Emergency Government

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” -H. L. Mencken (from Ralph Benko, from an addendum to a Mark Tapscott story at the Washington Examiner, found via Instapundit)

Yes we have yet another emergency, this the Swine Flu which was predicted months ago and the President promised that there would be enough vaccine for everyone, and from the folks who brought you:

"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before." - Rahm Emanuel

That was when the entire economy was going to go poof overnight and we needed, desperately needed, the stimulus package to do something!  Or perhaps it was the big, bad banks who were following federal regulations on lending and putting money out to borrowers who couldn't pay it back in housing and other areas that needed, oh, so needed, the TARP and rescue package because they were too big to fail! The auto companies were going down and they would be forced to go bankrupt and re-organize which would be awful because that would mean massive job loss and we just had to do something! And we have to have more lending in the housing market because that will collapse and the entire Nation will go to wrack and ruin , so we have to do something!  And the stimulus has pushed unemployment far above the expectations of doing nothing that we now need, desperately need, a second stimulus package, because we just can't sit by and do nothing!

Meanwhile, those Nations that didn't go on a spending binge are out of their recessions, worried that the US will pull down the rest of the world market as we flush our economy down the drain with emergency spending, and wondering just why the hell we can't stop doing things and let the recovery take over.  But those are the so very wise European governments that we are supposed to take our wisdom from... say, just why can't we follow their leads and let the economy recover and not try to tax and spend ourselves to oblivion and take much of the rest of the world economy with us?  For all the grousing, moaning and complaining about how much of the world's resources the US uses, it is also a fact that we are a quarter of the world's economy, produce much more per capita than anyone else around, and the world depends on us to be sober in our spending habits.

Instead we have gotten a massive hit to our economy, massive job loss, a disorganized private sector because government now sees fit to invalidate contracts on whim, and tax money flowing out in a tidal wave that will cause massive structural debt, increased inflation, devalue the dollar, and bring instability to all those countries holding securities in the US who are seeing their investment in our way of life go poof!

Now here's the question on structural debt via Non-Performing Loans (NPLs).

I've heard the US is heading north on NPLs, which are loans 90 days past due and unlikely to ever be paid off.  A large part of that is due to the new home market, which ripples through the economy to durable goods and consumer sectors.  We brought that on ourselves by encouraging those who are economically marginal to actually get federally pushed loans via lenders and the FHA then packaged those up (along with Freddie and Fannie) and put the 'US Govt Safe' seal of approval on them, when the loans, themselves, were anything but safe.  Now I'm going to start stealing some data from one of my previous articles to look at the NPL problems that have happened elsewhere:

NPL are Loans that are in default or close to being in default. And this International Journalists' Network article by Anya Schiffrin on the large role of NPLs in banking crises, points out that once a Nation gets over 9% NPL on all outstanding loans, it is starting to look at real trouble.

The role of NPLs in a Nation's economic structure cannot be over stated.  At the time of writing that article, the US NPL was less than 2% with the majority of that being in consumer debt, not institutional or business debt, and the majority of that consumer debt in the NPL status was in credit cards.

Now a note of update on my article via a Business Insider 23 OCT 2009 article by Joe Weisenthal who references this Financial Times article by Arthur Kroeber on 06 OCT 2009:

So just how big is China’s NPL time-bomb? That is largely a function of economic growth rates.

Average annual nominal GDP growth of 11 per cent, 9 per cent and 7 per cent over the next decade would generate net fiscal NPL costs of 6 per cent, 7.2 per cent and 8.7 per cent of GDP respectively in 2019 – substantial, but not catastrophic.

There is no necessary reason why existing NPLs, even including bad loans arising from the 2009-2010 monetary stimulus, should threaten the viability of the system. In short, the calculated bet of letting NPLs shrivel through time and growth can safely be placed one more time.

But this bet absolutely cannot be placed a third time.

The above scenarios only work if the financial system generates no net new NPLs in 2011-2019 beyond the banks’ own ability to provision and write down.

China has been playing games with its debt by shuffling it around to different vehicles, and has done so since the 1990's.  Twice China has shuffled its debt to different vehicles, and now the money is expecting to be paid out.  China has a major problem: there is a global recession and many of its hardest cash holdings are in the US real estate market, via investing in Freddie and Fannie.  The crony capitalist system, a form of national socialism, has allowed those in favor with the regime to build businesses, default on those loans when the businesses collapse and have that passed into debt vehicles approved of by the government.  Any similarity to the passing on of bad housing debt via federally approved vehicles is purely intentional.

