Scouting Report From DragonCon

At the end of August, there is a con. This con is not the biggest, but it is by no means small. Is this Dragon-con and it is open to one and all.

Seussian rhymes seem appropriate to describe my first time visit to the biggest Atlanta based con as the trip was a carefree mish-mash of genres with slightly disturbing subtext. Most of you have probably gone to the Labor Day weekend event, but I hadn’t because above all else, even fanboy-status, I’m cheap. And Dragon Con is not. But the chance to go for one day sprang up, and now I gift to those future noobs my basic working knowledge of waiting in line and what to expect. Practical gifts, like socks on Christmas. Garm was with me, and complained non-stop about every flaw, so, the mistakes I made are fresh in my mind. And if not, I can reference the enumerated email he sent me.

Race/Class/Profession:

Dragon Con is a four day-ish convention with sci-fi, fantasy, horror, anime/cartoons, cos-play (dressing up as characters only geeks recognize) and comics. About four hotels in the Hyaitt regency area host events in all their ball rooms, exhibit halls, and broom closets. You pay get a badge and start going to presentations, Q&As with actors, roundtable discussions, art exhibits, demonstrations, autograph signings, and other stuff I didn’t have enough time to see. It’s crowded and confusing and the guide book has a class on how to read the guide book. Seriously. Dragon Con is also a mix of Ren Fest, Halloween, a Trekkie Convention, and the of Comic Book Guy’s family reunion. Here’s the website, I suggest you read up and plan ahead because there’s too much confusion to just play it by ear. Oh, and waiting in line, plenty of that at popular events and registration.

There and Back Again:

You really do not want to drive back and forth with gas like it is, and with events going to the early morning in some cases. Securing local lodgings is a must. If you’re doing the whole con, register early and get a room in the area. I suggest printing your own maps from the internet for getting there and walking. Walking up is easy, as you can just follow the growing crowd of storm troopers and pirates, but finding the right building can be a time waster. Parking is amble, but drop the extra cash for a nearby spot because wandering back to the three dollar lot at night can be an adventure of its own. I departed the con to find a Romero-like unlit lot with scattered, lifeless bodies covering the concrete, which slowly stirred as we made our way to the car. This impromptu game of “don’t wake up the homeless” was super-fun, but all the same, probably something to avoid in the future.

The Mos Eisley Cantina:

So, while on my short-lived scouting trip I visited a number of events.
First, was the Q and A with Nathon Fillion and Alan Tudyk. Incredibly long wait to get in, but they didn’t start until both brown-coated super-fans and the rest of us muggles were in the cramped seating. The actors gave away signed prizes to the questioners and told funny stories. Very enjoyable and the con has many similar forums.

Next was the [adult swim] panel. First off, Jackson Publick and Doc Hammer were sitting a few empty rows behind us, so, much to the embarrassment of Garm, I gave Doc the old “what’s up” wave/head nod and the Venture Bros. hand sign. The [adult swim] panel was dressed as dragons (well, as a 6 year old might be costumed as a dragon) and acted as if the event was a forum for human/dragon relations—absurd humor, but funny. Clips from next years line up were shown and then in-character questions were fielded. They run a tight PR ship because when nobody rushed to the microphone their staffer underlings quickly formed a line and started a heated back and forth about dragons, dragon porn, and golf. It was funny, but not an insightful discussion of the good-to-great television they make. I left thinking they must vacation in coal mines because their jobs seem to be nothing but cool and fun.

After a 20 dollar hamburger, we checked out the Cthulhu movie panel. Though a small forum, it was in some ways the most fun because the horror based panel, which included the comic book editor of Hellboy, echoed many of the same ideas and opinions about the horror genre one cannot just insert into everyday conversation without ending up on a government watch list. We got real substance, real insight, and a hopeful feeling that some people are trying to save the genre.

Last we popped into the animated history of Batman. In an extremely overcrowded room, fanboys showed and were shown clips from various Batman cartoons. It was mildly interesting, but by that time in the evening the beer had begun to flow like wine and nary a minute went by without someone throwing down a geek gauntlet.

Of course, the big draw for most nerds is the scores of scantily-clad costumed womens (most of who were, yet again, on the tattooed arm of some loser). I myself fell in love half a dozen times, but bravely brooded from afar so as to avoid the risk of losing my soul—damn this gypsy curse! After a subtle but concerted effort on my part to stay really late and study the effects of alcohol on the fanged, chainmailed, and fairy-winged sirens was rebuffed by Garm, I left feeling at the very least the con had social aspects which were well worth future exploration. As one veteran put it, “Dragon Con is the only place your prowess as a man will be judged by the size of your long-box.” Moreover, it’s a place where you’ll meet thousands of people that think your ability to completely reenact the movie Predator by yourself is a healthy, non-disturbing skill.

If you’ve never been to a con don’t wait like I did. Go, you’ll have some fun, you’ll see some cool stuff, and meet tons of people with similar interests. As for Dragon con, with some planning more in depth than mine, it’s a good time for all manner of geeks and freaks—just try not to stare.

Golf Clap

Dude, you're doing something very, very right:

NEW CASTLE — A report of a family fight Wednesday afternoon in New Castle didn't turn out to be what police expected.

A nine-year-old girl called 911 after she awoke from a nap and heard her mother screaming. She went to her mother's bedroom and thought her mother was being attacked.

Turns out, her parents were just enjoying marital relations.

But the New Castle Police Department responded to the little girl's call, and even filed a report, noting "Mom and Daddy were involved in a romantic moment and daughter mistook them as fighting."

I think I'd carry a copy of that report around in my wallet. . .

Yes, We're Alive

One of my two possible endorsements this year. I just can't narrow it down. . . more later.

Inside Joke in Bones Finally

So, David Boreanaz from Angel fame is reading a comic book in the bath tub in the last episode of Bones. He's reading Green Lantern. He did the voice for Hal Jordan for New Frontier and he's been a maybe on the star of the live action. Just innocent fun or an omen? Anyway, that's an excuse to post this.

