It looks pretty ugly--the bill includes restrictions on federal funding for abortion and it passed narrowly--with two more votes than necessary.
We should not be surprised by either outcome. Abortion is still a highly divisive issue, and there are enough house seats where an incumbent cannot appear to be supporting the funding of abortion. In surveys, majorities are against banning abortion but they are also against federal $$ for abortion.
I avoided American politics classes throughout my life, but I did pick up one or two nuggets along the way. One of them is consider a vote total as an artifice of party organization, even or especially a narrow one. So, once the Dems knew that it would pass, they let those in more vulnerable positions to vote against. At least, that is the theory, and I have no reason to doubt it here. I am sure that some political scientist will look at the vote on this bill and determine that Dems in red or purple districts, Dems in first or second terms, Dems with stronger competition (I don't know how that would be operationalized) voted against the bill. Just a guess. [NYT has a good start on this]
Oh, and this was the easy part. We knew that a Health Care Reform bill would get through the House of Representatives. Getting through the Senate will be quite difficult, but the chances are pretty good for that now. On the other hand, as both my past week of cards and last night's (and this morning's) final table of the World Series of Poker demonstrate, low probability events just mean that something is unlikely, not impossible.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Theory Meets Reality
When I try to explain in my Intro to IR class that how we interact affects our choices--that the processes through which we interact influence the frequency, the costs/benefits, of the interactions. I try to illustrate this with barter vs. credit cards. But this story does a nice job of illustrating how a cash economy vs. credit card economy makes a big difference. In short, the city of NY forced the cab companies to take credit cards, which they resisted for a variety of reasons, but it has meant that more people are taking cabs, increasing their business, because the transaction is fast, easy, track-able, and delays the actual bill ;).
Wanna Bet?
ESPN will be broadcasting the final table of the World Series of Poker's Main Event on Tuesday, November 9th. You can follow the table right now on various twitter sites, as they play today from 9 down to two players. And the heads up match will be Monday, I guess. But I would bet right now what TSN (the Canadian brother of ESPN) will probably not televise the event at the same time as ESPN.
And yes, this is just me whining again about watching sports and other programs in Canada.
And yes, this is just me whining again about watching sports and other programs in Canada.
Talking the Talk: Teaching the Teach... Oops
Interesting piece using Fight Club to talk about Teaching--Faculty Club.
Includes this handy tip for Adviser Management:
This take on teaching is also largely correct:
Then I went to Texas Tech and had to teach beyond my area of expertise to very large classes, but the foundation of my teaching style (or philosophy as the piece cited above puts it) was built mostly in Vermont. The only real teaching lessons I learned at UCSD was to watch the same course (Intro to IR) taught by a fantastic teacher, by a strong teacher who was revising his course in light of the end of the cold war, and by a less than stellar teacher. I could compare and contrast and borrow/steal what worked.
Upon arriving at McGill, I quickly learned I had to increase my expectations, as the students were going to do the work and think about it. So tests became less about enforcement and more about pushing them and me to think more about the material. And, I loosened up somewhere between Vermont and now. I was never super-uptight, but now I am very relaxed, I play music before class starts to charge my batteries, and I have to balance how much youtube and other such stuff I use. Teaching 600 students, as I have been doing since 2005, has lead to a delicate balancing act--adding demonstrations and experiments to make things interesting but not too distracting--how much education and entertainment complement vs. overwhelm.
But do I have a teaching philosophy? Will have to ponder that some.
Includes this handy tip for Adviser Management:
If your adviser tries to change the subject from a discussion of your dissertation, shove one of the books, preferably one that is so new that you are confident your adviser hasn't read it, into his hands: "Um, have you seen this yet?" No doubt his frantic attempt to scan the bibliography and see if his work is cited will sufficiently distract him.No doubt. I am not the only narcissist in the academy.
