ISIS, ISIL, IS, Whatever

Some thugs just use brutal methods to carve some territory for themselves. They are so brutal that even Al Qaeda denounces them. Naturally this development alarmed many. Even people outside the Middle East are afraid of the new flow of terrorists. Do these thugs have any chance? Nah, they have ZERO percent chance of succeeding AT LEAST for two reasons:

1) Air Power

First, their success is due to governments everywhere underestimating them. Or in case of Syria, too busy to fight other threats. They are successful because they move in small numbers, making big powers with air supremacy unable to find and pounce them from the sky. Not anymore. Their success has made them cocky, moving in big numbers, with banners waving, providing targets for any ground attack aircraft! The Iraqi government just buy 25 Su-25 Frogfoots to do just that. How can ISIS react to such fury unleashed by these gunships? How can they stop gunships, heavy bombers, and other modern military equipments, bought from Russia or other countries, from massacring their warriors? They have no chance. Just ask Saddam Hussein army, they know the taste of fighting open war against first rate power with aerial supremacy.

2) No Money No Honey
Second, their source of income are multiple, but ultimately rest on their ability to loot Iraq and Syria. Once the Russians etc crush ISIS army (see #1), no chance in hell they can have this kind of money again. Without money, no terror organization can survive. Just ask the communist parties and rebels around the world after the collapse of USSR. Just ask how dependent the jihad recruiters schools on foreign money. They will resort to local donation. Good luck convincing Muslims to donate after the spectacular "WE WILL DESTORY KA'BAH" proclamation.


Ultimately, ISIS will fail because they are just too abhorrent, too cruel, too barbaric, even for Al Qaeda taste. When you burn everything around, everybody will go beyond afraid. Everybody will hate you and stop you. Violently. Looks like such simple logic escapes the hotshots in ISIS.

The West, Colonialism, and China

Many people hate "the West". Understandable. UK, USA, France, etc. are responsible for colonialism all over the world. Let me stress this, colonialism is NEVER pretty. It encapsulates racism, economic injustice, political injustice, slaughter, and so many other horrible things. It creates misery, resentments, and so many other "negative feelings."

Unfortunately, some people lost perspective. They confuse the cause and effect, the ends and means. They forget that it is colonialism that we must avoid at all cost, NOT THE WEST. 

What? You think only the West can practice colonialism? Do you think People's Republic of China is your savior?

Here, let me give you some example of Chinese colonialism:

1) The occupation of Vietnam. (111 BC - 39 AD, 43 - 544 AD, 602 -938 AD, 1407 - 1427 AD)

Yes, the Chinese repeatedly ruled Vietnam. Other than those 4 periods of domination, maybe you still remember how they invaded Vietnam after Vietnam stopped Pol Pot and his Cambodian slaughterfest. Wait, what? How come China tried to punish Vietnam for stopping the Killing Field? Sorry, my bad. Pol Pot is a friend of China. The Killing Field is worth defending.

There is an old Polish saying: "Under the German, we lost our freedom. Under the Russian, we lost our soul." I suspected Vietnam has the same view on France and China. It has been confirmed. My Vietnamese friends has said the same mentality exist in VIetnam. One of them even going further by saying that most Vietnamese won't admit that they were and are influenced by China culturally and politically, that Chinese occupation left many legacies that still important until today. They are just too ... careful not to be colonized by China again.

No, this is not paranoia because of history/the past alone. The Vietnamese have good actual reasons to be fearful and suspicious of its gigantic neighbor.

2) Spratly Islands (Late 20th century - today)

This islands is a hotpoint. Philippine, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Brunei contested that island. So does China. How does the gigantic China claim those islands? Does it has any merit? Not really. If you see the map on the right, Philippine is nearby, Vietnam is nearby, Malaysia is nearby, and Brunei is nearby. Not China. They only nearby if we count Paracel Islands which they wrested from the Vietnamese after the Vietnam war.

Check the map again. This is not only about Spratly. This is about total control of South China Sea. The border claimed by China will leave other countries with only a tiny strip of sea in front of their coast. Appalling. 

And how China assert its control? Simple: they send warships, marines, and fighter jets to attempt a de facto domination there! Who said the Chinese are ABOVE military action?

Oh, they also interested in Spratly because most likely there is oil deposit there. So ... if USA tried to conquer Iraq for oil it is colonialism, while China trying to conquer Spratly is only ... let me gues ... conflict of interest? HURRAA FOR DOUBLE STANDARD!

Oh yeah, similar case happens in Senkaku/Diaoyu. I already pointed out  that such conflict is utterly stupid. That, and an example of Chinese expansionism and attempt at colonialism. The Vietnamese indeed have good reason not to trust the Chinese. And that is not all.

3) Burma/Myanmar (Middle-late 20th century)

In the past, the Qing dynasty tried to conquer Burma. They sent 4 expeditions. Bad idea. VERY BAD IDEA! All of them were devastated by malaria and Burmese army. 

That was the past, how about today?

Well ... the military junta in Myanmar think that since the West refused to help them in any way, they can get helps from the Chinese. Bad idea. VERY BAD IDEA. The Chinese, hungry for natural resources, dictated every single contract. They pushed their luck with the Myitsone dam. Nobody in Myanmar wants that dam. Only the Chinese benefit from it. That is the last straw for the Myanmar people. Finally, the junta had enough and decided to open their country to democracy and western ideas. Heck, they even released most of their political prisoners!  

This is really a sobering experience. If you think US and Western domination is bad, Burma just show that Chinese domination is far from pretty or mutually beneficial. 

4) Rare earth mineral

Some year ago, some Chinese fishermen did illegal fishing in Japanese water. The Japanese coastguard apprehend those fishermen. So ... how does China reacted?

They used their monopoly on rare earth mineral to squeeze the Japanese to release those fishermen. It worked.

