The big one…

$636 million is a seriously big hunk of cheese. I sit out most lottery drawings these days, but I’m just sucker enough to take a swing at this one. Don’t get me wrong, I’d be thrilled to win “just” a few million bucks, I’ve got my targets set on getting the big, “Fuck You” kind of money. If my numbers come up tonight this old boy is just going to disappear quietly in the dead of night like a Mayflower truck full of football equipment. I’ll turn up eventually in some far flung outpost of humanity looking like Panama Jack, but before I do that, I’ll want to spend a significant amount of time getting to know my giant stack of cash.

It’s all a happy fantasy, of course. Statistically, I know there’s probably a better chance of getting hit by an asteroid, struck by lightning, and run over by a bus simultaneously than there is of winning tonight’s “big one.” Still, for a buck? I’m in. If there’s no post tomorrow, at least you’ll know why.

The Syria question…

So, it would seem that the Syrians are chunking chemical weapons at each other. The good news is that if they are busy beating the snot out of factions within their own country, they’re not busy chunking the same weapons at us or our allies in the region. Of course there’s a fair chance that will change as soon as the Western allies start lobbing cruise missiles at Damascus. It’s a game changer and makes the US and our allies legitimate combatants. I’m not saying I don’t like our odds in a general engagement with the Syrian army, but we should walk into this thing knowing full well that it’s going to be a shit storm from the minute we light the candle.

Politics and the 24-hour news cycle prevent us from going to war the same way we did in the first half of the 20th century. I might even be inclined to argue those are two of the contributing factors for why our latest wars have had declared “endings” rather than ending in substantive and actual victory. If CNN’s cameras had been around to film Dresden burning or the blood on the sand of Okinawa, I wonder if World War II would have gone into the win column or if we’d have collectively settled for an unsatisfying and counterproductive draw.

I have no compunction about England and the US leading the world on this latest Mid-East escapade. It’s probably the morally right thing to do and we seem to be the only countries around with the stones to do it even if the world will immediately crucify us for it. We just need to remember that in throwing our lot in with the Syrian rebels, there’s going to be a price to pay in blood, treasure, or more likely in both. The stakes of the game are the lives of the men and women who serve and we damned well better be playing with loaded dies before we decide to give them a roll.

If I thought we were going to storm the beaches, stamp the flame of radicalism out using any means necessary, establish a working and legitimate democracy, and stay there for 50 years to make sure the peace is secure, I’d be more inclined to say it’s a good idea. That’s the model that worked in Japan and Germany. If we follow the model used in Iraq and Afghanistan of political half measures hog tying military expediency, or worse yet, fire off a couple dozen cruise missiles and hope for the best, all we’re doing is creating more trouble than we already have – and a mess that we can’t avoid ten or twenty years from now.