Memorial Day Thoughts:

This Intel Dump post by Philip Carter provides some valuable, Memorial Day food for thought. (Link via Mark Kleiman.)

Who can disagree that we should remember the servicemen and women who have given their lives? But the link you provide says not only that, but adds that "The best way for us to honor the dead, while still engaged in war, is to continue the fight." Since you had to sneak in a political remark, those who disagree are entitled to respond to it. Many of us do not believe that the way to honor those who have died in vain is to kill more soldiers needlessly.
5.29.2006 10:46am
Ship Erect (mail) (www):
And yet, we cannot afford to take time away from our mission to hold memorial services, barbecues, or baseball games.

So... a day of memorials with no memorial services? Does this strike anyone else as weird? I guess it's fine, however, to post on a blog on Memorial Day, instead of going to the recruitment office and asking to be sent to the frontline of this war that is so important to "continue."

I would think that barbecues and baseball would be fine ways to honor fallen soldiers--they're both as American as apple pie (or should we not eat that, either?).
5.29.2006 11:11am
Freder Frederson (mail):
And yet, we cannot afford to take time away from our mission to hold memorial services, barbecues, or baseball games.

Read the guy's bio before you criticize him--he's currently on active duty in Iraq. Therefore, the comment is perfectly appropriate.
5.29.2006 11:18am
Ship Erect (mail) (www):
Oh my--I do apologize! Foot, enter mouth.
5.29.2006 11:30am
I know that Professor Bernstein, as the ultimate arbiter of unrestricted free speech (no matter who it might hurt and without regard for its actual value), left the comments off on his last post as a I'll comment here. Sorry to Professor Adler for the clutter and to all that feel this is off-topic.

Professor Bernstein, regardless of how we all feel about the statements of the Arab women in prison, you seem unperturbed by the idea that there are children being raised in prison. Children that did nothing except be born to the wrong parent. Never mind that this violates the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, not to mention the strict advice of child psychologists worldwide.

I recognize the disgust for the Arab women shown on television (ignoring, for a second, that Israeli television may have made some editing choices in their coverage.) Still, you find NOTHING wrong with the idea that children are born into prison with no recourse to get out?
5.29.2006 11:38am
Bottomfish (mail):
The solution to Disgusted's problem would be to either prevent conjugal visits, or take the children away from their mothers and put them up for adoption. I don't see either alternative as being more humane. Or is Disgusted saying that the women should not go to jail at all?
5.29.2006 12:54pm
Anderson (mail) (www):
Disgusted, I don't quite follow your point (&god knows, I am no fan of DB or of Israeli occupation policy).

The children are being raised in prison, presumably, b/c that's their mothers' wish. Was there anything to suggest that these women couldn't provide for their children to be raised by other family members outside the prison?

Or are you arguing against the policy of conjugal visits for female prisoners? That's certainly plausible, but then I suppose Israel would be criticized for denying said visits.

In a penal system that posits everyone as male, female prisoners pose unaccustomed problems. But unless being female (like being short?) is going to be an excuse to avoid prison, then we have to consider whether the female prisoners haven't participated in creating their own problems.

(It would be a lot more helpful for DB to open comments than for him to create the temptation for trespassing into other threads. If DB thinks the VC community fails to treat his remarks with sufficient respect, I don't think there's anyone requiring him to read the comments.)
5.29.2006 12:59pm
Is it a prison for you if you are with your mom, and she wants you to be there?
5.29.2006 1:01pm
Harry Eagar (mail):
I'd add to 'continue the fight' -- 'against the strategic foe.'

As long as Bush's first commitment is to appeasement of Sunni Muslims, this fight isn't going anywhere.
5.29.2006 1:26pm
Mark Kleiman (mail) (www):
Phil Carter's sublety as a writer seems to have exceeded the subtlety of some of his readers. CPT. Carter's post, linked to above, itself contains a link. In the sentence
All we can do is honor that which they stood for, and fulfill in our words and deeds the ideal which they died for.

the phrase "words and deeds" links to this Washington Post op-ed by former Navy General Counsel Alberto J. Mora.

Mora's piece is a forceful and eloquent attack on the mistreatment of prisoners -- which Mora as Navy GC strogly resisted when it was ordered by his superiors at the Pentagon at the behest of the White House -- as a betrayal of American values.

So Carter's plea is for us to "imitate the words and deeds" of Mora, the opponent of torture, and to "continue the fight" to make this country live up to its ideals.

As a soldier on active duty, Carter is, properly, limited in the criticism he can offer concerning the civilians who ordered him to the front. All he can do is offer a hint, and hope that (some of) his readers are clever enough to take it.
5.29.2006 3:12pm
Humble Law Student:

You don't have some right to post comments on this blog. If one of the posters doesn't want comments, they have every right to not "open comments."

Your childish temper tantrum is what is digusting...
5.29.2006 11:27pm