Ladies and gentlemen, that is economic colonialism in action!

EVERYONE learned the importance of rare earth mineral, so Australia and USA start re-open their rare-earth mineral mines again. Better late than never.



5) The Passport Controversy
China also used trickery to get what it wants. Sometimes, it is borderly juvenile. Like ... when they printed their territorial claim into their passport. Let me be clear: EACH PAGE of their passport displays China as the owner of Spratley, Senkaku, and many other contested regions. My guess is, they wanted to use any stamp on any page as prove of APPROVAL of Chinese territorial claim.

Nope, not working. India, Vietnam, etc. refuse to stamp those passports.

This is not a sign of good intention. It is a sign that the Chinese will use all means to grab new territories.

This sign was send not only to countries with territorial dispute with China: it was send to all countries. Unfortunately for them, once again they pushed their luck here. Now everyone know that China is willing to trick, to deceive, in order to got what they want. Smart people already know this, but this should enlighten all western haters to leave "China fans club".


You see, we have to be careful, watchful, and critical not only to West. The Chinese or ANY OTHER POWER also can be as ruthless, as exploitative, and as devious as the West and more! Time to ditch the mentality that only the West can practice colonialism. Time to ditch the mentality that the non-West are always the victim.

Affirmative Action and Quotas in Germany

Germany rejects Affirmative action. Their parliament refuse to put women quota on German's companies. Hurra! i already pointed out that affirmative action is sexist, racist, wrong, and in the end benefit no one, not even the women or the minorities or whomever its target group. In fact, it denigrates those target groups, since it assumes they can't be successful without any forceful intervention from the government. 

That's why the Deutsche Welle article that reports it baffled me. Sorry, "report" is not a correct word. "Feminist propaganda" is more appropriate. So, let's get started! Here are 2 most important points in that article that really annoys me.

First, these sentences: 
"Pohl admits that a quota is senseless, because it would not do justice to women and may even create new injustices. "But as long as we have no other instrument to solve the inequalities that still exist, it is unfortunately the only instrument that will work.""

Huh? Those sentences contradict each other. The first one validated my opinion. But, this Pohl suddenly change his mind. It is like saying "Racism is morally wrong, and economically unsound. It costs the society not only its moral high ground, but also its money. But since it is acceptable and beneficial for the society, we will use it."

Now, let's talk about "instrument to get gender equality." Hey, here is an idea, what about letting the women prove their capability in the company that decide to hire them WITHOUT quota, WITHOUT affirmative action? I am 100% sure many women can kick ass, they will prove to the whole world that misogyny is just stupid, detrimental, and above all ... expensive.

Second, we have this gem:
"Critics claim a women's quota "promotes mediocrity" and represents "an economic risk for the company." Sociology professor Heather Hofmeister says this argument is an indication of open misogyny: one can't just say that the female half of the population is less capable than the male, and Germany's good economic shape cannot be explained by the fact that its companies are almost exclusively run by men.""

Okay, here Hofmeister is just being sexist. Or dishonest.

"Women's quota promotes mediocrity and represent an economic risk" NOT because of the assumption that "all women are less capable than man." That is simply a strawman attack.

Gender equality is about moving BEYOND gender dichotomy. It is an idea that an individual gender has nothing to do with their competence. It is an idea that meritocracy is supreme, far above gender dichotomy. 

Look, let's just get real about those management positions, shall we?
Many women are more capable than many men.
Many men also more capable than many women.
A woman quota will advantage less competent women over a more competent men. It is a form of sexism, discrimination against men, not eradication of racism. The possibility that an incompetent women will be accepted ONLY because of her XX chromosome escaped Hofmeister entirely. I thought we are all about gender equality? Silly me, many feminist, leftist, etc just want to discriminate male, and starting the matriarch.

Let's just stop discriminating anyone just because she got a vagina. Don't start discriminate anyone just because he got a penis. Why it is so hard and complicated? Oh yeah, because according to many people, equality is not the issue. DOMINATION is actually the issue. Because according to certain ideology, two wrongs makes a right, and women has the right to dominate men. Silly me.

Hiroshima Nagasaki: How We Learn to Love the Bombs

Many peaceniks from the Left blame the US for everything. Now they even don't get the idea that the US has every right to disarm Iran, North Korea, and many other countries. One of their favorite argument is:

"The US is a hypocrite since they already nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki, therefore they don't have the right to prohibit others from acquiring nukes!"

That means they never read history. Or choose to ignore it. Here, let me enlighten you guys: 

The Terror of Imperial Japan

Hey, peaceniks, if you think USA is nasty and hypocritical, just try dealing with the Imperial Japanese of the 1930s & 1940s! They raped and massacred the whole city of Nanking, and created a systematic sexual slavery across their vast territories! Yes, let me stress it again: SYSTEMATIC SEXUAL SLAVERY! Got that? Oh, they also spouted that we have to support their empire, since they were creating "The Great Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere." Yeah, they had the nerve to declare sexual slavery as "prosperity"!

None of us buy that b.s. We in Indonesia have a saying "350 years under the Dutch is nothing compared to 3.5 years under the Japanese." Heck, my own grandpa told me the stories how the Japanese stole EVERYTHING from his house, even every single nails and bolts.

And don't let me start about their war mentality. They are baffled by the idea that any surrendered enemy combatants has to be treated with respect. Hey, who can blame them? In their honor-based culture, "surrender" is the apex of disgrace. That's why they keep fighting and fighting, AND RAPING in between. That continued even after the Allied started sending waves and waves of B-29 bombers in mid 1944. The destruction of their fleet, and the end of their oil supply from Southeast Asia in October 1944 didn't convince them to surrender either. Any sane government would throw the towel after that, but nope. To hell with sanity and the well-being of their people, the Imperial Japan keep fightin since their priority is THEIR HONOR!

