Chris Bertram, as well as Eric Tam highlight the American Prospect article by William Galston on just war theories and Iraq. The key quote:

Saddam Hussein may well endanger the survival of his neighbors, but he poses no such risk to the United States. And he knows full well that complicity in a 9-11-style terrorist attack on the United States would justify, and swiftly evoke, a regime-ending response. During the Gulf War, we invoked this threat to deter him from using weapons of mass destruction against our troops, and there is no reason to believe that this strategy would be less effective today. Dictators have much more to lose than do stateless terrorists; that’s why deterrence directed against them has a good chance of working.
In its segue from al-Qaeda to Saddam Hussein, and from defense to preemption, the Bush administration has shifted its focus from stateless foes to state-based adversaries, and from terrorism in the precise sense to the possession of weapons of mass destruction. Each constitutes a threat. But they are not the same threat and do not warrant the same response. It serves no useful purpose to pretend that they are seamlessly connected, let alone one and the same.

While well-intentioned, I believe that this construction has a fatal flaw.
Before I get into it, let me explain that I am not today waving flags to encourage an invasion of Iraq. I am a fence-sitter, probably tipped slightly in favor of invasion but anxious about the prospect that will face us afterward.
But as to this argument, I have a serious problem. First, that any WMD attack on the US (or any of our forces protected proxies) will certainly not be readily traceable to Saddam, or anyone else with the absolute level of proof that I believe would be required before some people would grudgingly support the idea of war.
Remember that there are many who do not today believe that Al Quieda was behind 9/11, and it is unlikely that we will get access to video of Saddam handing Joe Terrorist the keys to a truck loaded with smallpox ampoules, or of Saddam pushing a big red button labeled “Blow Up Tel Aviv”. As I have discussed below, the probable response looks more like:

“Wow!! Bummer about Tel Aviv!! Who would be crazy enough to smuggle a nuke in there? Wasn’t us, promise!! No, really!!”
While the tame game theory model suggests that he and others can be managed successfully through boundary and consequence-setting, the only thing that might work would be something Godfather-like:
If anything bad happens to me; if I catch a cold and go to the hospital; if I get hit by a car while rollerblading drunk; you will die. You are now the guarantor of my wellbeing.

and I have a hard time imaging some of the more profoundly antiwar folks being willing to accept anything like this.
Let’s talk about this for a minute.
I will not pretend to be an expert on warfare, conventional or otherwise, but I have studied and practiced a number of ‘real world’ martial arts for a number of years.
And the consistent most significant problem that is shared by all of them is ‘threat identification’; i.e. how do you know who is a threat and who isn’t? It’s easy to know on the mat or at the shooting range, but much muddier out in the streets and alleys of the real world.
…actually, I just realized that this is a longer and more significant point than I originally thought, and will polish it and try and post later today. Sorry about that!

Over at Slate, an interesting series by Robert Wright has begun, on Terrorism. So far two parts are up, and in them, he makes these assertions (with which I agree completely):
Proposition No. 1: Al-Qaida and radical Islam are not the problem.
Proposition No. 2: For the foreseeable future, smaller and smaller groups of intensely motivated people will have the ability to kill larger and larger numbers of people.
Go read it, it’s gonna be interesting. I was referred there by Matt Yglesias, who comments regarding assertion#2:

I think this is basically wrong because at the same time as technology reduces the number of people you need to carry out a destructive attack it also makes it easier and easier for big rich states like the United States to locate their would-be attackers. Admittedly, all our satellites and communications gear may still have let bin Laden get away (though it does seem like he’s dead) but even so they let us find and target rather precisely any number of Al Qaeda facilities that would have taken forever to find without 21st century IT.