This take on teaching is also largely correct:
you must not expect to be given any actual guidance from your department on how to be a teacher. You will only be able to obtain those skills through your own efforts.Teaching, like writing, takes a lot of practice. When I first started out, I just wanted to be clear and organized. I did not try to be interesting or engaging. I didn't even try to be funny, as hard as that might be to believe. My lecture notes from my first years of teaching were quite organized, developed, even occasionally researched. And they have served me well since. I think, in some ways, it was quite lucky that I was a visitor for two years at U of Vermont, teaching only a few courses, mostly intro to IR, to relatively small classes. I learned how to teach, more or less, in a low risk environment, playing to my strengths.
Then I went to Texas Tech and had to teach beyond my area of expertise to very large classes, but the foundation of my teaching style (or philosophy as the piece cited above puts it) was built mostly in Vermont. The only real teaching lessons I learned at UCSD was to watch the same course (Intro to IR) taught by a fantastic teacher, by a strong teacher who was revising his course in light of the end of the cold war, and by a less than stellar teacher. I could compare and contrast and borrow/steal what worked.
Upon arriving at McGill, I quickly learned I had to increase my expectations, as the students were going to do the work and think about it. So tests became less about enforcement and more about pushing them and me to think more about the material. And, I loosened up somewhere between Vermont and now. I was never super-uptight, but now I am very relaxed, I play music before class starts to charge my batteries, and I have to balance how much youtube and other such stuff I use. Teaching 600 students, as I have been doing since 2005, has lead to a delicate balancing act--adding demonstrations and experiments to make things interesting but not too distracting--how much education and entertainment complement vs. overwhelm.
But do I have a teaching philosophy? Will have to ponder that some.
Fort Hood--Too Soon To Comment [UPDATED]
It is too soon to develop any serious thoughts about the events at Fort Hood. We really do not know much about the suspect. There is probably still a lot of confusion about what really happened. Did the guy really hit more than fifty people? The press is already lionizing the female cop who may have been the one to take the guy down. She definitely deserves much lauding, but we really do not know much yet. If the first casualty of war is the truth, then the first casualty of this kind of event (other than obviously those who are harmed or killed by the attack itself) is what? Clarity? Editorial discretion? Patience?
One Canadian side note on all of this: for quite sometime, the Canadian Force exchange officers with many of Canada's allies, including at relatively high levels. Both the current and past Chiefs of Defense Staff, Natynczyk and Hillier respectively, served as Deputy Commander of III Corps, based at Fort Hood. There may be a Canadian general serving in that post right now (not sure). Just thought I would mention this relatively hidden Canadian connection.
UPDATED: Good explainer at Slate on some questions about the event.
One Canadian side note on all of this: for quite sometime, the Canadian Force exchange officers with many of Canada's allies, including at relatively high levels. Both the current and past Chiefs of Defense Staff, Natynczyk and Hillier respectively, served as Deputy Commander of III Corps, based at Fort Hood. There may be a Canadian general serving in that post right now (not sure). Just thought I would mention this relatively hidden Canadian connection.
UPDATED: Good explainer at Slate on some questions about the event.
Getting Nothing for Something
Interesting piece at NYT on the sale of virtual goods. That is, people are giving money to folks on the web for symbols/pictures/points that either have some value in a game or are just a gift of an icon to show that one cares.
I play a bunch of facebook-related games--Mafia Wars (where individuals play the role of mobsters trying to move up the ranks); Superhero City (where individuals play the role of superhero trying to move up the ranks); and Knighthood (where individuals try to build empires including friends and those seized from others). In each, one can spend money to gain points of some kind to develop new capabilities, re-energize the player and so forth.
While doing so can occasionally provide a competitive advantage, I have been mystified most of the time--why spend money on a free game? There has been only one game online that I have invested money in--poker. And that investment has been paid back many times over, I shyly admit. I have pondered paying a monthly fee for World of Warcraft since that does seem to be a heap of fun, but it has become harder to contemplate that step since I currently play a game that pays me money (not always, but over time, I am in the black).
So, this story surprised me:
But it did provide some explanations--that it is easy to buy a fake toy for a kid than a real one. Having a house full of long-ignored toys and games, I am sympathetic to the idea of just getting virtual ones that will not collect dust and will not take up space. Virtual clutter is no clutter at all.
