Economist on Bush

50 years of the EU

A couple of articles for your perusal.

I'm reading along in the first article and thinking, true, true, true. And I'm asking myself, does James agree? Then I hit a few bumps and think oh, I disagree with this, and this and this. I notice the name of the author -- John Mickelthwait -- a memorable name. And I realize I really like this guy. He and another writer whose name escapes me wrote a lengthy piece on globalization some years ago. I made copies and handed them out to friends with interest in the subject. It may have been an excerpt from a book on the subject if I recall. I have paid attention to his writing since.

Here's what I agreed with:

and this...

and this...

Then it becomes less plausible when we get to this next part.

While I too am an optimist by nature and want to afford most people a generous benefit of a doubt as to their intentions, I would NOT extend such generosity to the leadership of North Korea or Iran. Iran can dilly dally around with this nuclear development and play many games. They can say they have a right to have nukes. (after all, so does Israel, as frequently goes the short-sighted reasoning from the Middle East) They can say their nuclear ambitions are only about "clean energy sources" and not bombs. At the same time the Iranians are fully aware of that the US has been surprised to find itself in the "check" position on the international geo-political chess board when it comes to Iran. The king is trapped. For however long it takes Iran to build this massive nuclear arsenal/green peacable energy source, the words will continue to fly. This could take years without any direct attacks from Iran on theh US or vice versa.

Meanwhile, behind the curtains is another potential threat requiring no nukes. Iran's stated intention of becoming the sole superpower in the region. The potential of an oil embargo and not just of Iranian oil. And, most of all, their control of the shipping routes. Without any nukes, and indeed, with small flotillas of suicide boats in the Straits of Hormuz, along with old fashioned mining of the straits, they could shut off more than half the world's oil exports.

North Korea seems to me in a far weaker position. They have nothing to sell save more of their nuclear secrets. They have a large army and a starving population. They are a client state of China and as such, at China's mercy. But they too know they can blab pugnaciously as much as they like and nothing will come of it except for the occasional "Ewww, naughty, naughty, Kim!"

So, I see this more along the lines of the old Doonesbury cartoon where the Founding Fathers are drawing up the Constitution and one of them asks, "What about the slaves?" Pause. Silence. Then another Founding Father pipes up, "Let's leave it for future generations! Make 'em feel more involved." The Iranian and North Korean crises are likely to drag out with words alone coming from the US. It's not as if the UN, Europe or Canada is going to do anything more than talk either. The threat will grow. I do not believe anything Bush is likely to do will in any way, shape or form prevent either Axis of Evil from going ahead with their bomb building strategies. And the whole heap will be left on the doorstep of the next incoming US President. (Obama, is my prediction)

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

Speaking of 2007 and the future of Iran, here's a poll from AlJazeera.net:

Will sanctions work against Iran? A. Yes B. No Number of Pollers: 19200 Close Date: 31/12/2006 A. 25.2% B. 74.8%

Looks like the "No's" have it by a wide margin. What do AlJazeera.net readers know that John Micklethwait doesn't about the potential efficacy of sanctions against Iran???

Susan

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

Ahmanidinejad for the Gallows!

Thanks friend, my family are Iranian, you should engage your brain before pressing the 'post message' button.

x-ray
if your back's against the wall, turn around and write on it...

X-Ray, I pulled John before about advocating Iranian mass murder on a public message board. Such sentiments trouble me greatly.

Is this reflective of general right-wing attitudes here on the board and in the wider US? I say this because I was the only one to challenge John about his worldview the last time...

LR - If I said what I really thought about John Neff's post I would most likely get banned from this board.

x-ray
if your back's against the wall, turn around and write on it...

That is most likely because others don't take a flip, off-the-cuff comment as "advocating Iranian mass murder." And I think John explained as much last time.

I wouldn't begin to discuss the negative ramifications of a neutron bomb in Iran because I don't take John seriously and because I KNOW John. If someone else posted a serious suggestion of that nature, I might sarcastically dismiss the person for their lack of comprehension. But this is not in that realm. And I think you both know it.

As for the (hmphf) -- "reflective of general right-wing attitudes here on the board and in the wider US" -- (well, I never!) I think you know the answer to that as well, James. If I could speak for John, my guess is his comment is more reflective of a general frustration with words coming out of Iran from the mullah driven Ahmadinejad -- and not directed toward Ray's relatives or any other Iranian citizens merely going about their lives, not advocating the destruction of Big and Little Satan. Words of overstatement such as advocating neutron bombs (the ones never employed in the history of the planet) seem pretty obviously not to be a Neff Middle East Foreign Policy proposal.

So, yeah, calling someone on their overstatement -- fine and good. But asking if this is the general yadayada of the general right members of the gazette and the US is .... well, just a little lame. As a member of the right wing (so you say) contingency of the Gazette and of the USA, I reject the stereotype.

Now let's start having that same kind of hypersensitive reaction to the "troubling" words that can be directly accessed and translated on MEMRI.org.