USA vs Others?

Hey, with that mentality, how can you protest when the US finally nuked their cities? They had it coming. Others wouldn't be that nice. Let's say the Japanese faced nuclear-equipped Russians instead of Americans at that time. The Russians are never as squeamish as the Americans. To ensure the maximum effect of the atomic bombs, they would start nuking Tokyo and Kyoto, the political and cultural capital of Japan. If they have more bombs, they would nuke Osaka, Kobe, and other major cities too.

And now you peaceniks think that Americans is immoral? What other options they have? Here, let me show the other options to you:

A) Stop the war by agreeing "peace" with the Japanese, accepting their terms.

The Japanese were eager to keep China and many other "Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere." Good luck telling that with a straight face to the Chinese. They would be enraged! They would continue their war against Japan. People in other area like Indonesia would either die in millions because of the harsh treatments, or die in millions because they finally rebel, but the Japanese use superior firepower to massacre them.

B) Asking the Japanese to surrender unconditionally and immediately, renouncing all of their conquest.

Do you live in a fantasy world where "HONOR" were never a part of Japanese culture? Like I said before, they would do EVERYTHING to avoid losing face, even keepin a losin war goes on and on. What's next, asking lions to be vegans?

C) Just keep bombin and blockadin Japan until they surrender

The famine in Japan would be amplified. There would be outbreak of nasty diseases. Japanese would die in millions, slowly, excruciatingly. 

Oh, same thing would happen in their colonies too. That means, another millions would die in China, Indonesia, Indochina, etc.

Oh, the Russian actually planned to invade Manchuria, Korea, and Northern Japan. That means not only Manchuria and North Korea, would fall into communist hand. South Korea and Hokkaido would be grabbed by the communist. Say hello to the "People's Democratic Republic of North Japan." Say hello to total domination of Korea Peninsula by Kim Il Sung's dynasty.

D) Direct invasion to Japanese Homeland

US Navy and Army planned this invasion because they were unaware of the atomic bombs until last minute. They knew the invasion would be ... nightmarish at best. Not only thousands of Allied's and Japanese sailors and soldiers would die, millions of Japanese civilian would perish too. Hey, they already taught their CHILDREN to use a sharp bamboo spear to disembowel Allied soldiers! Those who can't fight would choose suicide instead of surrendering to the Allies. We know that because that was what happened in Saipan and Okinawa. The civilian population plunged to a cliff WITH THEIR BABIES in their hands, instead of surrendering. I can say 5 millions civilians dead already sounds optimistic.

Oh, since the Allies busy with the invasion, nobody would dare to question the Russians when they rolled to South Korea and Hokkaido.

As you can see, the other options are FAR WORSE than the atomic bombing of Hiroshima-Nagasaki. It was THE BEST CHOICE among several nightmarish options. The root of the nightmare is the honor-based Japanese culture. Even the peace party in Japan couldn't convince everyone else. They need Hiroshima-Nagasaki, AND Soviet invasion to silence the war party. Blamed Tojo, Hirohito, and other Japanese militarists, not Truman or the US. 

Don't like that? C'est la vie, life is not consisting of easy black-white option. Grow up and stop whining about  your never-exist childish dream. Hard choices have to be made, and we will be damned if we close our eyes and fool ourselves that all choices are easy.

Amazing Quotes 21: Samuel P. Huntington

From: wikipedia

We have tons of intellectuals during the 2nd half of 20th century. One of the most influential one is Samuel P. Huntington (1927 - 2008). Everyone, even laymen, know him thanks to his book "The Clash of Civilization." That is a pity, because that book is weak in comparison with his other book like "The Soldier and the State" or "Political Order in Changing Societies." Nevertheless, we can get tons of powerful quotes from him. Here are some of his most remembered quotes:

"Graduate students, are more reluctant to challenge this or that professor and have been captured by jargon and orthodoxy of the discipline."

If a scholar has nothing new to say he should keep quiet.”

"The quest for truths is synonymous with intellectual controversy."

The architects of power in the US must create a force that can be felt but not seen. Power remains strong when it remains in the dark; exposed to the sunlight, it begins to evaporate.

-- In “American Politics: The Promise of Disharmony” (1983) p. 75.

A world without U.S. primacy will be a world with more violence and disorder and less democracy and economic growth than a world where the United States continues to have more influence than any other country in shaping global affairs. The sustained international primacy of the United States is central to the welfare and security of Americans and to the future of freedom, democracy, open economies, and international order in the world.

-- "Why International Primacy Matters," International Security (Spring 1993):83.

The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion, but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do.

-- “The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order“ (1996) p. 51.

The Economist identified 32 major conflicts going on in the world in the year 2000, and if you look at those 32 conflicts more than two-thirds involve Muslims fighting other Muslims or Muslims fighting non-Muslims

--In the conversation with Anthony Giddens, Fall 2003, published by “New Perspectives Quarterly”

Review of "The Lady"

If you have read anything about Burma/Myanmar from the media and hope that this movie will provide more information, keep your expectation low. Very low. Bottom-of-the-barrel low.

Let me summarized the movie in one sentence: innocent-pure-kind hearted-one dimensional Suu Kyi fight against power hungry-cruel-demonic-one dimensional military generals. Yes, this is a typical Hollywood flick. Pure "entertainment" complete with oversimplification and cheesiness.

The filmmakers did EVERY SINGLE TRICK to make Suu Kyi looks angelic, and the generals looks devilish. They showed how Suu Kyi's father singing Kumbaya with the minorities leaders, and Suu Kyi herself said "Democracy without the minorities is meaningless." Another example, when Suu Kyi waited the acceptance speech of her Noble peace prize, the evil military cut-off power to her house at the last minute to make sure she can't used her radio! When that scene started, I already sighed and muttered "please, oh please don't use this trick. Please ..."

