Shock, awe and Hobbes have backfired on America's neocons Watch the adjectives and sneer all over this article.
Iraq has shown the hubris of a geostrategy that welds the philosophy of the Leviathan to military and technological power
The tragic irony of the 21st century is that just as faith in technology collapsed on the world's stock markets in 2000, it came to power in the White House and Pentagon. For the Project for a New American Century's ambition of "full-spectrum dominance" - in which its country could "fight and win multiple, simultaneous major-theatre wars" - was a monster borne up by the high tide of techno euphoria of the 1990s.
But darker dreams surfaced in America's military universities. The theorists of the "revolution in military affairs" predicted that technology would lead to easy and perpetual US dominance of the world. Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Peters advised on "future warfare" at the Army War College - prophesying in 1997 a coming "age of constant conflict". Thomas Barnett at the Naval War College assisted Vice-Admiral Cebrowski in developing "network-centric warfare". General John Jumper of the air force predicted a planet easily mastered from air and space. American forces would win everywhere because they enjoyed what was unashamedly called the "God's-eye" view of satellites and GPS: the "global information grid". This hegemony would be welcomed as the cutting edge of human progress. Or at worst, the military geeks candidly explained, US power would simply terrify others into submitting to the stars and stripes.
On the logo of the Pentagon's Information Awareness Office, the motto is Scientia est potentia - knowledge is power . The IAO promised "total information awareness", an all-seeing eye spilling out a death-ray gaze over Eurasia. Congressional pressure led the IAO to close, but technospeak, half-digested political theory and megalomania still riddle US thinking. Barnett, in The Pentagon's New Map and Blueprint for Action, calls for a "systems administrator" force to be dispatched with the military, to "process" conquered countries. The G8 and a few others are the "Kantian core", writes Barnett, warming over the former Blair adviser Robert Cooper's poisonous guff from 2002; their job is to export their economy and politics by force to the unlucky "Hobbesian gap". Imperialism is imagined as an industrial technique to remake societies and cultures, with technology giving sanction to those who intervene.
The Afghanistan war of 2001 taught the wrong lessons. The US assumed this was the model of how a small, special forces-dominated campaign, using local proxies and calling in gunships or airstrikes, would sweep away opposition. But all Afghanistan showed was how an outside power could intervene in a finely balanced civil war. The one-eyed Mullah Omar's great escape on his motorbike was a warning that the God's-eye view can miss the human detail.
The problem for the US today is that Leviathan has shot his wad. Iraq revealed the hubris of the imperial geostrategy. One small nation can tie down a superpower. Air and space supremacy do not give command on the ground. People can't be terrorised into identification with America. The US has proved able to destroy massively - but not create, or even control. Afghanistan and Iraq lie in ruins, yet the occupiers cower behind concrete mountains. and it gets more and more nasty through the article. Loaded terms and phrases everywhere....
#2
Article: One small nation can tie down a superpower. Air and space supremacy do not give command on the ground.
I guess if by "tie down", he means "prevent from staging the next invasion", he's right. But this is a trivial sense of the phrase "tie down". The fact is that North Korea hasn't moved on South Korea, and China hasn't moved on Taiwan - or Japan. Note that Russia hasn't taken this opportunity to retake the Central Asian states or the Baltic ones, let alone reconstitute the Warsaw Pact. In what sense does this talking head from Cambridge mean Uncle Sam is "tied down", if its potential adversaries haven't taken action to exploit the American Gulliver's temporary weakness? Could it be that the combined military establishments of North Korea, China and Russia don't view America as being "tied down"? Could it be that a Cambridge lecturer has a inferior understanding of America's military capabilities compared to the military men who have to stake their reputations, and perhaps their lives, on the accuracy of such judgments?
#3
I can remember in the 90âs listening to senior leaders talking of technology and how satellites and smart bombs will remove the soldier from the battlefield. They talked of this as the end all to war, but they reminded me of crows looking jewelry, and about as logical as a monkey looking at a wrist watch. Air Force General Short was one of them in his arguments that we could take Belgrade without putting troops on the ground. We learned the lesson this idiot, Richard Drayton, writes about back in the 90âs in the Balkans with Shortâs bombing of Belgrade. Smart bombs and Apache helicopters being controlled by generals in, Frankfort or DC alone wonât do it. It takes soldiers on the ground, controlling the technology, making the decisions, and holding the ground to be successful. What we learned in the Balkans was exercised very successfully by the ODAâs in Afghanistan and other places around the world. This propagandist needs to put his thesaurus away and read a little Robert Kaplan to better understand how we have capitalized on technology and used it to enhance the fight. Then he can sit down and STFU!