Plus for all the phenomenal growth rate China reports, the conservative estimate of having 30% of their economy underwritten by these loan vehicles, in other words 60% of their GDP depending on NPL loan swaps to different vehicles, is conservative because China under-reports the NPLs and over-estimates its growth.  Market based estimates go up to 50% of the economy underwritten by NPL loan vehicles picking up the temporary tab for the bills of past failures.  Those bills are coming due, US housing investments are tanking and China is in a bind.

So how are things going here?  Well the FDIC Select Peer Group and Report Date for 30 JUN 2009 sees some disturbing trends on 06 and 06A:

Real Estate Loans in the non-accrual and 90+ days past due is up to 2.31% from 1.29% in 2008.

Commercial real estate is up to 0.11% in the same category, up from 0.01% in 2008.

Construction and land development up to 5.23% from 2.16% in 2008.

1-4 family homes 4.10% up from 1.89% in 2008.

Other construction and land development 5.45% up from 1.95% in 2008.

The longer trends on these are going from EOY to mid-Year cycle so that there is only 6 months between 2007 and 2008, but still interesting to note them (06/30/2009, 06/30/2008, 12/31/2007, 12/31/2006), again all for the NPL (non-accrual plus 90+ days past due):

Real Estate  2.31%  1.29%  1.76%  0.90%  0.57%

Commercial 0.11%  0.01%  0.03%  0.00%  N/A

Const.         5.23%  2.16%  3.57%  1.05%  0.24%

1-4 Family    4.10%  1.89%  3.05%  1.34%  N/A

Other           5.45%  1.95%  3.44%  1.18%  N/A

We are just now getting the repercussions of the tanking of the real estate market in the NPL arena for housing.  Construction can be seen as a leading indicator as it feels the pinch first when housing starts are put on hold or canceled, thus causing a rippling into that part of the industry.  The last two interesting, indicating a cyclic market, but one that is increasing in its NPL area.  All of this while the mortgage market is only slowly seeing its rates go up for the same category:

Non-Farm Mort/Residential  1.66%  0.81%  1.20%  0.61%

The category I'm not showing is the 30-89 days past due, which shows that some of the influence is from those loans, no doubt, slipping into the other categories or just having a delinquent set of payees who can get payments in but late on a continual basis.  On 06A we get the final Gross line item for all loans and leases for the 06 section, and below that, in the totals, we get the full percent of all loans and leases past due including non-accrual for the entire banking industry that is overseen by the FDIC:

%Total P/D LN/LS    3.78%  2.45%  3.30%  2.20%  1.17%

This is a pretty good proxy stand-in for National NPL status, and the trendline from EOY 2006 to MID 2009 is up in all categories thus reflected in the total which is up by over double.  Of particular note is that the 'housing crisis' starting by EOY 2007 had lessened, somewhat, by MID-2008, and this was reflected in all P/D loans in all categories.  Thus the MID 2008 to MID 2009 jump is due to the intervening months as the market had been digesting the problems by EOY 2007.  The multiple 'crises' times between those two reporting periods changed what had been an up and down, choppy trendline (in other words still increasing but with rapid market changes) to one that now flattens out to increasing at a much higher rate.  If all the 'necessary' things to 'stabilize' the market had, indeed, actually stabilized the market, each of these trends would have flattened with minimal increase from the previous year.  Even with the undigested loans in the market, those were being addressed by changing in lending practices and crunching those loans out of the system.  This did cause some massive losses in big banks and all the money poured into those should have stabilized the market, but didn't do that.

So we are left at MID 2009 with NPLs going up towards 4%.

This is before all the 'stimulus' money gets into the pipeline, which is causing headaches on loans and lending as the projects that are being done do not address the structural problems of the market.

Additionally the Community Re-investment Act is getting re-upped, which is a major cause of the increasing home prices over time, due to easy money lending practices to those who can't afford such loans.  That is causing structural debt problems in the market that need more than just cash infusion in them, and need a change in the regulations to allow normal repayment expectations to hold sway and get the federal 'help' in lending out of the system.  Additionally the banks should be the ones to judge the ability of those credit vehicles that gather up such losses and put them on the market.  As both Democrats and Republicans have voted to approve past revisions of the CRA to achieve these policies, there is no 'party' to whine about as being at fault: they are both idiots in this area.