Thanks to the film one-dimension portrayals, no wonder after the first 20 minutes, I started to see a halo on top of Michelle Yeoh's head, and some fire & brimstone when the generals gathered. I even convinced that the generals headquarter is located at Mount Doom.

Hey, why don't they mention the Panglong agreement? In that agreement, basically some minorities have the right to secede  from the Burmese state. Why they don't incorporate this important detail in Suu Kyi's struggle? Maybe because ... it will make the conflict not one-dimensional? Ah the horror of the higher dimensions ...

What else bothered me? Let's see ... other than the "love for her country," this movie is also focusing on the love story of Suu Kyi and her families. It could be interesting but since this is a one-dimension film, it became so cheesy that no cheese-based snacks was allowed in the theater. Add to the facts that I am aware of how it would end because I follow the development of Burma to some degree, there is no surprise at all. Zzzz ...

Final verdict: 50/100

It could be lower, but I am aware that for so many people who has no clue about Burma, this film could be very moving.

Amazing Quotes 20: Ingersoll pt. 3

Atheists are wrong. There is a God. Ingersoll is the God of quotation. He is so good that I decided to put this 3rd list of his superb quotations. Yes this is my third list, here are the first and the second:

As long as every question is answered by the word "God," scientific inquiry is simply impossible.

-- "The Gods" (1872)

"Heresy is a cradle; orthodoxy a coffin."

-- "Heretics and Herecies" (1874)

I do not believe there is any being in this universe who gives rain for praise, who gives sunshine for prayer, or who blesses a man simply because he kneels.

-- "Some Reasons Why" (1881)

In all ages hypocrites, called priests, have put crowns on the heads of thieves, called kings.

--Robert Green Ingersoll (1884), quoted from Herman E Kittredge, A Biographical Appreciation of Robert Green Ingersoll, Chapter XII

The clergy know that I know that they know that they do not know.

--Robert Green Ingersoll, "Orthodoxy" (1884)

It seems to me impossible for a civilized man to love or worship, or respect the God of the Old Testament. A really civilized man, a really civilized woman, must hold such a God in abhorrence and contempt.

-- "Why I am an Agnostic" (1896)

It is told that the great Angelo, in decorating a church, painted some angels wearing sandals. A cardinal looking at the picture said to the artist: "Whoever saw angels with sandals?" Angelo answered with another question: "Whoever saw an angel barefooted?"

-- "Superstition" (1898)

Sandy, Obama, Romney, FEMA

The hurricane Sandy is a big catastrophe. Even the "Big Apple" couldn't prevent it. What the US and state government can do is minimizing the damage, and maximizing the preparation for the relief effort after the storm.

The department responsible for such thing, FEMA, until now do an excellent job. Here is one big pattern that everyone notice: FEMA SUCKS ASS everytime the POTUS is a Republican! Yes, not only during the Bush Jr., FEMA also sucks during his father's time, Clinton fixed it, Jr. ruined it again, now Obama had fixed it again.

How so? Simple, because Republicans think that Government IS the problem, and dismantle FEMA everytime they got a chance.

They hated Obama and government so much that their hate override the fact that government CAN do good like coordinating disaster relief. When governor Christie praised Obama, the GOP was enraged. ENRAGED!! How dare you saying that Obama and/or government can do good! HOW DARE YOU! People even start talking that Christie practically made a political hara-kiri with that praise. YES, they are that nuts! Fortunately, in my observation, in every comment section of such news, people just shaked their heads in their disbelief that a governor was criticized when he praised his president. There is hope indeed. If Christie is a genuine moderate Republican, there is hope that we can get our old GOP back, the party of Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Eisenhower, etc., not the party of Bachmann, Gingrich, Akin, etc.

Back to FEMA, I remember Paul Krugman once said something like:

"There is a saying that there is no atheist in foxhole. Many dispute that. Actually, there is one more accurate statement: there is no libertarian in a crisis."

Amen. Sandy just prove that prof. Krugman. Time for the libertarian to suck up their myth and return to the real world. Time to make sure they STAY AWAY from the POTUS office at least for another 4 years.

Mourdock, "God's Intention," and Spider-Man

In the heat of the 2012 election, suddenly Republican senatorial candidate, Richard Mourdock, said that "pregnancy from rape is something God intended to happen." And everybody is screaming. The democrats seizes it to discredit Republicans. Mitt Romney who before this fiasco endorsed Mourdock now throws him under the bus. Etc.

Folks ... let's think about that, although that statement looks nuts, Mourdock actually didn't contradict logic. Let me explain ...

First, remember what Uncle Ben said to Peter Parker? "With great power came great responsibility"! Using this valid logic, we can have "With infinite power came infinite responsibility." And of course "With no power came no responsibility."

Second, in case you forget, the Abrahamic God is not only omnipotent but also omniscient AND actively participates in this world. Since power is about relationship, a human has NO POWER compare to God.

VOILA, there you have it, "A God with infinite power is responsible for every single thing in this world." Hey, if God didn't permit that, who can object? Satan? Are you joking? Even Lucifer x 1.000.000 is still no match for God! 

So congrats guys, you can label ANYTHING as God's intention, as long as it already happened! The holocaust? God intended that! Rwandan genocide? God permitted that! W. won 2 presidential elections? With God's blessing! Obama defeated McCain in 2008? Of course God love to see that! 9/11 tragedy? God's will that too! Etc.

Christians will object by saying "God give human's free will." Irrelevant. Without any power to object, a will is only a will, it will be made real if and ONLY if God give His permission.

Don't like it? Maybe you should try God from other religion who has some limitation. Or God of Deism who only watched everything for whatever reason. Or atheism, where God is non existent.

