skip to main |
skip to sidebar
The title led me to believe the article was about something different, but still worth a read.
An important excerpt:
"We actually are not totally sure today what the composition of their leadership is," Giustozzi adds. "But one can detect an attempt to represent the different constituencies at the level of the leadership."
...
"The important big picture is Afghans like to tell you that this is a Pakistani phenomenon," Fair says. "As we all know, there is Pakistani involvement. There is recruitment across the border. In the tribal areas, madrasahs figure prominently. But even if Pakistan went away, you still have a largely Afghan-driven insurgency."
So we have an insurgency that has gotten more Afghan-centered and is making strides towards incorporating the various ethnic groups into it's leadership while focusing on effective harassing attacks on NATO and targeting programs designed to make life better for the locals.
I wonder what Petraeus will have in store for Afghanistan?
UPDATE:
CSM on Afghanistan.
Apparently China is not supply enough coal to satisfy it's requirements. It looks like their reserves are dropping by 3 days a month. We' will probably see another spike in the price of coal as China looks elsewhere to buy it if it can not ramp up domestic production. China is in the top two for coal reserves, so hopefully they focus more on domestic production then buying from Australia or the US.
I'm impressed, the Finnish environmental assessment phase for a new nuclear plant only lasts about 2 months? It should be a sign to the rest of Europe too. Not only are the Italians planning on building a new nuke plant (once it's made legal to build one) but the Scandinavians, some of the greenest countries in the Old World are starting to build them again!
Assume for a moment we could get enough data on these folk to plug it into Robert Pape's suicide bombing terror data base.
What kind of results would it yield now?
I had some problems with Pape's thesis, I felt like there could've been some more correlation rather then causation going on (in a nut shell anyway).
I've got a article refuting Pape's thesis sitting encoded on my hard drive just crying out to be read, but with the JD and my inherent laziness on the weekends it will remain there for a while. I will be sure to post my thoughts here once I wrap it up.
No! Never!
Wait. Apparently.
Kepel anyone? Finally seeing the violence inherent in the system. It's not about using violence as a tool, it seems to be more about violence for the sake of violence. Takfiri ideology is a very scary thing to mess around with. It is very easy to get burned. The very small percentage of followers of this wahabi-salafi inspired ideology, no one can control it and it will try and consume everything that is not itself. And it will eventually burn itself out.
I guess sympathetic Muslims everywhere are starting to realize that Al Qaeda sows more fitna then they create caliphate.
Offers a view of the affects of road building projects on some of the rougher areas of Afghanistan.
Relates to my "Better Development" post.
Interesting article here.
So Iran wants to use a 1921 treaty to help dissuade an American invasion, or at least cut one down if it were to happen.
Would Russia put it's neck on the line like that? It is an interesting proposal. I'd imagine that international outrage would be high to begin with were the US to invade to begin with, that Russia may not have to land troops then demand a IN mandated withdrawal. The Russians would just have to make a scene in the Security Council.
I can definitely understand the Iranians grabbing at whatever they can to help themselves out. At least until they test their first nuke.
Prices too high?
Of course they're too high!
Looks like we are well on the way to stretching the peak into a plateau.
UPDATE:
Or not. We will have to be seeing an affect soon. At least in more subjective types oil consumption. People have to get to work! So rising prices may not dampen that kind of travel. But vacations to Grandmas? That'll go first.
Looks like Sadr is kind of on the run. Or at least does not want to further array the rest of the Iraqi polity and populace against him.
But he still wants to target the Americans.
A) Americans generally patrol with Iraqi Security Forces right? So it'll be hard to target them exclusively.
B) Can't we just put the Iraqi forces in the lead? After all it is Maliki who wants JAM gone and is pushing ops.
C) As Dr. iRak @ Abu Muqawama points out. JAM apparently has Iranian support for continued operations against the US, but the not the Iraqi government.
I think he's breaking and is still risking more then he can gain. He'll end up further isolating himself from the rest of the population while the ISF and US isolate him more and more from the populace.
Well, assuming (as Dr. iRak also points out in the link above) the Iraqi government actually makes head way making people's lives better. There is still a good sign though, Iraqis coming to the US for medical support. Granted, that does not mean they support the Americans, and obviously we have the best medics on the ground. But it does show some sign that we are not necessarily detested in the area.
