As fears of peak oil, resource wars and economic collapse dot the headlines, it’s a fair question whether aviation, which chews up an enormous amount of fuel and greenhouse gases, is still a viable form of transport. The New Republic has an interesting piece about how flying defines our economy, and how screwed we’ll be if aviation goes away.
Turns out all the hooey about “OMG HACKZ0RZ!” has at least a grain of truth to it. According to the New York Times, weeks before the “haha the Olympics are on and noone will notice” mini-war Russia just sprang on Georgia, the breakaway republic’s servers were being pelted by Cossack nerds aiming to humiliate them and take down their internet infrastructure. Besides the psychological benefits, cyberwar is also exceedingly cheap, costing much less than a tank full of soldiers to implement and maintain. Whether these cyberattacks are the work of the Russian government, intelligence agencies or criminal organizations (or all three) is unclear, but in a larger sense these incidents point to the way wars might be waged in future conflicts. Of course, the people with the most to lose aren’t the Third World powers but Western and Asian countries, where more infrastructure and economic muscle is tied into net connectivity. JUst like terrorism, cyberwarfare is essentially asymmetrical.
Peter Bergen, who wrote the excellent Holy War, Inc., has penned a mammoth investigative report for the Independent that points to the possible decline of Al Queda as a force in the Middle East. Interestingly, it’s not American military pressure but Muslim religious leaders who are turning the tide away from extremism. Al Queda’s predilection for slaughtering plenty of innocent Muslims along with whoever else they have on their hit list isn’t going down too well, and opinion i turning against jihadism. It’s interesting that after pulling off the most spectacular terrorist attack in history and subsequently evading the American military for the better part of a decade, the one thing Bin Laden and Co. didn’t account for is human decency.
CIA director Michael Hayden recently announced that Al Queda is on the ropes, a spent force, and that the group has failed to gain traction in Iraq. Well, not so fast. A recent editorial in the Guardian points out that mass uprisings may not be what Bin Laden has in mind when he calls for jihadist revolution, and more importantly, terrorists don’t even need mass support to achieve their goals. All they need is the loyalty of a hard-core group of supporters, and they can continue their operations indefinitely. Will the leaders of those die-hards be Al Queda? Maybe not, as recent intelligence has indicated some disillusionment with Bin Laden and Zawahiri. At any rate, the last time the United States took their eye off the ball, they ended up suffering the most devastating attack in the US history, invading Afghanistan and Iraq, and basically ruining their standing in the world. For their own sake, a little more vigilance and a lot less swagger might be a good idea.
So says a new article in the New York Times. THe reasons cited include fatigue with an endless and pointless conflict, media running out of things to say about the war, and a government that’s more secretive than any since the Nixon administration. But you’ve got to wonder what’s wrong with a country when it’s people give a war in which 4000+ of their own soldiers and an untold number of Iraqis have died a colossal “meh.” With this kind of attitude, it’s no wonder that rising powers like China and India will soon be eating our lunch.
After five years and countless Iraqi and American deaths, progress is finally being made to pacify a raging insurgency and bring battling Shia and Sunni factions closer together. Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Malaki, previously viewed as weak and ineffectual, has succeeded in pacifying Basra using Iraqi forces, and in the process marginalized Shia firebrand (and likely backed by Iran) Moqtada Al-Sadr. Al-Malaki had previously been tenuously allied with Sadr, and whether any of this actually lasts is another question. The Atlantic has all the details.
Vanity Fair isn’t just George Clooney covers and Oscar parties, it’s also some pretty damn fine journalism, including this article detailing the legal wranglings and outright villainy of the Bush administration as they moved to change the old rules regarding interrogation, ignored the Geneva conventions and legalized torture.
The always excellent Frontline has pulled out the stops for the fifth anniversary of the War in Iraq with a huge documentary entitled “Bush’s War,” detailing the build-up from 9/11 onwards, the initial invasion and the continued bloodshed in Iraq today. It’s long, but worth the watch. Unfortunately, PBS hasn’t quite gotten the glory that is embedding video just yet, so you’ll have to head to their page to check it out.
The Globe and Mail has put together an excellent video and print documentary on the Taliban, and they’ve done so by actually going to the source and talking to members of this mysterious group that’s been keeping Canadian troops pinned down in Afghanistan for the last seven years.