So, thank you mister Mourdock to remind us how wonderful and responsible your God is!

Underdog Battles 3: Battle of Longewala

Where and When: Longewala, 30 km from Ramgarh, Rajasthan Province; 4 - 7 December 1971

Who: Pakistani Army & tanks vs 120 Indian soldiers

Background:
Once upon a time, the country named Bangladesh was part of Pakistan and called "East Pakistan." One of their key identity was their religion: Islam. Unfortunately, despite their smaller number, the Western Pakistanis dominated everything. Unhappy with this situation, the East Pakistanis or Bangladeshi protested. The West Pakistanis answered that protest with an outright genocide.

From Mapzones

Like other genocide, this one also triggered a mass exodus to their neighbor, in this case: India. The Indian government picked their calculator and started to do their math: which one is more expensive, taking care of the refugees or backed the Bangladeshi up with a military intervention? Hey, a military intervention is far cheaper! So they intervened and invaded Bangladesh, while sending their navy to begin a naval blockade in the Pakistani water.


The Pakistani Strategy:
The (West) Pakistani themselves until today, are the sworn enemies of the Indians, their military was, and still is, geared to defeat the Indians. But there is one problem: the Western and Eastern Pakistani was separated by India itself! It would be nearly impossible for the Pakistanis to reinforce their eastern territory in any war against India!

So, their strategy is to attack the western provinces of India instead, and grab as many territory as possible to attenuate any territorial loss of Eastern Pakistan. The Pakistani military never kid themselves that they could conquer the whole India. They were sure that international pressure would make any war with India short, so this territorial gain functioned as bargaining chip during the peace talk.

When the Bangladeshi independent war broke out at 3rd of December 1971, they immediately put that strategy into practice. They already send their spies into the border area to get the infos about Indian army units there. Based on those intels, they plan to invade the province of Rajasthan.

From Mapzones

Unfortunately, their intels missed a small military post on Longewala, manned by 120 Indian soldiers, on the road to Ramgarh.

Unfortunately too, those intels didn't inform the Pakistani army about the terrain, the geographical obstacle, and many other details.


The Contact:
The Indian post detected the Pakistani invasion far before they reached the post. Major Kuldip Singh Chandpuri, the commander of that post realized that he was badly outnumbered and outgunned. His 120 men who didn't have any tank would fight more than 2000 Pakistani soldiers, who got 45 tanks. His superior couldn't send any reinforcement, and advised him to either stand his ground or retreated.

He assessed his situation. His men has limited means of transportation, while the Pakistani army was highly mobile. Retreating was far more hazardous than made a stand in their post, which has the higher ground, and fortified by barb wires, and other defensive works. He decided to stand his ground.


The Battle:
When the Pakistani arrived in Longewala, 30 minutes after midnight, they were reasonably confident. The Indians were outnumbered, and outgunned. Too confident. In fact, they did almost no route reconnaissance nor engineering reconnaissance before their assault. 

Their opening artillery strike killed the camels in the post. The Indians hastily laid a minefield in front of the approaching Pakistani tank. Naturally this didn't work. Okay, so far so good for the invaders ... but then the Indian started to fight back.


First, the anti-tank guns of the Indians took out a dozen Pakistani tanks. The assault stopped after they discovered a barb wire. They guessed that they are blocked by minefield. Under the fire of the Indian army, it took 2 hours for the Pakistani to bring their engineers to the front ... only to find that the minefield was non-existent. 

Second, the Pakistani tried to surrounded the post, but the soft sand terrains bogged all armored vehicles down, making them sitting duck for the Indian's anti tank weapons.

Third, the far more numerous Pakistani army actually managed to surround the base, but they never managed to get close. The Indians repeatedly shot them down from their defensive position, using everything they got. Their superior position and the conduct of the Pakistani army convinced all the Indians in the post to stand their ground firmly. Again and again they repelled the Pakistani assault.

Finally, the sun started to rise. The Indian headquarters send some jet fighters and mowed down the Pakistani army from air. The fact that the post and the Pakistani army were all located in open terrains sealed the destruction of the Pakistani army. To complete the victory, the Indian send their own tank regiment to that post, sending the Pakistani army back to their border.


Aftermath
The battle was a big tactical and strategic victory for the Indian army. Their lost was 2 soldiers, 5 camels, and one jeep. The Pakistani lost 200 soldiers and 500 vehicles, including 34 out of 45 of their tanks. The Pakistani plan to invade India from this road was over before it even begun. For his conduct in this battle, Major Kuldip Singh Chandpuri received Maha Vir Chakra, the second highest military decoration in India.

This battle really showed that history has no mercy for hubris. He who is too proud to do proper recon to got their facts straight will receive nasty surprises. Very nasty surprises.

Myths Believed by The Left

Yesterday, I wrote about the myth believed by people on the right. Now, its the leftists turns!

The happy-innocent-natives

I already wrote a separate article about this.

Everything is the mistakes of the West!

The left revered so many intellectuals. Some are true intellectuals. Some are ... just say their work is actually a form of racism. For example are Edward Said, Noam Chomsky, Frantz Fanon and other writer who follow their lead.

Chomsky, from wikipedia

There is a pattern in their writing: The West is always wrong! Every problem in the world is the West's fault! You can reduce your problem by kicking out the West from your country, by attacking their interest everywhere you can find them! Chomsky for example, hates the West so passionately, so he defended Pol Pot and Khmer Rouge since the west hates them! To their credit, some intellectuals from the left like Brad Delong and Russil Wvong see this and declare that Chomsky is toxic. Unfortunately, most  people from the left still believe in this myth. That means those  leftists are racist. Plain and simple.