In the meantime, I love you all the same and wish you fabulous New Year!!!

Susan

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

A) Its the third time he's came out with this 'joke' Susan. Some people don't find such comments funny. One of the times it was said, it was mid-rant so simply putting it down to a joke isn't good enough, sorry.

b) I don't think its unfair to ask if its indicative of attitudes given that nobody else on here pulled him on it in the Mozart thread. Not only did nobody call him on it but he was actually engaged with. Maybe some folks are actually offended by such comments and its just because he's lynch's buddy they're saying nothing, I dunno. Personally, I'd pull anybody on inflammatory comments no matter who they are.

You may know John and his sense of humour personally but he's old enough to answer for himself so lets hear it - was it a joke or not ?

P.S. Happy new year to you too :-)

I didn't say I thought it was a joke, James. Nor do I think it was meant to be humorous. I only characterized it as a "flip, off-the-cuff comment" and one of frustration with official Iranian rhetoric. See, there's a difference. I do not believe John was seriously advocating Iranian-cide.

However your larger point that I get from you, is that careless words, when they come in multiples and when they are not properly countered, can build to a crescendo with the least discriminating of readers/listeners feeling comfortable using the words which can lead to the uninformed, intellectually lazy adapting some of those careless words as mottos or themes to live by.

On that point, I am in total agreement!!! Which is why I so resent the Hitler-Bush banners. The Israeli flag distorted into a swastika. The loosely sputtered accusations of fascist this and theocratic that when applied to the US government. Which is why I made an ironclad vow with myself to not use defamatory language -- even "cute" or "funny" nicknames -- in reference to leaders of the Democrat party or leaders of the Western countries with whom I disagree. I even try to extend that rule to leaders of terrorist states or organizations too but may occasionally slip up on that. I won't and don't dance a little jig when a Qusai or Uday is killed or when their father is hung. It's a little grim for that. But I am pleased by their absence from the planet.

By now you know I consider the present war to be a war of Western ideals versus Islamist ideals. I know for a fact certain that many Western Muslims are in my camp.  I'm quite certain -- given a choice between an Ahmadinejad world or an any Western country world, there are large numbers of citizens of Islamic majority countries who would also lean West.  I believe the death and destruction is going to accelerate for a looooooong time before the pendulum settles into its still posture. At such time, though I don't expect I'll be alive, I would very much like to see the West prevail in this amorphous stateless battle. Iran is a heavy duty player in this international struggle which is why, on occasion, you are likely to hear intemperate expressions of animosity toward the country as a whole. In the larger scheme of world events and our discussion of them, I don't weight such comments very heavily though I understand both yours and Ray's stance otherwise.

Susan

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

If the Mozart thread (and this one) are John Neff's idea of humour then he is one disturbed, unfunny individual. I can't believe people were making light of his comments on that particular thread. He is an embarrassment who doesn't deserve the level of respect he seems to get around here.

If this gets me banned, for upsetting 'Lynch's buddy', then so be it.

John Neff you are an asshole.

x-ray
if your back's against the wall, turn around and write on it...

Hello X. In the interest of sorting out the instant thread,- a project that may well divert animosities towards me-which would be OK - a positive thing actually at this point, I believe a background of the principle members involved would be helpful to understand where people are coming from. Obviously such personal information is at the election of the principles. X, you are of Iranian parentage either both or on one side . May I ask under what circumstances and when your parent(s) left Iran? For example was it to escape the Shah and company, or the introduction of the Ayatollah et al ? Or unrelated to either factor?

It would be helpful to know John’s history regarding the Holocaust, it’s aftermath and effect on his family and community.

(I will research the " Mozart" thread later because I never read or have forgotten the intercourse therein.) With that outstanding, a reading of John’s lines at this thread is in order. John calls for a neutron bomb for Ahminadijad. The object is Ahminadijad not the Iranian people. Now the actual real world problem of this proposed action would include collateral damage that could effect innocent Iranians, which, I think is the unintended stumbling block here. The second sentence calls for the gallows for Ahminadijad-- alone. So that phrase certainly, is only directed at Ahminadijad.

Since Ahminadijad took over Iran his direct statements about wiping the Israelis off the map with nuclear bombs has been threatened and repeated.. I would guess the barbs on the thread here are a direct answer to Mr. Ahminadijad and his calls for the nukes and the extermination of 6 million remaining Jews in Israel-- by Ahminadijad. Certainly not any annihilation of the Iranian people.

What do you think at this point?

Blessed ( or damned ) is the peacemaker. We don’t need nukes launched in anger anywhere on the globe. Talk about global warming !

Okay, I've said my piece on the subject.  Hopefully, this can be reconciled though not by Raymond or me. 

I'll only draw a teensy distinction between America and Iran; Bush and Ahmadinejad.  

I am finished.

