No Win Situation

What's funny about politics is the fact that politicians often have very short memories and absolutely cannot understand the consequences of their actions. Let's use President Obama's campaign promise of closing the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, which was overwhelmingly supported by a majority of the members of the Democratic Party, as an example. Don't get me wrong, I think Obama has done a pretty good job so far and expect him to get even more accomplished in the remaining 3 years in office. What I take offense with is politics in general. During his election campaign in 2008, then Senator Obama promised (read here, page 5) that, "As President, Barack Obama will close the detention facility at Guantanamo". I have no problem with the President closing down the facility, it is probably the right thing to do, but there are always consequences to every action. Only now are we seeing what those campaign promises are leading to.

Just watch any news channel today and you will see the story being played out on all of them. Closing the detention facility has one very large consequence which no one seemed to have realized when it was marked. If we close Guantanamo, where will the detainees go? There are several options for this problem, but only two that are remotely feasible. Unfortunately, neither option is all that good or politically acceptable for most politicians. First, we could send the detainees to another country, hopefully friendly to the U.S., to prosecute or to be released. Secondly, we could bring the detainees into the U.S. and try them here, with the consequence that if convicted they will be imprisoned here too. Although it seems that the latter is the more likely option, it seems we are far from a consensus or action on it.

Granted, the current fighting is very much along party lines, but there are few Democrats that are willing to bring these suspected terrorists into the country that they have sworn to destroy. Now, let me ask one question: When the proposal for closing Guantanamo was aired what did they expect to happen to the detainees? Did they just expect the problem to go away if Guantanamo was closed. This is a fine example of what could go wrong when a promise is made based purely on a political agenda. The Democratic Party pushed this promise throughout the campaign and it ended by painting them into a corner. Now several Democrats are trying to distance themselves on this very touchy subject. A few are even putting more pressure on the President to solve the problem without providing an adequate solution themselves. I don't know what they are thinking right now, but none of this indecision is making anyone look good. Now is the time to bite the bullet and do the right thing. Do I expect the posturing to stop? No, unfortunately I expect to see more politicking.

Many have publicly stated their concerns about bringing the detainees here, and honestly, I think that these people give way too much credit to the people we have in custody. Why do I think this way? First, they are not superhuman. They cannot just break their bonds at will. They are constantly under armed guard, military armed guard. Next, most detainees do not speak our language, and if they miraculously escape, will not be able to effectively blend into to the local population, no matter where they are held. Also, most of the detainees we have are not dangerous by themselves. There are few masterminds in the group capable of planning an escape of any kind. I don't think that the majority of these people are physically danger. They may have dangerous ideas, but they do not carry the plague. They cannot infect anyone just by being near them. They are only as dangerous as the average violent offender in the U.S. prison system right now. So what's the real reason for not wanting them here? Are they afraid that if we give them a jury trial that we will have to give them rights? That these dangerous individuals will use and abuse our justice system? Then make sure that the laws do not allow them to press an unfair and unearned advantage.

In the end it comes down to one thing: The partisan bickering needs to end and the work of correcting what's wrong with this country needs to start. I, for one, am tired of Republicans and Democrats arguing just for the sake of it. I know that both parties have differences in ideology, but the American people need more than high minded ideals to get us out of this current recession. I realize that certain segments of the problem has gotten better, but not everything is. Now is the time to work together, not argue, and make America the power that it once was. Stop the butting of heads on health care. Stop with the unproductive Socialist commentary. Stop the inaction on unemployment. It's time to get people jobs, good pay, a place to live and keep them healthy. I don't care how it's done, but it does need to get done.

Shiny New Things

One thing I've know for a very long time is that I am a huge fan of new technology. As a kid I was always interested in the latest news on computers, games and all the new hardware that was out there in the stores of the day. Radio Shack was one of my favorite mall destinations, along with the only decent arcade in town. Unfortunately, I had to wait many years to get the opportunity to get my own computer, a little less than 4 years ago to be exact. Since that time I have embraced the technologies that I was never able to have as a child and young man. Now I can appreciate it more.

Like I said, I got my my first computer not too long ago, and being 31 at the time, a little later in life than most. I shopped around a bit and decided on a Gateway computer. My Gateway was good for its time, not great, but good. It did all I needed it to -work, games and (of course) surfing the internet. A couple of months ago my aged and worn Gateway's DVD drive stopped working. And then the next week its power adapter died. Well, that was all the prodding I needed toward getting a new laptop.

