Always a Bridesmaid
April 28, 2006
So I was talking with a very close friend of mine when she dropped the bomb: \”E_(her longtime boyfriend) and I are thinking about getting married.\” This wasn\’t a big surprise. This was: \”I was wondering if you\’d be one of my bridesmaids.\”
Heh.
I\’m not married. I\’m not interested in marriage, except that I think gay people should have the same rights to make themselves miserable through the institution as anyone else–I certainly know some divorce lawyers who wouldn\’t mind the expanded marketplace. I have never fantasized about myself in a wedding dress.
Just to be sure: \”Do I get to wear a dress?\”
Her: \”Of course. That\’s why I asked.\”
Then, welling up from my boundless vanity: \”The bridesmaid\’s dresses aren\’t going to be hideous, are they?\”
\”You know me better than that,\” she reassured me.
\”Just checking.\”
In truth, I\’m tickled pink. I just don\’t want to wear pink. Or puffy sleeves. Or an empire waist. I suppose that I\’m going to have to trust her.
The implications of this request are only now settling in: I\’ll be involved with the bridal shower. And the bachelorette party. I\’ll probably get a make-over the day of the wedding and a complete body waxing a week before. And I\’ll get to dance with a groomsman. That\’ll be hilarious, since E_\’s friends are all manly men\’s men in manly professions who drive manly trucks. I have a friend who makes documentaries; I\’m tempted to invite him along to film the hilarity.
No date has been set, but oh, the chaos that will surely ensue…
For the record, if I have to wear the dress attached to this post, I\’ll probably have to kill someone.
Always a Bridesmaid
April 28, 2006
So I was talking with a very close friend of mine when she dropped the bomb: \”E_(her longtime boyfriend) and I are thinking about getting married.\” This wasn\’t a big surprise. This was: \”I was wondering if you\’d be one of my bridesmaids.\”
Heh.
I\’m not married. I\’m not interested in marriage, except that I think gay people should have the same rights to make themselves miserable through the institution as anyone else–I certainly know some divorce lawyers who wouldn\’t mind the expanded marketplace. I have never fantasized about myself in a wedding dress.
Just to be sure: \”Do I get to wear a dress?\”
Her: \”Of course. That\’s why I asked.\”
Then, welling up from my boundless vanity: \”The bridesmaid\’s dresses aren\’t going to be hideous, are they?\”
\”You know me better than that,\” she reassured me.
\”Just checking.\”
In truth, I\’m tickled pink. I just don\’t want to wear pink. Or puffy sleeves. Or an empire waist. I suppose that I\’m going to have to trust her.
The implications of this request are only now settling in: I\’ll be involved with the bridal shower. And the bachelorette party. I\’ll probably get a make-over the day of the wedding and a complete body waxing a week before. And I\’ll get to dance with a groomsman. That\’ll be hilarious, since E_\’s friends are all manly men\’s men in manly professions who drive manly trucks. I have a friend who makes documentaries; I\’m tempted to invite him along to film the hilarity.
No date has been set, but oh, the chaos that will surely ensue…
For the record, if I have to wear the dress attached to this post, I\’ll probably have to kill someone.
The She-Woman Man Haters Club
April 27, 2006
Well, another day, another buncha invites ignored and deleted. What is it with these people? Let\’s recap, shall we?
1. My 360 page is completely public. \”Friending\” me won\’t get you a secret cache of naughty pictures. Sorry. If you want to keep up with me, you can add me to your favorites without my permission, so feel free.
2. I\’m not going to \”friend\” anyone who has no information in their profiles. I don\’t care if you have a photo. I\’m looking for information about who you are and why I should be interested in you. News feeds by themselves are not content.
3. While I have nothing against sexually explicit material, if that\’s ALL you have to show for yourself, I\’m probably not interested in you.
Capiche?
Okay? Okay.