UPDATE:
You heard it here first folks! But looks like there is a growing backlash. Now, we just need to effectively move into the gap.
UPDATE:
Iraqi's losing patience with Sadr because his militia's fighting is disrupting their lives.
So apparently it was a nuke facility of some kind. The Israelis do not generally secretly attack other countries for chump change.
Still, I do not know why El Baradei wanted the info shared. Okay, I know why he did. But come one, why would the US and Israel? So Syria could wrap itself in the protective cocoon that Iran is currently in concerning the IAEA?
Yeah, right. S
How awesome must it be to be John McCain right now?
He's the Republican nominee already. He can take time to visit areas where the party traditionally loses. He can take time to do a 'biography' tour. He can sharpen his message with no threat of flubs or gaffes.
All he has to be is be John McCain until Obama emerges from the Democratic fracas.
On top of that, he guaranteed a percentage of the democratic vote!!!!!!!! Some 20-30% of either Obama or Clinton supporters will vote McCain if the other candidate gets the nomination.
Who would've thought it would be a good election to be the Republican candidate?
UPDATE:
It's sad, it really should not matter one bit, but it's right. It does, and will have a big impact. So much in live depends on being perfect. And when you're not, you get hurt.
-The last time Hamas wanted a mass display from Gazans, not many showed up. A fair amount did, but not near the number they wanted. Will this time be any different? I wonder if they want them all in one place so then can suicide bomb the crossings in protest of Israel! They've been bombing the fuel crossing for the power plant, and the crossing for humanitarian aid. So I would not put it past them.
- Interesting. Does this mean Hamas is willing to put a stop to the rocket fire?
-Maybe the whole war against Sadr is actually bringing political head way. First all the various government parties line up behind Maliki and now the parties that walked out are starting to come back.
- It's about damn time something is being done about this. The Israelis get blasted constantly at the UN for everything by the Arabs. It's seriously ridiculious. Moments of silence for the victims of Israeli aggression, constant condemnation of Israeli policy. Yet not a peep about Hamas, Islamic Jihad or Hezbollah. It's a pathetic double standard that will forever strip the UN of any legitimacy. I'm constantly amazed at how the body as a whole can't take simple steps to greatly increase it's legitimacy. Not letting perennial human rights abusers on the human rights committee and common sense things like that.
-This is especially interesting. You do not hear much about organized crime these days, it's mostly about terrorists. Which really, organized crime and terrorists have a lot in common. The steps we take to inhibit money flows to terrorists should be able to apply to organized crime as well. Heck, if we can catch Elliot Spitzer doodling a former Girls Gone Wild playmate (and it is nice to know those girls end up some place relatively nice, and not just doodling men on the street) we can catch the Mafioso red handed doing something illicit. I'd be very interested in a report on how and where the gains in the energy sector are being made. Governments have a lot of control over the energy sector, so it probably is not used to harm nations. I'd imagine some kind of money laundering scheme or gaining funds for additional illicit activity.
UPDATE:
- Hamas: Stopping rockets, but still smuggling weapons.
- Justice on the Organized Crime explosion!
- A few more articles on Organized Crime. Here and here.
- Oh, and Israel rejected Hamas' cease fire. And Hamas said it would be a tactic anyway.
- 12 smaller Palestinian groups are ready for a cease fire.
What is effective in harassing him, who is effective in countering him and what is dangerous to him. This article is more about what is effective.
I think it's more about denying the populace use of the cellphones. The taliban flourish in disconnected depressed areas. Disrupting the cell phone net would accomplish this. But it'll piss more people off then it will bring to their side. Smacks of some kind of desperation.
It's one thing to have a solid base in Pakistan, but it's another to be kicked out of Afghanistan proper and to try and weasel your way back in by attacking the lifelines of commerce and integration.
Careful an analysis of an Insurgent and their tactics should show the key to their down fall. They'll tell you who, what when and where. All you have to do is pay attention and follow up.
This could be HUGE. Here also.
What about the Druze Arabs who like Israel more the Syria?
I think it'll fall apart over support for Lebanese militants. Maybe Palestinian militants too, but definitely over Lebanon.
North Carolina, well at least their republican candidates for governor are embracing Nuclear power.