Posted by: 49 pan ||
12/29/2005 11:01 Comments ||
Top||
#4
It is thus so because we make it so. We could have just as well taken the Mongol approach and leveled and burned cities and towns that were trouble. Making birds carry their own rations to fly over the area. However, we bear the cost in blood and entanglement because we are who we are and do not engage in such behaviors. Now had we done that, be assured that Al-Guardian would have declared us the Anti-Christ and evil. On the other hand, when we spoke, we certainly would be listen to very carefully and very rarely mocked by pathetic third rate hacks writing on dog wipe.
#7
What is not said because of his own LLL insanity...is that the US military and intelligence is learning and learning fast...and dynamically changing. This is not the same USMC-USA that went into Afghanistan 4 years ago, and into Iraq almost 3 years ago.
Let the Euro-pussy drool, click his ruby slippers together. We are a far better fighting force (and trained for 21st century warfare) than we were pre 9/11.
#8
You've touched upon something which I think is fundamental to, well, to everything, anymouse.
You get a solid dose of it in the "State of Fear" background speech by Crichton - another of his masterful analyses, BTW.
Reality is composed of a googleplex of Complex Dynamic systems.
You don't take one compass reading outside San Diego and just sail to Hawaii - you adjust your course 10, 20, 30 times per day to correct for the myriad factors that affect your boat's meandering path.
And, 'tis true of everything more substantial than a Looney Liberal Lefty Brain Fart.
I, for one, am extremely happy that the opposition are simpletons - rigid, inflexible, irrational, and irrelevant.
You don't take one compass reading outside San Diego and just sail to Hawaii - you adjust your course 10, 20, 30 times per day to correct for the myriad factors that affect your boat's meandering path.
Luddite. Ever hear of the Sextant? Never allow your vessel to meander, it's unAmerican.
Posted by: Leon Clavin ||
12/29/2005 15:30 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Don't be so sensitive Calhoun. I was rethinking the post and figured that a sextant is only really useful for the occasional fix, so indeed, you would need a compass for real-time course feedback. Unless you had a quality goldie who could constantly point home.
Posted by: Leon Clavin ||
12/29/2005 16:29 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Clavin, baby, it was a metaphor. You post it, you eat it. As for telling me what to do, heh, don't be so Leon, be more Spemblish.
#14
Okay, you're right. An automatic Sextant is in order. It can also double in use like a simile.
Posted by: Leon Clavin ||
12/29/2005 17:10 Comments ||
Top||
#15
"Iraq has shown the hubris of a geostrategy that welds the philosophy of the Leviathan to military and technological power"
The paradox of an eleventh-grade vocabulary coupled with a second-grade mind.
The dainty stench of burnt envy drew me to the comments section of Little Green Footballs, where I found my reputation and personhood under mass grubworm assault. I don't know you've ever ventured into the subterranean underworld that is LGF's comments section, but it's sort of like a disorganized Nuremberg Rally, a lot of angry ruffians with nowhere to go lacking something better to do.
The catalyst for this impromptu rally was my clinical diagnosis of Daniel Pipes as "a patronizing little shit," which seemed to displease the footballers, not that any of them bothered to acquaint themselves with the causus belli (Pipes' pipsqueak character smear of Muhammed Ali). Then again, the poor dears don't seem to know the difference between an ocelot and an ocicat, another indictment of the limitations of home schooling.
This one sentence amid all that writhing distemper leapt out at me:
"May he [i.e., me] be kidnapped by 'insurgents' in Iraq then appear on an ugly net broadcast. I wonder, if in the moment before the knife started sawing into his fleashy neck if he might rethink his opinions on the GWOT."
He later corrected the spelling to "fleshy," lest anyone think I possess a flashy neck.
This sentence leapt out not only because it was directed at yours truly but because it fits a pattern of measel spots I've discerned.