The subject of today\’s tirade is the litany I see splattered across the profiles of tons of tgirls and lesbians. It\’s the one that reads: \”NO MEN, NO MEN, NO MEN!\” As the first part of this posting can attest, there is a pretty good reason for this screed. Most of the men who interract with transgendered people on the internet a priori are sexually motivated. Sad, but true. Worse still, the anonymity of the internet has created a climate where behavior that would get people arrested for harrassment in the real world goes largely unpunished. I mean, if a guy went up to a woman in a bar and showed her his penis, he\’d be in jail pretty quickly, once the bouncers got through working him over. Why men who would never have the…ahem…balls to do this in real life feel free to do this online is a mystery to me. It doesn\’t paint men in a particularly good light. Of course, this is painting with a pretty broad brush.
I\’m not going to surreptitiously declare \”No Boys Allowed\” on my profile. I have my reasons: There are nice guys on the net who ARE interested in being friends–it\’s true! I\’ve actually met some of them! There are men who are perfectly polite, who have something to say, and who we would be insane not to befriend. Remember: friends come and go, but enemies accumulate. The transgendered community already has plenty of enemies. We don\’t need more.
The key is in the ground rules. If you are straight (relatively speaking) or lesbian (relatively speaking) and have no romantic interest in men, make this clear and you should be fine…
Oh, hell…I know this is a fantasy world. Who am I kidding. Ground rules don\’t keep the pests away. Fortunately the architecture is in place to satisfy both the fantasy AND the reality. If I don\’t like a guy, I can ignore him, delete him, block him, and all but castrate him (well, I wish–I use a garlic press for this). If I like a guy, I\’m happy to have him as a friend. But I\’m going to make him learn to use the \”high sign\” to get into the clubhouse. I can almost guarantee that this gesture doesn\’t involve genitals. Sorry guys.
Cheers.
The She-Woman Man Haters Club
April 27, 2006
Well, another day, another buncha invites ignored and deleted. What is it with these people? Let\’s recap, shall we?
1. My 360 page is completely public. \”Friending\” me won\’t get you a secret cache of naughty pictures. Sorry. If you want to keep up with me, you can add me to your favorites without my permission, so feel free.
2. I\’m not going to \”friend\” anyone who has no information in their profiles. I don\’t care if you have a photo. I\’m looking for information about who you are and why I should be interested in you. News feeds by themselves are not content.
3. While I have nothing against sexually explicit material, if that\’s ALL you have to show for yourself, I\’m probably not interested in you.
Capiche?
Okay? Okay.
The subject of today\’s tirade is the litany I see splattered across the profiles of tons of tgirls and lesbians. It\’s the one that reads: \”NO MEN, NO MEN, NO MEN!\” As the first part of this posting can attest, there is a pretty good reason for this screed. Most of the men who interract with transgendered people on the internet a priori are sexually motivated. Sad, but true. Worse still, the anonymity of the internet has created a climate where behavior that would get people arrested for harrassment in the real world goes largely unpunished. I mean, if a guy went up to a woman in a bar and showed her his penis, he\’d be in jail pretty quickly, once the bouncers got through working him over. Why men who would never have the…ahem…balls to do this in real life feel free to do this online is a mystery to me. It doesn\’t paint men in a particularly good light. Of course, this is painting with a pretty broad brush.
I\’m not going to surreptitiously declare \”No Boys Allowed\” on my profile. I have my reasons: There are nice guys on the net who ARE interested in being friends–it\’s true! I\’ve actually met some of them! There are men who are perfectly polite, who have something to say, and who we would be insane not to befriend. Remember: friends come and go, but enemies accumulate. The transgendered community already has plenty of enemies. We don\’t need more.
The key is in the ground rules. If you are straight (relatively speaking) or lesbian (relatively speaking) and have no romantic interest in men, make this clear and you should be fine…
Oh, hell…I know this is a fantasy world. Who am I kidding. Ground rules don\’t keep the pests away. Fortunately the architecture is in place to satisfy both the fantasy AND the reality. If I don\’t like a guy, I can ignore him, delete him, block him, and all but castrate him (well, I wish–I use a garlic press for this). If I like a guy, I\’m happy to have him as a friend. But I\’m going to make him learn to use the \”high sign\” to get into the clubhouse. I can almost guarantee that this gesture doesn\’t involve genitals. Sorry guys.
Cheers.
Pesto Chango
April 20, 2006
Ah…spring.