I, again, shopped around for a new computer. Luckily it didn't take me long to find one I liked. I just had to get a flat black, dual core Sony Vaio. I've had some time to play around with this new toy, and I have to say, I'm very impressed by it. I love the look of the case, the great display, the feel of the keyboard and the fact that it had Windows 7 already installed on it. Coming from an XP system to the newest Windows OS I have to say, I like it. The new features and improvements make using my computer a bit better than I've experienced before. But, I won't go into detail on that. I will talk about the other computer that I bought this month.

Maximum PC's Editor in Chief Will Smith asked an important question in it's December issue, "What exactly is a personal computer"? I've had some time to think about this one a bit for myself lately. I do have a classic version of the PC, a desktop that belongs to the wife, and the more modern version that I discussed above. Mr Smith does bring up several other devices that are closely related and commonly found in a lot of homes in this day and age. My PS3 and 360 are very similar to a PC if not exactly meeting the standard definition. Now, about my other PC. I recently picked up a smartphone -specifically the HTC G1, the Google phone. It (like the other devices in my home) doesn't exactly qualify as a PC, but what is a PC these days?

The G1 can do a lot of the basic stuff that my laptop can do. It can connect to the internet, take notes, check the weather, view my e-mail, wake me up in the morning and a few thousand other tasks that I may want it to do. At risk of sounding old, I remember the days when phones could only make calls. Their displays could only show numbers in a single line monochrome LCD display. Seeing what smartphones can do these days is making me a believer in the possibilities of these smaller, more portable devices. Calling them smartphones is selling these devices short. Just call them smart period.

Unforgivable

This is the hardest post I've had to write, I don't even know where to begin. I guess I'll start by saying that I am angry and incredibly saddened. I know this doesn't make any sense yet, but it will. Some of you know that I am a soldier currently deployed to Iraq. What none of you know is that I am with Task Force 3-66. Task Force 3-66 has been in the news lately, our unit lost...That's not accurate. Our unit had two of our soldiers taken from us by an individual that I am ashamed to call a soldier. SGT Christian Bueno and PFC Michael Yates were from my unit, from my company.

I've read a lot in the paper, and have been briefed on a lot more than has been released, but I still can't make sense of what happened. I know how it all went down, which I will not go into detail about, but I still am in shock. It still hasn't fully hit me that I will never see those two soldiers ever again. I knew SGT Bueno, I'd see him every day. We were both platoon sergeants when our unit was in transition. I'd never been a platoon sergeant before or even in the unit long, but SGT Bueno was there to welcome me to the family. He was always eager to lend a hand or offer advice. When asked to do something I never heard him say no. There was a couple of empty lines in Stars and Stripes about him this morning, but nothing that could attest to just how extraordinary of an individual he was. I hate talking about him in the past tense, for the simple reason that he always seemed to be there when you needed him, when you needed a hand. And I'm sad that he is gone, sad for his family, sad for his friends, sad because no one else will know just how great of a person he truly was.

I am also angry. I have read some of the comments made by the father of (I'm trying to think of what to call him here that isn't too vulgar) the person that murdered our friends and I am disgusted. This man, this Wilburn Russell, is ignorant. He is speaking about things he has never, nor ever will, know.

The purpose of the stress clinic is to find out what will break your spirit, what will break your will and one way to do it is to tell them, 'That's it. You don't belong in the military. Get out of here'

I don't know what this "stress clinic" is he is refering to, but if he is trying to describe the facilities of the Combat Stress Center he is very wrong. The combat stress teams are here to help soldiers, there is no testing to see what will break the spirit and to even suggest such a thing is ridiculous. I have met a lot of mental health professionals in my nearly 12 years of service. Yes, there are not enough of them, but on a whole, they are very hard working and caring people that only want to make things better for their patients. This man's words are a slap in the face to those that are trying to help soldiers that have problems.

I understand this father's pain, but I can't agree with him. I know it's easier to blame someone else for a problem instead of looking at someone you love for the truth. I know why he blames the military mental health institution. He blames the military because the alternative is just so horrific. His son murdered 5 soldiers. There are other details that will come out as the this story unfolds, and when those details come out you will see that this guy is not to be pitied. He knew what he was doing and he should be fully accountable for what he has done. He robbed the lives of 5 people. He deliberately shot each one of them. What he did was unforgivable and he needs to pay for it.