New Frontier and other bed-time stories for the New Left

Justice League: The New Frontier is the animated adaption of “DC: The New Frontier.” This late 50s period piece re-tells the Golden Age transition to Silver Age, with political themes. JL: TNF is a revisionist DC history for comics and America—a love letter to circa 1960 comics and the New Left’s rise.

Beautiful Kirby-like models and editing make a well-paced geek-fest. Great actors; Jeremy Sistro vocalizes Batman with his chilling, dark tone. Timm and Cooke trim the comics to a brisk, faithful film—almost too faithful, with no big surprises. The villainous Centre speaks continuously through crazies, tying storylines together. There are no“this is Sparta!” moments, but numerous DCU cameos.

In this re-imagined age, the gov’ment persecutes masked heroes threatening the status quo during the so-called “Red Scare.” Many may be surprised the era’s establishment was the Democrats. AG Palmer, HCUA’s Hart, and even RFK hunted communists. These heroes stand in for activists and revolutionaries, the socialists pushing the democrats left and ushering in the Kennedy presidency.

The New Left was, with others, in the civil rights movement, and in the book the hammer wielding John Henry fought the KKK. In the movie, J’onn J’onzz takes the role as the mistreated outsider or subversive: fearing our xenophobia, his people viewed as a threat, yet won over by King Faraday’s secret hope for some utopian future.

Cooke calls it going from John Wayne to Paul Newman, with Rick Flagg representing the old traditionalists and Hal Jordan being the new enlightened hero. In Korea, Jordan would not fire on MiGs, doubting the goal was worth killing or dying. Odd, considering millions lived because the US stalemated the North. Flagg and Jordan’s space mission goes awry and the secret WMD arsenal threatens the planet. Flagg’s answer is self-destruction, pushing the proverbial big, red button. Jordan, the youthful hero, fights, attempting to land the symbolic “Ship of State.”

Superman is in the middle—an uneasy establishment agent. In the book, he’s working inside for change. Largely sidelined, he finally demands the Left’s metaphorical factions rally to stop the Centre.

A laser-belching, flying island means something. Cooke claims the Centre is communism. A fair metaphor, since socialists, while sharing communists ideals, historically have resisted politely. This monster is an island onto itself, populated with dinosaurs; opposed to human progress. Perhaps, the Centre is the status quo/political-center. Either way, the Centre is destroyed by shrinking it and destabilizing it—there’s an analogy.

"There are no Democrats, no Republicans. No hawks, no doves," King Faraday pronounces as the reconciled Left marches The Right Stuff style into battle. This sums up the ridiculous notion non-Democrats had any power in the late 50s. The enlightened, pacifist hero that wouldn’t kill for freedom or suffering, rejects the Centre’s self-declared dominance, “the Centre will hold,” and wills the world safe for the nanny-state.

The book and the movie’s montage ending echo with JFK’s speech. Interestingly, the JFK Library website’s transcript does not mirror the audio. This source’s errors are repeated in the book, and both works’ completely delete whole passages. These deletions show JFK heralding liberalism/socialism and attacking Communism. The italics lines are from the movie:

…the pioneers of old gave up their safety, their comfort and sometimes their own lives to build our new West. They were not the captives of their own doubts, nor the prisoners of their own price tags. They were determined to make that new world strong and free, an example to the world, to overcome its hazards and its hardships, to conquer the enemies that threatened from without and within.

The line: “Their motto was not "every man for himself"--but ‘all for the common cause,’” JFK did not say though quoted in the book.

Today some would say that those struggles are all over – that all the horizons have been explored – that all the battles have been won – that there is no longer an American frontier. … and we stand today on the edge of a New Frontier – the frontier of the 1960's – the frontier of unknown opportunities and perils, the frontier of unfulfilled hopes and threats. … Beyond that frontier are the uncharted areas of science and space, unsolved problems of peace and war, unconquered pockets of ignorance and prejudice, unanswered questions of poverty and surplus. … But I believe the times require imagination and courage and perseverance. I am asking each of you to be pioneers on that New Frontier. My call is to the young in heart, regardless of age – to all who respond to the Scriptural call: “Be strong and of good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed.”

The book keeps “poverty and surplus” and the Scripture quote. Both omit lines attacking promised futures, “where taxes are always low and subsidies ever high.” JFK asks, “…whether this nation … can compete with the single-minded advance of the Communist system.” This omitted anti-communist line changes the speech’s context.

Can a nation organized and governed such as ours endure? That is the real question. Have we the nerve and the will? Can we carry through in an age where we will witness not only new breakthroughs in weapons of destruction, but also a race for mastery of the sky and the rain, the ocean and the tides, the far side of space and the inside of men’s minds?

JFK never said the next part, "Are we up to the task--are we equal to the challenge? Are we willing to match the Russian sacrifice of the present for the future--or must we sacrifice our future in order to enjoy the present?" The book drops the Russian bit. JFK’s answer to these challenges was “all for the common cause”—matching the Russian philosophy?!—no wonder he skipped it!

That is the question of the New Frontier. …a choice that lies not merely between two men or two parties, but between the public interest and private comfort – between national greatness and national decline – between the fresh air of progress and the stale, dank atmosphere of “normalcy” – between dedication and mediocrity.

Not in the movie. The “two parties” line is not in the book; removing the words partisanship.

All mankind waits upon our decision. A whole world looks to see what we will do. And we cannot fail that trust. And we cannot fail to try.

Both works pick and chose, eliminating the Cold War context and promoting gilded exhortations for collectivism and socialistic reform. Doubtless this reading is disputable, but —much like this article—clearly there is some message. The audience can digest it themselves, if they acknowledge they are, in fact, being fed something. Otherwise they may just swallow it whole.

