Afghanistan: Still Waiting For Success

Here is an article by the Economist about the recent Taliban attack in Kabul.

THE Mujahideen Day parade in Kabul, at the weekend, was supposed to show Afghanistan’s new, Western-trained, armed forces coming of age. President Hamid Karzai, other Afghan politicians and a jumble of diplomats packed a podium to review the troops. Then, just as a 21-gun salute began, what sounded like celebratory firecrackers crackled from a shabby hotel some 400m away. As six lightly armed Taliban fighters took pot shots the dignitaries and military men panicked, shedding bits of ceremonial uniform as they scrambled for safety.

Casualties were not as serious as they might have been: the gunmen managed to kill three and wound 11 but failed to touch their main target, Mr Karzai. Even so, they scored a significant propaganda victory. Television pictures of the furore broadcast at home and abroad confirmed that Afghanistan’s capital is within reach of the Islamist fighters. “We can attack anywhere we want to”, boasted a Taliban spokesman after the attacks. This was the second big strike in Kabul this year. In January a three-man Taliban suicide squad blasted its way into the lobby and spa of a luxury hotel in the city, killing eight staff and guests.

Where is the rest of NATO? Has Merkel had too much of an impact? It's been since 2001, and still the fight is on. I thought Afghanistan is the war everyone agreed on, what happened? With Petraeus taking over United States Central Command soon, hopefully there will be a turn around.

Exit Question (rarely asked when people bring up our Iraq involvement): How many years are we willing to stay in Afghanistan?

Obama, Hillary: What to Do With Iraq

Here is an interesting article about withdrawing from Iraq, and the vagueness perpetuated by both Democratic candidates.

Can the Democrats be prepared to withdraw under any of these circumstances?

For now, they say, the answer is yes.

“Nothing is risk-free,” said Lee Feinstein, the national security director for the Clinton campaign, about the potential for chaos and violence if Americans leave. “But the risks of an indefinite blank check to Iraq are clear.”

“Obviously, we have concern for the situation in Iraq,” said Susan Rice, a foreign policy adviser to Mr. Obama. “But to take that logic to its extreme, we would stay there indefinitely till there is ‘kumbaya.’ We can’t physically do that. It’s impossible.”

Both campaigns argue that the promise of withdrawal is the only real leverage that the United States can exert on Iraqis to make political progress happen, and that a sustained presence will strain the military and distract from national security priorities in places like Afghanistan and Pakistan.

A pretty neutral (he calls McCain's plan unrealistic) look at the situation the Democratic party is in.

Iraq: No win situation?

Where I found this article:
Real Clear Politics

UN Forces Armed DR Congo Militias

Apparently, the UN can't get a break when it comes to its image in the world. Maybe it has something to do with corruption, lack of leadership, and/or neglect. Here is a BBC article on UN peacekeeping forces giving arms to militias.

The UN has covered up claims that its troops in Democratic Republic of Congo gave arms to militias and smuggled gold and ivory, the BBC has learned.

The allegations, based on confidential UN sources, involve Pakistani and Indian troops working as peacekeepers.

The UN investigated some of the claims in 2007, but said it could not substantiate claims of arms dealing.

UN insiders told the BBC's Panorama they had been prevented from pursuing their inquiries for political reasons.

Now it could just be allegations, yet this isn't the first time there has been corruption in UN initiatives, don't forget the oil for food fiasco. I like the UN, don't get me wrong, yet there needs to be more regulation in terms of its policies.

UN: What happened?

Three Story Sunday

Sri Lanka is still on fire.

Scores of Sri Lankan soldiers and Tamil Tiger rebels were killed this week in fierce fighting that has diminished the government's claim that it will wrest the north from rebel control by the end of the year.

On Friday, military sources told reporters that at least 165 soldiers had been killed and more than 20 were missing after heavy fighting Wednesday in Sri Lanka's far north. Earlier, the Army had claimed 43 soldiers and 100 rebels had died, while the rebels claimed they had killed 100 soldiers and lost only 25 of their own men.