Each of us deals with loss in their own way, and this is mine. Goodbye Christian, you will be missed.

SGT Benjamin Sharp,
Task Force 3-66
Iraq

Rich And Clueless

Watching the news has been a bit of a joke lately. No, not the news itself, just the people that are on the news. I constantly see TV "personalities" that happen to make a hell of a lot of money commenting on the economy like they are really in danger of being poor. Come on people, give me a break here. You're telling me that someone that gets paid $10,000 every time they are on TV is really concerned about whether or not they will have to live paycheck to paycheck? I don't buy it, and frankly, it's starting to irritate the hell out of me.

Today I watched the Flipside segment on CNN. What got to me was the fact that one of the talking heads was trying to convince people that a loss of benefits, ie...health insurance, was a good thing for you. She tried to say that because you don't have benefits with a job anymore that you could change from one job to another with less of a hassle. Well, that is true, except for one important detail. There are no jobs out there. I think it's irresponsible to try to tell people to not worry about insurance or other job benefits in an economy where there is no better thing. If someone loses health insurance from their job in this economic climate they most certainly will not be able to afford it themselves. I would love to know if that commentator has lost any benefits in the last year, if she had to struggle to find a new job, if she had to live paycheck to paycheck like so many do today, but I already know the answer to that one.

These people commenting on the state of affairs today are not like you and I. Take Rush Limbaugh for example. He's been leading the charge for a tax revolt in New York recently. He states that he refuses to work and live in New York today, not for your benefit or mine, but because he refuses to be charged more in taxes. I'm sorry Rush, but I can't sympathize. First, most people living in New York today cannot afford to just up and move out. They can't afford to just leave their jobs. They can't just refuse to be a part of the economic system that holds them. They are the ones suffering Rush, not you and to announce that you refuse to be a part of that same system just shows how out of touch with people you are. I still seeth when he said that he could afford it, but just didn't want to.

I'm sick of watching the news. I don't want to hear about the horrible economy. I don't want to hear about falling stock prices. And I definitely don't want to hear any rich, privilaged individuals trying to tell me that they what they are doing is for my benefit. It that's the case, I'm more than willing to accept a check from you, cash is preferable though.

The Art Of Twitter

Anyone that's used Twitter before knows all about how it works. For those of you that haven't, and that's probably only one or two of you, you have 140 letters, characters, punctuation marks, spaces or whatever to communicate with other Twitter users. 140. Why 140? I have no idea, but sometimes it's a challenge to compress a large idea into such a small space. Take last night for example. I had just finished watching The Spirit and wanted to share my thoughts on the movie. What I wanted to say was this:

I just finished watching The Spirit and I can honestly say that I was really impressed. I love the look of the movie, very reminiscent of Sin City (another favorite of mine) but unique unto itself. The characterizations are 40's pulp perfect and highly engaging and its sense of humor is very colorful. Seeing The Octopus in the garb of another hero of the 40s, after a sense, was funny as hell. My only wish is that they make more Spirit adventures for the big screen.

But instead, this is what I was able to write:

Just finished watching The Spirit. Very cool movie. I like that it's a throwback to the 40s and 50s style of storytelling. Awesome stuff.

All characters, punctuation and spaces total 140. It's very short, but I think I'm able to get my main idea across, and I definitely think you get the message about me liking it. Half the fun of using Twitter is trying to be creative in getting your message across. It's a bit harder to do with only 140 characters, but far from impossible. Well, time to go practice, see you on Twitter.

L, TU's Word Of The Day

Today's word of the day* is technophobia. Let us begin with the formal definition provided by Dictionary.com.

Technophobia [tek-nuh-FOH-bee-uh]

-Noun
Abnormal fear of or anxiety about the effects of advanced technology.

Related forms:
Technophobe.

Think about it for a second and take a look around you. How many electronic devices do you have sitting around you right now? Think you don't have many, look again. Right now I have more than just a couple, not that I'm a technophile (the antithesis of technophobe), I just like gadgets. Looking around me I have (obviously) the laptop that I'm writing this blog post with, an HDTV, DVD player, Xbox 360, PSP, DS, digital camera, digital watch, LED flashlight and various accessories to go with those devices. Now, think about this, how many of those would have been possible 20 years ago? Maybe one or two of those, if you had the money for them. 15? Maybe a couple more, again if you had deep pockets. 10? Almost all of these devices could have been available, and nearly affordable then. How about even 5 years ago? All but one or two, but that's really not the point I'm trying to make.

