Monkey-brained Musings
Tuesday, August 31, 2004
Back in the Saddle
Yeah, so it has been awhile since I posted an update. I cannot even blame it on dark, conspiratorial forces. Included below are some posts that I have been gathering. So what have I been doing? I have been working on my screenplay, working with Capital Metro on developing a proposal for trails along the proposed commuter rail corridor between Leander and the convention center Downtown, working with Connect Austin on a proposed Downtown circulator, and training for a duathalon. I completed the duathalon with an unofficial time of 1:54. It was a great experience, and I am now looking for my next fitness goal. As for this site, I will again pledge to provide more recent updates, and I will get to work on solving the permalink problem.
Yeah, so it has been awhile since I posted an update. I cannot even blame it on dark, conspiratorial forces. Included below are some posts that I have been gathering. So what have I been doing? I have been working on my screenplay, working with Capital Metro on developing a proposal for trails along the proposed commuter rail corridor between Leander and the convention center Downtown, working with Connect Austin on a proposed Downtown circulator, and training for a duathalon. I completed the duathalon with an unofficial time of 1:54. It was a great experience, and I am now looking for my next fitness goal. As for this site, I will again pledge to provide more recent updates, and I will get to work on solving the permalink problem.
Countering Bin Laden’s Six Points
Spencer Ackerman, guest host at TPM, has an interesting analysis and interview with the anonymous author of Imperial Hubris: How the West is Losing the War on Terror. Anonymous has identified six points that bin Laden repeatedly emphasizes in his messages that are the core of his opposition to America:
- U.S. support for Israel that keeps the Palestinians in the Israelis’ thrall;
- U.S. and other Western troops on the Arabian Peninsula;
- U.S. occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan;
- U.S. support for Russia, India, and China against their Muslim militants;
- U.S. pressure on Arab energy producers to keep oil prices low; and
- U.S. support for apostate, corrupt, and tyrannical Muslim governments.
It has been clear since our invasion of Afghanistan that the war on terror is more a political war than a military one. In order to advance our pursuit of the war on terror, we need to address these points in addition to pursuing military objectives.
Some of these points are only in the interests of the Arab nations. Most of the world favors low oil prices. Some points are not directly under the U.S.’s control. The apostate, corrupt, and tyrannical nature of many Muslim governments is not in the U.S.’s interest but it also is not something that the U.S. has much direct control over, and it is also something that can quickly be addressed. Some of the other points, though, are matters of U.S. foreign policy that the President and Congress do have a great deal of control over. Perhaps it is time that we began exercising that control wisely.
In his autobiography, former President Clinton recalls a conversation that he had with then President-elect Bush* prior to the inauguration. Clinton reports how he outlined for Bush what he saw as the nation’s biggest security problems:
- Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda,
- the absence of peace in the Middle East,
- the standoff between nuclear powers India and Pakistan,
- the ties of Pakistan to the Taliban and al-Qaeda,
- North Korea, and
- Iraq.
It is interesting to map Clinton’s six points to bin Laden’s. Five of Clinton’s concerns relate to al-Qaeda and the Muslim world. We can only wonder where we would be if the U.S. had been pursuing these priorities since 2000.
* We all know what the asterisk is for.
Spencer Ackerman, guest host at TPM, has an interesting analysis and interview with the anonymous author of Imperial Hubris: How the West is Losing the War on Terror. Anonymous has identified six points that bin Laden repeatedly emphasizes in his messages that are the core of his opposition to America:
- U.S. support for Israel that keeps the Palestinians in the Israelis’ thrall;
- U.S. and other Western troops on the Arabian Peninsula;
- U.S. occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan;
- U.S. support for Russia, India, and China against their Muslim militants;
- U.S. pressure on Arab energy producers to keep oil prices low; and
- U.S. support for apostate, corrupt, and tyrannical Muslim governments.
It has been clear since our invasion of Afghanistan that the war on terror is more a political war than a military one. In order to advance our pursuit of the war on terror, we need to address these points in addition to pursuing military objectives.
Some of these points are only in the interests of the Arab nations. Most of the world favors low oil prices. Some points are not directly under the U.S.’s control. The apostate, corrupt, and tyrannical nature of many Muslim governments is not in the U.S.’s interest but it also is not something that the U.S. has much direct control over, and it is also something that can quickly be addressed. Some of the other points, though, are matters of U.S. foreign policy that the President and Congress do have a great deal of control over. Perhaps it is time that we began exercising that control wisely.
In his autobiography, former President Clinton recalls a conversation that he had with then President-elect Bush* prior to the inauguration. Clinton reports how he outlined for Bush what he saw as the nation’s biggest security problems:
- Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda,
- the absence of peace in the Middle East,
- the standoff between nuclear powers India and Pakistan,
- the ties of Pakistan to the Taliban and al-Qaeda,
- North Korea, and
- Iraq.
It is interesting to map Clinton’s six points to bin Laden’s. Five of Clinton’s concerns relate to al-Qaeda and the Muslim world. We can only wonder where we would be if the U.S. had been pursuing these priorities since 2000.
* We all know what the asterisk is for.
Downtown Houston
Saturday night, after the convention, we wandered through Downtown Houston. They are doing some good work there with the light raid, a developing entertainment district along North Main, and with many loft apartments under development. Still, walking through Downtown can be a bit surreal. Downtown is largely a contrast between parking lots and skyscrapers. Other than a few relics, most buildings below five stories have been scraped away. The unfortunate thing is that is likely that many of those lots will remain vacant until the owners decide that another massive building is feasible. It is doubtful that those lots will be redeveloped on a human scale. Still, we ended the evening with a fine and relaxing pedicab ride across Downtown back to our hotel. There may yet be hope for Downtown Houston.
Saturday night, after the convention, we wandered through Downtown Houston. They are doing some good work there with the light raid, a developing entertainment district along North Main, and with many loft apartments under development. Still, walking through Downtown can be a bit surreal. Downtown is largely a contrast between parking lots and skyscrapers. Other than a few relics, most buildings below five stories have been scraped away. The unfortunate thing is that is likely that many of those lots will remain vacant until the owners decide that another massive building is feasible. It is doubtful that those lots will be redeveloped on a human scale. Still, we ended the evening with a fine and relaxing pedicab ride across Downtown back to our hotel. There may yet be hope for Downtown Houston.
