Sunday March 30
Mosley Makes Schumacher Look Mortal!
Richard Williams of the Guardian Unlimited writes that the rule change "wrinkles" introduced to Formula One over the winter may put an end to what he calls Ferrari's "deadening supremacy."
He's wrong about the first point but he's right that Michael Schumacher is probably a little worried. I will explore this more at Formula One Art & Genius later in the season. For now, I am betting on a 6th consecutive World Championship for Schumi, who has proved himself an expert at modern Grand Prix tactics and a clear leader statistically among all drivers in F1 history.
Posted by glenn at A Plan Under Attack
Did we start the war with enough force? As the blame game begins, the fight in Iraq is about to get a lot bloodier. The long and dangerous road to Baghdad -- and beyond.
Well, I was sure wrong on that one last night (early this morning, that is). Seems that the journalistic community is waking up to the fact that there are serious questions posed by this war. Like whether the assets deployed are sufficient, whether the US Army underestimated the enemy and whether -- as in all wars -- "the enemy has a vote."
Newsweek's cover story this week is titled "How Bloody?" MSNBC writes about the Abrams M1 tank:
So far in Operation Iraqi Freedom, the American military has lost two Abrams tanks. The first M1s ever destroyed by enemy fire in battle, they were caught in an ambush of the U.S. Army's 3/7 Cavalry near As Samawah, on the west bank of the Euphrates River. Two is not a large number, and the Coalition forces have at least 650 tanks in Iraq with more on the way. But U.S. officials are worried about the skill or at least the fanaticism of the guerrilla fighters who sneaked up on the tanks driving a "technical," a jeep, under cover of a sandstorm. More worrisome are the type and the source of the weapon apparently employed, a Russian-made Kornet antitank missile.
And the web poll associated with that article says that 48% of Americans believe the fight is "much more difficult than anyone expected." The American public. Fickle, yes. Stupid, no. And neither are the Iraqis.
Forensic Testing On Uniforms?
The first real-time televised war and the first major US combat scenario since the explosion of the Internet is having a perverse effect on American journalism.
The war in Iraq, now 11 days old, is an odd affair. Being the first real-time televised war and the first major US combat scenario since the explosion of the Internet, people can follow -- and become fixated on -- the moment-by-moment developments. There is no fundamental problem with the objectives of the war, but the degree of jingoistic nationalism pervading the American press is disturbing. CNN reported tonight on four bloodied US uniforms "discovered" in a hospital secured by US forces. It is known that wounded US soldiers were treated at the hospital, yet the uniforms are being flown to Texas for "forensic testing."
What's going on here? The obsession with American casualties is revolting. It's not a discussion of the burdens of war or the scope of casualties anticipated. It is, rather, a focus on the so-called "human" face of war. But more than that, it is a sign that the basic rationale for the war itself may be flawed. Having as yet found no evidence whatsoever of Weapons of Mass Destruction ("WMD" in war-speak), the Army is desperately searching for some telltale of war crimes with which to paint Saddam. Maybe they will find some. In the meantime, applying forensic testing to uniforms is not going to show anything, certainly nothing that Europe and the rest of the world would accept. And if even if did, why is this story now? The search for patsies has begun!