What? You disagree with that? Of course you disagree so many people think racism means when any white man has prejudice against others, but never thought the opposite could be true too. This is due to colonialism and imperialism practiced by the West until mid 20th century. At that time, due to its power, it was the West who COULD practice racism, but in today's world when the West is retreating, when other re-assert themselves, they start to practice their own version of racism against the West.

In essence: the practice of white man exploitation of the natives during the colonialism is racist. On the same time, the idea that white man COULD only exploit, so can't govern justly, so they have to be attacked ANYWHERE is also racist!

Israel is always wrong!
Folks, the identity of a "Palestinian" was created only recently. Before that, we only have "Arabs" or "Libanese" or "Jordanese" or anything like that. Even Yasser Arafat is an Egyptian for heaven's sake! Here is another facts that the Israel's haters doesn't know:

1.  Paradox of the Fisks. The most criticized state in the world is the most free state NOT the worst state. Everyone has access to what happens in Israel and USA, none has access to what happens in North Korea.
2.  There are thousand "Palestinians" who decide to live INSIDE Israel. What happen to them? They become Israeli citizens. They have the right to become members of parliament and cabinet, and ALL other kind of rights. 
3.  Thousands of Jews live in other Arabic countries during the foundation of Israel. They were harassed, and kicked out of those countries. 
4.  Oh yeah, their governments also suggested the Arabs in Israel to get out of there before they invaded and conquered Israel, so they can get MORE LANDS after the conquest. Tough luck, the Israel beat the invasion. Until now they are still whining that Israel "oppressed" them ... yeah right.
5.  In which country a Moslem can criticize their government without fear of death or arrest? Yup, only in Israel!
6. In which country you can have different religions with the elites without discrimination? Once again, only in Israel!

I can go on, but of course none of that matters for most people on the left. They only saw: 
Palestinian -> weak, Arabic 
vs
Israel -> strong, Western
Since they are western-hating racist, most of them think the only cool thing is to hate Israel with passion.

Capitalism is wrong! We hate economic growth!
The Left loves to point out the misery brought by economic growth and capitalism. They hate economic growth totally! Breaking news for you guys, economic growth is not a cure-all, BUT the absence of economic growth is a kill-all. Just ask the Zimbabwean. Or Indonesia during Soekarno time. Or any other country who insists not to have economic growth. What, you dislike that? Grow up and accept that pure socialism kills, just like pure capitalism!

The worst peace is better than war -> Military is wrong!

I already wrote another article about this.

Nuclear is wrong! 

This myth is started by the greens, and supported by the left. Here is some facts:
1) Nuclear Power Plant produce almost no greenhouse gases. I thought you care about global warming?
2) The production of solar cell and battery for any "green power", creates many extremely toxic chemicals waste. Wind turbines could kill migrating birds. Geothermal power plant produced sulfur and many other nasty greenhouse gases that makes CO² looks as harmless as a kitty. In essence, they are not as environmental friendly as the green tell us.
3) All nuclear power plant that experienced disaster were old reactors with old safety equipments and procedures. New reactors are far safer than them.

So, if you really care about the environment and global warming, start supporting nuclear energy!

Multiculturalism

A 2002 cartoon from Cox & Forkum, mocking both the left and the right

Multiculturalism is the idea that all culture is equal, and nobody has the right to judge any culture The idea behind it is a noble one. To make sure everyone is equal, to foster tolerance, to fight racism, etc. But in practice, multiculturalism from the beginning is a flawed concept.

Let's begin with the fact that multiculturalism tolerates intolerance. Yup, they saw no wrong in any non-tolerant culture, because "they are different" and "they have their own values." Yup, with this logic, they basically said it is okay to practice barbarism, like Sati, the burning of the widows in India. According to multiculturalism "Let them burn their widows, it is their custom. They have their own value." Holy hell ...

Some multiculturalist even goes further. They try to "preserve" all cultures, they think that culture is something static, not dynamic. This is is so wrong in so many levels.

First, who has the legitimacy to decide what people has what culture? Do they ALWAYS have that legitimacy?

Second, culture IS DYNAMIC. Those multiculturalist forget that 10.000 years ago, everyone was a hunter-gatherer. Most of us tossed that hunter-gatherer culture, started the agricultural one, evolved into industrial societies, and now started an informatics one. So does one of the biggest part of our culture: religion. Everyone started with animism, but now they are the minorities.

So please, spare your preaching how multiculturalism will foster world peace. It is not. It can be used to foster discrimination, violence, and other nasty things.

The Pure Innocent Happy Natives

I already stated my opinion about the "pure innocent natives" myth when I reviewed "James Cameron's Avatar" in my "Most Disappointing Movies" article. In that review, basically I said the natives is not really innocent, they could be as nasty as modern people and more. 

But recently one of my facebook friend shared the photo on the right. That brings another Luddite argument: 

"They are happier than us!"

What a joke. 

I could start by saying "Ignorance is a bliss." Other than that I could list another "NOs".

Another List of NOs

No philosophers to point out the flaws of these societies.

No books to improve your knowledge.

No method to spread knowledge widely and quickly.

No way to communicate with people on the other side of the planet.

No food from other regions/countries, only the same old boring food that your ancestor cook.

No cure for tons of nasty diseases.

No police to defend you. That makes "No crime or prisons" means "might is right," or "law of the jungle." What do you expect?

No defense against modern army. The "No stress No Bombs" become no longer true once these people meet some psychopaths with automatic weapons and gunship. By the way, I need to restate my previous argument: primitive people can and have mutilate each other just fine with their bows and arrows.

Here is a concrete example for the last 2 NOs, taken from Jared Diamond's book Guns Germs and Steel page 277. Diamond interviewed the women from Iyau Tribe in Papua. When asked about their husband their typical answer is: "Which one? I had 3 husbands. The first one died after another tribe attacked us. The second one died after my third husband killed him. The third one died after the brother of my 2nd husband avenged his brother." No wonder Diamond mocked the myth of "innocent natives" in that same page!