Superman Says, "Buy Acme Brand Products!"

So, we've all seen this Stride Gum ad where the long-lasting flavor bring sales to a stand still.



Not a bad series of TV spots; funny, ironic, and they even have one ad exploring a character's deja vu of being stuck in the ad cycle.

But now they have really done it. Last, Thursday's Smallville was one long Stride ad. See, Smallville likes to have s little fun playing around with some origins--often fake-outs that geeks may enjoy or groan at. So, they whip out a little diddy about "plastic man" (who isn't the well-known one) tying in with the return of Pete Ross, and--trumpets--Stride gum. Ross chews some kryptonite infused Stride gum and, of course, becomes stretchy (a trans-flesh in Ultimate-U parlance). He found it in an abandoned Stride factory where a band he was roadying for was playing.

Clark: "That place is closed down already?!"
Chloe: "Maybe next time they won't make the flavor last so long."

I. Kid. You. Not.

As Ross departed, he pops one more piece of gum into his gob, holds the product face-out like it was a pack of Mentos, and heaves it at a smiling pretty girl. I like to think of the ad men that came up with this as floating leg-crossed around board room table in a Zen-like peace. This is one of those things that so transcends retarded that it comes out the other end as genius. Retarded? Retarded like a fox.

A+ B Movies

The Last Boy Scout is a "love it or hate it" kind of movie. But, whether one of the Die Hard sequel scripts that didn't make it or just a zany buddy cop movie, this movie has nothing if not great lines. Somebody had to watch this before Die Hard 3, because the banter is like some beta-rough draft. Halle Berry, Damon Wayans, and Bruce Willis turn in a classic that is so "B" it can break most rules.

So, Willis is a private detective and former Secret Service agent that got canned for hitting a congressman. He's hired by a former pro-football player's stripper girlfriend (Berry) for protection. Turns out she was messing around with the team owner who was doing dirty deals with said congressman.

6 or 7 murders later, one committed by Willis, the game's afoot at a the football stadium. But the real greatness lies in the concept of the man against a world of evil. Willis is from a different world--a world of honor and duty--but we meet him after the real world has broken him and his family. Perhaps some conservative fantasy, the violent action strips away the modern baggage and reconnects him with his family on the basic level of protector. It is vintage, world weary anti-hero Willis wrapped in a twisting, crazy plot. It ain't Shakespeare, but hits with two fists of action and comedy in the head and the gut.

I Can't Resist . . .

posting this picture, mostly because I can imagine this conversation actually taking place:

Geek Parodies

Parody of geek favorites has maybe hit an all time high these days. On Adult Swim you have the Venture Brothers and Robot Chicken hammering out laughs about everything from the Fantastic Four to He-Man. Recently, Family Guy did an hour long parody of Star Wars: A New Hope. Truly, you can find many parodies on-line, but let's take a second to look at two geeky parodies that are better than good.

First up, Seanbaby.com; this little site is pretty R-rated, dirty but also very funny. Think David Spade or Dennis Miller ripping on the Superfriends.He's got about three sections on comic stuff and some more on video games. One section focuses on those old Hostess Fruit Pie ads that use to be in comic books. In the ads, some hero would defeat some villain in a couple of panels by occupying them and their murderous urges with the irresistible taste of jelly filled pastries. To the right of the bit-o-seventies-craziness is Seanbaby's commentary. Here's a chime-in from Doom himself, which nails these strange ads:

"Doom admits he cannot conceive of how the Trapster's plan failed. It had all things necessary - a nondescript henchman who is distracted with food, a metal base with no personnel or defenses, and doors that are easily punched off their hinges. Doom feels the only thing missing from its perfection was an air vent leading from the outside directly to the central control room. Oh yes-- a tiny flying robot who beeps hello and occasionally bonks into walls and makes weeping sounds might be nice."

If that's not enough, Seanbaby.com has a section on old, insane, racist, or just plain dumb ads from comic book yore with commentary and ratings. But the best is the SuperFriends page. He has video clips and funny character profiles, plus little one panel strips made from screen captures. One goes something like:

Lex Luthor: I have just invented the bathrobe!

Grodd: Bathrobe? What does it do?

Lex: When worn by gorillas the bathrobe renders them not (bleep)ing naked! Just look at you! Sitting there all naked!

Good stuff!

Another parody is a bit more esoteric. Calls for Cthulu is a YouTube show and blog. It's based on the fiction of guy named H. P. Lovecraft. If you don't know of him you've probably at least seen horror films deeply influenced by his work like In the Mouth of Madness. Cthulu is an "alien god,” and giant monster with an octopus face. He’s sleeping under most of the Pacific Ocean and he wants to eat your soul! Well, sort of, that’s the dime version.

In Calls, Cthulu runs a call-in talk show. The whole premise is that this inescapable horror is a dishing out advice and answering questions for average joes. He slips from ranting madly about rivers running red with blood and madness engulfing humanity to breaking down how long to wait to call girl you met. He also bags on the evil god of Scientology who video links in to take his abuse.

You kind of have to have met a Cult of Cthulu role playing freak to understand what a great send up these videos makes. Cthulu is an unfathomable “elder god” whose rise means the complete destruction of mankind and he’s giving out T-Shirts for any of us that make past the first wave. Calls takes a deep, rich mythology and brilliantly applies satire. Not sure if it has legs, but this parody takes something many people take waaaayyy too seriously and craps all over it--in a manner that's fun for all concerned.

Howitshouldhaveended.com is a another video site. Their website might take awhile to load, but HISHE is on YouTube as well. It parodies a number of mainstream movies, but it also hits movies like Superman, Spider-Man 3, Star Wars, and Lord of the Rings. Now, one can easily find funny comic parodies on sites like YouTube or Newgrounds, but its the premise that makes parodies solid gold. In HISHE, they make fun of the entire movie by questioning the ending. Like in Superman, the movie establishes early on that he's essentially a demi-god and then Luthor threatens him with two missiles. In the HISHE version, he hilariously dispatches the danger and then spends the rest of his time having coffee with Batman. The ending is the keystone to any good movie, and by completely undermining it HISHE has a premise that seems to work as long as Hollywood keeps cranking out the movies.

