Month: March 2011

TDW:

Take a trippy trip through the streets of NYC circa 1983 with Rick Liss’s stop-motion short No York City.  Music: Laurie Anderson – “For Electronic Dogs”

A heartening dispatch:

Misurata was in a desperate state yesterday, we almost lost all hope, but the strikes came at a good time with good intensity and frequency. They even managed to take out some convoys inside the city which was very impressive. Qaddafi's forces have been hiding in a hospital…. I can tell you that there've been zero casualties from international strikes….

There are snipers on top of buildings. Qaddafi's forces are still stationed on the main street, Tripoli street, but there's no random shelling anymore…. I've been able to go out, I've seen bakeries and groceries open for the first time in many days. The strikes made such a difference; Qaddafi's forces are scared of them. I want to express our gratitude and appreciation for these actions, we will never ever forget!

And a new unconfirmed tweet:

#Gaddafi tanks are now bombing the #Misrata hospital!!!!!! #Libya #feb17

Matt Latimer asks:

How did Republicans become the party of reflexive, perpetual war?

Another superb blog post from PM Carpenter. Money quote:

Obama's critics and Republican opponents are naturally all too delighted to confuse his internationalist pragmatism with an absence of principles, when in reality these — pragmatism and principles — are no antithesis. It would be a happy world indeed if the constant application of idealism always achieved the principled objectives pursued, yet history indicates its near abject failure in nearly every instance … whereas our hyperpragmatic presidents, from Washington to Lincoln to FDR, achieved nearly all of their principled goals.

I see no alternative to pragmatism in these times. The core truth is: the US is navigating the currents of Middle Eastern history in a way that cannot be reduced to a doctrine.

Interests and values conflict constantly; every rebellion has its own dynamic; reacting to an authoritarian regime and to a totalitarian regime must be different. The core hypocrisy of the US over the last few decades cannot be simply wished away. And yes, it lingers because oil matters still. Because we have refused to make the tough decisions to make us and the world less reliant on it as an energy source. You go to war with the economy and legacy you have.

That means that almost any action by this administration in this region can be criticized for impurity or inconsistency, or for violating a doctrine, or for representing (God forbid!) a nuanced direction. My own worries about Libya are based on the Libyan case alone. But I could be wrong and I'm going to take stock of this as time goes by. Assessing pragmatism's effects requires a series of non-ideological judgments.

The situation suddently heats up:

At least 15 people were reportedly shot dead by Syrian security forces in an operation against pro-democracy demonstrators in the southern Syrian city of Daraa. … The violence began when hundreds of people gathered at a mosque, the focus of rallies since March 18, to prevent police from storming a protest tent camp and makeshift field hospital there.

More from AJE:

A rights activist also told AFP news agency that security forces had opened fire on mourners attending the funeral of those killed in Daraa.

More footage at EA. Global Voices is tracking tweets and the disappearance of a prominent blogger journalist.

A reader counters Tim Lee:

CNN and the BBC aren’t free.

While it’s true their websites make money, those ventures are re-appropriating content paid for by their respective cable channels. In the United States if you get cable you’re paying a monthly fee of about $.48 cents a month. The only reason this is so low is because every cable operator carries them, so 60% of the country is paying this monthly fee. 

Just look at this chart from Time Warner. CNN is in the subscription business, with other incomes secondary, exactly like the New York Times. The BBC is a combination, with US revenue being primarily carriage fees and the UK model being solely taxed based. 

He also fundamentally don’t understand the actual cost of reporting. While there is no question some of the Times content is replaceable consider their war coverage. In Iraq the Times is “spending more than $3 million a year to maintain a heavily fortified Baghdad bureau.” This is the same as easily 40 reporters stateside.

A total flip-flop on Libya – and one that cannot be parsed without seeming to be completely, opportunistically anti-anything-Obama. This is the alleged moral man in the race.

 

Andy Morgan reports:

Gaddafi has been buying the affections and fighting skills of the nomadic tribes of the Sahara for a long time. His vision of a borderless Islamic republic of the Sahara struck a chord with the Touareg, who have been fighting their own rebellion against the governments of Mali and Niger since independence back in 1960. Despite widespread suspicion that Gaddafi only ever helped the Touareg to further his own territorial schemes, many Touareg fear the consequences of his fall from power. 

The more we know …

(Photo: Women from a nomadic Tuareg tribe dressed in traditional clothes hold a picture of Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi during the 16th International Ghat Festival, in the ancient city of Ghat in the heart of the southwestern Libyan desert on February 15, 2010. By Mahmud Turkia/AFP/Getty Images)

Ezra Klein fights back:

It is remarkable how much difficulty, how many things that could go wrong, how much potential blood and death and disaster are condensed into Wieseltier’s breezy promise that intervention in the Middle East can bring us nothing but honor. It is always a mistake, of course, to judge a policy by its advocates. And so I am trying to resist the impulse to oppose our policy in Libya simply because Wieseltier is so foolish in its defense. The truth is that for people who know little of Libya and have a record of being wrong about military intervention in the Middle East — a club to which both Wieseltier and I belong — a little humility is in order. But for Wieseltier, at least, humility is in short supply. It is too easy for him to imagine honor. It always is.

A reader writes:

I’m no biologist, but I doubt those frogs are actually getting it on. Frog mating doesn’t involve penetration and takes place in bodies of water – “froggy style” – rather than face to face. This photo is probably just tickling our anthropomorphic whimsy.

An expert enlightens us:

Those frogs aren’t mating (or, at most, one of them is, and no reproduction is going to happen). Mating in frogs is called amplexus.

The male climbs atop the back of the female, grasping her with his forelimbs, either just behind her forelimbs (axillary  amplexus) or around the waist (inguinal amplexus). Amplexus may begin on land, but is usually completed in water, since the eggs must be in a moist environment. Typically, the male and female shed gametes into the water, and fertilization is external.

Males of a number of species frogs and toads have been known to get overexcited, and amplex inappropriate objects (other species, empty cans, etc.), or, at times, multiple males will attempt to amplex the same female, and wind up amplexing each other in a sort of a ball.

The picture you show is something of this sort. Amplexus resulting in actual mating (i.e. shedding of gametes) doesn’t occur belly to belly. If the lower animal is a female, she might be able to right herself (although it can be hard to make a male let go), and then a regular amplexus, with gamete shedding, could take place (they’ll also have to move to the water; although I can’t identify the exact species, the frogs in the photo are a species of the genus Rana, which lay their eggs in water). If you google-image “amplexus”, you’ll get lots of pictures of frogs and toads in amplexus.

I don’t often say this, but trust me on this: I’m a herpetologist.

Another raises a disturbing possibility:

I’m in herpetology and actually study the effects of development (including roads) on amphibians.  I’m not personally aware of a Ranid frog in that region of France (or anywhere) that mates in face-to-face amplexus.  So I thought you should know that you most likely treated us all to some animal necrophila.

(Cartoon by Veronika Heckova, via Maria Popova)