Analysts estimate that virtual goods could bring in a billion dollars in the United States and around $5 billion worldwide this year — all for things that, aside from perhaps a few hours of work by an artist and a programmer, cost nothing to produce.
I play a bunch of facebook-related games--Mafia Wars (where individuals play the role of mobsters trying to move up the ranks); Superhero City (where individuals play the role of superhero trying to move up the ranks); and Knighthood (where individuals try to build empires including friends and those seized from others). In each, one can spend money to gain points of some kind to develop new capabilities, re-energize the player and so forth.
While doing so can occasionally provide a competitive advantage, I have been mystified most of the time--why spend money on a free game? There has been only one game online that I have invested money in--poker. And that investment has been paid back many times over, I shyly admit. I have pondered paying a monthly fee for World of Warcraft since that does seem to be a heap of fun, but it has become harder to contemplate that step since I currently play a game that pays me money (not always, but over time, I am in the black).
So, this story surprised me:
Zynga says direct purchases of virtual currency and goods will account for most of its more than $100 million in revenue this year, and that the company is profitable.
But it did provide some explanations--that it is easy to buy a fake toy for a kid than a real one. Having a house full of long-ignored toys and games, I am sympathetic to the idea of just getting virtual ones that will not collect dust and will not take up space. Virtual clutter is no clutter at all.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Unsurprising But Correct Political Outcome Of the Week
The Coburn Amendment to strip Political Science of National Science Foundation funding died a quick and well-deserved death. One could argue that the government should not fund research or maybe social science, but to pick out Political Science was, as I argued earlier, ignorance personified. [For other Saideman spews against Coburn, put Coburn into the search box at the top of the screen--I have about 4 or 5 rants of varying size].
I am looking forward to seeing a Political Scientist publishing a paper on the determinants of this vote--36 Senators voted for this amendment, 62 against.
Here is the list of Senators and their votes:
Grouped By Vote Position
A few surprises: Webb of Virginia? Sure, he is a relatively conservative Democrat, but the NSF is in Arlington, and there are heaps of good universities in the state with strong political science departments. Guess I have to vote against him in the next primary. Despite frequent references to a possible national candidacy, Bayh of Indiana is now clearly a force for ignorance. Interesting that the Republican for Nebraska was against the amendment but the Democrat was for. Each playing to beyond their base?
[UPDATE]: That didn't take long--quick analysis of the vote.
I am looking forward to seeing a Political Scientist publishing a paper on the determinants of this vote--36 Senators voted for this amendment, 62 against.
Here is the list of Senators and their votes:
Grouped By Vote Position
| YEAs ---36 | ||
| Barrasso (R-WY) Baucus (D-MT) Bayh (D-IN) Bennett (R-UT) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Chambliss (R-GA) Coburn (R-OK) Corker (R-TN) Crapo (R-ID) DeMint (R-SC) Ensign (R-NV) | Enzi (R-WY) Graham (R-SC) Grassley (R-IA) Hatch (R-UT) Hutchison (R-TX) Inhofe (R-OK) Isakson (R-GA) Kyl (R-AZ) LeMieux (R-FL) Lugar (R-IN) McCain (R-AZ) McCaskill (D-MO) | McConnell (R-KY) Murkowski (R-AK) Nelson (D-NE) Risch (R-ID) Roberts (R-KS) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Thune (R-SD) Vitter (R-LA) Voinovich (R-OH) Webb (D-VA) Wicker (R-MS) |
| NAYs ---62 | ||||
| ||||
A few surprises: Webb of Virginia? Sure, he is a relatively conservative Democrat, but the NSF is in Arlington, and there are heaps of good universities in the state with strong political science departments. Guess I have to vote against him in the next primary. Despite frequent references to a possible national candidacy, Bayh of Indiana is now clearly a force for ignorance. Interesting that the Republican for Nebraska was against the amendment but the Democrat was for. Each playing to beyond their base?
[UPDATE]: That didn't take long--quick analysis of the vote.