Ohio is taking a page out of France's book and declaring Nuclear power green energy.
What other states are going to get on board? Most likely those that already have quite a few nuke plants, it'll be easier to push the paper work through.
I do not buy it. This report argues that more food production is not the answer to the food crisis.
First, I think a main cause of the food crisis is because food is so expensive and it's expensive because big exporters have had serious problems with their crops. Australia is currently in an epic drought, and that is crippling their export, and India and Pakistan are having a heck of a time with rats and other pests devouring most of their rice and wheat crops. So these are off the market.
With so much developed country product going to bio-fuels, that also puts a large strain on supply.
However, there are developments on the horizon that could reduce this. Get rid of subsidies for bio-fuels and less will be used putting more on the market. As producing countries shift farm land and adapt to the changing climate, that will put more food on the market.
Further down the line, PETA has offered a 'X-prize', for the first company to produce commercially viable meat from a test tube. Were this to kick in, there would be no more 400 calories of grain to 100 calories of meat anymore. It'd be much lower. Thus saving more grains for the market. Were it to ever come on line.
I do not think that everyone starting their own backyard garden would solve anything tell you the truth. It might work for people who have backyards, but what about people in New York or Chicago? They can not exactly start a co-op in the middle of the city.
I do agree with the articles point that currently mass produced grains require too much oil in the form of shipping, fertilizer and production. That will be the biggest down fall of the agri-business. But I think most of it can be worked around tell you the truth, at least from the shipping and production stand points. Fertilizer will be harder to deal with, but simply rotating crops to replenish nutrients in the soil could be effective were it to adopted on a large scale. I think, I'm not really a farming expert.
UPDATE:
Here's an article from Intel Dump about the connection between food prices and violence. Which really is the biggest concern. Food wars. Nasty stuff.
UPDATE:
BBC article detailing some of the main problems I touched on above.
Now we're talking. This is fantastic news. The sooner we get this up and running the better.
Turn all the old waste into new fuel. Couple this with more efficient reactors and suddenly nuclear power loses it's biggest flaw. Waste.
It does not lose it completely, but it becomes much more manageable.
Finally looks like the US is getting serious about nuclear energy. Maybe we'll stop pussy footing around and get down to making it really happen.
A power grid with nuclear as it's base and main power source with solar and wind generating capacity whenever they can and taking areas that can sufficiently generate the power themselves off the grid. That would be one hell of a power grid.
Not actually nukes, but the equipment to enrich the Uranium.
This equipment is very lucrative, and I can see why the Nuclear Suppliers Group wants to be able to sell it. But I dont exactly agree with selling it. What's the biggest issue with Iran? Their enrichment program.
I'm more for a course like India suggests. Where the NSG arranges to sell enriched uranium to countries that require it, rather then proliferate the technologies to do it themselves. This would be both lucrative for NSG countries, and beneficial to other countries as well. If there is a guaranteed supply of enriched uranium, they'll be less likely to try it on their own. And it will be cheaper in the long run too.
UPDATE: Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists on fuel guarantees.
As prices go up, groups will find more incentive to launch these sorts of attacks.
Oil tankers are usually too big to assault directly, or do much damage to. In the attack mentioned above, the tanker was not harmed, merely shot at with something.
Still, more coordinated attacks of any kind are bad news. Especially with the increase in Pirate activity. With Oil a very high priced fungible commodity, one tanker captured and product sold could set up a Pirate group for a very long time and make them infinitely more dangerous. I do not think it's very likely.
On a more sinister note: terrorists attacking and destroying oil tankers. AQM gets some of those anti-tank missiles out of Iraq they are sitting on and starts hitting tankers... We'd see A LOT more damage to the markets.
UPDATE:
They actually breached the hull.
Looks like the Iraqi's have 'taken' Basra. I say 'taken' because it simply means the Jaish al-Mahdi (JAM) is not fighting right now. And now Sadr is warning of open war if the crackdown is not stopped.
I'm skeptical of his ability to launch an open war against the Iraqi government. Granted the JAM is more then capable of this, and if there are large defections from the ISF then there will be even larger problems. But what will the impact be on his supporters?
Ayatollah Sistani has declared that the Law is the only authority in Iraq. He will surely frown upon any moves against the State.
Even Iran, as quoted in the NYT article linked to first above, is happy with the Government's actions against JAM.
