I love looking back and thinking about my favorite books of the year.  Here are a couple books that I couldn't put down and didn't want to end:

In the Company of Soldiers: A Chronicle of Combat by Rick Atkinson.  Atkinson recently won the Pulitzer Prize for his WWII book An Army at Dawn and, in a sense, this is a great follow up book.  During the Iraqi War, Atkinson gets embedded with Major General Petraeus of the 101st Airborne (whose had made noise recently as the commander in charged of training Iraqi forces).  In the Company of Soldiers is a chronicle of the lives of the men who lead in battle.  Of everything that happens, it's the little things (like deciding whether to tape or paint Apache blades to protect from the sand) that make this book a great read for anyone interested in what happened on the group in 2003.

Imperial Grunts: The American Military on the Ground by Robert Kaplan is a military travelogue of experiences with US Special Forces teams and Marine units around the world.  Much of the book actually takes place during combat in Iraq but only the last chapters in the book have anything to do with it.  Instead, Kaplan treks around the globe visiting some of the most remote US military outposts in an attempt to understand the men who are the face of the United States to many people in war-torn corners.  The more I read the more I wanted to read and the harder it became to put down.  This is the first in a series of books about the US military and I very much look forward to the next (even if The New Yorker didn't much care for this one).

Posted at December 4, 2005 11:20 AM in response to Best Books of 2005?

Proudly from the blue states I say: Go Pats.
And then I add: not to talk politics or society or anything... but I read recently somewhere that 70% (ish) of Native Americans polled have no issues with the name "Redskins."  Personaly, it drives me crazy... but if they're not bothered by it, should the rest of us be?  Or, is this a matter of poor history lesions?
I've been debating this for years... change the name already!  I mean, imagine how much they'd make in sheer uniforms and hats.  Look at the Nationals, second highest in hat sales behind... well... let's put it this way: Go Red Sox.
And I don't expect the 'Skins to get anywhere this season... not with the Eagels on top and the 'Boys seemingly on the edge of post-season.  Then again, the last four SuperBowl losers pratically dropped of the face of the earth the following season... maybe the 'Skins make it after all.

Posted at August 3, 2005 11:18 PM in response to serious stuff

This is an idea I welcome, no matter how hard it may seem to achieve.  Elsewhere in these comments I stressed bringing in the international community, especially non-western nations.  I agree with piort that bringing in the Arab nations may be a way to reduce the American presence.  An even tougher nation for the US to invite in would be China, but I think the benefits of working with the Chinese on a nation or mutual interest (read: oil) could well be worth the risks.

Posted at June 17, 2005 1:29 PM in response to [Update] The News of the Times in Review: A Wedge in Public Opinion

Libertine, bringing up the ethic groups in Iraq brings up a good point - and brought up an old thought I wish we could act on.  The Middle East as we know it was largely drawn by British royalty who took no care large ethic groups.  Thus we have people like the Kurds with no home land.

In my wildest dream, we'd (and by "we" I mean the nations of the Middle East and interested parties equally) re-drawn the nation-states of the Middle East giving fine thought to ethic, religious, political and moral being.

Will this end the violence in the Middle East?  Perhaps... it's amazing what people with a homeland will fight for instead of against.

Posted at June 17, 2005 1:19 PM in response to [Update] The News of the Times in Review: A Wedge in Public Opinion

UN peacekeeping has largely been a disaster

And yet, they're better at nation building then the United States has been.  Granted, Iraq is an extremely tough nation to rebuild, a harder task than anything the UN (or US) have ever tackled before.  I believe the international community needs to do this as much as the US does.  My first reaction is the United Nations but there are other ways of bringing in the IC without UN peacekeepers.  NATO is an option... though, as I stated above, I'd like to see involvement from non-Western nations as well.

It was arrogant to believe that the United States (with very few allies) could rebuild Iraq.  The Iraqis are the only ones who can help themselves; nothing I said disagreed with that statement.  However, it is better for the people of Iraq (and the Middle East) to see that the entire world stands behind and with them.  Key to all this, again, is the support for non-Western nations.

The last thing the world needs is civil war in Iraq.

Posted at June 17, 2005 1:11 PM in response to [Update] The News of the Times in Review: A Wedge in Public Opinion

Indeed... now the public is waking up, they're going to look for someone else to start explaining Iraq too them.  But what are the Democrats going to say?  They can only say, "Bush really got us into a stupid mess" for so long before someone asking what the Democrats are going to do now.

What do the Democrats do now?  There's a strong voice on the left to get out of Iraq but I fear the world will be worse off should that happen.  My response is, and has been, international help.  The entire world - from France to China - needs a peaceful Middle East.  Because of Bush's actions, the path to a stable Middle East now starts in Iraq.

So bring in the United Nations... put the blue helmets on the French, the Russians, the Americans, the Chinese and put them all at the check-points with the Iraqis.  Show the people of Iraq that the entire world, not just America, not just the West, is behind their nation.

Peace is never a solo endeavor.

Posted at June 17, 2005 8:36 AM in response to [Update] The News of the Times in Review: A Wedge in Public Opinion

I am an avid movie buff but I'm not ashamed to say I own both Bad Boys and The Rock.  Heck, I even enjoyed the terrible re-make of Flight of the Phoenix.  Sure, it was no Aviator, but I didn't need it to be.  So, unlike charlie in post #4, I applaud Yglesias for taking on the world and announcing his enjoyment of movies because they're fun.  In the end, that's what movies are: fun.  Sure, those movies will never make my ten-top favorite movies of all times list... but sometimes, I need a break from heavy thinking, from politics and the intricacies of international relations.  Sometimes, I just want to see some crazy whacked-out general take over Alcatraz and hold all of San Francisco hostage.  So I say bring on The Island and where's the closest video store?  I want to rent Paycheck.

(Side note: for some strange reason I have faith that Ben Affleck is going to find his acting footing and shock the world.  Though I lost a little of that faith during Daredevil which I didn't get more than ten minutes into.)

Posted at June 5, 2005 9:01 AM in response to Blame Ben Affleck