I'm not an expert on football, but I've paid increasing attention over the last 5 years as my time in Baltimore has given me time to know and love the Ravens. Baltimore's 08-09 season was an incredible surprise to just about everyone, but the luster seems to have faded. Joe Flacco has hit a typical 2nd year plateau thanks to several issues: teams have had a year to study him, and they've picked out his techniques; Flacco also doesn't have many weapons on offense - Ray Rice is a monster, but Derek Mason is the only other reliable receiver. When you're in the red zone, short dump passes to Rice won't get you 6 points.
The Ravens will be fun to watch next season, but unless something changes drastically in the next 3 games, they're not getting anywhere near the Superbowl. The real stories this year, in my opinion, are the Patriots and the Saints. (The Bengals and Colts are doing well, but the Bengals are benefitting from consistently being underestimated, and while the Colts have Peyton Manning, he may be the only thing holding that team together.)
The game between New England and New Orleans on November 30th was one of the best I've ever seen. Both teams played an incredible first quarter, but the Patriots couldn't change enough to counter Drew Brees's incredible talent (highlights here). For the last 45 minutes of the game, the Patriots got worked like a Burmese kid in an Old Navy factory. As someone who hadn't seen the Saints play before and who also holds great disdain for Tom Brady and Bill Belicheat, the game made me euphoric.
Hopefully, New England's losses to the Colts and the Saints will finally break whatever spell has kept people afraid of the Patriots for so long. The Patriots had a great season back in 2007, but teams change so much between February and August; I don't understand why so many teams are still afraid of the Patriots. Anything can happen in a game - we've seen that several times this year. I've always gotten the sense that people think of the Patriots as the team that truly tests whether or not another club is great. Naive as I may sound, I'm hoping that their incredible loss to the Saints and their collapse against the Colts continue to snowball into a complete meltdown that removes the sense of invincibility that has helped the Patriots so many times before.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Commitment Issues Cont'd
The chatter about leaving Iraq and Afghanistan is constant now. I hear it on all the TV news channels, on the radio (yes, even non-NPR stations), and now on the street, too. I just. Don't. Get it.
Look. The debate isn't about which of these wars is "the good war" or "the right war." Those are misleading terms, anyway. The debate should be about how we change what we're doing in both countries to better fit our needs and the needs of these occupied countries. Inevitably, this leads us to the biggest problem we face: the goals we have are still too ambiguous to be helpful. Whether or not we have a moral responsibility to help build these countries up to a point that they remain stable and protect their people should not even be up for discussion. We do bear that burden, and I fear we are on the verge of leaving without fulfilling our obligations.
Before I go any further, let me point out that I am in no way condoning "endless war." That buzz term annoys me, but it's something I'll take flak for if I don't address it. I don't believe that our missions in Afghanistan or Iraq will take decades. Those who tout this argument seem to forget that America waged an almost 50-year long Cold War against another superpower and fought dozens of proxy wars and skirmishes while maintaining overall support from the American public. So let's be clear: the lack of objectives in Afghanistan and the lack of political stability in Iraq are the dominant obstacles to the success of both missions, but they are not the determining factor in whether or not we should stay.
I am in no way trying to trivialize the fact that American blood and treasure will be spent reaching these goals. I have friends in all branches of the military, and many of them are deployed overseas. I would love for the wars to be over tomorrow. However, we're engaged in a war against an enemy that feeds on poverty and misinformation (read: a lack of education), both of which exist on incredible scales in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's simply a fact of life that to help fix these issues, troops need to be there providing security.
Not surprisingly, a recent poll from NBC and the Wall Street Journal proves my point about American opinion on the wars we're mired in. Here's the good stuff:
(Click image for larger version)
Americans want to see a clear victory built on increasing reliance on the governments and armed forces of the countries we invaded. They don't know much else about what they want, but a victory is a must.
It's now up to the Obama administration to take in all the advice it can and make a decision. Time is of the essence, but I think the folks in charge understand that it's more important to make the right choices than to hurry up about making a decision at all. On the other hand, it would seem that we've already got our wires crossed. Fantastic.
Look. The debate isn't about which of these wars is "the good war" or "the right war." Those are misleading terms, anyway. The debate should be about how we change what we're doing in both countries to better fit our needs and the needs of these occupied countries. Inevitably, this leads us to the biggest problem we face: the goals we have are still too ambiguous to be helpful. Whether or not we have a moral responsibility to help build these countries up to a point that they remain stable and protect their people should not even be up for discussion. We do bear that burden, and I fear we are on the verge of leaving without fulfilling our obligations.
Before I go any further, let me point out that I am in no way condoning "endless war." That buzz term annoys me, but it's something I'll take flak for if I don't address it. I don't believe that our missions in Afghanistan or Iraq will take decades. Those who tout this argument seem to forget that America waged an almost 50-year long Cold War against another superpower and fought dozens of proxy wars and skirmishes while maintaining overall support from the American public. So let's be clear: the lack of objectives in Afghanistan and the lack of political stability in Iraq are the dominant obstacles to the success of both missions, but they are not the determining factor in whether or not we should stay.
I am in no way trying to trivialize the fact that American blood and treasure will be spent reaching these goals. I have friends in all branches of the military, and many of them are deployed overseas. I would love for the wars to be over tomorrow. However, we're engaged in a war against an enemy that feeds on poverty and misinformation (read: a lack of education), both of which exist on incredible scales in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's simply a fact of life that to help fix these issues, troops need to be there providing security.
Not surprisingly, a recent poll from NBC and the Wall Street Journal proves my point about American opinion on the wars we're mired in. Here's the good stuff:
(Click image for larger version)Americans want to see a clear victory built on increasing reliance on the governments and armed forces of the countries we invaded. They don't know much else about what they want, but a victory is a must.
It's now up to the Obama administration to take in all the advice it can and make a decision. Time is of the essence, but I think the folks in charge understand that it's more important to make the right choices than to hurry up about making a decision at all. On the other hand, it would seem that we've already got our wires crossed. Fantastic.
The Lunatic is in the Hall...
This post from Andrew Sullivan over at the Atlantic deserves to be read.
He and Ta-Nehisi Coates are two of my favorite bloggers. They're highly recommended.
He and Ta-Nehisi Coates are two of my favorite bloggers. They're highly recommended.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Reads:
