OId Fort Stevens on the Oregon Coast

Fort Stevens was built during the Civil War, although exactly what it was supposed to defend America from at that time isn't entirely clear. It was named after Isaac Stevens, an important general in the Union Army who got himself killed during the Civil War. From the Civil War through the end of World War II, Firt Stevebs defended the mouth of the Columbia River, but eventually it became obvious that submarines could do the job much more effectively. It has since been converted into a pleasant 2800-acre Oregon State Park. You can still see some of the gun batteries. I think the Japanese once lobbed a few shells at it, but otherwise it had a very peaceful existence during all those years. It's even more peaceful now, with plenty of camping spots. There's also a KOA across the road, if you prefer that kind of Kamping.

Iraq choices -- Extremely bad and even worse

David Brooks, in this morning's edition of Eugene, Oregon's daily newspaper, the Register-Guard, offered a solution for Iraq. "Soft" partition. Sounds good, but we've been there before.

It fails on the fundamental calculus of Iraqi oil and population. The Kurds are 20% of the population and control 40% of the oil. The Shiites are 60% of the population and control 60% of the oil. The Sunni Arabs are 20% and have nothing to speak of. These are rough numbers, but they illustrate the problem.

The Kurds hate the idea of Iraq. They are not interested in giving up anything in order to make it viable and they have negotiated a national constitution that gives them what they want. Asking them to give up Kirkuk and some of their oil in order to achieve something they don't want doesn't sound reasonable.

The Shiites would take a strong national government, because their 60% of the population would give them control. Even if they shared nicely, they would get 60%. However, if the Kurds exit with their oil, the pie shrinks. The Shiites can still get 60% if they follow the Kurdish model, and if it's good enough for the Kurds, why not them? They in fact have also enshrined this in the sacred Iraqi constitution that we helped bring about.

Leaving the Sunni Arabs. Brooks thinks that if they agreed to stop fighting, the other parties will give them things. The Sunnis doubt this. The Sunnis may harbor thoughts of a final arrangement in which they get more than 20% of the action. They've had it in the past and they have much more military expertise per capita than the Shiites.

There are two possible scenarios. A bloody Civil War in which America participates for some time before giving up, and a bloody civil war in which America takes an early exit. I suggest the latter. Won't this lead to a humilitation for America and a blow to our economic and strategic interests in the Middle East? Yes, it will. Next question, please.

Who is the danger?

The Register-Guard, Eugene, Oregon's daily newspaper, had two items today. One was an article about a gentleman from Canada who was wrongly identified as a terrorist, intercepted at an airport in the United States, and sent to his native Syria where he was tortured into making a false confession. The government of Canada has apologized and made compensation. The United States government refuses to even take him off the watch list.

Secondly, there was a letter to the editor, chastizing those of us who can't remember that we're in a worldwide war against terror and bemoaning the fact that some of us can't distinguish between those who attacked our freedoms and those who lead our country.

Remember the first item. When Osama's crew attacked on 9/11, they didn't attack our freedoms. They attacked our property and our sense of safety. Our freedoms are also being attacked, but the attackers are our national leaders.

Best Weather on the Coast

When is the best weather on the Oregon Coast? It probably isn't July or August. That's when the weather is hottest in the Willamette Valley. The winds blow in from the Pacific Ocean and bring cold and fog. Sometimes, just watching the fog climb over the hills can be fascinating, at places like Pacific City and Cape Kiwanda, but for the most part, it's not all that warm and pleasant. September is often better and maybe October, although the famous Columbus Day storm that hit Oregon in 1962 was on October 12. It actually happens to be the most pleasant on the beach in February, many times. The main reason is that a wind from the east will bring quiet decent temperatures and no fog.

California epithets

There's a big controversy over something that actor Isaiah Washington said during production of "Grey's Anatomy," of which he is one of the stars. Evidently, it had something to do with the sexual orientation of one of his fellow actors. I don't, however, know what the word was.

Because amazingly, in a world in which the filthiest language imaginable is used routinely on television, when a word gets written down it becomes too hot to handle. So this is now referred to as an "epithet." Which one, we don't know because no one will print it. It's unfit.

Out here on the Oregon Coast, we look carefully at people who seem to be moving in and if they don't meet out standards, we say, "Not from Oregon, are you? You from California?" And we siddle slowly across the street. We say that such people are Californicating our beautiful state. I think it's healthier. Californians! There I said it. I feel better.