Friday evening, violence struck near the Sri Lankan capital, Colombo, when a bomb went off on a bus during rush hour. At least 24 people were killed, and twice that number wounded, according to a government spokesman, who held the Tamil Tigers responsible. The rebels did not comment immediately.

Will it ever end?

Uganda still waits for peace, yet the LRA won't settle.

To one side of the clearing on the remote border, Sudanese government soldiers bristled with weapons and kept a lookout. To the other, there was little but an impenetrable wall of Congolese bush. In between gathered an eclectic mix of Sudanese mediators, Ugandan government ministers, journalists, rock-and-roll activists and tribal chiefs, all hoping to witness what should have been the end of one of Africa's longest and least understood wars.

LRA, the cultist rebel group with an insane leader.

Zakaria takes on the bi-polar foreign policy approach presented by John McCain.

Amid the din of the dueling democrats, people seem to have forgotten about that other guy in the presidential race—you know, John McCain. McCain is said to be benefiting from this politically because his rivals are tearing each other apart. In fact, few people are paying much attention to what the Republican nominee is saying, or subjecting it to any serious scrutiny.

On March 26, McCain gave a speech on foreign policy in Los Angeles that was billed as his most comprehensive statement on the subject. It contained within it the most radical idea put forward by a major candidate for the presidency in 25 years. Yet almost no one noticed.

Some reason I take it Zakaria wants the realist side to win. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

I believe making calculated decisions based off of a variety of views gives someone better judgment in making the right decision. If McCain wins the presidency, we'll see if the foreign policy formation succeeds or fails.

Just another Sunday.

Winning an Election Mugabe Style

Mugabe has went to new lows (at least according to this article).

Scores of children and babies have been locked up in filthy prison cells in Harare as Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe’s president, sinks to new depths in his campaign to force the opposition into exile before an expected run-off in presidential elections.

Twenty-four babies and 40 children under the age of six were among the 250 people rounded up in a raid on Friday, according to Nelson Chamisa, spokesman for the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC). Yesterday they were crammed into cells in Southerton police station in central Harare.

“This is ruthlessness of the worst kind. How can you incarcerate children whose mothers have fled their homes hoping to give their children refuge?” asked an emotional Chamisa yesterday. “In Mugabe’s Zimbabwe even children are not spared the terror that befalls their parents.”

The families were rounded up from MDC headquarters, where they had sought refuge from violence in the countryside.

Continue reading, it's a really fascinating article about the tragic situation that is occurring in Zimbabwe.

Mugabe: Threatened by even babies.

Trotsky Fights for His Life

What a Trotsky!

Where I found this video:
But I am a Liberal!

So Much for Mugabe Leaving

It seems he is here to stay.

Zimbabwe police raided the offices of the opposition party and independent election observers on Friday amid the continuing turmoil caused by the delay in releasing results.

Police seized election-related material from both headquarters and also took away supporters of the Movement for Democratic Change party suspected of alleged post-election violence, The Associated Press reported.

A journalist, who asked not to be named because of threats to his safety, told CNN that police, who arrived in several trucks and a bus, took away several people from the MDC offices in Harare who were "limping and in pain."

Mugabe doesn't let an election tell him he is a loser, he can clearly prove this with his police forces.

Paraguay Moves Left

The Colorado Party has lost its ruling edge, while a new president is being ushered in.

Former Roman Catholic bishop Fernando Lugo ended more than six decades of rule by Paraguay's Colorado Party in presidential elections, vowing to spread economic growth to the country's poorest people.

Lugo, who heads the Patriotic Alliance for Change, won 40.8 percent of the votes yesterday, compared with 30.7 percent for the Colorado Party's Blanca Ovelar, the Election Court said on its Web site. Former General Lino Oviedo was third with 22 percent. Ovelar's defeat was the Colorado Party's first in its 61 years in power, the longest of any ruling party in the world.