The best part of spring and summer for me is that I\’ll have basil coming up in my sunroom this year. I\’m growing basil, oregano, and rosemary this year–spaghetti herbs, in other words. I never used to have a green thumb or garden at all. I blame Emma for the change. A couple of years ago, Emma and her lovely wife invited me to attend an event in Tampa with them. They have a timeshare there, and I would not be on the hook for a hotel room. Well…things didn\’t go exactly as planned. We were interrupted by Hurricane Jeanne. I had even more troublesome events pending in the days and weeks after that. But before everything fell apart, we ate well from the vegetables that they had brought down from Cincinatti. One of these was a basil plant, from which they plucked fresh leaves for whatever dish they wanted. Basil, I was told, was not hard to grow. So last year, I gave it a go. I was up to my ears in basil by mid-summer. Basil is essentially a weed, and it doesn\’t take much to get it to grow.
That\’s when I discovered basil pesto.
Well, that\’s a little bit melodramatic. I\’d had pesto in the past, but I never thought twice about how to make it. I know what those packets of fresh basil leaves in the supermarket cost and I thought that it would be cost prohibitive. Little did I suspect…
The standard recipe for basil pesto goes like this:
2 cups fresh basil leaves
1/2 cup virgin olive oil
3 tablespoons pine nuts or walnuts
3 cloves garlic, finely minced (I acutally use a BUNCH more, but this is what the recipe says)
1/4 cup grated Parmesan cheese (I use cheese I\’ve grated myself–I\’ve got a source for great Parmesan–but the storebought canisters are fine).
Combine the basil, olive oil, nuts, and garlic in a food processor or blender, process until you have a thick paste. I usually serve this tossed over freshly cooked pasta, so I combine the pesto with the cheese at that time. You can put the cheese in after you have a paste while it\’s still in the blender if you\’re using the pesto as a dipping sauce. It goes well with flatbreads, or even as a condiment. Pesto can be refrigerated for days and frozen, but I never get that far–it\’s gone long before then.
So I\’m going to have pesto all summer. I\’m eternally thankful to Emma for starting this chain of events.There\’s something immensly satisfying about making a relatively exotic dish from food you\’ve grown yourself. Something primal, in a genteel sort of way. I say \”exotic,\” because my family was a middle-class, meat and potatoes kind of family. If my mom could see the things I cook now, she\’d be amazed. I\’m a little bit amazed myself sometimes.
Pesto Chango
April 20, 2006
Ah…spring.
The best part of spring and summer for me is that I\’ll have basil coming up in my sunroom this year. I\’m growing basil, oregano, and rosemary this year–spaghetti herbs, in other words. I never used to have a green thumb or garden at all. I blame Emma for the change. A couple of years ago, Emma and her lovely wife invited me to attend an event in Tampa with them. They have a timeshare there, and I would not be on the hook for a hotel room. Well…things didn\’t go exactly as planned. We were interrupted by Hurricane Jeanne. I had even more troublesome events pending in the days and weeks after that. But before everything fell apart, we ate well from the vegetables that they had brought down from Cincinatti. One of these was a basil plant, from which they plucked fresh leaves for whatever dish they wanted. Basil, I was told, was not hard to grow. So last year, I gave it a go. I was up to my ears in basil by mid-summer. Basil is essentially a weed, and it doesn\’t take much to get it to grow.
That\’s when I discovered basil pesto.
Well, that\’s a little bit melodramatic. I\’d had pesto in the past, but I never thought twice about how to make it. I know what those packets of fresh basil leaves in the supermarket cost and I thought that it would be cost prohibitive. Little did I suspect…
The standard recipe for basil pesto goes like this:
2 cups fresh basil leaves
1/2 cup virgin olive oil
3 tablespoons pine nuts or walnuts
3 cloves garlic, finely minced (I acutally use a BUNCH more, but this is what the recipe says)
1/4 cup grated Parmesan cheese (I use cheese I\’ve grated myself–I\’ve got a source for great Parmesan–but the storebought canisters are fine).
