Critical Section

Archive: February 7, 2003

<<< February 6, 2003

Home

February 8, 2003 >>>


Friday,  02/07/03  12:27 PM

The French are starting to take some well-deserved hits for their lack of support for the U.S. on Iraq.  I like this one!

Wired has a nice update on the Man vs. Machine battle, aka Kasparov vs. Deep Junior.  As you know, the series is tied after five matches, with one match remaining.  Chess experts feel the chess played in this match is the prettiest ever by a computer.  May the best, er, chess player win!

Scoble has a thoughtful post about Microsoft and Weblogs.  I like Scoble - he thinks of interesting stuff.  I like him so much, I'm adding him to my blogroll.  Welcome, Robert!

{
Wondering "what the heck is a blogroll?"  Well, you're in luck, because I'm in an explaining mood today.  When people have a weblog like this one, they often have a list of "sites they like" and/or "weblogs they visit".  I have one over there on the right.  This is a blogroll.  Some people get carried away and list every site they've ever visited, with the result that you have hundreds of links and it isn't useful.  But I like every site in my roll and visit them often.  You should, too!
}

Jon Udell writes about "Shipping the Prototype" in Info World.  I agree 100%.  Visual Basic is a great language for writing applications.  Heck, so is Korn Shell :)  Whatever gets your functionality out the door and into the hands of users...

Today I added GUIDs to this site's RSS feed.  You might be a geek if you know what this means, or care...

{
RSS stands for Real Simple Syndication.  An "RSS feed" for a website is a text file which contains a computer-understandable table-of-contents.  There are programs you can get called "RSS aggregrators" which combine RSS feeds from many different sites to create a customizable view of the contents of all the sites.  This is particularly useful with news sites and weblogs, which have content that changes frequently.  A nice friendly aggregator is Userland Software's Radio.
}

 

The Role of Inspectors

Friday,  02/07/03  06:52 PM

The U.S. government is patiently explaining to the world and to our congress the point of view that inspectors are not spies.  These explainers are intelligent, articulate people (well many of them are one or the other, and a few are both), and they probably don't need any help from me.  But you know me, they're going to get help anyway.

Here's the thing.  U.N. Resolution 1441 charged Iraq with disarming.  The role of the inspectors was and remains to verify that Iraq is disarming.  That is it.  They are supposed to watch and record as the Iraqis dismantle existing weapons and "prove" that weapons previously known to exist have been destroyed.  They are the U.N.'s eyes and ears to verify Iraqi compliance with the resolution.

The role of inspectors never was and is not now to find weapons nor to prove that they do not exist.  The inspectors are not spies.  I live in a town of about 10,000 people, covering about 6 square miles.  Imagine 10 nuclear bombs the size of washing machines were hidden somewhere in this town.  If I took 200 munitions experts with me, I could search for weeks and weeks and never ever find the bombs.  Iraq is the size of California, and includes large cities like Baghdad.  How in the world can 200 people search it thoroughly?  No way.  None at all.

The U.S. claims that Iraq is not complying with U.N. Resolution 1441.  By way of proof, U.S. officials have shown that Iraqi officials are moving vehicles and weapons away from locations the inspectors are due to visit, disguising chemical plants, and preventing the inspectors from interviewing key Iraqi scientists.  Hans Blix, the leader of the inspections team, said emphatically, "they know very well what they should provide. We have not seen it yet".  Mohamed ElBaradei, International Atomic Energy Agency Director General,  says Iraq needs to show "drastic change" in cooperating with U.N. weapons inspectorsThis is clear evidence that Iraq is in violation of the U.N. Resolution.

If you were confused about this, don't feel bad, because apparently many foreign governments and diplomats are confused also.  They are calling for more inspectors!  They don't get it.  You could put 10,000 inspectors in Iraq, and it would not matter one whit because they are there to monitor Iraqi disarmament, and the Iraqis are not disarming!

One final point before I leave the soapbox.  So there is clear evidence that Iraq is in violation of U.N. Resolution 1441.  They are not disarming.  So be it.  Whatever the U.N. decides to do about this, whether they do nothing, or debate endlessly, or send in more inspectors, or make another resolution, is the U.N.'s business.  But - and this is the point - the U.S. is not going to war with Iraq because a U.N. resolution was violated.  Don't be confused about this.  If the U.S. goes to war, it will be because, in the judgement of our government, Iraq represents a clear and present danger to the U.S.  That will be the reason.  So in order to go to war, it doesn't matter whether there is clear evidence that the Iraqis are not complying with a U.N. Resolution, what matters is whether there is clear evidence that the Iraqis have and/or are building WMDs.  I believe the U.S. government already has this evidence.  If they don't, they had no business going as far down the path to war as they have.  And if they do, I look for them to reveal some of this evidence soon...

 
 

Return to the archive.

Home
Archive
flight
About Me
W=UH
Email
RSS   OPML

Greatest Hits
Correlation vs. Causality
The Tyranny of Email
Unnatural Selection
Lying
Aperio's Mission = Automating Pathology
On Blame
Try, or Try Not
Books and Wine
Emergent Properties
God and Beauty
Moving Mount Fuji The Nest Rock 'n Roll
IQ and Populations
Are You a Bright?
Adding Value
Confidence
The Joy of Craftsmanship
The Emperor's New Code
Toy Story
The Return of the King
Religion vs IQ
In the Wet
the big day
solving bongard problems
visiting Titan
unintelligent design
the nuclear option
estimating in meatspace
second gear
On the Persistence of Bad Design...
Texas chili cookoff
almost famous design and stochastic debugging
may I take your order?
universal healthcare
entertainment
triple double
New Yorker covers
Death Rider! (da da dum)
how did I get here (Mt.Whitney)?
the Law of Significance
Holiday Inn
Daniel Jacoby's photographs
the first bird
Gödel Escher Bach: Birthday Cantatatata
Father's Day (in pictures)
your cat for my car
Jobsnotes of note
world population map
no joy in Baker
vote smart
exact nonsense
introducing eyesFinder
resolved
to space
notebooks
where are the desktop apps?