Will Lugo work for the poor or seal their economic placement?

More on Zimbabwe

Here is a Reuters segment:

The world is watching.

Three Story Sunday

Nepal is willing to use force to quell protests on Tibet.

Nepal says it is prepared to use force - including gunfire - to prevent anti-Beijing protests during the Olympic torch relay up Mount Everest.

The torch is scheduled to be brought up the peak from the northern, Chinese Tibetan side in early May.

Nepal is determined to prevent protests which may damage relations with China, says the BBC's Charles Haviland in Kathmandu.

The torch has attracted protests in some cities on the relay route.

The Olympic Torch is not being taken anywhere near the Nepalese base camp.

But Nepal's military and police have been deployed in extra numbers on the southern flank of the mountain because of sensitivities over the torch.

Well that's great to ...hear.

Russia still trying to grab "Greater Russia" from Georgia.

The United States called on Russia on Friday to repeal instructions to intensify its contacts with two breakaway regions in Georgia.

"We urge Russia to live up to its statements of support for the principles of Georgian sovereignty and territorial integrity and to repeal the April 16 instructions," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said.

Russia's Foreign Ministry said Wednesday that President Vladimir Putin has ordered the government to increase cooperation with authorities in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, drawing an angry response from the Georgian government, which accused Moscow of seeking to annex the two regions.

I have a feeling our warnings will go unnoticed in Moscow.

Paraguay's election today.

IF THE poll numbers hold, the world's longest-ruling political party will be dismissed by Paraguay's voters on Sunday April 20th. The Colorado Party, which came to power two years before China's Communist Party, has governed for so long that Paraguay sometimes feels like a run-down country club that exists purely for the benefit of party members. Yet despite fielding a good candidate, the Colorados could well lose to a complete political novice.

Their main opponent is Fernando Lugo, a Catholic bishop who gave up his job preaching liberation theology to the poor in order to stand for office. In person, he is rather less charismatic than his story suggests. But since being chosen as the figurehead for a coalition of the biggest opposition parties, he has turned into a formidable candidate. Those close to him say he has struggled to switch from officiating at mass to talking confidently about fixing Paraguay. But he has cut his hair, had his teeth polished and embodies a fresh start—unlike his two main rivals.

Are things about to move left?

Just another Sunday.

Zimbabwe: About to Get Worse or Business as Usual.

Shipments of weapons and troops are pouring into Zimbabwe from China. Is this a sign that things are going to only get worse?

Chinese troops have been seen on the streets of Zimbabwe's third largest city, Mutare, according to local witnesses. They were seen patrolling with Zimbabwean soldiers before and during Tuesday's ill-fated general strike called by the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).

Earlier, 10 Chinese soldiers armed with pistols checked in at the city's Holiday Inn along with 70 Zimbabwean troops.

One eyewitness, who asked not to be named, said: "We've never seen Chinese soldiers in full regalia on our streets before. The entire delegation took 80 rooms from the hotel, 10 for the Chinese and 70 for Zimbabwean soldiers."

Only time will tell.

Zimbabwe: Just another disaster.

Medvedev: Putin's Puppet?

Okay, maybe that's too simple question to answer. Yet May is coming, and soon Medvedev will "lead" Russia. International Herald Tribune has an article out about Kremlin Gazprom Bureaucrat (KGB) Medvedev and the direction he may take. It is quite obvious that Putin still retains a substantional amount of control in Russian politics, and change isn't likely. If Kasparov isn't surprised, we shouldn't be.

Will Dmitri Medvedev ever be his own man?

That question, which arose immediately after President Vladimir Putin named Medvedev as his successor, has yet to be settled. If anything, the notion has only deepened in recent weeks that while Medvedev will occupy the Kremlin after May 7, Putin will continue to control it from his new post as prime minister.

Whether or not this will be a proper or effective arrangement, it seems to be one that most Russians want.