Combine the basil, olive oil, nuts, and garlic in a food processor or blender, process until you have a thick paste. I usually serve this tossed over freshly cooked pasta, so I combine the pesto with the cheese at that time. You can put the cheese in after you have a paste while it\’s still in the blender if you\’re using the pesto as a dipping sauce. It goes well with flatbreads, or even as a condiment. Pesto can be refrigerated for days and frozen, but I never get that far–it\’s gone long before then.
So I\’m going to have pesto all summer. I\’m eternally thankful to Emma for starting this chain of events.There\’s something immensly satisfying about making a relatively exotic dish from food you\’ve grown yourself. Something primal, in a genteel sort of way. I say \”exotic,\” because my family was a middle-class, meat and potatoes kind of family. If my mom could see the things I cook now, she\’d be amazed. I\’m a little bit amazed myself sometimes.
Breakfast of Champions
April 17, 2006
I don\’t know about you, but I love to cook. I love to eat–probably more than I should, but life\’s short–so it\’s only natural that I should love to cook. It\’s always surprising to me that there are people who love to eat but hate cooking–and that I live with such a person. Knowing how to cook has numerous benefits:
1. It\’s cheaper than eating out, or even eating ready-made foods.
2. You eat better food. You control the ingredients and are unlikely to include a bunch of preservatives or texturizers or artifical colors. You also gain the advantage of using fresh ingredients rather than relying upon the inventory turn and shelf-life of items in the supply chain to your grocery store.
3. It takes less time than eating out. It was a shock to me when I realized this, but it\’s true. Even driving to the drive-thru at a fast food place probably takes more time than cooking the same burger yourself–AND you get a better burger.
Mind you, I like eating in restaurants, but I no longer eat fast food if I can avoid it and I\’m getting pickier about the restaurants I patronize.
4. Cooking a particularly yummy dish will impress your friends.
5. Being able to cook is an excuse to throw dinner parties.
Anyway…Part of my own path to \”the good life\” is the mantra: \”Don\’t Waste Calories.\” If you\’re going to eat, don\’t eat crap.
One of my cookbooks has this to say about pancakes: \”Americans must have become profoundly alienated from the kitchen for pancake mixes to have gained a foothold in the market. Pancakes are ridiculously easy to make.\” Sure enough, the book is right. They ARE easy to make:
2 cups of flour
1 tablespoon of baking powder
1 tablespoon of sugar
1/2 teaspoon of salt
One or two eggs
1-1/2 to 2 cups of milk (I prefer more, to make the batter pour more easily)
2 teaspoons of melted butter or oil (I use peanut oil when I don\’t use butter)
Combine ingredients in a mixing bowl, but don\’t over-stir (some lumps are fine). Pour into a skillet or onto a griddle–grease the cooking surface if it isn\’t non stick. Cook over low to medium heat until the surface bubbles, then flip–2-4 minutes.
Total time: about 20 minutes. We eat these with real maple syrup, which tastes a LOT better than the pancake syrups that dominate the market (made from corn syrup and \”maple flavoring\”). Real maple syrup is expensive, though, which sucks. We\’ve also banished margarine from our house. It DOESN\’T taste just like butter. There are tons of other pancake recipes out there. I like putting blueberries in my pancakes, for example. All of them are simple. And all of them are cheap. A pancake mix is much more expensive than the basic ingredients.
Okay…I\’m hungry now. I\’m off to the kitchen.
Breakfast of Champions
April 17, 2006
I don\’t know about you, but I love to cook. I love to eat–probably more than I should, but life\’s short–so it\’s only natural that I should love to cook. It\’s always surprising to me that there are people who love to eat but hate cooking–and that I live with such a person. Knowing how to cook has numerous benefits:
1. It\’s cheaper than eating out, or even eating ready-made foods.
2. You eat better food. You control the ingredients and are unlikely to include a bunch of preservatives or texturizers or artifical colors. You also gain the advantage of using fresh ingredients rather than relying upon the inventory turn and shelf-life of items in the supply chain to your grocery store.
3. It takes less time than eating out. It was a shock to me when I realized this, but it\’s true. Even driving to the drive-thru at a fast food place probably takes more time than cooking the same burger yourself–AND you get a better burger.
Mind you, I like eating in restaurants, but I no longer eat fast food if I can avoid it and I\’m getting pickier about the restaurants I patronize.
