How (not) shocking

"Senate Panel Accuses Bush of Iraq Exaggerations"

In a report long delayed by partisan squabbling, the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday accused President Bush and Vice President Cheney of taking the country to war in Iraq by exaggerating evidence of links between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda in the emotional aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Um, how much money and time did the government waste on this? Isn't this really old news? Thanks, NY Times and Federal Government, for sharing this late-breaking news.

A long way to go

Britain announced that it would agree to the cluster bomb treaty and ban the highly dangerous weapons. The BBC posted archived footage of cluster bombs being dropped - and it's scary stuff (unlike other aspects of war? I can't help but add sarcastically ....)

Jakob Kellenberger, president of the International Committee of the Red Cross,
said: "Cluster munitions are weapons that never stop killing."

Of course the US is grouped with the delightful nations of Russia, China, India, and Pakistan against such a treaty. How did we get in this position? I guess I shouldn't be so naive - we've always been in this position.

Countries like the US, India, Pakistan and Israel claim such munitions can
be highly useful on the battlefield and want to see the treaty watered
down.

Maybe if (most) of the world signs enough treaties, war will be banned someday ....

Unfortunately, we never stop inventing new ways to kill each other.

Tragedy

There's an interesting summary of international reaction to the terrible events at Virginia Tech on CNN.com. The article highlights press coverage from India (there are many Indian students that Virginia Tech, and of the professors killed was Indian), South Korea (they worry about backlash against Korean communities in America), and Britain (which focuses, unsurprisingly, on American gun laws. They conclude, sadly, that nothing much will change).

The emotional side of me who remembers my college years still quite clearly can't even manage what it must be like for students on campus, for the families of the victims. Just awful.

The more aloof and cynical side can't help but think that there Karl Rove is thrilled that this opportunity has arisen for Bush to play the concerned, fatherly, in-charge figure that played so well post 9/11. I'm sure the administration can't help but welcome a short break from the constant criticism.

I can't help but wish that Bush would show the same level of compassion and sympathy for the 1000s of innocent Iraqi who have lost their lives in what many consider the same senseless way. And the 10,000s Sudanese in Darfur. How does any of that make more sense?

I'm not saying it wasn't a terrible, horrible event. But when you step back and look at it on a global level (which I can though I know many can't, understandably) it's unfortunately just a tiny drop of blood compared to the pool that the world amasses daily from war and disease.

How Long Does it Take for History to Become Repeatable?

Hopefully longer than five years ... because if we start a war with Iran it'll be Iraq all over again, only worse.

There's a good article in The Australian (hey, I get quality news where ever I can) that discusses recent conflicting statements made by Bush and his Administration. Y'all should read it (especially those whose main news source is the Green Bay Press Gazette).

Mr Bush reacted sharply yesterday to questions implying that his administration was tampering with intelligence material to justify a military strike against Iran.

"The idea that somehow we're manufacturing the idea that the Iranians are providing IEDs (improvised explosive devices) is preposterous," he said, emphasising that the claims were "not a pretext for war".

Don't you love how the administration is so offended when we accuse them of tampering with evidence? As if we had no reason - no right - to do so?

Far too many of us were complacent the first time around and our country slipped into war.

We can't let it happen again.