dust has settled.

From Where Have All the Flowers Gone there's a telling verse.  "Where have all the soldiers gone?  Gone to graveyards, every one."  That's bad enough.  At least spare the children!  But then in war civilians get killed.  And that is another of the myriad of reasons I hate war.

We've Got It All Wrong!

Actually both sides have it wrong when it comes to buying information.  Yesterday I wrote about the bounties being offered for information regarding the where abouts of certain al Qaeda leaders.  Not to be out done, the Somalians have come up with their own offer for information regarding the where abouts of President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton!

Ten million?  Fifty million?  No way.  Far more practical. Ten camels for Obama and twenty chickens for Clinton.  Ten hens and ten roosters, or cocks as they say.

 Does that make Hillary the better value?  I would certainly think so if you either wanted to raise chickens or produce eggs.  Unless of course, those ten camels include both male and female.  I don't know, though, how much of a market there is for camel off spring and as far as I know they don't produce a saleable product unless you consider their hair for pricey coats.  They are good pack animals and Obama is accumulating quite a bit of baggage, but then he isn't the one receiving the offer.

It seems to me if either side of this perpetual conflict knew what they were doing, the rewards would be reversed.  Thirty three million for information on top al Qaeda leaders.  Most who would have that information probably wouldn't have a clue what to do with that kind of money.  The only ones really good at handling that scope of financial windfall are the leaders themselves who use it for their own bribes.  Like exile in friendly countries should push come to shove.

Now in this country it's a different story.  We all dream of riches.  Just look at the amounts spent in casinos or on lottery jackpots just on a chance.  Know where Obama is going to be campaigning?  Done deal!  With a lump sum payment to boot!

As for the information we're seeking, we'd probably get a lot more takers if we were the ones offering the camels and the chickens.  Something any good villager could use;  food for sure, maybe even a dowry if they have such a thing.  Certainly a way to get their goods to market since most don't have cars or pick ups.

So there you go.  Those who say our leaders don't get it are absolutely right.  It's an eye opener though, to find our adversaries don't get it either.  Camels for Obama.  Come on.  Camels in any ones back yard would be sure to draw the attention of the eye in the sky drones.  Try as you might, you just can't make them look like cattle!