A Very Bad Week for the Allied Militaries
First, the Afghanistan runoff falls apart, left with Karzai in place and fewer incentives to govern better, despite the harsh words from the Brits.
Second, an Afghan police officer kills 5 British soldiers.
Third, an American officer kills more than a dozen other Americans at Fort Hood. It is too early to know really well what happened, but the combined facts are just horrible: that the suspect is an officer, a psychologist whose main job was to deal with soldiers with post-traumatic stress syndrome, has a Muslim name and was wearing traditional garb earlier in the day, and was upset about being sent to Afghanistan (although he would have faced minimal danger there, probably spending all of his time on a base). Just horrible for those who were hurt or killed and those related to them, but also a huge challenge to the Army as it has flashbacks to the fragging incidents during and after Vietnam, and to Obama and Gates as they try to figure out what to do next in Afghanistan.
I keep on hearing that as Afghanistan goes, so goes Obama's election chances. I still doubt that very much as the economy will still matter more, and I think people will generally assess Afghanistan in light of the difficulties and the fact that Obama inherited that war (and will have managed to extricate the US from Iraq, even if Iraq then falls apart). Moreover, the competition does matter, and the Republicans seem content to feed on themselves. Still, Afghanistan is going to be a burden for the entire term and beyond. There are no easy solutions, and I have struggled to justify staying and reinforcing. The lack of any good alternatives seems to be the best reason to stick around a while longer, but Karzai is making that exceedingly difficult.
Perhaps the best option is to try to focus as much effort at the local levels, and mitigate what Kabul is doing.
But definitely a depression week.
some American and European officials are pressing for at least a few arrests of what one administration official called “the more blatantly corrupt” people in the Afghan government. Administration officials declined to provide the names of people they wanted to see arrested and acknowledged that such arrests were a long shot. The international community’s wish list of potential defendants includes Mr. Karzai’s brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, a suspected player in the country’s booming illegal opium trade; Gen. Abdul Rashid Dostum, who is accused of involvement in the killings of thousands of Taliban prisoners of war early in the Afghan conflict; and one of Mr. Karzai’s running mates, Marshal Muhammad Qasim Fahim, a former defense minister who is also suspected of drug trafficking.
Second, an Afghan police officer kills 5 British soldiers.
Third, an American officer kills more than a dozen other Americans at Fort Hood. It is too early to know really well what happened, but the combined facts are just horrible: that the suspect is an officer, a psychologist whose main job was to deal with soldiers with post-traumatic stress syndrome, has a Muslim name and was wearing traditional garb earlier in the day, and was upset about being sent to Afghanistan (although he would have faced minimal danger there, probably spending all of his time on a base). Just horrible for those who were hurt or killed and those related to them, but also a huge challenge to the Army as it has flashbacks to the fragging incidents during and after Vietnam, and to Obama and Gates as they try to figure out what to do next in Afghanistan.
I keep on hearing that as Afghanistan goes, so goes Obama's election chances. I still doubt that very much as the economy will still matter more, and I think people will generally assess Afghanistan in light of the difficulties and the fact that Obama inherited that war (and will have managed to extricate the US from Iraq, even if Iraq then falls apart). Moreover, the competition does matter, and the Republicans seem content to feed on themselves. Still, Afghanistan is going to be a burden for the entire term and beyond. There are no easy solutions, and I have struggled to justify staying and reinforcing. The lack of any good alternatives seems to be the best reason to stick around a while longer, but Karzai is making that exceedingly difficult.
Perhaps the best option is to try to focus as much effort at the local levels, and mitigate what Kabul is doing.
But definitely a depression week.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Google This, Dude!
Interesting story about googling--basically revealing that the first few words entered and google's guess about your question produce some very interesting divisions: you is vs you are; what is up with vs how is it that, etc. Take a look and then play.
I tried "why does":
What a strange set of responses: eye twitch, gray hair, even poop floating make sense. But perhapsthe strangest one is why does love always feel like a battlefield? Does this reflect the enduring relevance of Pat Benatar? And, of course, I am thrilled that one of the responses is about Harry Potter--Snape's killing of Dumbledore.