Technology by it's very nature changes rapidly. In the last 20 years we've gone from VHS being the dominant video format, with DVD and Blu-ray following. Now, the paradigm is starting to shift away from physical media altogether. Who out there has not downloaded a computer program or a movie or TV show? I know I have and I'd bet money you have too. But some people are not like you and me. Some people hate when new technologies are released. Why? Some people just hate to see their old favorites replaced. Just look at the backlash that happened when CDs supplanted records as the dominate music format. Then again, some people just hate technology.

Which leads me to technophobes, people that hate technology for no logical reason. I just read an interesting article on Time.com about a group of technophobes, well, probably just one technophobe and a bunch of his clueless neighbors. The article had the quaint title of "English villagers send Google snapper packing", quite catchy I think. Anyway, to quote the esteemed gentleman that was so horribly defiled by the evil Google syndicate:

"I was upstairs when I spotted the camera car driving down the lane," villager Paul Jacobs told The Times of London newspaper. "My immediate reaction was anger: How dare anyone take a photograph of my home without my consent?"

Upon seeing this car drive down his lane Mr. Jacobs coordinated with his neighbors to block the route of the vehicle. Let me get this straight. This guy sees a car driving down his road. He doesn't like that the car is going to take a picture of his house from a public access road and decides to form a mob with his neighbors. He then blocked the road to prevent a person that was not committing an illegal act from doing what he was hired to do by a reputable company. And this guy thinks he was the hero here. I can just hear him now.

"I saved the lives of all my neighbors...No, wait. That's not right. I saved the reputation of my villi age by...Hang on. I'll get it in a second. I know. I impeded an evil technology from...Never mind. I've got nothing."

There have been several arguments brought up against Google implementing its Street View technology in Google Earth. Some have even said that photographing homes will lead to an increase in burglaries. Now I have to say that that idea sounds completely ludicrous to me. How would photographing the front of a building, something that ANYONE with a camera can do, lead to an increase in home invasions? Maybe today's criminals are tech savvy, or maybe just lazy.

"Why, back in the old days criminals used to scope out prospective victims in person. Now they can plan a strategy from the comfort from their own home."

Except for one minor detail. Google Street View only shows views of buildings from a street perspective. That's not the idea entry direction for a would-be crook to go. I don't know, I've never robbed anyone before, but wouldn't going in the back (where no one including Google can see) be preferable?

It isn't that the technology or Google itself is bad, in fact, this technology has been around for decades. It's just the fact that this guy is just afraid. He is afraid of change and of new things he does not understand. But, instead of researching the subject and understanding what it's all about he chooses instead to be ignorant. Choosing to be ignorant, and displaying it in public is his right, but he does not have the right to interfere with a company that has broken no laws.

*Disclaimer: In using the phrase "Word Of The Day" I am not stating that I will, in fact, write about a word every day. It just sounded better than "Word Of The Week" or "Word Of The Whenever The Hell I Feel Like Writing About A Word".

Interesting History

I don't know why but I've in in kind of an archaic mood as of late, at least as far as my reading habits go. I recently picked up Michael Crichton's Timeline. Not a bad book, some of the science is hard to follow, but an interesting look at the Middle Ages. When I think of the 1300-1400's I think the Dark Ages, not an age of invention and creativity. We all tend to focus on the negatives of that time, such as the Black Death and events like the Spanish Inquisition. Mr. Crichton's book gives an interesting and alternative look at what may have been.

I also picked up a copy of The Name Of The Rose. I've never read this book before, although I have seen the movie adaption with Sean Connery and Christian Slater. It's a very interesting story involving a murder mystery at a 14th century monestary. I really haven't been able to read a lot due to a heavy work load lately, but I was very excited to see this book and couldn't resist picking it up.

The Middle Ages isn't the only period in history that intregues me. I am also fasinated with World War II and the events leading and following that world changing even. Being in the line of work that I am, having a healthy knowledge of military history can only help. Now, it's time for me to return to the present and, shortly, go to sleep. I have work in about 6 1/2 hours.