More and more the rightwing militant "anti-idiotarians" (as they deludedly think of themselves)have been relishing the prospect of antiwar figures undergoing the Daniel Pearl treatment. They keep bringing it up as the retribution that'll deliver certain choice heads on a platter. In a sick irony, Daniel Pearl's marytrdom has provided a negative inspiration to certain super patriots professing to fight for truth, justice, and the American way.
For example, Anna Benson, the bodacious wife of a Mets pitcher, recently burst her bodice giving full lusty cry to an aria painting the glorious prospect of Michael Moore's neck being used as a log.
"You are a selfish, pathetic excuse for an American, and you can take your big fat ass over to Iraq and get your pig head cut off and stuck on a pig pole. Then, you can have your equally as fat wife make a documentary about how loudly you squealed while terrorists were cutting through all the blubber and chins to get that 40 pound head off of you."
And just this morning, the day after Christmas and the second day of Hannukah, blogdom's zestiest Zionist party girl elevated the discourse by dismissing the concerns of legal scholars perturbed about Bush's domestic spying thusly:
"Someone ought to tlell those legal scholars not to worry.......it's smooth sailing once those Radical Islmonazis saw through their jugulars."
(Her excitable italics.)
Civilized people were appalled, disgusted, and sobered by the vicious execution of Daniel Pearl, and the beheadings that followed. But many of the warbloggers are not civilized people. It is clear that despite their sincere protestations of horror, rage, and pity, the execution of Daniel Pearl aroused them on some primitive, subconscious level. They got off on it. It functioned as death porn to their seething, frustrated psyches. (Frustrated, because the war in Iraq simply hasn't gone the way they thought it would or should. They have been denied the glorious clearcut victory they craved.) The beheading ritual tapped into their sadistic impulses, and excited their own fantasies of torturing their foes. When rightwing bloggers and posters conjure that under Islam, Democrats--which they've come to call dhimmicrats--will get what's coming to them (i.e., the business end of a butcher's blade), it's as if it's a horrible fate that couldn't possibly happen to them*--because it's a death wish directed outward. The Islamic terrorists serve as proxies and stand-ins in this imaginary theater of cruelty, enacting what they (the warbloggers) would like to mete out to us (their domestic adversaries). Sometimes the punishment they seek is more Jacobean, as when Michael Fumento greeted Cindy Sheehan's threat to tie herself to the fence in Crawford, Texas to protest the 2000th military death in Iraq with the sentiment, Good, let her lash herself to the fence: "Leave her there and maybe the crows will do the world a favor and eat her tongue out."
It's no accident that it is the rightwing bloggers and pundits who have been avid about defending the use of torture against suspected terrorists. Nor is it an accident that many of them pooh-poohed Abu Ghraib, sluffing it off as no more harmless than fraternity hazing. But what their decapitation odes reveal is that what they'd really like to do is permit torture closer to home. Domesticate it. Trivialize it. Completely destigmatize it as a tool of the state.
I don't worry about this being actually implemented, though I worry fractionally more every day. I'm interested in it more as a pathological rash afflicting the more rabid warbloggers. It's a sign of impotence, this lurid fury of theirs. It bugs the hell out of them that those of us who opposed the war have turned out to be right. It thwarts the hell out of them that Ward Churchill still has tenure, that they couldn't convict Sami Al-Arian down in Florida, and that their latest purple-finger festival fizzled out so soon. If postwar Iraq swirls down the drain, they'll be looking for someone to blame, and since they never blame themselves for anything (a bedrock neoconservative trait), they leaves nobody here but us chickens. I dread to think of the imaginary punishments they'll devise for us appeasers, turncoats, and traitors; I'm sure they'll be quite vivid. I may have to quarantine myself from these sites to preserve my serene disposition.
(*as another LGF poster put it: "Funny thing, the liberal mindset: expend all energy on phantom 'enemys', meanwhile the real enemy pounds at the fucking gate, ready to chop off their heads." Note: "their," not "our." LGF'ers have a touching faith in the undetachablility of their own heads under the grisly Islamofascism they spend so many hours daydreaming about.) To paraphrase the inimitable Lileks, Jimmy Wolcott's work not only defines the word "arch", but reminds you why no one uses it anymore.