I could do this all day. But how about one more?
I find a recurring theme--poop and dogs eating poop. "Why did I get married?" If you are asking google this, then perhaps one needs a bit more help than the internet.
"Why is there a dead pakistani on my couch?" Oh my.
Actually, that is due to Lost, perhaps:
And try "who says"
I tried "why does":
I could do this all day. But how about one more?
"Why is there a dead pakistani on my couch?" Oh my.
Actually, that is due to Lost, perhaps:
And try "who says"
Best Quote Thus Far on Tuesday's Elections
The bad news is that they’re still Republicans — with all the baggage that entails.From a NY Times Op-ed that makes claims similar to those I made yesterday--not to read much into the outcomes.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Disaster Du Jour: Afghan Police Kills Brits
It is bad enough that the locals don't trust the police, but we now have multiple incidents where the Afghan police--the key to counterinsurgency--firing on the ISAF forces.
Slate's explainer does the 'splainin'
Again, I think we ought to try to do counterinsurgency right before we pull up and get out, but days like this make it hard, very hard, to sustain that position.
Slate's explainer does the 'splainin'
Again, I think we ought to try to do counterinsurgency right before we pull up and get out, but days like this make it hard, very hard, to sustain that position.
Israel and the Syrian Reactor
Check out this story. It is a fascinating tale of the discovery of Syria's nuclear weapons program, including intel efforts that were smart, some that was pure luck, and now the two sides agreeing to deny that anything happened.
Gratuitous Plug of the Fall
U of Michigan Press has put together a nice page on the new edited volume, Handbook of War Studies III, which includes a piece I wrote with Erin Jenne. If you teach conflict stuff, this is an excellent reader for advanced undergrad and especially graduate seminars. Even if I do say so myself. And, yes, being on the same page as the other contributors, all influential scholars in the field, is very cool.
Reading Too Much Into Election Results?
With a handful of elections yesterday in the US, it is easy for much to be made about each one. But as any decent social scientist will warn, with a small number of observations, generalization is risky and it is unclear that there are any trends.
Republicans won a couple of governor races and gay marriage got another defeat in Maine, but the Democrat won in the controversial election in upper New York. What pattern can we discern? Other than gay marriage still loses in referenda, there is not much of a trend at all.
So, instead some observations:
1) Gay marriage is still bringing out opponents to vote more than supporters. I am confused by the following:
2) Sarah Palin might just be the equivalent of box office poison--she lost her election last year, and her candidate lost last night in New York. No wonder the GOP candidates in NJ and VA ran towards Obama, rather than towards Palin. Where the Republicans go now is a mystery, but I do not rule out further acts of self-destruction.
3) Candidates matter. Hoffman in New York just came off as a boob. The NJ governor was apparently quite disliked even by those who like Obama. There was no national momentum or flow, but, instead, personalities of each candidate mattered a great deal.
4) The key next year for the midterm elections will be, as always, the economy. If the job picture improves by then, then the Democrats should be more ok than not, although the President's party usually suffers in midterm elections (but not always as of late). If health care passes, then the Dems can claim some successes. However, I do think there are some risks to the Republicans of being the party of No. More people want change and reform than those who do not. Being opposed to change works to win party primaries, but obstinacy as a party platform is unlikely to gain pluralities/majorities of votes in most districts and states.
And as always (at least since last year), for expert analysis on US (and other) elections, see www.fivethirtyeight.com.
Republicans won a couple of governor races and gay marriage got another defeat in Maine, but the Democrat won in the controversial election in upper New York. What pattern can we discern? Other than gay marriage still loses in referenda, there is not much of a trend at all.
So, instead some observations:
1) Gay marriage is still bringing out opponents to vote more than supporters. I am confused by the following:
Opponents repeatedly warned voters that if gays were allowed to marry, it would be taught in the public schools, a tactic that proved effective in California last year.What does this mean? Teaching kids to be gay? Teaching kids that gay marriage is legal? Teaching kids how to marry in a gay style? I have not seen these ads, so if any of my readers can make sense of this, I would appreciate it.