Nothing Racist About This

Hendrik Hertzberg:

"To deal first with the obvious: Rice may be “only” the second woman and the second African-American to be Secretary of State, but she is indisputably the highest-ranking black female official ever to have served in any branch of the United States government. Her nomination to a constitutional executive office would cost McCain the votes of his party’s hardened racists and incorrigible misogynists. They are surely fewer in number, though, than the people who would like to participate in breaking the glass ceiling of race or gender but, given the choice, would rather do so in a more timid way, and/or without abandoning their party. And with Rice on the ticket the Republicans could attack Clinton or Obama with far less restraint."

First off, what hardened racists? I've met many a repub and they never introduced themselves as hardened racists, there are no "plantation republicans" like the log cabin republicans. But see how it is written "his party's hardened racists." Not "lose the votes of hardened racists who might otherwise vote republican," no, the GOP's full racists and misogynists, like we seat a delegation of klansmen at the convention.

But that aside what is with these lines:

"given the choice, would rather do so in a more timid way, and/or without abandoning their party. And with Rice on the ticket the Republicans could attack Clinton or Obama with far less restraint."

So, let me get this striaght. 1) Rice is a timid breakthrough. Is this because she's some uncle tom, or does this writer wish to suggest that a VP spot is a "timid" breakthrough? Is she somehow more "safe" for us cross-burning types? 2) So, then Rice allows us to attack the black guy and the woman in ways we couldn't get away with otherwise? Something like following up a prejudiced joke with "some of my best friends are black?" Wow. Just wow. Oh. Oh, wait there more--he's got a little more bile--wait a sec.

"Choosing Rice would be a trick. Her failures would be buried in an avalanche of positive publicity... But the trick would not be an entirely cynical one. Her ascension, though nowhere near as momentous a breakthrough as the election of Obama or Clinton, would be a breakthrough all the same. In this connection, a kind word for George W. Bush may be in order. By appointing first Colin Powell and then Rice to the most senior job in the Cabinet, a job of global scope, Bush changed the way millions of white Americans think about black public officials. This may turn out to the most positive legacy of his benighted Presidency."

So, again she's not momentous, not exactly clear why, but she would be wrongly greeted as a positive when the truth is she's part of the benighted "junta." In fact, she's the only good thing Bush ever did! She's less than Hill or Obama, she's failed, she's a shield for race-baiting, but she's the best thing Bush ever did.

Dude! That was the political equivalent of kung-fu kicking five guys at once! What's a thank-you card like from this guy? "I didn't need the help, and you could have done better, but considering your retardation, this was fine work which my moron boss likes... PS: you're ugly."

Angel: After the Fall

I know I'm not the first person to point it out. But I looked for the article I read about it and couldn't find it, so I'm writing my own article.

Angel: After the Fall is pretty good. The next book's cover (one of them) will mirror the JLI number one cover. It is an interesting choice. Justice League International, as it came to be known, was an odd-ball version with a wierd humor.

Clearly, some match-ups are visual: blue Beetle's goggles and Wesley's eye-glasses, or Lorne and the Martian Manhunter because of the green skin. But there might be more. Guy Gardner and Angel, well he had to be up-front, but also Guy Gardner was one of two chosen to be earth's protector, and he kind of resented the other guy.

Take Gwen and Illyria. Both could have taken the place of Dr. Light, but Illyria stands in for the mystically powered Dr. Fate--a fit for her but not for Gwen. Dr. Light and Gwen can both control a basic force of nature. Oberon the dwarf and Gru don't really jive except they are both bit characters.

Most interestingly is Gunn as Mister Miracle. Whedon has written every issue full of twists until finally he's going to need an escape artist to get the heroes out of this one. It just screams confidence and that's good because I'll need greatness from Angel since Buffy is now gay--for like no reason what-so-ever.

Oh Great

So now if I have one too many arguments over whether or not I actually own the bed, need my hands while driving, or own the pizza I just paid for, I may end up not being allowed to go within 1000 feet of my own home? Oh, that's just super.

Hey, Spot, see how far that restraining order gets you when you realize I put the food in the laundry room and you don't have the opposable thumbs necessary to open the door. Yeah, that's right. Beg! Beg for me to come back.

An All-Stoner Iraqi Army?*

Apparently so. According to this Military.com article, the Iraqi Army plans on phasing out their existing stock of venerable old Kalashnikov-designed AK-47 to the, well, less-old but updated Stoner-designed M-16/M-4.

In a move that could be the most enduring imprint of U.S. influence in the Arab world, American military officials in Baghdad have begun a crash program to outfit the entire Iraqi army with M-16 rifles.

[. . . ]

So far, the U.S. military has helped the Iraqi army purchase 43,000 rifles - a mix of full-stock M-16A2s and compact M-4 carbines. Another 50,000 rifles are currently on order, and the objective is to outfit the entire Iraqi army with 165,000 American rifles in a one-for-one replacement of the AK-47.

Now I must admit that the first thing that jumped out at me in the article was this:

"We in the U.S. know that the M-16 is superior to the AK ... it's more durable," said Army Col. Stephen Scott, who's in charge of helping the Iraqi army get all the equipment it needs to outfit its forces.

Wait, what!?! Well, with regular maintenance it might (and that's a big "might") be a push, but c'mon. It's an AK, which has well over half a century of well-documented legendary resilience in the most deplorable conditions imaginable. However, there's a caveat to Col. Scott's statement, which hopefully will quell the never-ceasing, often-tiresome, and usually-good natured argument over which platform is better:

Scott added the mass of AK-47s from various manufacturers floating through the Iraqi army's inventory could cause maintenance and reliability problems. Getting both U.S. and Iraqi forces on the same page when it comes to basic weaponry is part of the argument for M-16 outfitting.