Finally some of the instability is reflected in TARP, itself, with funds going unaccounted for and the market not knowing how the public will react to that.  As the Federal Reserve pushed that vehicle forward, and Timothy Geithner was a prime mover at the end of the Bush Administration and continues on in the Obama Administration, his role in this is not to be underestimated, particularly in the lead-up to the 'necessary' bailouts.

So, if you really and truly believe that all the spending will actually make the government solvent AND help out the entire market for NPLs, then you need to address the structural components leading up to this problem, which has been in large part from the federal side, with crony lending institutions (FHA, Freddie and Fannie) plus willing (or coerced) banks facilitating these policies which date back to the Carter Administration and were puffed up during the Clinton Administration and Bush Administration.  That is a bi-partisan problem and pissing about it being 'Bush's Fault' ignores the long standing structural problems both parties have willingly introduced into the lending arena.  All of those extra regulations to 'help' people have now changed the path of the entire economy, and throwing good money after bad is putting us into a nasty position of not being able to have all that lovely outgo be covered by tax income.  That then gets you inflation, as the Federal Reserve puts money into the system to cover those debts, thus reducing the value of the dollars currently held.  And supporters must then address the economic growth problem in the US, as small businesses are not hiring people due to the instability in the market introduced by the federal government and more regulations and not letting the rule of law put companies into bankruptcy for restructuring, and those external holders of our debt that have a huge insolvent debt load that needs some hard cash income to try and keep their economy afloat.

Which is China.

If you cry, bitch and moan about Halliburton and its evility, then where is the crying, bitching and moaning about AIG, Merrill Lynch, Bank of America, GM, Chrysler, etc. that are holding this country hostage with federal help?  If you complain about the petty overcharges by Halliburton, then why are you not complaining about the huge rip-off that is going on with these companies and the billions in TARP that are not being accounted for?  Would it not be better to have these large companies go through bankruptcy restructuring, which they would all do, have their debt and valuation properly assessed and then get on with life as smaller, leaner companies that would then open up the market to new entrants?  Or do you really like the idea that companies deemed 'too big to fail' can hold our Nation hostage via willing politicians willing to put these huge corporations on the dole and then run them as efficiently as the federal government can, which is at the post office level of things?

I am more than willing to let the rule of law run its course with these companies.

'Cash for Clunkers' was a nice one month sugar rush, but now the auto market is seeing less in the way of purchases as people decided to buy early and not try to get the best possible deal on a car later.  Thus you are not getting a long term upturn in the market, but a short to mid length down turn that is happening during a recession.  Thus making the recession worse.  It is that same sort of 'do something for the sake of doing something without a plan' that is causing this problem.  Extending loans to those who can't pay them back means more failed loans, not increased prosperity.  Increased prosperity means more and better paying jobs and a competitive job market, not one with artificial price supports in it at the low end which places a barrier to entry for first time job holders in place because of the cost of hiring them.  This is not getting people to work, allowing them to make a living for themselves, no matter how marginal, and making the entire cost of business much, much higher and encouraging businesses to lay off people at the low end.  Which we now have during a recession with the latest minimum wage jump.

This economy is being run into the ground by politicians who think that we can regulate our way to nirvana, and willing followers who believe that everything in life should be regulated.

That is not a description of freedom, but one of tyranny.

Terrorism and its increasing lethality over time

One of the lovely things one can do at the MIPT Terror Knowledge Base is slice through the accumulated terrorist activities that have been going on since the late 1960's and get a feel for some of the overall trends in activity. This is the 'by the numbers' look at things, and is very grossly unfair to some groups that cross multiple categories in their espousing of why, in particular, they should be killing folks. Be that as it may, I will start at the beginning of 1979 as that is really the year the US had to pay attention to things. We had, indeed, been attacked numerous times before that in various parts of the globe, but this is a pointed look at things. Thus start at the beginning:

Terrorist Incidents > by GroupClassification	Range: 01/01/1979 - 01/01/1989
Group Classification Incidents Injuries Fatalities Anarchist 8 3 0 Anti-Globalization 61 48 5 Communist/Socialist 761 1525 252 Environmental 1 42 3 Leftist 110 100 30 Nationalist/Separatist 878 4335 1519 Other 112 414 97 Racist 6 42 2 Religious 190 805 551 Right-Wing Conservative 25 59 19 Right-Wing Reactionary 1 0 0

This conforms with the general view of terrorism of that time, that there were two main forms of it: Left/Communist - 871 incidents and Nationalist/Separatist - 878 incidents. That said the Left/Communist types were a pretty benign variety, with only 0.32 deaths/incident. These include things like attacks on property, infrastructure, hijackings and such.