4. Cooking a particularly yummy dish will impress your friends.
5. Being able to cook is an excuse to throw dinner parties.
Anyway…Part of my own path to \”the good life\” is the mantra: \”Don\’t Waste Calories.\” If you\’re going to eat, don\’t eat crap.
One of my cookbooks has this to say about pancakes: \”Americans must have become profoundly alienated from the kitchen for pancake mixes to have gained a foothold in the market. Pancakes are ridiculously easy to make.\” Sure enough, the book is right. They ARE easy to make:
2 cups of flour
1 tablespoon of baking powder
1 tablespoon of sugar
1/2 teaspoon of salt
One or two eggs
1-1/2 to 2 cups of milk (I prefer more, to make the batter pour more easily)
2 teaspoons of melted butter or oil (I use peanut oil when I don\’t use butter)
Combine ingredients in a mixing bowl, but don\’t over-stir (some lumps are fine). Pour into a skillet or onto a griddle–grease the cooking surface if it isn\’t non stick. Cook over low to medium heat until the surface bubbles, then flip–2-4 minutes.
Total time: about 20 minutes. We eat these with real maple syrup, which tastes a LOT better than the pancake syrups that dominate the market (made from corn syrup and \”maple flavoring\”). Real maple syrup is expensive, though, which sucks. We\’ve also banished margarine from our house. It DOESN\’T taste just like butter. There are tons of other pancake recipes out there. I like putting blueberries in my pancakes, for example. All of them are simple. And all of them are cheap. A pancake mix is much more expensive than the basic ingredients.
Okay…I\’m hungry now. I\’m off to the kitchen.
Playing Devil\’s Advocate
April 13, 2006
So…Iran is ramping up their nuclear program. One of the scenarios envisioned by our current administration includes the use of nuclear bunker busters. I can\’t in good conscience support the use of such weapons, and it terrifies me to think what the political landscape of the world will look like should such weapons be used. But, unfortunately, there\’s already a precedent.
The photo attached to this entry is an M1A2 tank. The M1 tank is the jewel of the American Military. It\’s also a nuclear weapon of sorts. The M1 makes extensive use of depleted uranium in both its armaments and its armor. Depleted uranium is extremely dense, which makes it an incredibly effective armor that contributes to the relative invulnerability of the M1 to most smaller armaments and many larger armaments. The use of depleted uranium as the core of the shells the tank fires enables those shells to penetrate just about anything on the battlefield short of a fortified bunker. Most armor partially liquifies when hit by one of these shells. A friend of mine who drove an M1 when he was in the army notes that the armor of an enemy vehicle hit by a round from an M1 will \”splash.\”
While it is true that these are not fissionable weapons, they are weapons that a country without a nuclear program cannot match.
In the wonderful documentary, The Fog of War, Robert McNamara notes that diplomacy succeeds when we are able to put ourselves inside the skin of the other side. Right now, the administration isn\’t doing this. They\’re running the same script that ran before the Iraqi invasion. Iran is developing weapons of mass destruction. Iran wants to blow Israel off the map. Iran funds terrorism. Iran may give Al-Qaida a nuclear bomb. Etc. But let\’s put ourselves in their place for a second:
Fact: the United States of America has nuclear weapons, including the M1 tank.
Fact: the United States has invaded the countries immediately to the east and west of Iran and is in the process of building permanent bases in both.
Fact: Iran is ruled by a Shiite theocracy. They are arch-enemies of the Sunni dominated Al-Qaida. This doesn\’t mean that they don\’t embrace terrorism, just that they are not ideologically wedded to it in the same way as Al-Qaida and are extremely unlikely to provide aid to them–unless the US does something stupid.
Fact: the only country in the region with credible and demonstrable links to Al-Qaida is Saudi Arabia, which is in bed with the currrent American administration.
Fact: the United States has recently negotiated a deal with India giving India a green light to develop nuclear weapons outside the bounds of various non-proliferation treaties.