#3
I thought Anna Benson wa a lusty nut....turns out she's got some redeeming qualities after all. People who, by their deliberate or ignorant actions increase the amount of risk to me and my family, are due a spit of mucous in the face and a bitchslap of reality, not civilitty. Moore is just such a pig, and he does it for profit
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/29/2005 16:29 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Who is this self-important, overly urbane twit? Iâve never heard of him.... and I certainly donât spend a great deal of my valuable time contemplating the proper torturing or snuffing of liberals. Well, not physically anyhow.
Let me get this straight Mr. Effete Yankee Author:
1) âIt bugs the hell out of them that those of us who opposed the war have turned out to be right.â
Are you insane? You havenât been âprovenâ to be right. Far from it. Oh, right, youâre the author of Attack Poodles and Other Media Mutants: The Looting of the News in a Time of Terror, currently #94,760 on the Amazon sales list. Which doesnât exactly make you Gore Vidal, does it?
2) âBut many of the warbloggers are not civilized people. It is clear that despite their sincere protestations of horror, rage, and pity, the execution of Daniel Pearl aroused them on some primitive, subconscious level.â
You sir are confusing what you WANT your political enemies to be with what they actually ARE, which is pretty disappointing coming from a self-professed intellectual. Of course, so is calling other intellectuals âpatronizing little shits,â but lets not split your thinning hair(s).
3) âThe Islamic terrorists serve as proxies and stand-ins in this imaginary theater of cruelty, enacting what they (the warbloggers) would like to mete out to us (their domestic adversaries).â
We prefer to beat you in elections, actually. So far weâve been rather good at it too. There will (naturally) be setbacks at some point in the future, but itâs likely we will continue to win in the long run. If you dislike us so much, why not outwit us politically rather than boring us with your condescending, impotent prose?
Oh, thatâs right: itâs all you can do.
4) âI dread to think of the imaginary punishments they'll devise for us appeasers, turncoats, and traitors; I'm sure they'll be quite vivid.â
Iâve got one: I cruelly condemn you to read the Constitution (with out closing your eyes and skipping over the first two amendments of the Bill of Rights), The Federalist Papers, and Professors Allen and Schweikartâs A Patriot's History of the United States. Or would that compromise your âserene disposition?â
#5
It's really nice to have the likes of a Jimmy Wolcott drawing attention to himself. All you do is shoot a back azimuth from any position he takes and you can't be too far off morally.
#6
Daniel Pearl was not executed. He was murdered. Murder most foul. And yes, that did reach a deep chord within me. Did it not touch Mr. Wolcott at all? He allegedly shares an avocation with the late Mr. Pearl. They are authors, writers, reporters. If Mr. Wolcott had decided to report on events first-hand in Pakistan, had arranged for an interview, and then found himself abducted, humiliated and slaughtered like a sheep on video for thousands of jihadiwannabees to cackle over, would he wish his death to be ignored and tut-tutted over with a knowing glance at cocktail parties?
Christopher Hitchens also writes for Vanity Fair. He harbors no great affection for President Bush. But he is honest enough to open his eyes and understand that America's choices are limited right now. We must fight this battle NOW, or try to explain two generations from now that we didn't want to hurt the Islamists' self-esteem.
Calling Pearl's slaughter an "execution" in an article on terrorism is what finally convinced me to cancel my decades-long subscription to National Geographic. I miss the photography and archaeology articles, but I won't support that sort of vile "objectivity" any more (not to mention their Chicken Little global warming litany).
While world is watching Saddam Hussainâs trial for killing Kurds, Pakistanâs general Musharraf, a self appointed president, has ordered killing of Balochis. Ethnically Balochis are related to Kurds who centuries ago migrated from Kurdistan to Balochistan. While Balochi language shares many words with Kurd language, Balochis share fate with their far off Kurd brothers. Kurds have been tortured and killed by Saddam Hussain Balochis are being killed by Pakistan Army. Right now, general Musharraf is doing this despicable Job.
A few months back, General Musharraf personally threatened Balochis on a TV channel that he would hit them and they even wonât know what has hit them. During last 6 years of his tyrannical rule, General Musharraf thwarted every threat to his power through any meansâlegal or illegal. He collaborated with criminals and corrupts where necessary and kidnapped and tortured his opponents where nothing else worked.
