anti-failure

Bravo Terry!

2005-12-06T05:01:00.000-08:00

Terry, over at Nitpicker is breaking out the champagne, celebrating the completion of his degree. Drop in and add your voice to the congratulatory chorus!

Why aren't we hearing this question?

2005-11-18T07:12:00.000-08:00

"So here we are, two years after the fall of Baghdad, and the President still has no plan to get us out of Iraq. When does Mr. Bush intend to start doing his job?"

Speaking Sense About Iraq

2005-11-18T07:06:00.000-08:00

Please go and read Representative Murtha's statement on Iraq.

As I had noted in a comment at Nitpicker,

My take has always been that, having created this mess, we should stay as long as we are doing more good than harm (not that I could quantify what that means, mind you). But I had no better solution then "walk away" when it was clear we were causing more harm than good.

Murtha's plan makes more sense than anything else I have heard proposed. My take is that initially the Administration will continue to orchestrate attacks on Murtha (and anyone else putting forward an alternative to the status quo). But, once they start catching enought flack from the congress-critters up for re-election in '06, BushCo will roll out something remarkably similar and demand that we bow before their brilliance.

Lies and the lying liars?

2005-11-13T16:03:00.000-08:00

Let me join skippy in noting for the world that there is a terrorist sympathizer in our midst who has called for evil-doers to destroy the Coit Tower, which Bryan quite accurately describes as "a monument to the heroic firefighters who battled the multiple conflagrations that occurred after the San Francisco earthquake of 1906 and continue to risk their lives."

(OK, I know that I am doing just what Bryan implores us not to. However, I never had any will power anyway. Besides, how else are we to fight back against those terrorist sympathizers?)

High-Speed Video

2005-11-12T04:21:00.000-08:00

If you like the bullet photo, you should also know about high-speed video (HSV) cameras. There are many out there, from many different manufacturers. But, most modern HSV cameras can give you 1,000 megapixel images per second, and can store up to (typically) 1 to 10 seconds of imagery.

If you need to go faster, you can get in excess of 100,000 frames per second, but at reduced resolution, perhaps 256x64 pixels. While the resolution sounds low, it is still enough to make out what is going on for most applications that require such high frame rates.

You can find some examples created by Gene O'Connell and his team at Tech Imaging.

Follow the link for "Demo" and a window will pop up with some cool high-speed video footage. (If it looks like the movie is not playing, click the "->>" button a few times to increase the playback rate.)

If you need high-speed imaging services, talk to the folks at Tech Imaging.

Oh, all right. If you need insanely fast high-speed imaging, check out DRS's page of "Ultra-High Speed Digital Images". The "Terminal Ballistics" section (second from the bottom) has some extraordinary stuff. While you are there, poke around the "Photo Gallery" links to the left.

Their Imacon 200 can run as fast as 200 million images per second (that is not a typo). Of course, you only get a maximum of 16 images, so it's all in the timing.

A "Thank You" to our Veterans

2005-11-11T15:47:00.000-08:00

I have long believed that we are quick to take for granted the men and women in our armed forces who strive to keep us safe in our beds. The fact that we can take their work for granted is a testimony to their overall success.

So, let me extend my personal thanks to all who have served (or are serving) under our nation's flag. In particular, let me publicly thank those vets whose blogs I follow regularly; Terry, Bryan, and Daniel (who, alas, is no longer blogging, but is still serving for his second time in Iraq as a 'stop lossed' soldier).

And finally, my deepest thanks and respect go to my father, who, as a 20-year-old second lieutenant, led his platoon through a long night in 1945 upon a height they called Coconut Hill, on the island of Cebu in the Philippines. I cannot comprehend the occurrences of that night. I only know that 60 years later the nightmares continue to visit you on some nights, and that you can still weep for those who died.

Bush in Freefall

2005-10-28T04:57:00.000-07:00

Life has intruded upon Blogging, but, for my hypothetical audience, check out this amusing bit of Flash animation.

I don't think the "Guarantee" covers this

2005-10-23T19:19:00.000-07:00

But, it can be a lot of fun to take photos like this one. Terry (over at Nitpicker) kindly pointed people here to my blog, so I took a couple of photos of an Ace of Diamonds and sent them to him.

If you want to learn more about how to take your own high-speed photos, check out Dr. Loren Winter's site at HiViz.

The key to a good bullet photo is the flash. This was taken with an EG&G model 549 Microflash. These strobes (sad to say) are no longer manufactured.

Liberal Hawks and Ends Which Justify Means

2005-10-21T21:49:00.000-07:00

Over at Philosoraptor Winston Smith takes umbrage at Atrios characterizing Liberal Hawks as chumps. WS states:

The WMD case was pathetic but that's not the case that liberal hawks relied on. There was a strong humanitarian case to be made for the war, even if it may not have been quite strong enough to justify it.

While one could put forth a case for invading Iraq as a "humanitarian intervention", the Bush administration chose not to do so. Their stated reasons for the invasion were *not* humanitarian, and it is no surprise that they didn’t try to obtain a true international consensus. (Similarly, they did not prepare for the post-invasion obligation to govern. Providing Iraqis with good governance was not one of their goals.)

My main objection to those who would support the invasion of Iraq on “humanitarian grounds” is one of process. What is the due process for a humanitarian intervention? It is generally accepted that humanitarian intervention requires a consensus of either the UN, or some broadly multi-national body directly charged with security in that region (e.g., NATO for Kosovo).

For one to claim that "humanitarian grounds" justify the invasion of Iraq is, IMHO, morally equivalent to supporting a lynching on the grounds that, while one doubts that the person lynched had actually committed the crime that inflamed the mob, one believes that he had committed some other crime for which he *did* deserve to die, and due process be damned.

(And yes, one can create a scenario where an invasion on humanitarian grounds might be justified without international consensus, but that scenario is not Bush's invasion of Iraq.)

BTW, Winston Smith is noteworthy, in part, for posting in his comments

Yes, I'm changing my position in response to criticism. I consider this a virtue.

I only hope that I will be able to do the same.

Why does the world need another blog?

2005-10-04T19:43:00.000-07:00

Beacuse, as best I could tell, I needed to register with blogger if I wanted to leave comments at Terry's blog, Nitpicker. The registration screen asked for a name for my blog, and the next thing I know ...

Besides which, my wife is tired of hearing me rant and rave at the computer screen. Evidently the sound of the keyboard doesn't bother her reading nearly as much.

The name is inspired by Bryan Lentz's comment. He's an Iraq-war vet running for Congress.

Six Democratic War Vets Seek House Seats

Bryan Lentz, 41, an attorney from Swarthmore, Pa., volunteered to go to Iraq at age 39 with a civil affairs unit. The Army reserves major was so disillusioned by the lack of a plan in Iraq that he decided while he was in Iraq to run for Congress.
He is trying to unseat 10-term GOP Rep. Curt Weldon, who is vice chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.
"I'm not anti-war, I'm anti-failure," Lentz said. "We need to define what victory is and we need to set a plan to get there. You cannot stay the course if you do not set a course."

(Thanks to Andante at Collective Sigh for the pointer)