Fact: the United States has indicated a willingness to go to war with Iran to prevent them from developing nuclear weapons. Iran does not currently have the wherewithal to build nuclear weapons and protests that their nuclear program is peaceful in nature. Iran also knows that the United States has a history of disbelieving the protests of their perceived enemies. Iraq swore up and down that they didn\’t have Weapons of Mass Destruction–and in fact DIDN\’T have them–but it didn\’t stop the United States from invading.
Fact: Iran offered the United States a comprehensive proposal to resolve their differences in 2003, which the Administration rejected out of hand.
Iran, then, is in a hard position. They live in a rough neighborhood. They don\’t feel they can trust the United States to deal fairly with them. And who can blame them? Let\’s face it, the M1 tank is a terrifying weapon of war. Nevermind the nuclear option, faced with an army of M1 tanks on both borders, who can blame the Iranians for wanting to develop something with which to protect themselves from them?
It is my belief that a war with Iran would be the height of folly. Because I believe this, I have written to my congressional delegation–all of whom are Republicans, by the way: Jim Tallent and Kit Bond in the Senate and Kenny Hulsoff in the House of Representatives. What I told them in the letter I sent was that the United States Constitution does not give the Executive Branch the power to wage war. Article I, Section Eight of of the Constitution explicitly gives the Legislature the power to declare war–and no formal declaration of war was ever issued against Iraq, by the way; the authorization to use force was not such a declaration–and gives the Legislature the power to frame the rules of engagement. And I told them that I oppose any war against Iran. Further, if they deem that a war with Iran is justified based on reliable and fully vetted intelligence, that it require a formal declaration of war from Congress as laid out in the Constitution.
Do I expect any action on this? Well, frankly no. Tallent has been in bed with the Administration from the get-go: he\’s a puppet of the Blunt machine in Missouri, and until that machine is brought down (Blunt is in the orbit of the Abramoff scandal), Roy Blunt pulls the strings. Blunt is deeply in bed with the administration at this point. Bond has been a party yes-man for decades and he doesn\’t have the imagination to bolt. Which leaves Hulsoff. Hulsoff is a rare congressman with a spine. When the House voted to change the rules of ethics two years ago to give Tom De Lay carte blanche to remain Majority Leader even if he were indicted (!), Hulsoff demurred. It cost him his seat on the House Ethics committee, and, truth to tell, the ear of the party.
What do I expect of all of this? Unfortunately, I\’m pessimistic. I think there WILL be a war with Iran. I think it will go about as well as the war with Iraq. And I think it will be the nail in the coffin of the American Empire. America has always been able to trade on the fact that its intentions are \”good\”–even when they haven\’t been–but if America goes to war with Iran, that illusion will be shattered for generations to come. What this will probably gain me is a place on some watch list. My phone may be monitored. And I doubt that I\’ll ever be able to hold a political office once my personal peccadilloes are put into a file somewhere. But, dammit, I\’m going to engage the process. I\’m not ready to declare American democracy dead. And I\’m going to hope for the best. The world, after all, has no shortage of windmills to tilt at.
Playing Devil\’s Advocate
April 13, 2006
So…Iran is ramping up their nuclear program. One of the scenarios envisioned by our current administration includes the use of nuclear bunker busters. I can\’t in good conscience support the use of such weapons, and it terrifies me to think what the political landscape of the world will look like should such weapons be used. But, unfortunately, there\’s already a precedent.
The photo attached to this entry is an M1A2 tank. The M1 tank is the jewel of the American Military. It\’s also a nuclear weapon of sorts. The M1 makes extensive use of depleted uranium in both its armaments and its armor. Depleted uranium is extremely dense, which makes it an incredibly effective armor that contributes to the relative invulnerability of the M1 to most smaller armaments and many larger armaments. The use of depleted uranium as the core of the shells the tank fires enables those shells to penetrate just about anything on the battlefield short of a fortified bunker. Most armor partially liquifies when hit by one of these shells. A friend of mine who drove an M1 when he was in the army notes that the armor of an enemy vehicle hit by a round from an M1 will \”splash.\”
While it is true that these are not fissionable weapons, they are weapons that a country without a nuclear program cannot match.
