Thursday, May 20, 2010

It really was the North Koreans who sank the South Korean ship

The latest reports indicate that a torpedo fired from a North Korean submarine sank a South Korean ship with a loss 46 sailors. Whatever else one might say, that was an unprovoked attack, which has (so far) led to no reprisal against the perpetrators.

This was the largest cost in lives for a single incident, since the original 1950-1953 Korean War. That war was never resolved by a treaty, only halted by an armistice.

While diplomats always dither, I suggest that this incident demands real action, because of its egregious nature, and the magnitude of the death toll. The problem is provocative action by units of the North Korean navy, committed upon the high seas. So, the solution is that no units of the North Korean navy should be allowed upon the high seas, until their government changes its idiotic ways.

I rather doubt that the UN security council would ever do anything substantive. They have almost never acted responsibly, not since that original Korean war. So, it is the South Koreans and their allies that must act, on their own.

My suggestion: allow no North Korean naval vessel passage on the high seas, until the North Korean government acknowledges the sinking it perpetrated, and promises massive policy change. Period. No room to maneuver, no room to "save face". The penalty is sink-on-sight.

Then, the South Koreans and their allies must actually carry out this threat. The North Koreans will inevitably challenge such a declaration, and they must suffer for it.

Sinking surface ships is fairly easy; sinking submarines is more challenging. So, I think a US navy battle group or two must be committed to this, and they must be free to sink whatever they see. No questions asked.

Once they get their noses rubbed in it, I think the North Koreans may steer a different, less objectionable, diplomatic course. This will be true in spite of the megalomaniac idiot they have for a dictator, because he depends upon the North Korean military to stay in power. While extremist, those generals are not fools.

We will have to hurt them to achieve this result, though. We must be prepared to do exactly what I propose: sink the bastards. No half measures. No mercy.

Wednesday, May 12, 2010

On Really Bad Drivers

I see some really idiotic behavior on the roads around here all the time. I never see anyone pulled over and ticketed for it, either. Some of the worst offenders seem to be rather rich and priviledged, too. Others are obviously "new grads" from the local driving school, which makes me wonder what that school actually teaches.

These behaviors include ignoring yield signs (including the implied yield on a freeway entrance ramp), cutting people off, following too close, high-speed weaving, pulling out without looking first, passing in no-passing zones, failing to dim headlights, and running red lights and stop signs. These are all basically "being in the wrong place at the wrong time doing the wrong thing" offenses.

In addition, I see slow traffic not keeping right, vehicles wandering all over the road out of their lanes, and drivers way too distracted by cell phones to even be on the road at all. That last one is already illegal under the old "failure to keep a proper lookout" law; so we don't need a new law about cell phones. We just need to enforce the one we already have.

Trouble is, the only real enforcement I see going on is speed and parking tickets (and precious few of those). I don't know if that is because it's just so easy to sit and wait for the radar alarm go off, or if it's because the lawyers and judges have so screwed up the court process that only speed and parking tickets "stick" anymore. (If it is the lawyers, then maybe Shakespeare was right.)

In Texas, under most conditions on the highway, it is "being in the wrong place at the wrong time doing the wrong thing" that causes the accidents, not speeding itself. Speed merely sets the level of damage as the accident occurs. It's only in residential areas, city streets, parking lots, and rainy, foggy, or icy weather that speed itself is a prime cause of the accidents.

So, if we were serious about reducing highway traffic accidents, we would be demanding that our police ticket the egregious behaviors (that I listed above) as higher priorities over speeding. I simply don't see that going on. As for residential areas and parking lots, that is where speed causes a lot of the accidents, and that is where speeding tickets need the higher priority.

What kind of body count does it take to get these priorities straight? Isn't 40,000 a year enough?