I could go on, but I am sure you got the point. What? You still think their way of life is more advanced?

Tell you what, talk is cheap. Put your money where your mouth is. Lenin once said "people vote with their feet." If you think that their way of life is so "advance," just give away all your belongings, go back to the jungle and join them. Come again? You prefer the comfortable modern life? That means you're "No Action Talk Only" in this matter.

Disrespect

Oh yeah, I also get some response that I have to respect them, and telling that they are primitive is a form of disrespect.

Err ... I respect them by treated them like an adult who can take criticism well. I respect them by NOT suggesting them to emulate an ostrich, avoiding all contact with modern civilization. Contact between those people and us is INEVITABLE, so better let them prepared for it.

Oh yeah, I also NEVER stated that we can't learn anything from them. I am sure we can learn many things from them, but learning from them IS NOT THE SAME with saying that their way of life is superior to ours. And I am sure, they can even learn MORE from us, since our ancestors already experienced their way of life, while theirs haven't experienced our current way of life.

I also showing respect by expecting them to progress, not to be static, locked in hunter-gatherer way of life forever, totally dependent on us to defend themselves. If that is not respect, I don't know what is.

Multiculturalism
This kind of argument usually made by "Multiculturalist" who thought that all cultures are equal, and we have to put each culture in a bubble to make sure they remain unchanged forever. No they are not. Some culture generally is more primitive from the others. Culture is also dynamic, evolving and changing, not static.  Sometimes it is not the whole culture itself that is primitive, but only some aspect of it. But a multiculturalist doesn't want to hear that. They perceived cultures as museum exhibitions where each exhibition has to be "static." They never perceive human as human, who are always changing, can do wrong, and have to be scrutinized and corrected.  Hopefully this article debunk the dangerous tenet of "multiculturalism."

So what are you waiting for? Start respecting them by helping them to overcome the 3000 years of lack of scientific and technological progress! You could start by NOT glorifying their current way of life.

Bullshit Building 9: Every Statue of the Worst Tyrant

After discussing 8 bullshit buildings in Asia, Europe, and Africa, time to move to the continent across the Atlantic: America.

You can see, unlike for my previous bullshit buildings articles, I choose a little bit cryptic title for this one. So let's start this article with a pop quiz: Who do you think is the worse tyrant of all time?

My guess most people will vote for Adolf Hitler, or Joseph Stalin, or Mao Zedong. After those 3, Pol Pot, Vlad the Impaler, Saddam Hussein, and many other infamous dictator who slaughter less people will come second. Not me. My vote goes to Francisco Solano López, the dude in the photo on the right. I am pretty sure most of you will scratch your head when you hear that name or see that photo. I guess, readers who come from or know the history of Brazil and/or Uruguay will nod in agreement with me. As for people who come from Paraguay and Argentina ... it is complicated.

In order to understand the bullshitness of the statue of this man, you have to know his story. This is a story about true love ... and unprecedented horrors.

Before the Tyrant

Its all begun in Paraguay, mid 1850s. Carlos Antonio López ruled Paraguay with iron hand. He was a tyrant, but his people still managed to live under his rule. He built many schools, roads, telephone lines, etc. At the same time, he made Paraguayan army the most powerful army in that region. His jealousy almost instigated wars with Great Britain, USA, and his neighbors, but he always managed to defuse the situation at the last minute. Oh yeah, he also abolished slavery and torture, and releasing all political prisoners jailed by his predecessor. Not bad for a despot.

López Sr. send his oldest son, Francisco Solano, to Europe. His objective: representing his father to buy arms. Of course he had fun too during this tour. In Paris, he met a beautiful Irish prostitute, who was also an ex-wife of a French officer, a very beautiful blonde named Eliza Lynch. And they fell in love. When Solano returned to his home country, Eliza came with him. López Sr. and many other were understandably outraged when they discovered  this. Nevertheless, amor vincit omnia, love conquers all, so Eliza stayed as López Jr.'s mistress.

Quick comparison between the worst tyrants:
In his early years, Hitler experienced hardships: death of his beloved mother, rejection from Vienna University, etc. Combined that with 1st World War, rampant inflation, etc, life is pretty hard for young Adolf. 
Same with Stalin, he was targeted and jailed by the Czars secret police during the chaotic last years of the Romanov's reign.
Mao also experienced similar hardship, living as a poor student during China's tumultuous time, ravaged by civil wars and corruption, full with uncertainty. 
Contrary with them, Francisco Solano López was born with silver spoon in his mouth, due to winning a genetic lottery. What a lucky bastard ...

Then López Sr. dropped dead in 1862 and succeeded by Francisco Solano. To say that "everything went downhill from this point" is a very big understatement. 

The Beginning of the reign

López decided to continue the development. Unfortunately, his delusion of grandeur, combined with the vanity of his mistress means lots of bullshit projects. One example is the Asuncion Opera House, which imitates the La Scala Opera House. This Opera House didn't have any roof for decades. That is one good example of a bullshit building, but the story of that Opera house won't do justice to López since the Opera House was the least problem he created.

At that time, the political world of Latin America was divided by the traditional Blancos vs  western-oriented Colorados dichotomy. At the same time, Brazil and Argentina struggled to become local superpower. López was a Blanco. So did the government of Uruguay. But the government of Brazil of that time was Colorado. So, the Brazillians didn't like the fact that a Blanco government ruled on its southern border, and decided to invade it.

The Triple Alliance War

López decided to help his fellow Blancos in Uruguay. One problem: Paraguay and Uruguay never have a shared border. So López send his army to slaughter and loot everything in Brazilian territory near Paraguayan border, hoping to distract the Brazilian army. Because that area is basically a thick jungle, the Brazilian army didn't even bother to send any major unit to repel López army.