The State of the Union

I make it a policy never to listen to a State of the Union address. Or a candidate's acceptance speech at a national convention. Some things are just too stressful. So rather than talk about yesterday's speech, I'll hold forth on what fun we have on the Oregon Coast.

When Jason Lee and his friend Cyrus Shepard got married in 1837 in Salem, they decided as many others would later that the Oregon Coast would be a great place to honeymoon. There were no roads at the time, so they packed up some horses, hired a guide, and made their way out to a site near Lincoln City where they spent a week with their new brides. This makes them the first known honeymooners on the Oregon Coast. Nowadays, people are just as likely to come to the Oregon Coast for the wedding. Wren Smart will help you if you need to make arrangements.

History on the Lower Columbia

The Columbia River Maritime museum is one of the "can't miss" attractions in Astoria. Located at the east end of town, right on the river, it has been designated Oregon's official maritime museum. The building is in the shape of a wave, in case you were wondering why it seems so unsquare. The purpose, according to museum director Jerry Ostermiller, has been to break out of the box of a traditional museum. If you've ever seen their display of a Coast Guard boat, simulating its passage through a breaking wave at the Columbia River Bar, you'll agree that they've succeeded.

There are lot of museums on the Oregon Coast, and you'll get quite a few articles about them in Oregon Coast Magazine.

Seaside Excursions

Once upon a time, the Seaside Aquarium was a "natatorium," or indoor swimming pool. Natatorium is one of those words that you were taught if you took Latin in school, just to show that Latin gave you something useful. Anyway, the natatorium was a great idea in 1924, but during the Depression, times got tough and the swimming pool business didn't work out. So the pool was converted to an aquarium, which it remains today. It's one of the few private, family-owned aquariums around the Oregon Coast.

Seaside has been another hot spot for Oregon Coast real estate in the last few years. There isn't a lot of available oceanfront, most of which is taken up with hotels and resorts.

Confessions of a Global Warming Sceptic

I've always been a little sceptical of global warming. Particularly the dire and fairly specific predictions about what would result, such as rising oceans. It's been about 20 years. CO2 keeps increasing and the average temperature does seem to be trending a bit upwards. But the oceans? I'm here on the Oregon Coast and frankly I haven't noticed it coming an iota higher up on the beaches.

But on the other hand, I have enough respect for the basically unstable and sensitive balance of the climate that permits humans to populate as much of the planet as they now do. Maybe things will be OK. Maybe, but maybe no. It seems like a silly gamble.

Particularly when the U.S. economy seems unable to produce as much as it consumes, year after year, and we go increasingly in hock to foreigners. Don't get me wrong. Love foreigners. Wonderful folk. But I just don't want to see them own all our assets, which is where we'll end up at the current rate.

So even though I'm not a global warming hawk, I'm a Thomas-Friedman hawk for a mass program to achieve energy self-sufficiency. This is the sort of thing we do. We're the top techno country and this is a techno problem. Let's fix it, be proud of it, and screw the Arabs. Also, maybe we won't melt the Arctic.

The Big Brother Incident

Everybody in India and UK seems to be upset over an episode of a "reality" TV show called "Big Brother," in which an actress from Bollywood (the Indian version of Hollywood, located in Bombay) is seen to receive snide remarks about her ethnic heritage. She breaks down and appears distraught.

Politicians in both countries are now jumping on the bandwagon. Indian politicians are declaiming that racism has no place in a civilized society. British politicians at the highest levels are harumphing that Britain is not a country that tolerates such attitudes, although of course, it does.

Meanwhile, three things seem to be getting less attention than they deserve. The first is that this is a "reality" TV show, which means that it has nothing to do with reality and all the participants, who are getting paid, realize that the show will die, and they will not get paid, if nothing happens. The show doesn't work if everyone is polite and accommodating. It's essential to have assholes. Some of the participants obliged.

Second, the actress is, to restate the obvious, an actress. She might have said, "Oh, don't worry, sticks and stones may break my bones, ..." Instead, she had a breakdown due to the anguish caused by racist remarks. Which apparently she had never heard in Britain before. We should take her anguish with a grain of salt.

Finally, the criticism is coming from India, which defines racism. India is riven by prejudices based on language, religion, and caste. Britain collectively does not treat its most despised groups the way Indians treat dalits. The pot is definitely calling the kettle black here.

