Beaten by time Sobering Gaming update
Regarding Sobering, political & depressing - once again these articles are making a mistake in comparison. A much better comparison is a before and after comparison in Iraq - and the corresponding before and after would be for Australia. For Instance the number of Tortures in Iraq before and after the war. Percentage of indiscriminate killings before and after. General freedom of movement - whatever... Where a comparison can reasonably be made, the statistics are better now than before. Because so few tortures by corrupt officials happened before (in Australia), a % reduction of those in Australia doesn't mean much. Perhaps there would be an increase in murder suicides and terrorist/criminal activities against immigrants (to make a comparison of the types of bad things that are happening more in Iraq than before) - but from a very low base. If you can understand the gist here. Things have improved for Iraqis in leaps and bounds and Emigre Iraqis are going back in droves.
This post has been removed by the author.
Welcome back, Marco! And Marco's evil clone...
Sure, it's a case of unnecessary hyperbole to make an unnecessary point, but I would disagree that things are necessarily better for average Iraqis.
I guess I am dwelling on pre-war vs post-war misery, but I believe that the mass graves will bear me out that for average Iraqis it was more miserable pre war, especially as most post-war violence is being aimed at foreigners and their supporters, as well as the general economy. I guess *since* then the insurgents are pacing themselves, to make it look like things are degenerating to some extent. I, as you, believe that the prospect of it improving from its current level is fairly slim or needs a decade of patience at least following the current path.
The most disquieting fact for mine (leaving aside the thousands and possibly tens of thousands of civilians killed in the conflict to date), the chief non-foreign targets of the terrorist/insurgent/radical/whathaveyous are the young men lining up to become policemen and soldiers. Every other car bomb seems to be aimed at a queue of presumably young, fit moderates whose crimes against their murderers appear to include a desire to help create security and peace and a willingness to take US money.
Then comes a question to mind - what do we as Australia do about it - I know! send our troops home and let them sort it out themselves
But Marco, our troops *are not engaged in any combat operations*! Their main role is to provide security for Australian diplomats and contractors, with a sideline in providing training for (a handful of) Iraqi troops, building an air traffic control system and (if I recall correctly) something to do with wharf security. These are important jobs, but with the possible exception of the air traffic business, there is no particularly Australian expertise being provided.
Let me disagree with you one paragraph at a time. All three of those things mentioned are particular strengths and specialties of our military (raw confrontation is not). Otherwise the Americans would be doing them. For instance the wharf/shipping security involves specialised Oz minesweepers that have been doing it since desert shield (in rotations). The Iraqi training is also specific to Aus expertise. I don't need to repeat that I believe the Oz contingent is critical to the future of Iraq.
Tuesday, September 28, 2004
There are various things going on that I could go into in great detail – such as completing the first two rooms worth of renovation, and being absolutely delighted to discover that the colour scheme really works; or that we got to play with power tools on the weekend and cut a ruddy great hole in the floor at the old house to enable a pest inspection to take place; or that we expect to receive the deposit this week, which will pay for the kitchen, ceilings, doors and lighting renovations; or that settlement is due in early December, which is when we will be in the market for amateur removalists – but the main point I need to get across in a single sentence is that Fiona and I will be away for a week from tomorrow for our second anniversary, so I have a million things to do at work before I go home today.
Here’s something a bit political and depressing, based on an American version of same.
Managed to kill off a character last night, but not the one I expected to. The cliffhanger from the last session ended with Jimbo’s druid being dragged into a niche by a subterranean strangler thing, but Chris’ barbarian bravely interposed himself into harm’s way to save his little buddy and got throttled in his place.
I also managed to give the survivors a run for their money with two goblins and some imposing bugs. For those not in the know, goblins are amongst D&D’s least dangerous monstrous opponents (no, really, they’re about as nasty as an over-friendly dalmation). I may have to downgrade the threat levels on my adventure designs…
9 smartarse remarks
Post a Comment
9 Comments:
'Differently awful' is not *better*, per se. And there can't be any arguing, surely, that things appear to be awful and getting more so (in some places) by the day. January will undoubtedly be a bloodbath, but I somehow doubt that even relatively undisrupted elections (a theoretical possibility, though not where I will be putting my money) will usher in a new dawn of peace and democracy in the cradle of humanity. And it's hard for me to look at the apparent current descent into civil war and view it as anything other than the consequence of a series of horrible misjudgments and arrogant adventurism.
I can easily see this decimating a generation's worth of exactly the slice of the Iraqi people that the US wants to support. What I don't see is a lot being done about it. Not making them line up in exposed places to apply for jobs would be an elementary starting point.
In other words, anyone could do it, and Latham's policy (which I refuse to acknowledge as a 'cut and run' policy, which is US political rhetoric bullshit that the Coalition seconded rather than come up with an imaginative slander of their own) acknowledged that, whatever its merits or otherwise, Iraq was not and is not Australia's war to fight (I personally continue to decry it as completely illegal, but that ain't my call, I guess).
I don't buy the "if we leave with the job half done, the terrorists will have won" argument, either. The way I see it, if you start deciding your foreign policy on the basis of catchy sound bites, you've already descended well below an acceptable degree of engagement.
The term "cutting and running" is one that the Economist article mentioned - I don't really know the source, but their impartial perspective, (they just as often favour Labor) it is what it is. Latham wasn't exactly specific about what he meant, though, and I took it to mean that he may or may not decide to send replacements at Christmas depending on various factors.
Unfortunately, on both sides of politics, catchy sound bites win votes (for swinging voters). I don't think I would put you in that category though. You tend to be selective about which sound bites you take in. While Australians keep going "casualty-less", and Iraq's emerging governments keep asking us to stay, public opinion is going to be determined on sound bites based on economic prosperity (our military staff in Iraq is making heaps of money for their families at home, as well as costing the Government money)Good on Australia for being involved in conflicts in such a way as the risks seem to be better than working in a mine.