"I'm also a fan of AKs," Scott said. "But keep in mind most of these AKs have been sitting around in bunkers or whatnot for 30 or 40 years [and] are in various stages of disrepair."

OK, so it won't quell the arguments, but if it's true that the AK's the IA has now are falling apart (and a lack of maintenance and/or years of use/abuse will do that to any machine) then yeah, there's a need to replace exisiting arms. Why the M-16/M-4 family, though? First the positives, at least as I see them.

For starters, the M-16/M-4 is certainly more accurate than the AK-47 family; I've never talked with anyone who seriously disputes that. For the IA trainers on the ground, be they SF, Regular Army/Marine personnel, or civilian contractors, the task of training the IA is made much easier by having a universal platform with which the trainers are intimately familiar. For U.S. troops, knowing that the "good" Iraqis are the ones with M-16's will hopefully make friendly-fire incidents easier to avoid. . . at least until some of the new weapons fall into insurgent hands. Ideally, and this is touched upon in the original article, we or the IA will be able to trace any M-16's that fall into insurgent hands back to the units to which they were issued via serial numbers or other identifying marks. Additionally, and these points may be a bit niggling, the M-16 is lighter, easier to reconfigure for mission-specific roles, has less felt-recoil and better ergonomics (easier to shoot well), and, as mentioned above, uses the same ammunition and (obviously) parts that are already in the U.S. supply chain.

A further point, as Grim over at BLACKFIVE points out, is that this further cements a still newly-born modern Iraq with the west, at least as far as military-industrial supply chains and politics go:

Envision an army trained by the United States, with extensive counterinsurgency experience, an internal structure increasingly in line with the NATO standard (cf. the new NCO academy) -- an Arab, Muslim army that integrates Sunnis and Shi'ites in cooperation toward a goal of a modern state open to peaceful trade and prosperity. Now imagine this army in a future world with a happier Iraq, and no longer needing such large force numbers internally. Now imagine that army can tie into NATO supply chains, and partially deploy in support of future Coalitions dealing with further COIN operations -- an army that, like the army of El Salvador, remembers kindly American sacrifices that brought its people out of tyranny and chaos.

We've talked a lot about what future challenges face the world. Imagine what that army would be worth, in a decade or two. What investment would be worth having that army, that ally?

I admit I'm not too sure about such optimism; after all, I'm negative by nature. But hey, a future Iraqi army, well-trained and equipped by us, going on to help other oppressed peoples at least sounds good.

So that's the good; what about the bad things regarding the replacement of all IA AK's with M-16's or M-4's? There's the weapon itself; it's just not as well-designed from a reliability standpoint as the Kalashnikov family of weapons. Yeah, it's all that great stuff I mentioned above, but unless the troops are very well-disciplined regarding weapons maintenance, those slick new M-16's are going to crap out in a hurry in a small-parts-hostile environment such as Iraq. U.S. troops have to clean their weapons at least daily; after all, not having a working gun in a free-fire zone would really, really suck. Will the Iraqi Army be as diligent? I grant that this is a training issue; hopefully with the right kind of basic and refresher training, such problems can be alleviated, especially if the eventual withdrawal of U.S. personnel involves transitioning the IA into all Counter-Insurgency roles with embedded U.S. personnel advising IA units.

Then there's the much-derided cartridge/caliber of the M-16/M-4/AR-15 family: 5.56MM NATO. Yes, it's flat-shooting. Yes, it has a higher velocity than the AK-47's 7.62x39MM. Yes, it's an inherently more accurate cartridge than the 7.62x39. Yes, it has better range than the 7.62x39. Yes, under optimal conditions and good shot placement, it can instantly incapacitate or kill. . . though at shorter ranges the 7.62x39 has more inherent stopping power.** But is a 1/2 MOA difference in accuracy really worth the decrease in familiarity, the cost of procurement, decrease in reliability, and shorter-range stopping power?

And why the M-16, with it's rather notorious operating system? Why not use something along the lines of HK416 or any of the other piston-driven M16 derivatives that use the same magazines and most of the parts of the M-16? After all, if we ignore the ammunition issue for the moment, why not use an M-16 derivative that uses an operating system that plays a huge role in the AK's afore, and oft-mentioned reliability?

Well, the SECOND thing that jumped out at me in the Military.com article was something that wasn't there: who exactly is going to benefit from this armament transition? Well, considering Colt and FN make the majority of U.S. military small arms, I'd say Colt and FN. Especially in light of what Confederate Yankee found regarding Colt and The Hill:

Colt had relied on a series of lobbyists in Washington, but now [Colt President] Keys, a decorated veteran who played an important role in the 1991 Gulf War, has taken on more of those responsibilities himself.

"I knew a lot of guys up on the Hill," he said, referring to Congress. Among those is Rep. John Murtha, the powerful Pennsylvanian who is the highest-ranking Democrat on the House defense appropriations subcommittee.

Keys' uncle, Thomas Morgan, also represented western Pennsylvania in the House and served as mentor to Murtha when he first arrived in Congress in 1974.

"You couldn't have a better guy than him, with his experience," Murtha said of Keys. "When he tells you something, you can take it to the bank. No matter how good a lobbyist is, talking to the president of the company means more."

Oh, well, that's great. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for American businesses making money, but how much of the Iraqi Army decision was swayed by the U.S. Government and how much was the U.S. Government swayed by lobbyists? As Confederate Yankee says, it's not a smoking gun, but it's certainly something to ponder.

I'll adjust my tinfoil hat a bit here, but speaking of large government contracts and the Iraqi's switching out their small arms, what about SAW's and crew-served weapons? Are we going to be replacing all those RPK and PK machine guns as well? I wonder if FNH-USA is about to get a large order for M-249's and M-240's. Again, something to think about.