I've commented on this before in my Facebook SNAFU, but the populace would be acutely aware of who is causing trouble this time around. Heck, Shis are even angry with their political leaders for not politicking fast enough! How will they respond to waves of violence caused by them for not ascertainable reason? First, AQM is now targeting the Sunni awakening movements more so then Shia groups. Ethnic cleansing is roughly finished in Baghdad, so Sunni death-squads are not as big of a problem as they were (I'd say they were not at all, but have no facts to back that up).
Once the violence tamped down, the real trouble makers began to be noticed. Who happened to be bands of Shia criminals claiming to be JAM. There was a backlash against these groups, and Sadr was forced to retool his group. As security increases, JAM is not seen as needed anymore and it's excesses are less tolerated.
Why would it be any different this time around? When an actual war erupts in the streets that were formerly comparatively calm? If JAM simply lashes out, the populace will be the ones to suffer. And they'll backlash again.
With Sistani, Hakim, Baghdad and Tehran arrayed against Sadr, you better believe they'll take any opening he'll give them to consolidate their hold on the population. It would be political suicide to launch a wave of violence now. So I think he's bluffing.
But I am skeptical of how much these acts can be viewed as 'consolidation' efforts by the Iraqi government. On the one hand, this is undoubtedly an intra-Shia power struggle. But on the other, we have the Iraqi government challenging and seeking to disband a paramilitary group. But there are paramilitary groups all over Iraq *cough* Sahwa *cough* Peshmerga *cough*.
Although I suppose the Shia regions are the most stable, yet the most potentially violent, so it makes sense to start there. The Kurds are stable and peaceful and not bothering anyone and appear to be on board with what the central government wants to do, they did support elimination of the JAM after all.
As for the Sahwa movements, the Sunni provinces are still unstable for anything action to be taken. Were the military to make an incursion, well then there would be Civil War for sure. Still more time has to pass for those groups to solidify and potentially be absorbed into to the ISF or the private sector.
Iraq is an interesting conundrum, in any other state we'd be talking about government suppression by force of a political group, well just that, government suppression of a political group. The JAM does have a political base after all, and was actually elected. However I do not think the problem is with the political arm, it's with the military arm. Obviously the political nature makes them more of a target, but you do not seek Hakim and Maliki going after Sistani's followers.
Too much bad blood, instability and not enough time. We'll see how the next election goes.
UPDATE:
Militias causing more civilian casualties, so their down fall begins.
UPDATE2:
Confirmed.
I've always wondered if a better use of Aid monies is developing countries would be to build infrastructure instead of agricultural aid and the like. Would building roads, power plants and transmission lines lead to greater development?
Most states can not afford to keep up with the kind of demand, especially electricity. But if the infrastructure were in place, people are intuitive, they can use it to help themselves in the way they most see fit. Much like a cell phone allows poor Africans to operate in ways that they see fit and become more effective.
Would a road near the village have the same affect? What about a power plant that supplies an area with electricity?
Here is the article that spawned the idea, it is an article about China subsidizing infrastructure projects for the countries around the, mainly roads. Really just ways to get Chinese goods into the cities.
UPDATE:
Cellphones and development! The more and more we give people the tools to succeed on their own terms rather then funnel aid into trying to make them like us, or follow our developmental path, the better off we'll be. Especially when you take into account that the atmosphere can literally not take the rest of the world following the Western development model.
Someone needs to remind Ahmadinejad that the United States, Britain, France, Russia, China, Pakistan, India and Israel could turn the entire surface of his whole country to a radioactive glassy like substance. Although I do enjoy when he runs his mouth.
Stories like this always crack me up.
I love it when Authoritarian states are trying so darn hard to keep control that they have to react to the stupidest, most trivial slights.
China is by far the best example though. Like this, poor Cafferty the Chinese paramilitary torch police will be coming for him.
In reference to Tibet, China instituted an official 'no unauthorized reincarnations' policy. How ridiculious is that!
So Brazil now has two huge oil fields off it's coast line. One of the main arguments against peak oil is that while the finds of easy to get and easy to process oil is declining, as prices rise there are plenty of large oil fields that will become competitive.
