2006 in the rear view mirror

I'm not sure how 2006 will be viewed by historians in 50 years. Wars still rage in many places, and a nice roundup can be found at Strategypage. U.S. casualties in Iraq are down compared to 2005, though the media would be hard pressed to tell you that (they'd rather trumpet the number of casualties, as if that's the only barometer of how things are going). Somalia is being freed from the Islamist Courts, though hopefully this doesn't mean the return to the war-lord status-quo. A photographer for reuters was caught modifying pictures to make Israel look bad in its war against Hezbollah, and all his pictures were removed from their database and he was canned. A good start against the corruption of the media, but there's a long way to go. Has anyone f0und Jamil Hussein yet? He's the Iraqi Police Captain the AP has used as a source in a number of articles that no one has been able to verify - and no one has been able to find him since a question about his credentials has arisen. Rather than focus on finding the truth, the AP has circled the wagons - just like you'd expect from someone with nothing to hide... at least this makes it very clear that you can't assume any news organization is giving you the full truth. If it fits their agenda (i.e. Dan Rather), they'll go with it, and use the 'fake but accurate' defense if their evidence turns out to be fraudulent.

I hope that 2007 will see a further decline in wars being fought, and an increase in peace, freedom and stability. I hope we lose fewer lives in Iraq, though I know that if we become too shy about combat, we'll have more casualties there or somewhere else later because we didn't do the job right, and do it now. What should we be doing? We should always be re-evaluating and adjusting the plan to fit the circumstances on the ground. No plan is perfect, and no plan that is the best one for now will be the best one a month from now. The goal is to have Iraq be able to defend itself and assure its citizens freedom and equal treatment under the law, which means a democracy with a decidedly secular bent. If the Iraqi experiment works out as well as the American experiment, maybe the whole sewer of middle eastern corruption and terror can be rolled up.

I think the key to getting Iraq to the next level of stability will be to solve Iran. Will Iran's economy implode due to negligence of their oil infrastructure? Can we take a chance that Iran's own people will rise up and replace the mullahs before they get 'the bomb'? Will Iran make good on its promise to 'wipe Israel off the map' (along with whomever else happens to be in Israel on that fateful day) when they get 'the bomb'? I think they will. Is there any way we can support the people of Iran in toppling their government, and can we help guide the next regime to be a better neighbor to Iraq? Without Iran's support, will Syria fall on its own? We have found lots of evidence of Iran supporting the insurgents in Iraq - these are acts of war. Why aren't we treating them as such? Is our military truly incapable of handling 'maintenance duties' in Iraq while taking on another mission in Iran? Would the drop-off in support for the insurgents in Iraq (not to mention loss of support to Hezbollah in Lebanon) make up for the drop-off in troops we'd have if we moved them into Iran? There are a lot of intertwined questions that I'm not able to answer - and I doubt anyone can. I do think that Iran has been given too free of a hand and it needs to be called on its acts of war.

2007 also means that someone other than His Highness of Corruption, Kofi Annan, is in charge of the U.N. Hopefully his successor will turn that organization into something useful and worthy of trust - under Kofi it was nothing but a cesspool of corruption and lunacy.