Since his illegal take over, Balochis have also been challenging his legitimacy to power. They openly challenge his claim to power and want him to go home as he was fired by a legitimate prime minister. They want provincial autonomy and due share in local and federal resources.
Pak Fauj which has been in illegitimate control of state of Pakistan since the creation of this country, it hates even mildest opposition to its right to rule Pakistan. Military generals, who rule Pakistan on behalf of Pak Fauj, ruthlessly bomb and kill people where there is dissent.
They killed thousands of Bengalis who challenged their right to rule. Eventually Bengalis got relief while 90 thousand of Pak Faujies disgracefully surrendered to Indian Army in 1971 war. Then East Pakistan became Bangladesh. Even this disgraceful defeat did not force Pak Fauj change its doctrine.
Itâs the same Pak Fauj with same doctrine to illegally rule the state of Pakistan and bomb and kill the people if they resist.
Before going to killing spree in Balochistan, general Musharraf started debate on Kala Bagh dam. While his soldiers are killing innocent Balochis, hundreds have been killed by now; he was talking to âyes menâ in Sindh about Kala Bagh Dam.
Even the people in largest province Punjab are focusing on Kala Bagh Dam. They are as unconcerned about genocide in Balochistan as they were unconcerned to genocide in East Pakistan.
Saddam Hussain is on trial for killing Kurds, but will general Musharraf ever be tried for killing Balochis? Perhaps not, because none of the Pakistani generals has ever been tried for his crimes. More over, this is not the first genocide general Musharraf has ordered. He has been implicated in genocides before. Reports are still available about the genocide he ordered in Gilgit.
The people of Pakistan need to forget about Kala Bagh Dam and focus on Balochistan. They need to play their role to stop Pak Fauj from this killing spree. Without East Pakistan, Pakistan is still there, but without Balochistan, Pakistan wonât be there any longer.
Posted by: john ||
12/29/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
1. Foiled in his attempts so far to drive a wedge between the Marri and the Bugti tribes of Balochistan, Pakistan's military dictator President General Pervez Musharraf has ordered not only an intensification of the air strikes against the members of the revolting Marri tribe in the Kohlu and adjoining areas of Balochistan, but also an extension of the ground and air mounted operations against the members of the Bugti tribe in the Dera Bugti and adjoining areas.
2. Apart from rushing army and para-military reinforcements to the Marri and Bugti areas, he has also shifted four more helicopters, hitherto deployed on quake relief work in the Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK), to Balochistan for use against the Marris and the Bugtis. Now, 12 helicopters are being used as gunships to quell the spreading second war of Baloch independence, spearheaded by the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA). Of these, eight are being used against the Marris and four against the Bugtis. In addition to the use of helicopters, there have been three more air strikes against Marri youth. Representatives of the Balochs have alleged that the helicopters have also been using napalm against Baloch youth.
3. As a result of these intensified operations, the casualties have been mounting. At least 160 Balochs have been killed since December 18, 2005---- 120 Marris and 40 Bugtis. A large number of injured Balochs has been prevented by the security forces from seeking medical assistance. The security forces have shut off electricity and water supply to many Marri and Bugti areas and blamed the BLA for having done so by firing rockets at electricity transmission towers and water supply lines.
4. Musharraf and senior Army officers as well as leaders of the Musharraf-created Pakistan Muslim League (Qaide Azam), which is the only political formation supporting the military action, have denied undertaking any military operations against the Balochs. Instead, they have been projecting it as a law enforcement operation undertaken by the para-military forces against "fararis" (criminal absconders) who, according to Musharraf, have been trying to obstruct the economic development of Balochistan.
5. At the same time, they have also been projecting the operations as directed against the clandestine training camps of the BLA located in Marri territory in the Kohlu area. The army has claimed to have destroyed at least six so-called training camps and says seven more are still functioning.
6. It is learnt that the decision to extend the operations to the Bugti area was taken by Musharraf following an ambush of a convoy of the Frontier Corps in which over 15 para-military personnel were killed. There have been at least two ambushes of security forces convoys in the Marri area too, resulting in the death of about 20 members of the security forces. The Army has imposed an iron curtain in the areas where the war of independence is raging and has not been allowing details of the fighting to be disseminated by the media.