Light-sweet crude may decline, but tar sands, Venezuelan type heavy oil, oil shale in the US will still be around. And at 115 bucks a pop, the costs of extracting and refining becomes acceptable.
So maybe we are not running completely out of oil.
Pirates!!!!!!!!!! Attacks up around the world, especially near Somalia and apparently Nigeria too.
The program discussed here is the most important thing the US can commit the Navy to at this point. Military to military contacts are a great way to use hard power to develop governmental based 'soft power'. When you couple those missions with these, trips be the Mercy and Comfort that provide free medical care to people at the ports they stop at, you've got a goodwill developing machine.
Just look at the Naval response after the Tsunami, it was fast and effective and had a tangible affect on the way the US was perceived in that part of the world. And it could help to form, what a lot of people (including Lt Col Nagl) have been calling for (and Obama too) and advisory corps to help training and support our allies.
Teaching allies to interdict Pirates will also be teaching them to interdict smugglers, terrorists and other criminals. It's a win-win.
Unless you really like Pirates.
UPDATE:
Christian Science Monitor story about Defense and State requesting funds to help train counter-terrorists around the world. But only 750 million after a 250% increase? But it's a start.
On a side note, the CSM has some fantastic reporting and published great stories.
Here is another source on the topic.
I'll admit it, I know next to nothing about Nepal and the Maoist insurgency there.
But I have been seeing a lot lately on how the Monarchy has held elections and the Maoists are doing quite well. This means they won the insurgency!
I may have to look into the context of the insurgency and how it operated. It's always interesting to see how an insurgent group wins of loses.
UPDATE:
So, they really did win.
I wonder how this will affect the Naxalite insurgency in India. Nepal probably will not act as a base for the Naxalites. At least I hope not, that would lead to an Indian attack on the staging areas. Maybe this will convince the Indian insurgents to moderate and try the electoral route.
UPDATE:
No straight majority, but they'll be the key party in the new government.
UPDATE:
Here is an article from CSM on the Naxalite insurgency in India.
This is just what Iraq need, militias further entrenching themselves both in the country and out of it.
Look at Turkey, Pakistan Palestine and Lebanon where after disasters the militant groups are the first too offer aid. It simply legitimizes them for a long time afterwards and makes it that much harder for other groups to dislodge them. It's a natural progression really, and wont be too terrible as long as they were to disarm and join the government.
UPDATE:
Abu Muqawama has a post about this too, with more pizazz then I can muster.
CNN also has a brief story about the topic, brining in the fact that the groups are supplying basic needs type stuff! Ridiculous. When did Iraq turn into Western Africa? Building militias with food? This should shame everyone involved.
I honestly think he'd be a great candidate in 2012 after being the governor of Illinois for a term. Then no one would be able to assail him at all. For now I think he's really long on ideas, but really short on substance.
Comments like his recent 'cling' flap really do not help his cause. Here's a nice Op-Ed covering what appears to be the real problems and inconsistencies with his comment (without the typical bile dripping off of some commentary I have read.) I'm more worried about the 'looking down on blue-collar Americans' and the inherent hypocrisy about deriding protectionism while promoting it himself... This will not help people get over the fact that he is a Colombia and Harvard law elitist. Sure Bill and Hilliary are too, but they do not go around dropping hints that they actually are. But that might be from a more polished political machine.
Of course this would not have been a problem were Hilliary to be out of the race. Then Obama would be consolidating instead of trying to pander. Hilliary can stay in as long as she wants, but Obama v McCain would be the best election scenario. And that's what I'm hoping for, although I'd still vote McCain.
Proto-typical argument for the 'opportunity' theory for civil conflict. Insurgency and civil conflict are more likely in places where the insurgents can offer more money then the government/economy can.
The resort to racketeering activities and criminal behavior is a positive development. It means this: less external money coming, reduces the legitimacy of the insurgency, and increases the contact with the population that the insurgency has (which leads to more tips and more arrests/kills for the counter-insurgent).
Personally I find the grievance model of civil conflict more compelling. I see civil conflict as a continuum, terrorism on one end, insurgency in the middle and civil war on the other end. Grievance is the more important motivator for individuals and groups while opportunity mainly informs the level of conflict. The real issue is that real grievances have the affect of broadening the appeal of extremist groups, that's the real issue.
