[Population: One] <A HREF="http://popone.innocence.com/ar

So, what’s up in Iraq?

I’m not even pretending to keep track of the reputed chemical weapon finds, but MSNBC is. As of now the only recent discovery confirmed by the military turned out to be pesticides. There are two or three other rumored finds out there, but the key word there is “rumored.”

We may or may not have killed Saddam in a recent bombing run.

Stratfor claims that there’s still fighting going on in Umm Qasr. The British are holding down that entire area, which I mention mostly for the sake of noting yet again that Rumsfeld said we wouldn’t need the Brits. Ahem. Anyhow, this is a problem because it hampers naval access to Iraq.

The Kurds are pushing towards Mosul and Kirkuk alongside US troops. Turkey continues to threaten to intervene if those cities come under Kurdish control. I’d been thinking that Powell’s visit to Turkey patched up those problems, but evidently not. So, that continues to be something worth watching.

The US is continuing to have all kinds of friendly fire problems. One has to expect some of this in a war, but the Brits don’t seem to make these mistakes as often, and the British friendly fire incidents to date have been in the heat of ground battle. Conversely, it’s the US planes hitting the wrong targets. Well, and most recently a US tank fired into a hotel. Two journalists dead so far from that one.

The 4^th Infantry Division finally landed in Kuwait. Obviously, the 3^rd wasn’t waiting for them before taking on Baghdad, contrary to some reports. (My guesses included.) Will they be more occupying forces? Will they go for Tikrut in case Saddam makes a last stand there? Are they just insurance? Damned if I know.

And, finally, the invasion itself is probably just about complete. Which does not mean they’re done fighting — just that the organized opposition is very close to wrapped up. What we’ll see from here on in is unorganized opposition. Welcome to the occupation.

[Population: One] <A HREF="http://popone.innocence.com/ar

Rules of Attraction rocked; thought you’d like to know.

Nah, really. It’s glossy and terribly calculated, but it’s also stark and unflinching, and I like that in a movie. The plot isn’t exactly much but you wouldn’t complain if it was a romance with this little plot. Think of this as the anti-romance. Come to think of it, pair it off with The Talented Mr. Ripley and maybe Igby Goes Down and you’ve got yourself a nice thematic trilogy.

Basically: three students at Bennington College (I mean Camden College, not really based on Bennington, really) have varying degrees of unrequited love slash lust for one another, and matters proceed poorly because what do college students know about healthy relationships? The students are played by the cream of the WB teen drama crop, and they do a surprisingly good job. The roles are the kinds of roles you expect to see Ryan Phillipe playing, except these guys do it better and with real energy. Some of the directorial tricks fall flat, but some are perfect. (That energy thing again.) Watch for the split screen.

For the trainspotters, I will note that a) the real Bennington does not have a cheap Burning Man ripoff party, and b) the real Dress To Get Laid party wasn’t that wild the one time I made it up there. Then again, I’d have been one of the sneered at Ivy League interlopers, so maybe I missed the real fun. But that’s not the point, really; Rules takes place in the hyperreal. Inhale.