2) Sarah Palin might just be the equivalent of box office poison--she lost her election last year, and her candidate lost last night in New York. No wonder the GOP candidates in NJ and VA ran towards Obama, rather than towards Palin. Where the Republicans go now is a mystery, but I do not rule out further acts of self-destruction.
3) Candidates matter. Hoffman in New York just came off as a boob. The NJ governor was apparently quite disliked even by those who like Obama. There was no national momentum or flow, but, instead, personalities of each candidate mattered a great deal.
4) The key next year for the midterm elections will be, as always, the economy. If the job picture improves by then, then the Democrats should be more ok than not, although the President's party usually suffers in midterm elections (but not always as of late). If health care passes, then the Dems can claim some successes. However, I do think there are some risks to the Republicans of being the party of No. More people want change and reform than those who do not. Being opposed to change works to win party primaries, but obstinacy as a party platform is unlikely to gain pluralities/majorities of votes in most districts and states.
And as always (at least since last year), for expert analysis on US (and other) elections, see www.fivethirtyeight.com.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Ask the Readers: The Most Efficient Part of Any University Is ....?
The Parking Police. This is a hard lesson I learned in graduate school, where fees and tickets went up even during/because of economic downturns. This has continued to be the case wherever I have taught. There are all kinds of rules one can overlook or bend at a college campus, but staying a few minutes too late in a metered spot or parking in the wrong zone are going to be punished.
I was reminded of this by a tweet by the Reduced Shakespeare Company that apparently was ticketed at Duke.
Is there any other part of university administration is generally quite efficient?
When I talk about bureaucratic politics in my classes, I always ask them which part of the school's bureaucracy drove them the most crazy. No consensus at McGill, but that shows what a low tuition rate will do. At all the places I taught in the US, the answer was always the financial aid office.
Again, readers?
I was reminded of this by a tweet by the Reduced Shakespeare Company that apparently was ticketed at Duke.
Is there any other part of university administration is generally quite efficient?
When I talk about bureaucratic politics in my classes, I always ask them which part of the school's bureaucracy drove them the most crazy. No consensus at McGill, but that shows what a low tuition rate will do. At all the places I taught in the US, the answer was always the financial aid office.
Again, readers?
Premature Anniversary Fest
Heaps of articles and posts these days marking the anniversary of Obama's election, but he has only been in office for about ten months, so it seems premature to consider his performance thus far. Of course, we can rate him every week or month, but he really was not President in November and December of 2008, even if we wished it to be the case or if it felt like it as Bush was marginalized.
Therefore, I should wait until January 20th or so before rating Obama's first year in office. Indeed, we should know by then his decision on Afghanistan--the most widely watched and anticipated call Obama will be making in his first year in office.
Finally, a legitimate reason to procrastinate.
Therefore, I should wait until January 20th or so before rating Obama's first year in office. Indeed, we should know by then his decision on Afghanistan--the most widely watched and anticipated call Obama will be making in his first year in office.
Finally, a legitimate reason to procrastinate.
Where To Go From Here?
John Burns has a nice response to all of the questions he has received about the future of Afghanistan now that the runoff has collapsed. It addressed the difficulties and tradeoffs quite well, as Karzai is being asked to change his stripes and act more decisively against the forces that undermine the legitimacy of his government--including corruption at the highest levels.
It is kind of funny that Montreal has been going through a similar process--its municipal election,a three-cornered race between an incumbent who presided over much corruption, a nationalist politician seen as anathema to much of Montreal, and a third candidate that is widely viewed as, ahem, wacky. The incumbent won, promising to end the corruption that flourished in his previous term.
Who do I have more confidence in to turn things around? Karzai or Tremblay? Um. Can I get back to you guys on that? If I had to bet, I would bet on Tremblay since his family is not as directly implicated and because there are other institutions that might play a significant role, such as the Provincial level here.
Updates:
I am quoted for my pessismism in today's Globe and Mail.
