The only reason I’m highlighting this is because I taught¹ at Junction City High. Some students of mine had relatives that were hurt in the war.

Not sure why this was news in Lawrence on February 11, 2009, but there you have it.

No political commentary here or in the story really; I’ll just say that a) the effects probably run a lot deeper than this or any story can convey, and b) Military service exacts such a toll on one and one’s family that I can’t imagine why anyone would want to do it.

Thankfully for those of us that are not so motivated, they do.

1. or whatever it was I thought I did

Samantha Power, you’ll recall, was one of Barack Obama’s senior foriegn policy advisers. I say “was” because she was fired after referring to Hillary Clinton as “a monster” to The Scotsman (fired after what, an hour?) and an el foldo by the Obama people.

Turns out, as this Obsidian Wings post shows, she may have formed that opinion long before she ever met Barack Obama, based on her evaluation of how the Clintons, the worthless State Department¹, and the U.S. government dealt with the Rwandan genocide of the 1990s.

The content of the post is shocking (but hardly surprising) if it is an accurate portrayal of events — and I must say that I believe it is. Be sure to read it all.

1. Just because State was staffed by Democrats then isn’t what makes it worthless. It’s headed by Republicans now, and it’s still just as worthless.

KHARTOUM (Reuters) – Mia Farrow has offered her freedom in exchange for that of a respected Darfur rebel figure, virtually imprisoned for more than 13 months, in a letter to Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir.

That would be the Omar Hassan al-Bashir who overthrew a democratically-elected president in order to impose an Islamic state by force, while attempting to exterminate other ethnic and religious groups in Sudan.

Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) Humanitarian Coordinator Suleiman Jamous has been confined to a U.N. hospital in Kordofan, neighboring Darfur, since the United Nations moved him there without permission last year.

He needs a stomach biopsy which cannot be performed there.

Khartoum said if he left he would be arrested, but has said it is open to talks on his release.

“Before his seizure, Mr. Jamous played a crucial role in bringing the SLA to the negotiating table and in seeking reconciliation between its divided rival factions,” Farrow said in the letter dated August 5.

“I am therefore offering to take Mr. Jamous’s place, to exchange my freedom for his in the knowledge of his importance to the civilians of Darfur and in the conviction that he will apply his energies toward creating the just and lasting peace that the Sudanese people deserve and hope for.”

This, of course, assumes that all parties want peace. And they do — but on vastly different terms.

NATO officials say they have caught Iran red-handed, shipping heavy arms, C4 explosives and advanced roadside bombs to the Taliban for use against NATO forces, in what the officials say is a dramatic escalation of Iran’s proxy war against the United States and Great Britain.

“It is inconceivable that it is anyone other than the Iranian government that’s doing it,” said former White House counterterrorism official Richard Clarke, an ABC News consultant.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stopped short earlier this week of blaming Iran, saying the U.S. did not have evidence “of the involvement of the Iranian government in support of the Taliban.”

Welcome to the face of post-Iraq “realism”.*

But an analysis by a senior coalition official, obtained by the Blotter on ABCNews.com, concludes there is clear evidence of Iran’s involvement.

“This is part of a considered policy,” says the analysis, “rather than the result of low-level corruption and weapons smuggling.”

Iran and the Taliban had been fierce enemies when the Taliban was in power in Afghanistan, and their apparent collaboration came as a surprise to some in the intelligence community.

The “intelligence community”, at least as pertains to that region and to Islamic extremism, doesn’t seem to be worth a bucket of warm piss over the last fifteen years.

*: I’d love to say years of being addled by transnational leftism and its Orwellian notions of “tolerance” caused this, but as much as anything, George Bush’s incompetence in an astonishing variety of arenas caused it.

Leaving aside the question of whether or not England is worth standing up for these days, which is ultimately irrelevant, I don’t blame them one bit.

If you are captured by a regime such as Iran, or any of a dozen other terrorist financiers, you can assume the following (particularly if you are an American, but this applies to any Westerner):

1. That, contra the Geneva Conventions, you will be trotted out and displayed for as many propaganda purposes as your captors can think of;
2. That you will be killed as soon as either these purposes run out or they decide that killing you serves such a purpose (for example, stirring their own people up); and
3. That no one — certainly no Western power — is going to come to your aid, unless that “aid” comes in the form of toast points and shrimp cocktails. Their own politics at this point preclude it.

And what about “name, rank, and serial number?” As every teacher knows, the key to expecting a certain behavior is to a) clearly define what is acceptable and b) either demonstrate or provide detailed instruction on how to produce that acceptable result. If none among these sailors demonstrated that, it’s not the fault of the individual sailors — it’s the fault of the Royal Navy. Also the fault of the Royal Navy are whatever rules of engagement that did not allow them to defend themselves when they were clearly not in Iranian waters.

The predictable calculation of someone with a well-developed sense of self-preservation in this situation would be a strictly mercenary one — if no one’s going to bother putting any effort into defending me (or helping me defend myself), why should I bother defending them?

It might be reasonable to ask for at least some stoicism rather than to wave and blow kisses to Ahmadenijad on the way home, but that too is irrelevant on balance.

So under those conditions (and for civilians under any conditions), the sailors have my blessing, for whatever that may be worth, to lie, grovel, and schmooze their way to survival. They weren’t equipped to do any other.

The conservative campaign against the mainstream media has scored notable successes. It exposed Dan Rather’s forged National Guard memo and jumped all over Newsweek’s absurd report of a Koran-flushing incident at Guantanamo Bay. The mainstream media is biased, arrogant, prone to stultifying group-think and much more fallible than its exalted self-image allows it to admit. It also, however, can be right, and this is most confounding to conservatives.

Cold reality is here now for all those who’d care to look at it. It’s painful, but a large majority of it is also true. And I’m sure none of you reading this are getting your hopes up too high that either President Bush or the tragicomedy known as the Iraq Study Group are going to stay out in the cold long enough to take that long overdue look.

I don’t like posting about the war — although it is the defining issue of the current political climate — because so many others do it, and because of what the effect of reading the posts is on reasonable people (and unreasonable people alike — I have been called names and even falsely accused of a crime because of them). But I have for many months questioned in my own mind the motives and wisdom of our so-called “leaders” who maintain what is now clearly a disastrously-misguided, failed policy — both with regard to Iraq itself and the Middle East in general. I do not support the use of the skills, the talents, and the sacrifices of brave young men and women for a political “face-saving” operation; which is essentially what the ISG recommends.

I believe that, if it had been executed correctly, the removal of Saddam Hussein by military force and subsequent restoration of Iraq to a democratic footing would, while having many bad near-term effects, would have resulted in a long-term gain for the world. I still believe that. I do not take seriously anyone who claims clairvoyance in this regard. Needless to say, it has not been led by the current C-in-C or his advisors to anything remotely approaching correct execution.

And it’s only my first beer. Just think how happy I’ll be after five.

UPDATE [12:46 12.09]: Another thing I’m going to think about is the Nine Wise Persons’ consideration of Parker v. District of Columbia, a brief report on the gist of which you can read here.

Yet for all Kim’s canniness, there is evidence that he may be losing his edge. And that may be reason to worry: totalitarian regimes close to demise are apt to get panicky and do rash things. The weaker North Korea gets, the more dangerous it becomes. The question that should be of greatest concern to the U.S. military in the Pacific—and the question that will likely determine the global balance of power in Asia for generations—is, What happens when North Korea collapses?

The scenarios Kaplan outlines are frightening indeed. It’s too good to excerpt chunks of it here. Just go read it all.