The Nationalist/Separatist folks were out to make a point at 878 incidents and with 1.73 deaths/incident, they had a lethality scale nearly 6 times that of the Left/Communist sort.

Topping them both, however, is the Religious terrorists, with 190 incidents and a whopping 2.9 deaths/incident. It appears that while there were not that many religious based attacks, they were quite deadly.

This pretty well sums up where terrorism was moving from the Iranian Revolution - with the Left/Reds being relatively light on casualties (think of the various Red Brigades and Red Armies here), the Nationalist/Separatists that inflicted themselves upon governments and their supporters and random passers-by (think IRA, ETA, PLO here) and the virulent religious-based organizations (think Hezbollah and Hamas here).

Moving up one decade and here is what the 1989-1999 era looks like:

Terrorist Incidents > by GroupClassification	Range: 01/01/1989 - 01/01/1999
Group Classification Incidents Injuries Fatalities Anarchist 13 0 0 Anti-Globalization 71 14 10 Communist/Socialist 678 602 397 Environmental 2 0 0 Leftist 137 115 41 Nationalist/Separatist 597 5069 1110 Other 74 47 80 Racist 6 6 0 Religious 294 15292 1758 Right-Wing Conservative 4 0 2 Right-Wing Reactionary 2 2 0

Left/Communist - 815 incidents and 0.49 deaths/incident
Nationalist/Separatist - 597 incidents and 1.86 deaths/incident
Religious - 294 incidents and 5.98 deaths/incident.

Each of the major categories has become more lethal, with the religious incidents more than doubling in lethality while the Left/Communist types almost doubled in lethality. Trailing are the old, homegrown Nationalist/Separatist that only became 10% more lethal over the previous decade.

This is a major change in terrorism from the previous decade. Nationalist/Separatist organizations staged 32% fewer incidents (878 vs 597) but saw the death rate climb by 10% per incident. This is due almost entirely to the sidelining of most of the IRA-based organizations, although some of the more fanatical sorts are still around of course. What remains *are* the more deadly organizations as they want to show *results* to their members. That is not a good trend, at all.

The Left/Communist groups also saw a decline in incidents by 6% (871 v 815) but the deadliness of them increased harshly, going up to 163% of the previous decade. Apparently with the death of the USSR came a change in attitude by such groups that to remain viable they, too, had to show *results*. Additionally some of those organizations (like FARC and Shining Path) had lost primary funding and supply sources (USSR, Cuba) and have resorted to more home grown criminal circumstance with FARC taking over a portion of the narcotics trade in Columbia. So not only results but a shifting from showmanship to a need get revenue to sustain their movements.

It is the religious side that is most worrying, however. The number of incidents climbed to 153% (190 v 294) of the previous decade and the lethality of each incident skyrocketed to 206% of the previous rate. That is a horrific trend which points to the venom with which such attacks are carried out and the shift to 'suicide bombers' that would, in itself, increase the lethality of such attacks. That sole shift would nearly account for the numbers, save the fact that that was not an across-the-board change by all groups. What was seen, however, was more use of rockets, RPGs and VBIEDs. While Israel would suffer the most from suicide bombers, it would be those organizations carrying out VBIED attacks (Hezbollah and al Qaeda) that would shift the balance overall.

Finally there is 1999 to the present:

Terrorist Incidents > by GroupClassification	Range: 01/01/1999 - 09/04/2007
Group Classification Incidents Injuries Fatalities Anarchist 86 6 0 Anti-Globalization 71 14 3 Communist/Socialist 2125 4120 2014 Environmental 80 0 0 Leftist 90 89 20 Nationalist/Separatist 3149 17392 6971 Other 67 174 59 Racist 23 11 1 Religious 2244 21978 11459 Right-Wing Conservative 84 12 247 Right-Wing Reactionary 11 8 14

Left/Communist - 2215 incidents with 0.92 deaths/incident.
Nationalist/Separatist - 3149 incidents with 2.21 deaths/incident.
Religious - 2244 incidents with 5.11 deaths/incident.

The majority of new attacks are in Iraq, which has served as a major point for Islamic terror organizations to organize. Apparently, though, even with the large number of civilians that are being attacked, the actual dead per incident has *dropped* (5.98 v 5.11) over the previous decade. Remove the 9/11 attacks (counted as 3 attacks by MIPT for NYC, Pentagon and Shanksville) and the death toll (2982) that leaves you with 2241 incidents and 8477 killed for a ratio of 3.78 deaths/incident. Outside of 9/11 the attacks going on by Islamic groups in Iraq and elsewhere are far LESS deadly, by 48%, because they are no longer attacking unprepared targets. Also the violence in places like Somalia is dispersed, save for a few concentrated attacks, so that overall casualty rates drop as violence is pushed from urban to rural environments.