So, is the Iraqi Army getting the best tool for the job and are we getting our money's worth? Only time will tell; but I can't help but get a sour taste in my mouth.

*No, I couldn't resist the horrible pun. I can't help it.
**I'm speaking of mil-spec, full metal jacket ammunition of course; the hollow-points et al. available to civilians in the U.S. is another matter entirely.

Chicken or the Egg

..."I have some news," McCain said a rally this morning. "Al-Qaeda is in Iraq. Al-Qaeda is called al-Qaeda in Iraq. My friends, if we left, they wouldn't be establishing a base...they would be taking a country. I will not allow that to happen my friends. I will not surrender. I will not surrender to al-Qaeda."...

... "I have some news for John McCain, and that is that there was no such thing as al-Qaeda in Iraq until George Bush and John McCain decided to invade Iraq," Obama said...

Un-huh. Very glib. Well, Obama may, as he boasts, "give a good speech," but isn't that a little like saying that there were no Chinese Communists, or Russia MiGs for that matter, in Korea before America invaded?

The evil Islamofacist we drove from power in Iraq didn't have armies of foreign forces roaming his police state? Shock! Even more shocking, when it appeared we would conquer territory previously held by said Islamofacist they entered the fray, seeing it as a major front in their global war.

Obama's right, al-Qaeda wasn't fighting for a foothold in Iraq under Saddam. And German Panzers weren't moving en masse through Italy until they started getting routed. Now, true they seem to be 4GW fighters with different tactics, but if the ideas is that Iraq was some completely neutral state, not connected in anyway to the tide of radical Islam that fuels a world-wide network of NGO and rogue states fighting a fourth generation war--that seems a pretty glib. Is he really saying that Iraq, Iran, Syria, Liberia; Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, the Muslim Brotherhood, and Ansar al-Islam (to name a few) were not part of the problem? Just a bunch of Switzerlands?

Doesn't al-Qaeda mean "the Hub?" I wonder what they connect to? Surely, not Saddam! I mean, Saddam supported Hamas, attacked Israel, claimed to be a direct descendant of the prophet Mohammad, and tortured/murder those who opposed his totalitarian rule, especially religiously--but he's definitely not linked to any sort of source ideology or extremism from which all these groups draw. Scoff! Once the last card-carrying member of al-Qaeda proper is tried in federal court, found guilty beyond reasonable doubt, and sent to a prison with the necessary facilities to cater to their religious beliefs everything will be super!

For some reason the evil conservatives don't get what is so clear if you watch the MSM. So, what do I think of Obama? Barrack Obama is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.

A Corporal's View

Via BLACKFIVE comes "Iraq and the Marine Corps" - a Corporal's View. It's not just the normal moaning and groaning of the grunts on the ground (not to imply that moaning and groaning is unwarranted), but a well-reasoned series of observations by someone who has been there, done that, and is going back for more. I anticipated some of his points (media reports are way behind what's actually happening on the ground; the lack of power of the [mil-spec] 5.56mm) and was surprised by others (bringing back the M-79). Again though, the points are well-reasoned and based on actual experience, not second or third-hand accounts. For example, on body armor:

We have no lightweight fast infantry anymore. Here is another situation where technology has improved our casualty situation at the extreme expense of our killing ability. Thousands of troops are alive because of their flak jacket and body armor, but how many more thousands of enemy are alive because the Marine wearing 50+ lbs or armor could not chase the insurgent more than 500 yards without having a heart attack? I consider myself in pretty good shape, but having a flak jacket with ESAPI armor plates, side SAPI plates, a Kevlar, a standard magazine load, and rifle is very cumbersome. I could not conceivably chase down a determined insurgent who wanted to run away over any appreciable distance. The body armor situation I think represents a microcosm of larger trends happening in society and/about the military. Our society has placed so much emphasis on protecting the troops that our military has acceded to it. My job is to defeat the enemy, not protect myself. Although I have no way of proving it, I am willing to bet that if we had adopted a lighter weight form of body armor (even at the expense of protection), increased mobility would have offset increased casualties with the killing of more enemy. When you fail to kill the sniper because you cannot run his position down, he returns to kill more of your friends the next week. When you fail to kill the AQI cell leader because you cannot climb over a wall in your body armor, he lives to organize a SVBIED that detonates on your friends along an MSR several days later. Our sense of force protection projected from the top-down is so misguided and permeates every aspect of our training, fighting, and mission. It disgusts me. I accept that I am expendable so why can't everyone else?

And on the Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police:

The Iraqi Army (IA) and Iraqi Police (IP) in Anbar are tremendously better than they were in 2006. The IP's in particular are much better in AO Raleigh. In 2006 they were infiltrated by insurgents and AQI and could not be trusted. The ones that could be trusted were afraid to leave their bases and do any policing, which to be fair essentially amounted to military style patrolling. The IP's are now out on the streets, proud and unafraid. They look more professional, have better weapons and vehicles to include flak jackets, interact with a grateful population that respects them (the old Sadaam-era civilian disdain toward police officers has evaporated), and will not back down from a fight. In the city of Fallujah, the IP's are largely running the security show and the US presence has been reduced to MITT/PTT teams and essentially one company of grunts. They more and more act and gradually look like a professional force, largely because they are becoming one. IP's maintain an overwatch position in front of the main exit of CF and guard the most important bridge in Anbar for coalition convoy traffic. These jobs could not have been provided in 2006, and I would have laughed should someone have suggested them. My 2007 deployment was in many ways emasculating because of increased ISF presence, and I could not be happier.

I encourage you to go read the whole thing. Hopefully the people on high in the USMC and elsewhere will read it as well.

Outage

Sorry for the lack of posts over the last couple of days (a video doesn't count); genie and I were busy yesterday and my ISP suffered a temporary outage that lasted from last night until this afternoon sometime. Posting will resume as scheduled as soon as I catch up with the mass of email, RSS-delivered articles, and missed regular website reading. Unreal how much stuff one misses online when there is no online.