NY Times keeps up its run of apt but understated headlines:
It is kind of funny that Montreal has been going through a similar process--its municipal election,a three-cornered race between an incumbent who presided over much corruption, a nationalist politician seen as anathema to much of Montreal, and a third candidate that is widely viewed as, ahem, wacky. The incumbent won, promising to end the corruption that flourished in his previous term.
Who do I have more confidence in to turn things around? Karzai or Tremblay? Um. Can I get back to you guys on that? If I had to bet, I would bet on Tremblay since his family is not as directly implicated and because there are other institutions that might play a significant role, such as the Provincial level here.
Updates:
I am quoted for my pessismism in today's Globe and Mail.
“It doesn't seem to me that now the pressure of the election is off that he will become more transparent. Is he going to fight corruption now? What is his incentive?” asked Stephen Saideman, a professor of political science at McGill University.
NY Times keeps up its run of apt but understated headlines:
Karzai Vows Corruption Fight, but Avoids Details
Monday, November 2, 2009
A Boondoggle Too Far?
I could be way far up north right now. The Security and Defence Forum, a branch of the Canada's Department of National Defence responsible for outreach to the academic community, has arranged a trip to Iqaluit, capital of Nunavut (this is the same organization that sent me to Afghanistan a couple of years ago). The purpose, I think, is to show to scholars what Canada is doing as part of its Arctic Sovereignty program--defending the arctic from the new threats in a global warming world.
I could have gone, but I would have missed a couple of classes and some research time. And since I am an arctic sovereignty skeptic, I am not a terribly receptive audience. My research in the Canadian military begins and ends with the missions in Afghanistan. Once Canada leaves Afghanistan in 2011, as it has promised, my interest in its military will drop, and its interest in me and my work will also decline.
Instead, Canada will focus on protecting its northern regions from various threats--the Danes (an island or two in dispute), the Russians (who claim much of the territory under the formerly ice covered ocean), and the Americans (who will insist on free and unregulated passage through the various newly ice-less straits). But therein lies the problem. While Canada already has the capability to limit Danish poaching, it will never have the capability to deter or thwart Russian or American transgressions. The real answer, as always, is for Canada to align with one side who can deter and/or thwart the other. And you can guess which is which.
So, instead, our local post-doc who does all of the administrative work of our research group (soon to be a research centre) has gone north, and appropriately so since she has a sincere interest in both the Canadian Forces and Arctic Sovereignty.
Anyhow, so we have proof that I can say no to a freebie.
I could have gone, but I would have missed a couple of classes and some research time. And since I am an arctic sovereignty skeptic, I am not a terribly receptive audience. My research in the Canadian military begins and ends with the missions in Afghanistan. Once Canada leaves Afghanistan in 2011, as it has promised, my interest in its military will drop, and its interest in me and my work will also decline.
Instead, Canada will focus on protecting its northern regions from various threats--the Danes (an island or two in dispute), the Russians (who claim much of the territory under the formerly ice covered ocean), and the Americans (who will insist on free and unregulated passage through the various newly ice-less straits). But therein lies the problem. While Canada already has the capability to limit Danish poaching, it will never have the capability to deter or thwart Russian or American transgressions. The real answer, as always, is for Canada to align with one side who can deter and/or thwart the other. And you can guess which is which.
So, instead, our local post-doc who does all of the administrative work of our research group (soon to be a research centre) has gone north, and appropriately so since she has a sincere interest in both the Canadian Forces and Arctic Sovereignty.
Anyhow, so we have proof that I can say no to a freebie.
Poppy Time in Canada Again
The poppies are symbolic here because of their role in one of the most famous poems to emerge from the First World War, In Flanders Field. And the poppies are doubly ironic these days, as the Canadians have lost 133 soldiers over the past eight years in Afghanistan, often in or near fields of poppies. The generation of Veterans from World War II is disappearing into time with those from the Korean War just behind them. With few battles in between, the war in Afghanistan, albeit involving a smaller group of soldiers here, will provide the next generation of poppy-pinners.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)