4:45 P.M.

Have had a busy morning here. A hard disk on one of the file servers failed, requiring a complete restore from the backup. This was the first server to fail since we made Tivoli our main backup package (replacing Legato).

Fortunately, the server in question was not a particularly large file server--it handles roughly 30 users. Restoration took about 3 hours, and then a few tweaks were needed to bring it back to its original state. More fortunately, the restore worked more or less the way we hoped.

(Update: and a busy afternoon. Crawlingwestward has a post about the new Louisiana Portal, which includes a link to a gis server called wwwlamap--which, incidently, I did the basic setup for. The portal was having problems, which became MY problems because no one else wanted to deal with it).
But...

I meant to post this last night, but instead opted for rest: I came across this VERY VALUABLE AND USEFUL RESOURCE called Today In Iraq. I'll be adding this to my link list soon, and it's now daily reading for me. The person posting at the site goes by the (I assume) nom de plume of yankeedoodle, and the research is thorough. There are links to publications ranging from Stars and Stripes to Al Jazeera, with an emphasis on capturing a range of facts and opinion every day. Posts are headlined with terms War News, Commentary, and Casuality Reports. I spent some time going over the archive, discovering a LARGE number of stories that just don't make it to standard media (or web) outlets.

A big thanks to whoever yankeedoodle is.

Otherwise, while combing through the usual websites (and ones I've just discovered, like Today in Iraq) last night, I happened upon Bernard Kerik on C-Span (link is Real Audio). Kerik is Senior Policy Advisor to Paul Bremer. Kerik gave a speech that was neither unexpected or inspiring--like watching a basketball game where you not only don't care who wins, but it's garbage time by the middle of the third quarter...

I noticed a couple of things, however. Kerik was (maybe still is, I don't know) the Police Comissioner for New York City. I assume he's working on building a police force in Iraq, while fulfilling as much of a Comissioner role as one can, given the circumstances. What I found interesting was a statement he made to the effect that we don't have any records to compare crime, violent or otherwise, vis-a-vis the final year(s) of Hussein's rule and the opening months of occupation. Hmmn. Bush consistantly argues the point that the "world is better off without Hussein," a straw-man argument if there ever was one. However, no one apparently KNOWS if IRAQ is better off, at least by any measure that civilized society uses.

Why is that? No one asked, even though a Q & A followed Kerik's speech. Presumably, crime records were kept--or were they? NO ONE ASKED...we're the records looted? No one asked...Kerik noted mass graves--but NO ONE ASKED if the graves were recent (i.e., since, say 1998) or if they were from the 1991 uprising--and, yes, it makes a difference. NO ONE is defending Hussein--he was/is a thug. But mass graves from 1991, at the very least, should cause every American to take pause. Our government told Iraqis to rise up against Saddam, then allowed Hussein to mow these people down when they did just that. Like it or not, we are complicit in this massacre.

So, yes, when the massacres took place, when the mass grave were dug and filled with the bodies of Iraqis, DOES make a difference.

Kerik mentioned the overall deterioration of the Iraq infrastructure--for example, power plants have antiquated equipment, the sewer system of Baghdad consists of five separate sets of drains, which are NOT interconnected, and he caustically noted that Hussein opted for "band-aid" solutions--and more palaces. But while the AEI crowd seemed to nod their heads in unison, I began to think about this.

Now, why on earth would Hussein engage in building palace upon palace when it was obvious his country was going to hell in a handbag, and was taking the express train in getting there? Oh sure, there's the whole aspect of Hussein's meglomania, but then I thought: what about all the sanctions against Iraq? Might THAT have something to do with it? If I recall, the sanctions blocked infrastructure upgrades like new equipment for power plants, on the grounds that it could be converted to military use. Sewer system infrastructure could well have had the same restrictions, but we don't know. Why? Because the so-called free press allows their collective sheep-brain to take over whenever an Administration official solemnly invokes the Saddam card. In fact, I'm now guessing that Hussein embarked on major palace building, and major palace upgrades not only because he was a maniacal creep, but probably because that was the only public works project he wasn't specifically prohibited from doing.

Does this mean Saddam Hussein was a good guy? Of course not! Was he a SMART guy? Don't think so either--otherwise he never would have invaded all of Kuwait. No, Saddam was a despot (sorry to have to keep saying it over and over, but it seems like all those who had a hard on for war accuse thinking people of being Saddam lovers. So, let me ONE MORE TIME FOR THE RECORD NOTE: We don't love Saddam Hussein. We DO APPRECIATE the efforts of our men and women in uniform. In fact, we appreciate their work SO MUCH that we'd prefer they ONLY have to actually DEFEND the United States and/or it's allies, not INVADE A FOREIGN COUNTRY that wasn't threatening us).

Anyway, it seems a likely reason Hussein embarked on massive palace building and upgrades is because it provided jobs to ordinary Iraqis. And anybody in a position of power, even a raving despot like Saddam Hussein, knows that you need to provide sustenance to the population, which means JOBS. Duh. If all other avenues for public construction are cut off, then the only thing left is to build up the palaces...we'd need a place to stay post-invasion, right?

And in case anyone thinks I'm confining my blame to Team Bush, think again. Team Clinton is equally culpable, and it goes further back. Iraq has been a case study in miserable long term planning for at least the last FIVE administrations, beginning with the millionaire peanut farmer himself, Jimmy Carter.

How many more despots will it take before our public officials begin to realize or understand that YOU DON'T CODDLE overseas despots in an attempt to run an end around for the sake of business and "stability." In the end, you will get neither. Geez, Iraq is case front and center for why this is such a mistake. Oh, and in case you think it's our first mistake, look again. Right next door is case front and center number 2, Iran, where a policy "success" (minus the appalling human rights situation under the Shah) blew up in our face in 1978, while down the road a bit, Vietnam is case number 3. Korea is another example. Indonesia is only now emerging from the nightmare of Suharto. South America has an ugly legacy of military dictatorship, courtesy of the Red, White, and Blue.

Who's next? Ourselves?