Putin, who is limited to two terms under the Russian Constitution, in December endorsed Medvedev, a first deputy prime minister and longtime aide. With the Kremlin championing his candidacy and using its authority to marginalize the opposition, Medvedev coasted to victory in March. Since then, he has introduced no major staff appointments, changes in the structure of government or strikingly new proposals.

While heir to all-mighty czars and general secretaries, Medvedev comes across as the dutiful senior bureaucrat he once was, a former law professor who seems more interested in doing a line-by-line budget analysis for fiscal 2010 than in carrying this nation forward.

So no change.

Russian Political System: Hybrid Democracy, Flawed Democracy, Authoritarian?

Zimbabwe: Will Mugabe Stand Down?

Here are some Reuters segments:

and

Mugabe is no friend of the people.

Ethiopia's Prime Minister

Newsweek has a good interview with the Prime Minister of Ethiopia Meles Zenawi.

Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi is easily Washington's most important African ally in its war on terrorism. In 2006, the United States quietly helped Zenawi's forces invade neighboring Somalia after a U.S.-financed coalition of warlords lost the capital of Mogadishu to an Islamist alliance known as the Union of Islamic Courts (UIC). The Ethiopian forces ousted the UIC but have been bogged down since then fighting an Iraq-style insurgency by Somali Islamist and clan militias. The current round of violence has driven 750,000 from their homes, and Ethiopia's allies in the United Nations-backed transitional federal government [TFG] have been unable to control Mogadishu, much less the rest of the country.

Very interesting.

Exit Question: Is support for authoritarian regimes to quell Islamism worth it?

Olympic Boycott: Yes or No?

There is a lot of controversy in terms of this years location of the Olympics, that it is taking place in China. On the Olympics website there is a statement that says "The Games have always brought people together in peace to respect universal moral principles. The upcoming Games will feature athletes from all over the world and help promote the Olympic spirit." A very compelling statement.

Is this true, universal moral spirit? It's a very romantic view of the event. Besides the fact of authoritarian undemocratic regimes participating, the statement is plastered on the website. This year the event takes place in China, whose government might take the "universal moral spirit" statement in different light, maybe with a little touch of Mao.

The real question here is, should the world stand up and say no to the Olympics and begin a boycott? Some say yes, others say no. I'll give two articles on reasons why people should and why people should not.

The first article comes from Ethan Gutmann, author of Losing the New China. In the article he explains why a boycott should take place.

It was my four-year-old son's first demonstration. But he was getting cold, the police were manhandling the Tibetans to the point that there might be a stampede, and I wasn't sure if the bus that had just rushed by at such an unseemly speed actually carried the stupid torch, so we headed for the tube and home. My son wanted to know why people kept saying "China, stop the kitty."

"It's 'stop the killing,' " I corrected.

I tried to explain for the nth time: "Suppose you have a neighbor who has a dog. And he beats the dog. You can hear the dog crying all day. Then the neighbor comes by and invites you to bring your dog .  .  ."

"Daddy, we don't have a dog."

"I know. We will sometime soon. I promise. But pretend. The neighbor wants to invite your dog--and every other dog in the neighborhood--to a dog party. A big dog party. Black dogs, white dogs, yellow dogs, red dogs .  .  ."

"Or a mouse, it could be a mouse party, Daddy. Or a cat party .  .  ."

Okay, I thought, he gets it.

It wasn't until I got home and saw the paramilitary blue and white tracksuits flanking each torchbearer, and the wolfish Chinese army profiles so familiar to anyone who has lived in Beijing that I got it. I regretted not dropping off my son with some kindly Tibetan woman and trying to stand in front of the bus myself.

The second article is by Fareed Zakaria, who feels boycotting the Olympics is only going to bolster Chinese nationalism.

At first glance, China's recent crackdown in Tibet looks like a familiar storyline: a dictatorship represses its people. And of course that's part of the reality—as it often is in China. But on this issue, the communist regime is not in opposition to its people. The vast majority of Chinese have little sympathy for the Tibetan cause. To the extent that we can gauge public opinion in China and among its diaspora, ordinary Chinese are, if anything, critical of the Beijing government for being too easy on the Tibetans. The real struggle here is between a nationalist majority and an ethnic and religious minority looking to secure its rights.