I’ll respectfully disagree with Matt, simply because of the disparity between the potential number of attackers to monitor and the resources (and level of intrusiveness) necessary to monitor them. Plus, if I’m correct (and Wright makes a parallel argument when he says:

This high-tech mobilization of radical constituencies needn’t be centrally orchestrated. Since 9/11, American pundits have griped about the propaganda issuing from TV channels run by Arab governments. But take a look at the free market at work: The new, unregulated satellite TV channels—notably Al Jazeera, founded in 1996—haven’t exactly been a sedative for irate Muslims. The uncomfortable fact is that a free press often fuels antagonisms because people choose channels that bolster their biases. (Which is the most popular American cable news channel? The most ideological one—Fox.) Increasingly, “tribes”—interest groups of any kind, including radical ones—will be, in effect, self-organizing.)

the overall level of ‘spontaneous’, or ‘self-generated’ terror will increase.

Dan Hartung, over at lake effect: a weblog, has a good post on the number of European refugees who were resettled in WW’s I and II.
Take a look, and decide for yourself how to fit the current issues into history…and whether it is ‘racism’ that we are dealing with.
(link thanks to War Liberal)

Porphyrogenitus fails to live up to his blog title (“Ranting Screeds”) once again, in putting together a thoughful and informed discussion of the structure of the E.U. and some likely consequences.
Shameful business, as my son says. We are becoming rant-deprived…

Posted a serious review over at Blogcritics; it’s of Mark Doty’s new book of poetry, Source.
Check it out check it out…

Commenter Ziska writes:

The guerrilla war/ terrorism distinction escapes me. The difference, as far as I know, is that you can have terrorism without guerrilla warfare (mostly because you can’t manage guerrila war) but that you seldom have guerrilla warfare without terrorism.

Well, you’ve got part of it. Terrorist tactics are a subset of guerilla tactics, but applied without the military discipline or tactical and strategic intent. Typically guerilla tactics will focus on the actual forces of the opponents…in this case, it would be Israeli military outposts, reservists staging areas, etc….while what we are seeing is attacks against photogenic targets of opportunity. In my mind, there’s a significant difference in the moral standing of the two, as noted in my post earlier.

I’m not at all convinced that non-violence would work in Israel/Palestine, or that it worked in India, or that it worked anywhere. There was also a violent resistance in India, and England had many practical reasons to exit.

You’re kidding, right? As long as the Indian Revolt was violent, supressing it maintained huge support in England, despite the fact that colonies were simply no longer economically viable. If tyou read the contemporary accounts, it was Gandhi’s campaign which unlocked the English opposition, and allowed them to move to the center of the political stage.

One form of “moral parity” that I would argue is that if a tactic being used by some present insurgent group was also used by some successful insurgent group in the past, one that has been admitted to the family of nations such as Ireland, Israel, and Algeria, then we must find some additional reason for denouncing the present-day group. Not just because of the tactic.

Again, I’ll suggest that you review your history. My late father-in-law fought with the French in Algeria (as well as Indochina), and he and I had a number of discussions about both, and about the tactics used by and against the French in both cases. Terror was used by the FLN against the Pied-Noir leadership, and to enforce discipline and secrecy within the FLN (and doubtless to purge the occasional political rival within the FLN) but primarily it was a straight-ahead guerilla war against the French military itself. Ireland waged war primarily against the British colonial apparatus (including the tax-collectors) and the much-hated landlord class.

