Fanatics With Guns....

As I was reading this excellent (as always) piece by Ralph Peters, this passage made me stop and think:

At the height of last week's fighting in Gaza, one Palestinian in 300 carried a weapon in support of Hamas - a third of one percent of the population. Now Hamas rules 1.5 million people.

Numbers still matter, of course. But strength of will can overcome hollow numbers. And nothing - nothing - gives men a greater strength of will than religious fanaticism.

That's exactly the aspect of the radical fundamentalist Islamic movement that scares me the most -- they have that powerful underlying motivation that animates their every action, whereas we look a lot like sheep ambling towards the slaughterhouse. Only something like 9/11 seems to wake us up, and even then only briefly. We lack that motivation, and they have it. And it gives them power that frightens me.

The entire piece is an excellent, sober analysis of the recent events in Palestine and the Gaza Strip. As they say, read the whole thing. Here's his (very slightly) hopeful conclusion:

The true believer always beats the feckless attendee. The best you can hope for is that the extremist will eventually defeat himself.

And that does leave us some hope: Fanatics inevitably over-reach, as al Qaeda's Islamo-fascists have done in Iraq, alienating those who once saw them as allies. But the road to self-destruction can be a long one: The people of Iran want change, but the fanatics have the guns. And sorry, folks: Fanatics with guns beat liberals with ideas.

Faith is the nuclear weapon of the fanatic. And there's not going to be a religious "nuclear freeze." It doesn't matter how many hearts and minds you win, if you don't defeat the zealots with the muscles.

Catch Ralph's commentary every chance you get, and don't miss his books.

Poop on the Porch

Mike D. passed this story along:

I bought a bird feeder. I hung it on my back porch and filled it with seed. Within a week, we had hundreds of birds taking advantage of the continuous flow of free and easily accessible food.

But then the birds started building nests in the boards of the patio, above the table, and next to the barbecue. Then came the poop. It was everywhere: on the patio tiles, the chairs, the table...everywhere. Then some of the birds turned mean: They would dive-bomb me and try to peck me even though I had fed them out of my own pocket. And others birds were boisterous and loud: They sat on the feeder and squawked and screamed at all hours of the day and night and demanded that I fill it when it got low on food.

After a while, I couldn't even sit on my own back porch anymore. I took down the bird feeder and, in three days, the birds were gone. I cleaned up their mess and took down the many nests they had built all over the patio. Soon, the back yard was like it used to be...quiet, serene and no one demanding thei r rights to a free meal.

Now let's see...our government gives out free food, subsidized housing, free medical care, free education and allows anyone born here to be an automatic citizen. Then the illegal's came by the tens of thousands. Suddenly our taxes went up to pay for free services; small apartments are housing 5 families; you have to wait 6 hours to be seen by an emergency room doctor: you child's 2nd grade class is behind other schools because over half the class doesn't speak English; Corn Flakes now come in a bilingual box; I have to press "one" to hear my bank talk to me in English, and people waving flags other than "Old Glory" are squawking and screaming in the streets, demanding more rights and free liberties.

Maybe it's time for the government to take down the bird feeder.

This is the first immigration-related email in quite a while that I agree with. It analogizes nicely a couple of the points I keep making about our current immigration policy: the welfare programs are wrong-headed, and "immigrants" who are really just transient workers with no intention of becoming Americans are undesirable. Removing the welfare programs -- and enforcing immigration law in the workplace -- would indeed "clean up our porch".

But I'm pessimistic about this happening. More likely, I think, is the direction things seem to be headed in Congress: some token (and utterly useless) "border security" efforts, some token internal enforcement, and a huge broadening of immigrant welfare programs and an amnesty for those already here.

All of which makes me start thinking about the unthinkable: where else, other than America, might I want to live? Because if we continue down this path, I don't think my country is going to remain the kind of place I want to live in...

Metric System

Most Americans have only a passing acquaintance with the metric system. Most Americans I know -- even technical folks -- have no intuitive sense of even the most basic metric units, such as meters, °C, kilograms, etc. Likewise, most find conversions a bit intimidating, and would most likely have to hit the books (or the web) to convert, say, inches to centimeters.

I recently found the map at right, which shows (in red) the countries of the world that officially do not use the metric system. I knew there weren't many -- I'd probably have guessed ten or so -- but only three? Look at the company we're in: Liberia and Myanmar (formerly Burma).

In my own experience, this is a little misleading, but not too much. Everywhere I've ever been (and I've never been to Liberia or Myanmar) everyone is at least familiar and comfortable with the metric system. However, in some countries, remnants of the older, non-standard units still exist. For example, in the UK one can still find some speed and distance signage on the roads that uses miles instead of kilometers, and in the grocery stores you'll find some items packaged in non-round metric values (like 454 grams) that just happen to be a round Imperial value (454 grams equals 1 pound).

Even here, the metric system is starting to "sneak in" a bit. Wine is normally packaged in metric sizes these days. Many mechanics are familiar with the metric hardware found on Japanese and European cars. Electronics technicians and engineers generally use the metric system, even though they may not even know it. We even passed a law a decade or so ago mandating a switch to the metric system. What's holding up the works?

Probably it just boils down to this: completely switching to the metric system would involve a considerable expense without an obvious way to recover the expense. Certainly if the entire world (and especially such a huge market as the United States) were using a single system of measurement, there would be lots of small efficiencies that would benefit us all. But if you look at it from the perspective of most individuals or companies, mostly you see additional expense and no extra revenue.

For example, suppose you owned a saw mill in Idaho that catered to the local building trade. To switch to the metric system would mean that (for instance) a 2x4 (in inches) becomes a 5x10 (in cm). All of your products would be affected. You'd have to print new price sheets and catalogs. You'd have to buy new software to plan your cuts for the new products. You'd have to re-tool all your fixed jigs, and likely you'd want to buy new saw blades that had a metric kerf. You'd have to train all your workers, and even your customers. All of this would cost a significant amount of money -- but where's the benefit to the company? None at all...

Only a small minority of individuals or companies in the U.S. would actually see a benefit by conversion. Some companies currently make two versions of their products -- one built to the metric system for the international market, and one built to English measures for the American market. These companies would benefit by having a simpler product line. Some individuals would benefit because they must, for their work, use both systems; having one would be easier. But there aren't very many examples like this. Most of us, and most companies, would simply incur a useless expense in converting.

Which probably explains the recurring complaints by international trade organizations about our intransigence in sticking with English measurements. I'm sure they'd like nothing better than to see us uselessly wasting our money and time converting, while they can sit back righteously praising our efforts -- which temporarily would make them more competitive.

Having said all that, I must also say this: I wish the U.S. had already adopted the metric system. It grates on me that we are not participating in one of the few worldwide standards that actually makes sense. But I don't think it's going to happen anytime soon, for the reasons given above. Unless, of course, the moonbats come to power -- in which case we'll be switching to the metric system along with changing our national language to French (or perhaps Esperanto)...