In these circumstances, a boycott of the Olympics would have precisely the opposite effect that is intended. The regime in Beijing would become only more defensive and stubborn.

Obviously a different outlook for what we should do.

The problem for me in boycotting the Olympics is that I don't watch the Olympics. I can boycott in spirit, yet in reality it doesn't have the impact it should. If the boycott doesn't become realized and no one takes notice, will it be considered a failure? I say no.

It will possibly give a message to the organizers of the Olympics that never again will they place an event with lines such as "universal moral spirit" in a place of obvious oppression.

Boycott: Yes, No?

Gen. Petraeus on Iraq Surge

Here is the Gen. Petraeus testimony to Senate Armed Services Committee. Progress has been made, yet it is "fragile and reversible."

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to provide an update on the security situation in Iraq and to discuss the recommendations I recently provided to my chain of command.

Since Ambassador Crocker and I appeared before you seven months ago there has been significant but uneven security progress in Iraq.

Since September, levels of violence and civilian deaths have been reduced substantially, Al Qaeda-Iraq and a number of other extremist elements have been dealt serious blows, the capabilities of Iraqi security force elements have grown, and there has been noteworthy involvement of local Iraqis in local security.

Nonetheless, the situation in certain areas is still unsatisfactory and innumerable challenges remain. Moreover, as events in the past two weeks have reminded us and as I have repeatedly cautioned, the progress made since last spring is fragile and reversible.

Has the surge created a "loop" like situation as Zakaria insists?

Only time will tell, only time will tell.

Where I found this article/video:
Real Clear Politics

American Intervention, Neoconserative Ideal or Amercian Ideal?

Here is an article by Robert Kagan, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, who argues that the supposed "neoconservative" ideals that people so blindly quote are actually part of American history (in respect to military interventions, unilateral or otherwise). In other words, advancing "liberty" isn't a foreign concept. The article is rather long, yet very interesting.

To understand where the idea of promoting American principles by force comes from, it is not really necessary to parse the writings of Jewish émigrés. One could begin with less obscure writings, like the Republican Party’s campaign platform of 1900. In that long-forgotten document, the party leaders, setting the stage for what would be William McKinley’s crushing electoral victory over William Jennings Bryan, congratulated themselves and the country for their recently concluded war with Spain. It was, they declared, a war fought for “high purpose,” a “war for liberty and human rights” that had given “ten millions of the human race” a “new birth of freedom” and the American people “a new and noble responsibility . . . to confer the blessings of liberty and civilization upon all the rescued peoples.”

The past or the present?

I'm going to leave you with this JFK quote (which is partly quoted in the article) from his Inaugural Address in 1961.

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

Would he get by saying that today?

Where I found this article:
The Weekly Standard blog

Three Story Sunday

Does NATO want out of Afghanistan?

In public, NATO is demanding that all allies contribute their fair share to the ongoing effort in Afghanistan. But behind closed doors, a paper has been circulated that may provide the beginnings of an exit strategy. Germany is pushing the plan.

So far, little has remained behind closed doors at the NATO summit in Bucharest. Almost every cough from every negotiating session has found its way into the press. But there is one paper that has remained largely in the shadows. NATO diplomats have been working on a far-reaching strategy paper for the ongoing mission in Afghanistan.

Say what you will on the situation in Iraq, Afghanistan I thought was clear cut in terms of acceptance. Are some members of NATO have second thoughts about Afghanistan? Some would say...yes.

Soft money in the election.

Four years ago, wealthy Republicans bankrolled two influential, loosely regulated political organizations that helped President Bush win reelection with TV ads invoking the 2001 terrorist attacks and maligning the Vietnam War record of Democratic nominee John F. Kerry.