Also, during the outage, I discovered this whole "outside" thing. Why was I not informed earlier? Now I have what one of my newly-discovered "neigh-bors" calls a "sun-burn." She looked at me funny and shooed her kids away when I inquired further into this "sun" business. Of course, now my net's back up and I'm able to find all my answers on Wikipedia. Thankfully, there is no need for that messy and social-interaction-generating (shudder) "outside" again, at least until my ISP fails me again.

Absurdity

Supermen and the World of Tomorrow

Science Fiction is a new literary form historically speaking. Pure Sci-Fi, in the Wells/Roddenberry vein, is a form of prophecy. Sci-Fi stories tell us “of things to come,” and transpose our issues onto worlds to which “no one has gone before.” So what’s the connection to comics? Well, arguable the big six: Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Wolverine, Spider-man, and Captain America (along with their nemeses), are all Sci-Fi characters. Hulk, Green Lantern, the Human Torch--the list of Sci-Fi superheroes goes on.

The superhero, the colorful man-god, is modern idea. The similar archetypical heroes come to mind: Robin Hood, Odysseus, or Hercules, but these heroes are not regular people who transcend humanity with science and technology. Unlike the Campell-ian hero of a thousand faces, the superhero promises a new world.

Technology is a word often used to sum up the 20^th Century. Many technological milestones could be the comic book superhero’s origin, like the atomic bomb. One less earthshaking milestone nonetheless captures the superhero’s spirit: the 1939 World’s Fair.

The Fair’s theme, “the world of tomorrow,” was punctuated by the Perisphere and Trylon, a huge sphere next to a towering spike, symbolically shouting, “the world going up.” This message of technology transforming the world was the new creed of the 20^th century. But the message was more than optimism in the face of the past decade of world-wide depression. The Fair comes just before an era of superstars and the promise technology will propel common people to god-like versions of themselves.

In this era people, regular people could become epic figures, and their stories could be told to millions. Think about it: Einstein, the super-genius; Hitler, the super-monster; Hughes, billionaire and fastest man alive in his H-1 Racer. Not surprisingly, the ‘30s host the first superhero movies, like Superman. Mass communication brought forth a superstar generation to the world stage.

The man of tomorrow would be an exulted power-house. Though cliché now, back then the future held jet-packs and robots and life under the sea. The man of tomorrow is a dream with wide appeal, even for those not suffering from an adolescent male power fantasy. The World’s Fair seems to be a crystallizing event for this idea. The man of tomorrow would transcend the mundane day-to-day life--Nietzsche’s ubermensch, or superman, done New Deal style.

Superman, sometimes described as a super New Deal figure in the Golden Age, epitomizes the Fair’s themes. Superman’s nickname “the man of tomorrow,” cites the Fair as much as the ubermensch. Metropolis is the city of tomorrow, and its biggest landmark, the globe atop of the Daily Planet, is just a spinning Perisphere. The Fair actually hosted "Superman Day," with a public appearance by Superman, played by actor Ray Middleton. Superman may be the ultimate man of tomorrow, literally transforming from a mild-mannered nobody into the most powerful superhero in every adventure.

The Fair was a celebration of the “art deco” style, which is central to the look of the Fleischer Studios’ Superman cartoon. In fact, that Fleischer look would get a revamp in Batman: the Animated Series, with the so-called “dark deco” style. In Batman: Mask of the Phantasm many items at the Gotham World's Fair were inspired by the real World’s Fair. The rocket and planet centerpiece echo the famous Trylon and Perisphere exhibit. In the movie, many bat-gadgets and the bat-mobile spring from the exhibits Bruce Wayne encounters as a young man. Even the Bat-cave is a fair-like exhibit with dinosaurs, computers, and a gigantic penny.

Batman is a more difficult “man of tomorrow” than Superman. Originally a weird figure of the night or a hard-nose detective, Batman is also a super-willed, gadget wielding power-house. He moves with surprising ease from depression-era vigilante to a superhero standing with Superman fighting aliens. As a James Bond meets Sherlock Holmes meets Howard Hughes, Batman becomes a one man, city-wide guardian. Batman is superhero even without any powers, Sci-Fi or otherwise.

But some heroes are odd fits. Wonder Woman, the magical Amazon is not exactly a Sci-Fi superhero. She’s a person from a lost-city, a mythic-figure from a lost-world. Technology will let us discover these lost mysteries. The technology finds her, originally by downed fighter pilot, and brings her into the world she now protects. Sub-mariner is similar in his lost-world origin. Wonder Woman and Namor are Jules Vern Supermen, science-fantasy characters. They are mythical figures but in this world—the world of tomorrow—fighting Nazis and flying in jets.

The 1939 World’s Fair was just before WWII and Captain America. Turned from weakling into the perfect human specimen, who is oddly Aryan-looking, Cap is a classic WWII superhero. Some of the Fair’s visions had turned to nightmares in the war. In one of Cap’s early adventures the Red Skull drives a huge mechanical worm/drill through a skyscraper, destroying it. Something that could have been an exhibit at the Fair becomes a WMD. Cap was the war-time super-soldier; the superman embodying democracy and the war effort.

After the war a new superman, a new man of tomorrow, would suffer in the moral confusion of the cold war. Spider-man was bitten by the atomic spider (ironically enough at a science fair) and became a superhero. He is misunderstood and slandered in the media. Peter Parker and post-war America learn with great power comes… well, you know. Spider-man is the 1960s, the kid America—powerful beyond knowing, but faced with problems beyond power, the American superman reborn. Actually, both Spidey and the Hulk were also viewed as counter-culture icons: hounded by authority out of fear and hate. In these books superheroes transcended humanity, but it only created more problems.