With that, however, is less good news as the Left/Communist organizations have ramped up the number of their incidents (2215 v 815) by 272% of the previous decade (again with many staging in Iraq and Afghanistan, but upticks in S. America with FARC being a main contributor). Worse still is that their lethality per incident has increased (0.92 v 0.49) to 188% of the previous decade. Although still less lethal than their Islamic counterparts, this is nearly a 300% increase of the 1979-89 era in fatalities. This rate has not declined but increased over time and consistently so.

On the Nationalist/Separatist side have steeply ramped up incidents (3149 v 597) over the previous decade (in places like Indonesia, Malaysia, East Timor/Sri Lanka, India/Kashmir, Somalia, PKK and still the traditional ETA) by 527% of the previous decade. Here there is also some accounting for Nationalist backlash against outside organizations, increases in separatists movements and by such things as the AUC going after FARC and similar Turkish groups going after the PKK and Islamic organizations. Additionally the casualty rate has increased to 119% of what it was the previous decade (2.21 d/e v 1.86 d/e). This, perhaps, is worse because so little reporting is done on it and the traditional media pays little or no attention to purely Nationalist or Separatist terrorism. In the US, if it is not attacking Americans, it is getting little coverage.

And the decade span is not over yet.


These organizations waging illegitimate and predatory warfare upon Nations and peoples has slowly grown in violence, decade on decade, and are *only* countered by force of arms that is trained to deal with them. By operating outside of the Nation State framework, these organizations are outlaw to it, by the law of nations. To effectively counter these movements and organizations, they cannot be treated as mere criminals violating a particular law here or there: they are a class of organization that threaten all peoples and Nations by seeking to undermine them.

The most virulent and deadly predators are the Islamic sort, but the trends for the other two major types is upwards, decade on decade, with the Nationalist/Separatist organizations now hitting in the same region of deadliness as the Islamic organizations. While their attacks are not major showmanship pieces, often taking place in far off places, the attacks are pointed and lethal. Separatists, in particular, don't tend to throw their lives away in suicide attacks, and thus they keep organizational skills and tactical abilities over time and increase them. With the spread of Islamic disorder has come the spread of organizations that seek to further disturb the order of Nations by their undermining of them through predatory war.

If we concentrate on the purely Islamic sort of predators, we miss the other predators that are also growing in virulence and lethality over time. The US, in particular, cannot afford to treat the Islamic predators *alone* and attempt to differentiate them from those that also seek to destroy the order of all nations. Hitting that sort hard with military capability is something that the US , even with conscription, can do on a global scale. This disease has spread too far, too widely and is engendered by a world awash in 'small arms' that includes inexpensive mortars, RPGs and even such fun things as SAM systems.

It is a pure luxury to think that we can treat only the Islamic predators and leave the rest untouched. That is why we cannot and should not attempt to use a 'semantic battlefield' and 'redefine them' by their own terms: we lose track of what these organizations are and what they do. If the Islamic communities cannot confront such things and properly address them, then those Nations that abide by the law of nations must simply name those predators as outlaw and deal with them summarily as threatening civilization. That is why the Piracy laws deal simply with such individuals when brought in: when found to be a Pirate you get life imprisonment.

That is a civil crime when captured and brought in, but on the battlefield Abraham Lincoln had the full right not only as Commander in Chief but as Head of State to decide that the law of nations needed to be enforced with summary finding on the battlefield. Stopping those who attack in a predatory fashion without sanction from another Nation, requires the harshest penalties civilization can render as such individuals are a true hostis humani generis... an enemy of mankind. Name them for what they do, and the punishment appears to fit the activity. The easy days of warfare between Nations has sunk back to trying to stop predators before they overwhelm the law of nations. And there is a damn sight more of them out there than JUST the Islamic sort.

And they are ALL your enemy.