One of the insurgencies biggest resource bases tends to be stolen oil. With the US chipping away at the economic aspect of the insurgency and now the Iraqi government making attempts to reduce the outside funding available to groups real progress can be made.
By using the CLC as essentially a stop gap Job Corps the US is attempting to supply both economic development and security at the same time. There is not doubt that for a stable Iraq the CLC and Sahwa movements will have to be disbanded and they are nothing more then a temporary measure. Here are some of the more interesting comments from the linked article:
"The new jobs program marks a sharp departure from one of the most highly touted goals of the so-called Sunni awakening, which was to funnel the U.S.-paid volunteers, many of them former insurgents, into Iraq's police and military."
-The problem facing the 'surge' is this. Bremmer and Sanchez, the first two gentlemen responsible for Iraq after the invasion operated with a different strategy. They wanted elections right away to establish some legitimacy to operate through. Crocker and Petraeus with their COIN strategy is operating on the complete opposite principle. While BS were going for legitimacy from the Macro (Federal government) level, CP are developing legitimacy from the Micro (local level). One of the end phases of COIN is elections at the local level. Once security is established, elections are held, and then incompetent people are vetted and replaced. This helps establish stability after a period of COIN and security. Now we have micro level developments impacting the established macro status quo. Which is not beneficial. I believe Iraq is scheduled for elections sometime in 2009. I see our commitment really being looked at after this election.
"Fearing that the armed men might return to violence without long-term job prospects, it has decided to divert them into civilian work or send them to vocational training programs."
What these awakening groups have done is essentially create various paramilitary groups, which is never good for a central government. Look at Colombia and Sudan. However, they are at least a temporary solution to the paradox of security being required for economic growth, and economic growth being required to end insurgency with is causing the insecurity. Okay, maybe it's not so much of a paradox, but you get the idea.
By essentially using these awakening paramilitary groups as a job program, you both establish security and a measure of economic growth. However, the gains need to be solidified really quick through private sector development or assimilation into nat'l security forces to prevent the paramilitary groups from turning against the central government and US forces.
"The slow pace of government vetting is largely what caused U.S. officials to decide that the CLC program should become a job corps."
Supports the above micro-macro controversy.
"In the absence of definitive Iraqi steps, the U.S. military is moving ahead with its own CLC transition. Only about 21,000 volunteers have said they want to join the Iraqi police, according to U.S. figures."
The low number who want security forces positions speaks to the importance of private sector development. And highlights the problem that is coming, and quickly I would say, of micro and macro colliding.
Now the Iraqi government is dragging it's feet getting the CLC's into the government. And now the US wants to cap the neighborhood watches at 100,000 total? I hope that as individuals move out into national police and army they allow that 100,000 to be refilled by volunteers. The Insurgency is going to have to come up with a lot more resources to match 300 bucks a month in salary. This is why it is important to let the neighborhood watches be refilled by volunteers as individuals move on to private sector or government positions. As the security level improves and jobs are created, the US and ISF can demobilize the units and fold them into either the ISF or more likely the private economy.
I know I've shown up way late to the prom and there have been a lot of developments that probably discount these comments, and they have been better stated elsewhere. But pulling it all off of Facebook, this is the best I could do to try and make sense of it all! Especially during finals week.
So OPEC is actually reducing the amount of oil they are selling. Why?
1. The states cant absorb any more money... Yes that is as stupid as it sounds.
2. Like the article suggests, OPEC countries are retaining oil for future sale. Because at 110 bucks a pop they have to sell less anyway to keep the coffers full, they can afford to sell less now to have more later. Confirmed in this article, at least in Saudi Arabia.
3. They CANT pump more oil because their oil fields are: in decline (scariest alternative) or they simply cannot effectively exploit the rest of what they've got (most likely branch in this scenario).
A few comments on oil pricing...
Are the markets really that skitish that a drop from gasoline stocks from 30,000 barrels ABOVE historic norms to about 20,000 barrels ABOVE the historic norms sets off alarm bells!? Because it can't be crude oil stocks. There was a slight drop, but we are still well within the mid range of historic norms. Consumption is dropping, demand is slowing for the first time in a long time. WE DONT NEED INCREDIBLY HIGH RESERVES. At least not ABOVE historic norms...