In the 1970s and ‘80s, Wolverine appeared as the super anti-hero, rejecting the man of tomorrow. After Vietnam, everyone knew good didn’t always win, the government is evil, and “heroes” kill without mercy—at least, that seems the idea behind Logan. A tough, murderous, tortured mutant; Logan is experimented on by the government. The mutants were minorities, and Wolverine, when rewritten, eventually became the quintessential “oppressed by the government" character. Weapon X is like John Rambo: both made powerful and also betrayed by the military/industrial complex. The Fair gave us the super-soldier, and the ‘70’s and ‘80s give it back with cynicism and bitterness.

Today the question is what's next, what after the superpowers? When the “Persons of Mass Destruction” arrive will it kick off a new level of conflict? Will wannbes and psychos respond with “escalation?” Will we be ruled by a small group of super-beings from their watchtower far above? Will the government reign in these supermen by legislation and put them to work for Uncle Sam? Regardless, the technological dream lives on in “microscopic make-out sessions,” and a “planet of the capes,” or even an “illuminati” round-table.

The man of tomorrow’s story is the first superpower’s story. The comic superhero is the depiction the power and the pain technology brings; a Sci-Fi prophecy for the America. Superheroes are the 20^th century mythology, and they might be summed up by same word as the century: “technology.” The techno-myth, the 20^th century Sci-Fi prophecy, was embodied in the World’s Fair. This vision of the future gave birth to superheroes who explore and herald this world of tomorrow. Superheroes promise us that, much like the 1939 World’s Fair, we can become supermen. We can transcend mere mortality to become fantastic: for good or for evil.

Mrs. Obama Goes to Washington

Recently, Mrs. Obama's Princeton thesis was forked over to the media in a rare act of transparency. This was the right thing to do when Princeton pulled the work because of the political season. Now, let's punish that good deed by tearing it apart.

To research her thesis, the future Mrs. Obama sent an 18-question survey to a sampling of 400 black Princeton graduates, requesting the respondents define the amount of time and "comfort" level spent interacting with blacks and whites before they attended the school, as well as during and after their University years. ... In addition, those surveyed were asked to choose whether they were more in line with a "separationist and/or pluralist" viewpoint or an "integrationist and/or assimilationist" ideology.

This thesis was fueled by a nagging feeling:

"no matter how liberal and open-minded some of my white professors and classmates try to be toward me, I sometimes feel like a visitor on campus; as if I really don't belong."

Is it in any way telling that in 1985 she felt there was a massive gulf between whites and blacks--so large even at the Ivy League leftist epicenter she was an outsider? Suggesting that as a black in America she is a member of some underground nation/culture, barely comfortable with only the most hardcore leftists; existing inside, but not part of, America. The first quote in the thesis is from Stokely Carmichael's Black Power suggesting blacks must withdraw and close ranks to gain the power to re-enter society as full members. The next quote is about black political candidates needing to communicate they are for all people not just black people. Ironic, huh?

"I hoped that these findings would help me conclude that despite the high degree of identification with whites as a result of the educational and occupational path that black Princeton alumni follow, the alumni would still maintain a certain level of identification with the black community. However, these findings do not support this possibility."

The question is does she see herself as an outsider to America. Does Princeton represent "white-America" now, and does she harbor some black-separatist viewpoint? The notion in the thesis was something like:

"at Princeton I'm detached from the black community and soon I'll never be truly accepted in either world. And furthermore, my fellow black alumni are losing their identification with the black community and seem not to care"

So then, if in DC will she have to be the outsider navigating white-America? This and some of her other comments may give some unease. Maybe she's right, but something just hits the gut as wrong. "I'm not one of you, and being one of you is a betrayal to my community," is that a fair interpretation? Not exactly equals from creation judging each other by the content of their character, eh?

By the way, FNS is reporting that Mrs. Obama made the same "proud" comments twice in one day, which runs opposite to a minor misspeaking.

Walking Out Across the Line

Avi Green over at the Four Color Media Monitor has an interesting post about a glowing review of yet another anti-bush/anti-war comic book.

Black Summer began with an issue #0 that was one of the most shocking single issues published in years. In this essential preview to the 7-issue series, superhero John Horus storms the White House and executes the President. Minutes later, Horus goes live on national television to explain why he has done this: Because the Commander-in-Chief had committed severe criminal actions including election fraud and starting an unnecessary, illegal war for the benefit of his oil conglomerate cronies.

...those who have long been angered, frustrated, and ashamed of the way things have gone in this country were probably cheering on this fictional avenger.

Avi rails against this idiocy:

The reviewer is actually insulting even his own side by suggesting that the liberals are so frustrated, they'll be literally willing to condone what this Ellis-created monster has done. Just how does he know that they really want that to happen? Or, is he doing the right thing to make it sound as though he doesn't care if they take the risk of condoning violence against American politicians?

As in Punisher: the End, I'm always surprised at how the "anti-war" left seems to secretly long to murder their enemies (whose true inhumanity is something they alone fathom). The reviewer called Horus's actions "political murder." That is, I imagine, murder premised on politics. That particular homicide is more like killing the heir to the throne or the Night of the Long Knives. What I read about was a President that had committed crimes--so, why is that a "political murder?" Either he doesn't understand the meaning of political or, more disconcerting, he doesn't understand the meaning of murder.

He seems to revel in the politicized comic book, writing "everything is political," but he seems to be some what smitten with the fantasy of politicized murder. What he seems to fail to see is that, from the Manchurian Candidate to JLU's alternate universe President Lex, the evil politician is killed after it is shown he's a monster. You might not like Bush, but he isn't a genocidal maniac nor in league with the Soviets. I mean, LOL, the left doesn't really believe he should be executed--excuse me? ... 78% according to Zogby? ...uh, anyway--fantasy can be fun, but let's not go over board.

Furthermore, it seems interesting that libs don't really seem to notice war crimes and death unless somebody they are politically against is in power (cough-Rwanda-cough).