Bill O'Reilly drinks Kool Aid, finds it yummy

Last night, on the Mr. Bill show, we got a look at the mind of Mr. O'Reilly as he not only decided to indulge in Kool Aid but add a lovely word to the 'Culture Warrior' lexicon: defeat. Somehow I just can't see 'traditionalists' liking that idea nor looking to embrace it with any great degree of love and caring. He has decided to actually agree that questioning the Iraq war was 'right' with respect to Bill Moyers - Bill O'Reilly now *agrees* with that. He does state that in the 26 APR 2007 Talking Points Memo. One does question this from the very same man who, on 07 FEB 2007 put forward this:

Nearly every intelligence agency on this earth believed Saddam had an arsenal of deadly weapons. But poor WMD intelligence doesn't excuse the poor post Saddam planning by the Bush administration or the failure of the Iraqis to put aside ancient hatreds and work together for freedom. — That combination, poor planning with hatred on the part of the Iraqis might doom Iraq.

Yes, nearly every INTEL Agency on the planet believed this, including UK, France, Russia, China, Israel. Given the stocks of weapons, the amount of raw material and the processing facilities that were THEN in-place at the end of Desert Storm, there was no question of Saddam's capability to research, make and produce chemical weapons if not more. In point of fact there are numerous citations that I rounded up in this post. This sort of information garnered AFTER a war in which individuals of the prior regime and the documents of that regime are available was something that NO INTEL Agency on the planet could accomplish in any way, shape or form. No *journalist* could either. The folks at Regime of Terror continue to hound down documents, interviews, citations and the such like so that a fuller understanding of what Saddam's regime *was* doing can be seen.

What Bill Moyers and other Leftists are looking for is to enforce some sort of 'perfect world' standard on wars, as seen in this post on Dan Froomkin encouraging journalists to break the code of standards and ethics at the WaPo, and giving terrorists a full panoply of rights after waging illegitimate war. Saddam aided such organizations and utilized them in attacks against the West and in other ways to have the West remove restrictions on trade with his regime. That lovely world got us to 9/11. I have some news for Bill O'Reilly: there is no such thing as absolute certainty on *anything* in the INTEL Community, just levels of confidence. If you wish a scientific rendition of facts so as to make something lock-solid, you may forget about it as that is not possible in this world of ours. NO INTEL on the planet is 100% right in all ways after it has been gathered and cast with other pieces of INTEL. That is a world of uncertainty and judging risks and the INTEL Communities do not, by and large, give much credence to the blustering and dissembling of tyrants, dictators and genocidal rulers.

For damned good reason: it can get you killed if you DO.

On post-war plans, none of them from DoD, CIA, State... you name the group and its pre-war plan would have fallen into complete shambles as the single, salient thing that they all depended upon was some part of the regime staying around. Anyone, really. I went over that problem with this post on why the 'oil drop' could not work. This has been *confirmed* by two journalistic sources that have been on the ground in Iraq: Michael Ware and John Burns. Particularly troubling is Mr. Ware's citation of the Iraqi WMD industry being *mothballed*, which more commonly refers to being stored someplace so that it can be restarted later. That, in point of fact is the most displeasing thing coming from Mr. Ware, beyond the harsh contradictions between his ideology and his experiences. From both of these men we get a view of a regime that disappeared and in a scatter-shot way, picked up its terrorizing again. That simple disappearance of governmental structure by those in power just upping and leaving, brought the entire thing down. Because we had such poor interior HUMINT in Iraq before the war, like most other Nations, we had no idea as to the truly horrific conditions Saddam was subjecting his people to. And Saddam had *videos* of torture and killing sessions made to distribute to the population so they KNEW what would happen to them if any crossed the regime.

Do that to a society for three decades and tell me what it looks like. Then include the harsh factionalization that is typical of such Arab regimes. No, I'm afraid that Mr. O'Reilly and the Left are a bit too caught up in decrying poor INTEL and that the journalistic segment was and IS doing nothing to remedy the problem. To date we still have no organization, no group, no news channel, no documentary, nothing that looks at the problems in Iraq as they came about and *why* the place was the particular kind of hellhole it was. Because doing so would show the bankruptcy of those that have attempted to paper over this with ideological venom, and the true vacancy of 20th century 'Realism' and our understanding of post-war situations. By not doing that the PRESS is at fault for not serving its educational and background purposes, to help place the present in context of the past. Instead ideological diatribes continue ever onwards and no one dares to actually address the problems of the Middle East without some sort of rose-colored lens arrangement.