Received: from hellrimore2983.com ([195.166.233.167]) by mail.mysitehosting.net (Merak 4.4.2) with SMTP id XXXXXXXX for ; Mon, 02 Sep 2002 22:07:53 +0200
From: “SHEIKH SHEHU MUSTAPHA”
Reply-To: shehumusa@email.com
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 21:08:41 -0700
Subject: MUSTAPHA
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.1990
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=”us-ascii”
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
My dear friend,
I got your email address through the internet,so do not be surprised.
First of all let me sacrifice my life in this transaction ,by letting out this piece of information i am about to give to you.As a betrayal of this trust puts my life at stake.I have choosen this transaction to be strictly business,so that you would not think otherwise,as you would be rewarded for your assistance.
I am sheikh shehu musa mustapha,a business tycoon from iraq,presently in prison in iraq for the past four years,for my alledged assistance to the american government against my motherland iraq(treason),which i happen to know nothing about.My detractors have finally put me to shame,but i leave them to their own fate.
In july 11 1999,i was accused of assisting the american government as a spy against iraq, i am sure that the outside world has no knowledge this happening,since i did not in any way transact with the american government or any other government,if not i am sure my case would have been making news in the world ,as acase of violation of my fundamental human rights,which i have been deprived of since i have not stood trial since my incarcertation.
My companies assets have been seized, my numerous accounts frozen and as such my family have been living in abject in poverty as i, their breadwinner have been rendered useless in prison.As luck would have it against me,my wives are uneducated and my children too young to pull up a fight.
My dear friend,i do not want you to inform your western government yet,of my predicament,because i stand to loose my life and lives of my family,if that happens now.I am willing to loose my life but i want my family to live and tell the story of my life,since i do not even know my fate now.So please listen carefully and adhere to my instructions if you are willing to assist me.
In the year 2000,some of my trusted aides on my orders,successfully smuggled some of my money out of iraq,without the government knowledge.This money amounting to $61,340,000 was successfully smuggled and lodged with a security firm in holland.But my so called trusted aides as if they believe i am never going to make it out alive,eloped with $20,000,000 of this money,i leave them to their fate.However the documents backing the remaining money in the security firm in Holland was sent to me through my trusted friend Al Farouq,who knows nothing of the contents of the documents,but has kept it in safe hands.I cannot bear to see my family suffer in pain and lacks,so i am willing to sacrifice my life for them to live.
My friend ,all iwant you to do for me is to help me retrieve the money from this security company and secure it.All the documents would be sent to you once i am sure you are willing to assist me.Then i want you to send some amount from this money to my family through my friend Al Farouq,who would in turn help me smuggle them(my family) out of iraq to your civilized world,from where they can now after their safety has been guaranteed,tell the whole world about what is going on in iraq.
Whatever befalls me after then i am ready to take.
I am placing my life in your hands,so even if you are not willing to assist me,please do not let this story out,because it would mean you are killing me and my beloved family.
Iwould appreciate it if you send me your telephone#,since i am entitled to make just one call to my family once in every two weeks.But icannot provide you with any phone number,as the best and only way to contact me is through the internet,which we are provided with as a form of recreation in prison ,though under tight scrutiny,but not to worry the guards here have been friendly to me,besides they do not understand english.
If you can assist me in this transaction,i am offering to give you 20% of the money in the security firm,once retrieved,for your efforts,so apart from your good conscience,iam offering a reward.If i hear from you,i would there after furnish you with the neccesaryinformation.God bless you
Yours trully
Musa Mustapha.

Damn, I’ve had this address less than two months…

Why are you looking at your computer?? Go play with your kids…we’re off to the beach, the art museum, and maybe the bookstore…

“You loser. You incredible loser. You don’t have a single cell of taste in your whole body. Not a cell, not a mitochondria, not even a virus. You should get out of the movie business tonight and go work at a 99 cent store where they sell cheap-ass rejects, because the movie you recommended to me tonight was the worst castoff reject-laden piece of shit I’ve seen since “Supertroopers”, and my FIFTEEN YEAR OLD SON even apologized for making me see that. This move had the stupidest script I’ve seen in years, most of the acting was phoned in, except for the lead, who appears to have gone to the Al Pacino School For Cheap Overemoting for this film. The writer/director didn’t miss a cheap or obvious opportunity in the script, and the producer…the same guy, coincidentally, who forgot to spend more than the 99 cents – like the stuff you should be selling instead of working on movies – on special effects WHICH WERE CRUCIAL TO THE FILM.
Not only do you owe me the $18 I spent on tickets, but I want the $400 I would have billed for the time, as well. What a god-damn unbelievable loser you are for recommending this film, and so are all the stupid loser people who are making it the biggest film in the country right now…
What are you doing for dinner Tuesday? Want to come over?”
As you may guess, we saw ‘Signs’ last night.
I did manage to crack up a few people in the lobby as I was calling my brother and leaving this message as we walked out. And the group of teenagers who walked out in front of us has the classic comment ”Jeez, we should have seen XXX”. No s**t, kids, you should have.

Forgot to add arch-liberal Andrew Edwards as well as fellow Raven, the Fusilier Pundit (had to keep the blogroll karmically balanced, ya know).