Obama would be wise to hold a press conference and say "welcome to the world of a completely ineffectual US in international affairs, courtesy of Bush/McCain's diplomatic and military disasters and overstretch." Instead, he'll probably come at him from the right, using some unsightly, incoherent Frankenstein's monster of a position.Since counters seem the order of the day, we should start an Obamastein counter. His health-care plan should be at the top of the list.
I am more and more certain that there is zero chance of a confrontation with Russia, even with a President Palin. The reason is that Russia's military is still too weak to confront the US military in open battle, and they've made it pretty clear that any attack on Russian territory will be immediately answered by a nuclear strike. Even though they successfully copied US tactics in their swift strike into Georgia, they suffered relatively heavy losses from anti-aircraft fire.
Congress has started hearings into what role the US played in instigating Georgia to move forces into S. Ossetia, as well as investigating who drew first blood, and Iran was a huge part of the discussion. With this in mind, check out this crazy assertion that Bush goaded Georgia as cover for a limitednuclear strike on Iran. On a sidenote, I just learned that the price of oil rose dramatically in June following rumors of a thwarted nuclear strike on Iran.
Everything the US is doing pretty much plays into Russia's hands. So keeping with the meme of watching the actions of our new Chinese overlords, I think the real action is in the Asian response which has been politely negative. Russia can't be too happy about that.
Posts
2 comments:
We all know that it's fun--whenever questions arise as to the true intentions of some apparently religio-fanatical Republican politician--to paraphrase James Watt on the unimportance of the environment vis-a-vis Jesus' Second Coming--but does it hit the mark? Does any of us believe that the religious instinct is stronger in the James Watts and Sarah Palins of the world than the venal instinct? Sarah Palin can't really be more comfortable than I am with the idea of nuclear holocaust with Russia because she thinks she's going to Paradise the instant she dies, can she? Wouldn't that be a far too rational attitude to hold, given all the wacky stuff they believe in?
IDK, but if Kim Jong Il has the bomb, and India and Pakistan have the bomb, and no one's pulled the trigger yet, what does that say? Haven't all the close calls been between the "responsible" powers? I think there's a strong argument to make that the quickest path to stability in Middle East is Iran getting the bomb. Fanatics on all sides would no longer be able to act outside their borders.
I think having a nuclear button at your disposal sobers you the fuck up. But, the end of the cold war also seems to have started this ear worm that nuclear war is no longer apocalyptic, which I think leads to an itchy finger. Out of my ass, my guess is that the more certain President Palin is that the nuclear option means the Second Coming, the less likely she is to use that option, because who really wants that?
I love writing President Palin. Gets my hadron collider spinning. BTW, cleaned up the giants posting. Hope it makes even less sense.
Post a Comment