But that was just the START of Mr. O'Reilly's inanity last night. Thank you to Hot Air for posting up the *other* segment that really takes the cake. In that segment Mr. Bill had on Ms. Rend Al-Rahim is the Executive Director and co-founder of the The Iraqi Foundation. Mr. Bill was ready to hit her with prime Defeatocrat work, with the recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll as ammunition. Now as that report is still under wraps at NBC and WSJ, what can be done is to look at the summary data at a place like Pollingreport - Iraq polls. Politicians love polls as do television commentators and such, because they can be used to 'gauge public opinion'. Thusly, Mr. Bill now feels it high time to add in his grand idea to 'Traditional Values' that *not* supporting democracy and helping people who had been under the boot of a tyrant for decades, IS a traditional value:

I really hate to say this, because I really wanted your country to have a shot at democracy, but I don't think its gonna happen. And if I were an Iraqi Citizen right now I would do everything I could to get out of there. Because I don't think the Iraqi People have stepped up enough to help the American forces control the fanatics and the killers. The Kurds in the north, they're doing very well, they banded together. And Kuwait in the south has a Shia-Sunni mixture and they're doing very well. But for some reason, Madam, the Iraqi People are putting up with this terrorism and its going to lead to even more terrorism, am I wrong?

Yes, that 'Culture Warrior' also adds in the concept of comparing a small nation with limited territory, that you could easily lose in parts of Iraq to that of a much larger Nation. Perhaps he will next opine that Italians can't get the hang of stable government and he wouldn't be able to understand that because the Vatican CAN. Yes, those 2.4 million Kuwaitis living on 17,820 sq. km., which is about the size of Connecticut and Rhode Island, can show how easy it is to those 26.78 million Iraqis living on 437,072 sq. km, which is a bit larger than California. And Kuwait hasn't had a vicious and brutal dictator killing them off for 30 years, but did get the lovely opportunity to get INVADED by Saddam's Iraq. The Kurds to the north, in case it escaped Mr. Bill, happen to have a strong ethnic tradition of success and have had over a DECADE of safe haven from the tyrant Saddam.

I guess the rest of Iraq doesn't deserve that much time, according to Mr. Bill.

Then he is told that the People of Iraq are, indeed, stepping up to problems, informing on terrorists, leading soldiers to weapons caches and terrorists, and working hard and risking their lives to do so. From that Mr. Bill starts to opine some *more*:

O: All right. We see...[cross talk]... we hear that...

R: We have seen an improvement.

O: We hear that, but we see the body count every day. You know there are either more terrorists in Iraq than in any other country on the face of the earth has ever seen. Or the Iraqi People simply aren't doing what they should. As you know, no insurgency can exist unless the population tolerates it. That's what happened in Northern Ireland. It got to the point where the Northern Irish said 'no more' and it stopped. Here you got the Sunnis and the Shia, they hate each other, they're bombing each other. It doesn't seem to me that they're gonna stop. And we can't make them.

Oh, my! Such a lovely example of an ISLAND Nation finally wanting to stop terrorism. Plus he pulls the old Maoist 'fish hiding in the school of fishes' bit. Of course it would be wonderful if there were a civil society that recognizes civil government, but Mr. Bill seems to have forgotten that for 30 years and more it was the rule of a dictator that worked hard to put people who had little in common together so as to play them off against each other and start breaking down communities and instill fear of government. Just what he wanted. Northern Ireland is so like that, isn't it? Dictatorial rule for decades on end by a single leader? No democracy or even memory of it there? Society torn apart and individuals videotaped as they were fed into plastic shredders feet first? Yes, Northern Ireland is just *so* like Iraq.

And some of that Mr. Bill even recognizes, but when he asks about how Saddam controlled the terrorism, even *I* can answer that: those that he did not invite in and train he simply executed via his multiple secret police organizations and the Republican Guards and various other paramilitaries that he had. His sons *also* had a few of their OWN secret police and paramilitaries, too. So abusing Iraq and using the Nation as a personal plaything was a 'family affair'.

Perhaps Mr. Bill just doesn't understand the concept of: Police State?

Tyrannical Dictator?

Really I have trouble describing the exact sort of leader that would order open execution of his political enemies, have that filmed and then run that on the nightly news and in theaters. One can find the videos out there, but I will not point anyone to such sickness and cruelty, lest they get a fine idea to start doing that *here*.

That works. Terror works. Terror works to destable... terror works to keep this madman in power. But look... you're an American citizen now. Look at it from our point of view, we're losing very fine Americans in the desert in a country that does not appreciate it. All the polls say the same thing. We got more than 10,000 wounded that are gonna feel those wounds the rest of their life. We have more than that... but I'm talkin about really severe wounds. You know... Americans say 'enough'. We gave you blood and treasure, we did everything we could and the Iraqi People are sittin there and watchin this garbage go on, and they're not joining with us in enough numbers to make a difference. And that is why you got 55% of the country goin 'get out'.