Now, some of the same GOP donors and operatives are planning a similar independent group to help the party hold onto the White House this fall, according to Republicans familiar with the discussions.

The organization is one of several independent groups aligned with both Democrats and Republicans that are busy arming for the general election, in a year that could see record activity by such outside entities. They are plotting strategy, crafting ad campaigns, and raising millions in "soft money" - largely unrestricted contributions from wealthy individuals, corporations, and labor unions.

Fair or unfair. The political heat is coming sooner than later.

Charlton Heston dead at 84.

Charlton Heston, who appeared in some 100 films in his 60-year acting career but who is remembered chiefly for his monumental, jut-jawed portrayals of Moses, Ben-Hur and Michelangelo, died Saturday night at his home in Beverly Hills, Calif. He was 83.

His death was confirmed by a spokesman for the family, Bill Powers, who declined to discuss the cause. In August 2002, Mr. Heston announced that he had been diagnosed with neurological symptoms “consistent with Alzheimer’s disease.”

An Iconic figure dies, leaving many young people to wonder who he was. The first Heston movie I ever saw was The Ten Commandments, a movie that still brings awe every time I watch it. My favorite Heston movie happens to be the Planet of the Apes, with its vibrant social messages wrapped into a futuristic nightmare. He will be missed.

I'll leave you with this unforgettable seen.


Just another Sunday.

3 1/2 Years for Speaking Your Mind, Chinese Justice

Sometimes we as Americans take things for granted. Everyone in the United States can make the most offensive statement about our country and not get in trouble (i.e. in the legal sense). China is different. You can't speak against the State because the "State" is the entire populace (or in other words the dictatorial ruling elite). Hu Jia, human rights activist, spoke his mind and now he is behind bars.

A Chinese court Thursday sentenced an outspoken human rights advocate to three and a half years in prison after ruling that his critical essays and comments about Communist Party rule amounted to inciting subversion, his lawyer said.

The conviction of Hu Jia, 34, quickly brought outside criticism of China at a time when the government is already facing international concern over its handling of the Tibetan crisis. Hu's case has been followed closely, especially in Europe, and critics say his conviction is part of a government crackdown to silence dissidents before Beijing plays host to the Olympics in August.

The government of China's way of dealing with dissents...put them in jail. If no one is speaking out about Human Rights abuses, then there must be none, right?

More than a billion under control.

Consumer Cuba

After the transition from power between Fidel Castro to his brother Raul, there have been some changes happening in Cuba.

Here is a Reuters segment:

Will this lead to real change? Should the U.S. engage? So far the White House has taken a wait and see policy.

Cuba, how long till you are free?

Iraq Showdown: What Do We Do?

What should we do with Iraq? That is the burning question I'm sure everyone is sick of hearing. Yet two foreign policy giants (or one giant and some other guy) take on the task of trying to solve the puzzle that is Iraq. Both offer opposing views, but to look at it in a larger picture, they both represent two different wings of foreign policy. The realist versus the neoconservative.

The first foreign policy guru is Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Adviser to Jimmy Carter, and a foreign policy realist. Below is an excerpt, click here for the full article.

Both Democratic presidential candidates agree that the United States should end its combat mission in Iraq within 12 to 16 months of their possible inauguration. The Republican candidate has spoken of continuing the war, even for a hundred years, until "victory." The core issue of this campaign is thus a basic disagreement over the merits of the war and the benefits and costs of continuing it.

The case for U.S. disengagement from combat is compelling in its own right. But it must be matched by a comprehensive political and diplomatic effort to mitigate the destabilizing regional consequences of a war that the outgoing Bush administration started deliberately, justified demagogically and waged badly. (I write, of course, as a Democrat; while I prefer Sen. Barack Obama, I speak here for myself.)

As always with foreign policy realists, stability reigns.

The other foreign policy guru is Max Boot, author/historian, and a foreign policy neoconservative. Below is an excerpt, click here for the full article.