7. Even while projecting the operations as law enforcement action against absconding criminals, the military spokesmen have not denied that the action was provoked by a recent incident in which rockets were fired at a meeting addressed by Musharraf in the Kohlu area. The BLA has denied firing any rockets on Musharraf's public meeting and has accused the Musharraf regime of stage-managing the incident in order to use it as a pretext for ordering air strikes against the Balochs fighting for their independence.
8. Replying to statements made by military spokesmen and some members of the Government that no Government can sit quiet when the head of state is sought to be assassinated by criminal elements, Baloch and other political leaders belonging to the minority communities such as Mr. Afsandyar Wali Khan, the Pashtun leader of the Awami National Party of the North-West Frontier Province, have pointed out that even if the Government's contention was correct, it did not call for air strikes on the Balochs. They have referred to the two attempts to kill Musharraf in December, 2003, and the subsequent attempts to kill Mr. Shaukat Aziz, the present Prime Minister, and the Corps Commander of Karachi in which Punjabis were involved and asked whether Musharraf ordered air strikes against the Punjabis after those incidents.
9. In response to the military operations, the BLA has confined its tactics to guerilla actions directed against train and other means of transport, gas production and pipeline facilities and ambushes of military and para-military convoys. It has avoided a frontal confrontation with the security forces, in which it will be the loser. It has been trying to extend its guerilla operations to Punjab. It has also sought networking with the revolting Shias of Gilgit and Baltistan and the Sindhis, who have been angered by the attempts of Musharraf to force through the implementation of a project for the construction of the much controversial Kalabagh dam. The dam is meant for the benefit of the Pubjabi farmers. The Sindhis are strongly opposing it on the ground that it would reduce the water available for Sindhi farmers.
10. The Baloch nationalist elements have appealed to the international community and the United Nations to take cognisance of the ant-Baloch military operations and force the Army to stop them. They have also appealed to international human rights organisations to send their observers to Balochistan and to have the issue raised before the UN Human Rights Commission in Geneva during its forthcoming meeting in February.
11. The Baloch nationalists have assured the international community that an independent Balochistan would put an end to the activities of Al Qaeda and the Taliban from its territory and co-operate with it in the war against international jihadi terrorism. It has also assured the international community that an independent Balochistan would not become another Bangladesh---- a hotbed of Wahabi/Salafi fundamentalism.
12. Pro-Independence Uighur elements based in the West and in Pakistani Punjab have made overtures to the BLA and offered to co-operate with it in a joint freedom-struggle against the Punjabis in Balochistan and the Han Chinese in the Xinjiang region of China. The BLA has not so far accepted this offer since it does not want to be seen as anti-Chinese despite its opposition to the Gwadar project being constructed by the Chinese in Balochistan.
13. Despite this, there is considerable nervousness among Chinese engineers and other experts working in Balochistan. Measures for their physical security have been strengthened by the Pakistani authorities, who had also kept the Chinese informed of their decision to launch air strikes on the Balochs.
(The writer is Additional Secretary (retd), Cabinet Secretariat, Govt. of India, and, presently, Director, Institute for Topical Studies, Chennai. E-mail: itschen36@gmail.com)
Posted by: john ||
12/29/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Roger Simon posted a link to a Michael Crichton lecture in Washington, D. C. last month. He discusses the background to his novel 'State of Fear' and how it applies to just about everything. It's long, but a 'must read'. It could probably post on page three or opinion.
He closes with:
"Is this really the end of the world? Earthquakes, hurricanes, floods?
No, we simply live on an active planet. Earthquakes are continuous, a million and a half of them every year, or three every minute. A Richter 5 quake every six hours, a major quake every 3 weeks. A quake as destructive as the one in Pakistan every 8 months. Itâs nothing new, itâs right on schedule.
At any moment there are 1,500 electrical storms on the planet. A tornado touches down every six hours. We have ninety hurricanes a year, or one every four days. Again, right on schedule. Violent, disruptive, chaotic activity is a constant feature of our globe.
Is this the end of the world? No: this is the world.
#4
State of Fear was great reading - I passed it on to the Fatwa-issuer of Alaska, and he liked it too....well-documentsed and footnoted debunking of enviros and the global warming hysteria
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/29/2005 16:25 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Actually there are two different ways the world ends: the lesser and the greater. The lesser end of the world is when YOU die. The greater end of the world is when I die...
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