To quote TO: "Get your pop-corn ready"
33? That's a lot! And there are those pesky but delightful 4Gen Molten Sodium reactors. Can you imagine, a molten metal nuclear reactor? Awesome. I wish I had more time and access to try and compute a MW total and then percentage total for the US energy supply with these numbers.
My buddy Chris tossed this my way. FANTASTIC article. Covers every important point accurately and in detail. Pay special attention to the comparison between the amounts of radiation experienced be people from various sources.
This is how the comeback is going to happen. At sites that already are operating reactors. Half the battle is already done, and the NIMBY lobby should be pretty much out of the question. Well hopefully, although it might be better accepted as long as the developers keep suggesting coal as an alternative instead. But you'll still have those people who insist on renewables instead of nukes. Nothing against them, in certain areas they would be fantastic, but the sun does not always shine and the wind does not always blow and in some areas there just is not enough sun or wind to meet the energy intensity required to power the area (think Chicago or New York).
The key: Toshiba has already built two reactors on budget. That's really the only thing hold nuclear back, potential cost over runs. This looks to solve some of that, the NRC is doing a good job adjusting regulatory schemes, and it's good to see the private sector responding similarly.
I can not remember where I got the idea for the post, I'll look and give credit later.
Which will get us first.
My vote is for global warming. Peak oil will most likely result in the decline of cars, which in turn will force an even greater movement into urban centers. Over 50% of humanity are city dwellers now, and peak oil will only increase the rise. By 2050 75% of humanity will live in cities. Peak oil before that time will only demand that people move closer to jobs, services and the like.
Cities are incredibly power intensive. Renewable energy sources cannot match the intensity needed in today's cities. Were city growth to far outstrip power growth capabilities then cheaper and quicker (ie coal or natural gas) would have to be used to supply the urban centers. This would further exacerbate global warming.
Although, I will admit that peak oil removing cars and causing this kind of urban growth would, by removing cars would greatly impact the level of carbon emissions, and increased production in cities may not overtake this reduction. There are far too many variables for me to even know let alone discuss right now. The move to cities would make mankind more vulnerable to climate change effects. Anytime you compact a distributed system into a smaller area you run the risk of it collapsing.
Anyone familiar with 'Guns, Germs and Steel' knows that animal domestication and urban centers are the reason for why the West became 'best' rather then the 'rest'. Imagine in 2100 that 90% of humanity lives in cities... Can you imagine the disease environments that will spring up? A Westerner cant travel to India for any length of time with out getting sick (simply from different germs and the water). Hell, I went to Poland for a few weeks and got sick off of their tap water! Even if best sanitation practices follow mankind into the cities, just the sheer difference in peoples could make each zone nearly impossible to navigate by someone from any other zone. Bird flu becomes rampant in Asia but is contained. The Asian cities become immune, but any Westerner would be infected upon travel. What impact would that have on Globalization? It would not impact the exchange of ideas, but it curtail the exchange of people and maybe even goods.
UPDATE:
So most cities actually have a low per-capita CO2 output. However, I wonder how much can be chocked up to power plants NOT being in the city itself. I wont argue that living in a city has many advantages. For instance, I walk to class and the gym and spend maybe an hour and a half driving my car in an average week. But as mentioned above the city is energy intensive! It matters where we get that power from.
I was listening an Iraq Pentagon Brief on 4-7 while I was running and the General giving the briefing was trumpeting the defection of an Iraqi working with AQM who turned in a huge cache of weapons. Among these weapons, or at least what was mentioned primarily, were large numbers of wire guided missiles and anti-tank weapons. Granted I do not have all of the numbers but most of the Terror attacks involve car bombs and suicide attacks, not coordinated assaults on enemy positions. The stock pile, well most of it, is from Saddam's regime so that will explain the mix of homemade and military grade explosives that were reports.
The more puzzling development is that the military grade weapons have not been widely used.
An insurgency focused on propagating itself would be using the weapons to stage guerrilla attacks on enemy tanks and armored vehicles and more importantly to attack convoys to get more supplies for the insurgency.
But AQM is not an insurgency, it might function better as one, but it is not. I think a lot of it has to do with what I have mentioned before about the 'cult of martyrdom'. AQM cant get recruits to engage in the messy prolonged insurgent struggle because those they attract are after one thing, a quick death via suicide bombing to strike at the infidels.