The consequences of withdrawal and defeat in Iraq are likely to be even more serious, because it is located in a more volatile and strategically important region. Brzezinski thinks that Shiite-Sunni enmity is "in large part the sour byproduct of the destructive U.S. occupation" and would evaporate after our departure. Few serious analysts share his optimism.

Most of those who have spent any time in Iraq agree with the National Intelligence Estimate issued last year. It warned: "If Coalition forces were withdrawn rapidly ... we judge that the ISF [Iraqi Security Forces] would be unlikely to survive as a non-sectarian national institution; neighboring countries -- invited by Iraqi factions or unilaterally -- might intervene openly in the conflict; massive civilian casualties and forced population displacement would be probable; AQI [al-Qaeda in Iraq] would attempt to use parts of the country -- particularly al-Anbar province -- to plan increased attacks in and outside of Iraq; and spiraling violence and political disarray in Iraq... could prompt Turkey to launch a military incursion."

As always with neoconservatives, image is key.

Both offer their view on what needs to be done in Iraq. Where do I fit? Though I'm not European, Max Boot explains me well...

During my travels in Europe and the Middle East in recent months I have heard many who opposed the invasion urge us to stay until the situation is stabilized...We would hear near-universal moaning that the Americans were leaving Iraq as recklessly as they entered it.

As always...yeah.

Iraq. Nothing more needs to be said.

Where I found these articles:
World Politics Review blog

A Protest Against Guns or Against Criminals?

Apparently there was a march today in Chicago against gun violence (or for more gun control) after a tragic shooting that resulted in the death of a student.

Three hundred anti-violence activists and Chicago Public Schools students joined local leaders in their fight for gun control this morning following the shooting death of an 18-year-old Simeon Career Academy student over the weekend.

“It’s up to the children to tell the adults to do what’s right,” Mayor Daley said while standing outside the Thompson Center next to 20 empty desks representing the 20 CPS students killed in shootings so far this school year.

Obviously people are right to be upset, no one should have their life cut that short. But the protest in general puzzles me. Last time I checked, Illinois already has some pretty stiff gun control laws (click here to see a list of gun control laws in Illinois). The killer in question most likely disobeyed these laws, making the rally cry for more "gun control" odd.

Here are some gun laws I'm sure were broken:

Purchase:
A buyer is required to show his Firearms Owner’s Identification Card (FOID) when purchasing any firearms or ammunition.

Requirements for Foid:
Is over 21 years of age. If under 21, he must have the written consent of his parent or guardian. In such case, the guardian himself must not be ineligible for a FOID, and the applicant must never have been convicted of a misdemeanor or adjudged a delinquent.

Possession:
It is unlawful for any person under the age of 18 to possess a handgun, or concealable firearm.

Carrying (Residents Only):
It is unlawful to carry or possess any firearm on any public street or other public lands within the corporate limits of a city, village, or incorporated town, except when: an invitee thereon or therein, for the purpose of the display of firearms or the lawful commerce in firearms.

If he was able to attain a gun with all of these exemptions, obviously he was breaking the law to begin with. He is a criminal, criminals commit crimes. If he had enough gull to kill the student with a gun in a public setting what would stop him from killing him with a knife? But what these people in the march are calling for is for more gun control, but what exactly? Illinois already has strict gun control laws.

There is not much more you can do besides outlawing the ownership of guns. Though a good portion of Americans agree with the idea of have stricter gun control laws (49% according to Gallup poll Feb 8-10, 2008), a majority of Americans believe there should not be a ban on the possession of guns (68% according to Gallup Poll Oct 4-7, 2007). A ban on guns is out of the question.

Being that Illinois already has strict gun control laws, I don't see what more you can restrict. Maybe those marching should be protesting against what they are really protesting against, criminals. Let's not elude ourselves in thinking criminals follow the rules, they don't. The people should stand up as a community and say no more. They should send a clear message to the criminals that "we're not going to take it anymore" and no more will you get a free pass. That's what the protest should have been about.

Lesson of the day: Criminals don't play by the rules.