Of course, out here on the Oregon Coast, we know all about racism, having mistreated our Indians a century and a half back. However, we have decided to rectify the situation. Since we once corrupted them with liquor, they have now been given the inside track to corrupt us with slot machines. What goes around, comes around.

Sunni vs Shiite: The Ku Klux Klan analogy

There's an interesting analogy to be made between the current situation in Iraq and the Reconstruction Era in the American South after the Civil War. In both cases, an outside armed force overthrew the established, traditional power structure and attempted to install a new arrangement under which the formerly oppressed people would exercise freedom.

There are many points on which the analogy does not work, but there's no question that the officers of the Confederate Army were white, and the officers of the old Iraqi Army were primarily Sunnis. People who are accustomed to military leadership are easily persuaded that the interests of their people require them to crush the aspirations of the those formerly oppressed. I'm sure the Sunnis, just like the Southern whites, consider their fight a noble one.

Whether it is or not isn't relevant. We're talking about practical matters, and just as blacks in the South could not hold their own against the militarily trained and economically advantaged whites, so is it unlikely that the Shiites, even with a greater preponderance of the population, will ever defeat the Sunnis militarily. Our policy, which has been to back the Sunnis into a corner and convince them that they couldn't prevail, is based on a fallacy. Which is that the 20% of the population that the Sunni Arabs represent cannot defeat the 60% Shiites. Time will tell, but in a war, I'd still bet on the Sunnis.

Cherry Picking Democracy in Iraq

Soon we will be hearing Bush's until now secret plan to fix Iraq. There doesn't seem to be much doubt about the nature, only the numbers. We're going to send more troops. Bush has consulted with lots of people before making this decision.

Except the Iraqi government, which clearly doesn't want it. Iraq being a democracy [sic], the government in sensitive to the wishes of its people. Those people are now clearly in favor of America packing up and leaving. They may also be fearful of the likely consequences, as well they should, but they want us out. They watched America stay for almost four years and continue to lose, or not to win as quickly as we'd like as the administration prefers to put it. They see no prospect of good results from America's continued involvement, which they would like to see terminated.

But we won't, because whatever nonsense we spew about the sovereignty of the Iraqi government, they have none. We are the occupiers and we will decide how many troops conduct the occupation and for how long. This creates a fatal contradiction. We want to raise the legitimacy of the Iraqi government we have created, but because we have created it and won't let it tell us to leave, its illegitimacy becomes transparent to every Iraqi.

Ashley Treatment

The parents of the disabled girls Ashley in Seattle are catching hell from the self-righteous over their decision. Ashley should be glad, if she's capable of being anything, that she lives at a time and in a country where keeping her alive is given a moment's consideration, let alone whether it's unethical to provide her with anything less than the maximum lifetime experience of which she's capable.

I suspect that the "advocates for the disabled" have spent very little time in the type of situation which Ashley's parents have experienced. I have only done a small bit myself when my aged mother was dying and the task was less, was shared, and was clearly time-limited. I wouldn't consider doing what Ashley's parents have done, let alone face a lifetime of continuing to do it. But that's their choice.

However, let's put that choice in context. It's the same context as keeping Terri Schiavo alive. This is not a world with unlimited resources. When you decide to maintain someone in a vegetative (Schiavo) state in some vague hope of a better outcome, or near vegatative (Ashley) because you somehow enjoy the relationship, you spend millions of society's dollars. The spenders seldom pay it all or even much of it; it's passed on to everyone else in medical bills and insurance. But it's a ton of money for every such decision.

Meanwhile, in India, about 750,000 children under the age of 6 die annually as a result of bad water. Hardly anyone considers it a moral obligation of America to fix this problem, but we could do it easily for the amount of cash lost annually in Nevada casinos. On a smaller scale, we could have devoted the cash required to keep Terri Schiavo staring at the walls for years to saving thousands of young lives.

But we don't. We are ethnocentric, which is why we don't save children in India. But even in the United States, we have an infant mortality rate that is among the worst in the advanced industrialized world. For the cash we spend on silly grand gestures, we could save many American babies who would have the prospect of actual, full and productive lives.

We should not expect Ashley's parents to work any harder than they have, and we should not as a society consider extending more services for the severely disabled until we've taken care of our reasonable priorities.