Map of South America

Since his distraction operation failed, López had to cross Argentinian territory to assist Uruguay directly. When he asked permission to do that, president Mitre of Argentina reject him. Even though Mitre was no fans of Brazil, the thought of López army crossing his territory was even more appalling. At that time, February 1865, the Uruguayan government already fell. This was the best chance for López to defuse the situation. López didn't see it that way. It seems he thought that apologizing is for pussy, so he declared war against Argentina, and send his army to slaughter and loot the Argentinians, forcing their way to Uruguay.

Extremely pissed by this, the Argentinian, Brazilian, and Uruguayan government created a "Triple Alliance," hence the name "Triple Alliance War". Yup, you read it correctly, the land locked and small country of Paraguay was at war with similar-size Uruguay plus its 2 gigantic-size neighbors. López managed to unite the Brazilians and Argentinians. Too bad that alliance was meant to hunt his head.

After some victories in the early stages of the wars, the destruction of Paraguay Navy in the Battle of Riachuelo totally changed the war. Paraguay army was retreating, and repeatedly defeated by the alliance's forces. The alliance were also losing soldiers, but with their massive population and resources, they could replace it. Paraguay on the other hand, started to run out of adult male, so they were forced to recruit minors. Adult males were not the only thing they ran out. Remember the fact that Paraguay is a land-locked country? The Paraguayan army had difficulties in replacing their used ammunitions since most of their ammo were imported. Lòpez and his rag-tag army were  forced to flee from the capital, to the jungle.

Like a typical tyrant, he was sure that he was destined for greatness, so all this defeats had to be due to conspiracies! He blamed his advisors, officials, military officers, and all the foreigners. He even begun slaughtering his own families. His 2 brothers and 2 brothers-in-laws were all killed. See, Stalin, Hitler, and Mao had slaughtered millions, but butchering their own family directly? Nah, those amateurs never go that far!

But wait, that was not all! López mother suddenly revealed one terrible secret: he is literally a bastard, fathered out of wedlock. He went ballistic. His own mother even conspired against him! His reaction was swift and brutal. His old mother was caged, together with his sisters, and flogged along their journey deep inside Paraguayan jungle. Remember, we are talking about his mother here, the woman who bring him to this world!

There is an adage "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter," but no one say "one man's mother torturer is another man's hero." So now you see why even a maniac like Hitler suddenly looks like Florence Nightingale in comparison to Francisco Solano López. No. Forget those 3 amateurs. I am pretty sure that López supervised the devil himself when Satan wrote his dissertation about "Cruelty". Poor Satan definitely need some guidance from López!

During his flee, finally López was cornered by the Brazillian army. He was killed at 1st of March 1870 when the Brazillians tried to disarm him. His last words were Muero con mi patria! or "My nation die with me!" He got a point there. Eliza Lynch was forced to dig her lover's grave with her bare hand before kicked out of the country.

The Aftermath

Paraguay Territorial Loss

After the death of López, Paraguay lost almost everything. At that time, Paraguay was known as "The country of woman" since for some years adult male were generally absent. A large part of its territory was annexed by Argentina and Brazil, including areas where the very important yerba mate cash crops were cultivated. The Alliance army also practically occupied Paraguay until 1876. Of course Paraguay had to pay reparation to Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay. 

Despite winning the war, the Alliance got crippled by their debts. Brazil, for example, only managed to pay off their debt in the 1950s. So, in essence, López ruined 4 countries, while slaughtering most of the male population of his own country and his own brothers, and as the final act, he also tortured his own sisters and mother. López put the bar very high for any future dictator who are interested in replacing him as "The worst tyrant of all time."

Oh yeah, his true love, Eliza Lynch also tried to come back to Paraguay some years later, when she thought she could reclaimed some of "her" properties. She was kicked out again, this time permanently. She died in obscurity in Paris in 1886.



Today's situation
So, you already know the life of Francisco Solano López. Maybe you wonder "Who the hell want to make a statue of this monster?"

Remember in the beginning of this article when I said that Argentinians and Paraguayans view of him is complicated?

Fast forward to the 1930s. At that time, Paraguay faced another war. This time against Bolivia. They need to rally the people. They need an unifying figure, a hero ... a legend. Desperate to found one, they finally settle with Francisco Solano López. Paraguay politicians eagerly re-visioned history to make him look as heroic as possible, whitewashing everything. They even moved his remains to "National Pantheon of Heroes," and designates his date of death as "Heroes Day." The dictator of Paraguay in 20th century, Stroessner, also took the remains of Eliza Lynch, declared her "national heroine," and buried her in a notable grave in Asuncion. So, despite the fact that López is the dude who flogged his own mother, he is until today (2012), considered as the greatest Paraguayan hero! That's why they built him some statues! Wow, imagine your reaction if you saw someone built a statue to respect Hitler in Israel or in his hometown ...

Not only the Paraguayans, the Argentinian revered him too! As sign of respect, in 2009, the Argentinians even named one of their Armored Artillery Group after López! Huh? How come? That is because he and his father repeatedly ranted against the British. For those of you who forgot, Argentina is still pissed by the British after the Falkland War.

No wonder everybody said politic is dirty, bloody, and above all ... disgusting ...

Previous Bullshit Building Article: Chinese Ghost Towns
Next Bullshit Building: Ion Storm's Office

Sources:

"Stupid Wars" by Ed Strosser and Michael Prince

The "War Nerd" article on the War of Triple Alliance
South America map from:  http://www.boothroyd.com/sa.htm
Paraguayan territorial loss map from:  http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Krigsteater_trippelalliansekrigen.png?uselang=es

Photos of Statues from Panoramio:
http://www.panoramio.com/photo/15831475
http://mw2.google.com/mw-panoramio/photos/medium/68338240.jpg