Susan 

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

My favourite publication on the race for the Presidency

Good overview there, James. I'll bet Al Gore and John Kerry would be disappointed though.

Haha, it's not too late to make those Hillary/McCain wagers, folks! I'm taking on all comers who believe either of these two will be the presidential candidate for their respective party. The din has dimmed lately, I've noticed.

But they [Congressional Dems now in power] will try to keep the public’s attention firmly on the administration’s mishandling of its biggest foreign venture.

Haha, that will be a fresh approach! Like the Dems waited until winning over Congress for that. And like they have the answer to the "mishandling." I liked the line I posted yesterday from John NYTimes Burns --

...we in the press who are always so smart and, if you will, so self-righteous, that we always know how it should  be done.

Two years ago when we sat down to dinner in our blast-walled compounds around Baghdad, we had plenty of ideas about what they should be doing and what they weren't doing.

I have to say those ideas have dwindled and when we sit around the table at the NY Times and try to imagine something that can save this -- in the sense of standing up some kind of a stable government here -- and get American troops home, it's extremely difficult to imagine what that formula would be.   

The ideas have dwindled. I see the 'biggest foreign venture' as getting worse, expanding its borders and still being on the front burner for more than one upcoming presidential inauguration. Unfortunately. And since fire is on my mind this dry, windy winter day, I think this foreign venture blaze will have to burn itself out which could take years and many more lives of many different nationalities.

Aware that she [Hillary Clinton] is unpopular among conservatives...

Hillary unpopular with conservatives, huh?  Hillary is also unpopular with liberals and other Dems. Her high polling, it seems to me, is a combination of high regard for her husband and name recognition. Since the country is more conservative than liberal and since it is necessary for a Democrat to have -- as they say in the music biz -- crossover potential, her chances are minimized. Don't even get me started on how the Dems won't take this opportunity to show their feminist nature by running the first woman presidential candidate.  Never an easier way to make a few bucks than betting against the candidacy of Hillary R. Clinton. Of course that implies that those who bet will be honorable about paying up come 2008.

I still like Barak Obama's chances. His inexperience is a plus if he can rally an impressive team of experienced and serious side-kicks. His wife is also a winner. Republican neighbor (okay, she's closeted) told me she met him in DC at an AIPAC conference and liked him very much. She'd cross political lines to vote for him if the election were tomorrow. If he doesn't do anything to screw up anytime soon, I think his chances are excellent. If it comes to pass, Obama could offer some gratitude to President Palmer.

John McCain = the Republican the Left thinks they love. Hahaha. His bipartisan creds will be shot once those endorsements of Bush from years gone by are played and replayed. Same for the remaining members of the Right who think he's okay. Then they'll play up his coziness with John F. Kerry. 72 with several bouts of melanoma, tempermental, stubborn to a fault and tends to focus on the petty -- lest we forget the whole television-movie clean-up project he and Lieberman co-authored.

I still like Giuliani. Spotty personal life? Must mean divorce/s. Oh big deal. But I have heard that his present wife makes Teresa Heinz seem normal. Wives can make or break a candidate. Remember when Kitty Dukakis admitted to drinking (ugh!) nail polish remover when she was out of booze?  Eek, that's bad for a candidate!  Giuliani = my top pick. But since I'm usually out of step, my guess is I won't get this wish.

No such doubts assail Mr Romney. After making a fortune in venture capital and rescuing the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics, he was a reasonably successful Republican governor of one of the most liberal states, Massachusetts. His pitch will be that he gets things done—for instance, he worked with Democrats to create Massachusetts’s universal health-insurance plan. His handicap among some voters will be that he is a Mormon.

Romney's dad was the governor of Michigan way back when I was too young to vote but still followed the race. Somewhere in my archives I have a polaroid picture of the two of us taken at a shopping center where George Romney was campaigning. Yes, JFK's being Catholic was an issue in the 1960 election but I don't recall a PEEP about Romney being a (GASP!) Mormon shortly after but still in the 1960s. Did Mormonism become less acceptable in the past 40 years?

It's an impossible job being the President of the United States at any time but especially now. Such an era-ist comment, but it's true. There is no one capable of handling the job but someone's gotta do it. Whoever has the job will necessarily fail and it can only be hoped that the successes outweigh the failures.  Though few will notice the successes when there are so many outlets to note the failures.  I have a feeling that the good will, both nationally and internationally, that might accompany an Obama presidency could give his presidency a jump start none of the others would experience. His honeymoon stage might last a little longer than others. But there is a dark cloud in my mind that wonders if these next few presidencies to come mark the end of the American primacy.

Susan

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

My money is on a white male for the next president. And you can take that to the bank!

anyone wanna bet against? Susan ? go on I'll give you 7/1

Actually, the odds are way in your favor, James, if we look to the past. 

But you're not taking this into consideration. The pin-up factor goes a long way in the US and A!

Susan 

     
“Half a truth is often a great lie.”

Ben Franklin

So, no chance then ?? lol