In the wonderful documentary, The Fog of War, Robert McNamara notes that diplomacy succeeds when we are able to put ourselves inside the skin of the other side. Right now, the administration isn\’t doing this. They\’re running the same script that ran before the Iraqi invasion. Iran is developing weapons of mass destruction. Iran wants to blow Israel off the map. Iran funds terrorism. Iran may give Al-Qaida a nuclear bomb. Etc. But let\’s put ourselves in their place for a second:
Fact: the United States of America has nuclear weapons, including the M1 tank.
Fact: the United States has invaded the countries immediately to the east and west of Iran and is in the process of building permanent bases in both.
Fact: Iran is ruled by a Shiite theocracy. They are arch-enemies of the Sunni dominated Al-Qaida. This doesn\’t mean that they don\’t embrace terrorism, just that they are not ideologically wedded to it in the same way as Al-Qaida and are extremely unlikely to provide aid to them–unless the US does something stupid.
Fact: the only country in the region with credible and demonstrable links to Al-Qaida is Saudi Arabia, which is in bed with the currrent American administration.
Fact: the United States has recently negotiated a deal with India giving India a green light to develop nuclear weapons outside the bounds of various non-proliferation treaties.
Fact: the United States has indicated a willingness to go to war with Iran to prevent them from developing nuclear weapons. Iran does not currently have the wherewithal to build nuclear weapons and protests that their nuclear program is peaceful in nature. Iran also knows that the United States has a history of disbelieving the protests of their perceived enemies. Iraq swore up and down that they didn\’t have Weapons of Mass Destruction–and in fact DIDN\’T have them–but it didn\’t stop the United States from invading.
Fact: Iran offered the United States a comprehensive proposal to resolve their differences in 2003, which the Administration rejected out of hand.
Iran, then, is in a hard position. They live in a rough neighborhood. They don\’t feel they can trust the United States to deal fairly with them. And who can blame them? Let\’s face it, the M1 tank is a terrifying weapon of war. Nevermind the nuclear option, faced with an army of M1 tanks on both borders, who can blame the Iranians for wanting to develop something with which to protect themselves from them?
It is my belief that a war with Iran would be the height of folly. Because I believe this, I have written to my congressional delegation–all of whom are Republicans, by the way: Jim Tallent and Kit Bond in the Senate and Kenny Hulsoff in the House of Representatives. What I told them in the letter I sent was that the United States Constitution does not give the Executive Branch the power to wage war. Article I, Section Eight of of the Constitution explicitly gives the Legislature the power to declare war–and no formal declaration of war was ever issued against Iraq, by the way; the authorization to use force was not such a declaration–and gives the Legislature the power to frame the rules of engagement. And I told them that I oppose any war against Iran. Further, if they deem that a war with Iran is justified based on reliable and fully vetted intelligence, that it require a formal declaration of war from Congress as laid out in the Constitution.
Do I expect any action on this? Well, frankly no. Tallent has been in bed with the Administration from the get-go: he\’s a puppet of the Blunt machine in Missouri, and until that machine is brought down (Blunt is in the orbit of the Abramoff scandal), Roy Blunt pulls the strings. Blunt is deeply in bed with the administration at this point. Bond has been a party yes-man for decades and he doesn\’t have the imagination to bolt. Which leaves Hulsoff. Hulsoff is a rare congressman with a spine. When the House voted to change the rules of ethics two years ago to give Tom De Lay carte blanche to remain Majority Leader even if he were indicted (!), Hulsoff demurred. It cost him his seat on the House Ethics committee, and, truth to tell, the ear of the party.
What do I expect of all of this? Unfortunately, I\’m pessimistic. I think there WILL be a war with Iran. I think it will go about as well as the war with Iraq. And I think it will be the nail in the coffin of the American Empire. America has always been able to trade on the fact that its intentions are \”good\”–even when they haven\’t been–but if America goes to war with Iran, that illusion will be shattered for generations to come. What this will probably gain me is a place on some watch list. My phone may be monitored. And I doubt that I\’ll ever be able to hold a political office once my personal peccadilloes are put into a file somewhere. But, dammit, I\’m going to engage the process. I\’m not ready to declare American democracy dead. And I\’m going to hope for the best. The world, after all, has no shortage of windmills to tilt at.