Why yes, Mr. Bill, terrorism does work so long as it is applied day after day, year on year without end. Works quite well, actually. And the moment you give up, you give up your rights because you are too terrified to do anything. It is very strange to put that context out and then point to 55% of Americans who CANNOT TAKE IT. Then Mr. Bill goes on to pontificate a bit on defeat, so that it can be excused:

Its most serious for the Iraqi People. See, we'll recover from this. It was the *wrong* battlefield. It was. And there's no gettin around that. We made a mistake. Alright. But when we pull back as the next President... Bush will keep them there as long as he's in office. That'll happen. But the next President isn't going to do it, Madam Ambassador. And unless the Iraqi People get the urgency of the situation, there gonna be a lot more dead people in the street.

[..]

Sometimes you have to retreat, regroup and come back.

Retreat?

Come back?

Just like we did for South Vietnam?

Have some Kool Aid, Mr. Bill. You deserve it.


On the day of 26 APR 2007, Mr. Bill is giving up. That is 1498 days since the start of fighting in Iraq. Time to take a look at wars in the past that Mr. Bill *could* have supported to their end, which I take from my previous article on Wars long, wars short: Quasi-War with France, The War of 1812, Mexican-American War, actual *war* part of the Philippine-American War but not the insurgency part, The Boxer Rebellion, World War I for the active US fighting, World War II, The Korean War, The Gulf War.

Now for those that he could NOT have gotten through with American blood and treasure being spent...

The Revolutionary War. So sorry, Mr. Bill, you would be a Loyalist... or turncoat.
The Barbary Wars. Islam over O'Reilly!
Northwest Indian War. Running back to civilization already?
The US Civil War. Bill O'Reilly, Copperhead.
Westward Indian Wars, cumulative. How the West wasn't worth it, I guess.
The full Philippine-American War. Islam over O'Reilly!
The Vietnam War. Groovy, huh?


And as I have had to go over casualty figures for a few things, lets take a look at where we stand, which is 3335, according to the Iraq Coalition Casualty site, using only US casualties up to the 26th, which compares with the following:

Alcohol related vehicle deaths - about 17,000 per year. All voluntary.
All automobile deaths - about 42,000 per year.
South Fork dam collapse of 1889 - 2,200 dead.
The 1906 Earthquake and fire in San Francisco - between 700 and 3,000 dead.
1918 Spanish Influenza - 500,000 dead in the US *alone*.
Peshtigo, Wisconsin fire of 1851 - 1,500 dead... which is a lot for the size of the Nation then.
Johnstown, Pennsylvania flood of 1881 - 2,200 dead.
Galveston Hurricane of 1900 - between 6,000 and 8,000 dead.
Steamboat Sultana explosion of 1865 - 1,547 dead, most of those wounded Union veterans returning home.
Septicemia, year 2000 - 31,224 dead. The #9 cause of overall death in 2000.

From the NIH at the Septicemia page: "Appropriate treatment of localized infections can prevent septicemia."

Yes, clean your cuts and scrapes as you can die from having the infect. In large numbers, every single year, Americans die, voluntarily, from neglect. Neglecting themselves. And not doing what they should have learned to do at age 5. Absolutely voluntary, not cleaning one's cuts and scrapes. I am sure quite a few people do that all the time.

The certainly do die from it.

And the estimated cost of the war is $456 billion for FY 07. Sounds like a lot, huh?

That is LESS than the Merchandise Trade Deficit the US ran up importing more than we export, which was $750 billion (thanks to the CIA Factbook). With an economy of just about $13 trillion. So add Iraq and the Trade Deficit TOGETHER and you are still not at 10% of the US economy. And with a 3.4% growth rate the US added another $442 billion dollars to the size of the economy during 2006. Yes, you read that right: the 3.4% economic expansion basically OFFSETS the cost of the war in Iraq. That 3.4% is *conservative* and may actually be HIGHER by a fair margin.

So there you have the Iraq War from Mr. O'Reilly's point of view.

A war that is offset by economic growth, that has so few casualties that a simple 10% of Americans taking better care of themselves would offset it per year, every year, and a length longer than most modern conflicts, but not all... and nothing compared to some of the things the US has gone through previously.

Obviously way too much for America.

Now about that Avian Flu... shall we surrender now?