But still, with mortars and rockets they could be doing a HECK of a lot more damage then simply causing chaos. Targeting US convoys, patrols, ISF convoys and patrols. But they are not, they are focused on killing innocent people in market places. While that is effective in proving that the government cant protect anyone, there is nothing on the other end. Which is why the Sahwa movments sprung up, AQI was only about death and destruction not about state building.
Here we have another example. Only this time surface to air missiles were specifically mentioned. Granted there were not placed there by AQM, they still had access to them and virtually anytime an American helicopter crashes or a plane goes down somewhere the media reports on it. So why are they not being more widely used?
I was thinking about this quite a bit in the pool this evening (made me miss count quite a few 500's and not focus on finals). This is a post from back in February (sparked by finishing up 'The Sling and the Stone').
Fourth Generation Warfare and Wahabbi-Salafis
a. Ideological Comparison
1. Mao v Qutb, Bin Laden, Zawahiri
2. Are there ideological weaknesses that prevent Salafi groups from successfully engaging in 4GW?
3. Has any Salafi group engaged in true 4GW?
4. Can a Salafi group engage in a true 4GW strategy?
5. Can Salafi groups exist absent nationalistic struggles? Is the appeal to the caliphate a proxy for nationalism?
b. Location Comparison
1. Vietnam, Cuba, China, Nicaragua v Iraq, Afghanistan, Algeria, Egypt (Palestine, Lebanon, Pakistan)
2. What geographic features are absent, present in current hot beds
c. Social Structures
1. Survey of successful 4GW countries, and a survey of Salafi hot beds
2. Can inherently tribal societies sustain 4GW?
d. Analysis of Failures
1. Why are Salafi groups so bad at 4GW?
2. Algeria
3. Egypt
4. Iraq
e. Phases Analysis
1. Phase I – Terrorism? Egypt, Saudi Arabia?
2. Phase II – Insurgency? Iraq, Pakistan?
3. Phase III – Conventional Warfare? Algeria?
f. 1979 Afghanistan Analysis
1. True 4GW?
2. What were the significant success factors?
g. Text notes: Sling and the Stone p 79
1. “A coherent, applicable message is central to 4GW”. This is where Salifis fail. They have a plan and a message, but it lacks specifics, is inherently utopian, and is overly simplistic due to the origin of the plan. On top of this, the ideology is brutal, unyielding and is implemented too fast.
2. Are there political phases as well as military phases to 4GW that have to be addressed in this context? Do Salafi groups fail at these political stages? “The Failure of Political Islam”
3. Lucky for us Salafi groups are incompetent 4GW fighters, phase one they can be effective, but they fail in 2 and 3, they are incredibly hard for them. Why is this? What is inherent to phases 2 and 3 that make them difficult for Salafi groups to master? Where are the gaps, either socially (narrow appeal either because of tribe, sect or creed) or doctrinally (where are the gaps that would appeal to the populace)?
4. Is the only successfully executed 4GW in the Islamic world 1979 Afghanistan?
5. Does the composition the various Salafi groups limit their ability to engage in 4GW? “Understanding Terror Networks”
h. Ramblings trying to get my point out:
1. Islamist groups seem to be able to marshal a core cadre very well, and recruit in a limited fashion, but can never seem to move past PIII i.e. Iraq. Even with a permissive government, they seem to have a tough time i.e. Pakistan. Does Islamist ideology itself destroy their chances of successful executing a 4GW? In Iraq we have seen a backlash, same in Afghanistan (this is a grayer area). Why? Iraq especially – Pre-surge AQI held and controlled territory. They were rejected. Was this purely ideological, or tactical?
Just a real brief sketch of an idea that I had, I have not nailed down what terms I would use to describe the Islamists/Wahabbi-Salafi, but I am thinking of just defaulting to what Abu El Fadl uses in 'The Great Theft', Puritans (although I think Wahabbi-Salafi is acceptable too).
I'll mainly be covering international law, insurgency and energy, but anything else that grabs my fancy will be fair game.
I imagine my posts will be more of a mix of links with a few comments and fewer more substantive posts. I have been doing most of my 'blogging' via Facebook (much to the dismay of the peers I am connected to there). I'm going to start by simply copying over some of my more recent stuff from there.
Thanks!
