STATE OF DELUSION
What is this nonsense about a secret plan to invade Iran? Our president hasn't the political capital left to buy a pack of gum.
The fact that our war machine is ineffective at controlling unwilling populations should be obvious to anyone above the order of cockroach. That all the Democrats, and half the Republicans are dead against the concept of a surging George Bush, tells you all you need to know. Except for the "Bilbo Rileys," the Long Island Martinis, the Rush Limbaughs, and the Barney Bushes of the world, the president is all alone in his delusional thinking.
There may have been a time when the US could have gone pop-pop-pop and blasted Iran's nuke facilities to smithereens. But that time is not now. Our commander in chief couldn't fight his way out of a wet wonton.
The best way to roll back Iran's technological advances is to adopt measures that keep oil prices low. Low oil prices will cause the Iranian economy to implode, the food and energy subsidies that prop up the regime to end, and the government to collapse. We've seen this before, in the Soviet Union.
Despite what the aforementioned loyalists will tell you, Ronald Reagan had no more to do with the demise of the Soviet Union than Bonzo the chimp. The Soviet Union broke down from an economy, propped up on high oil prices, collapsing when prices fell. As Thomas Friedman wrote in today's OP-ED column, this whiplash effect was the one-two punch that the Soviet economy could not withstand.
Friedman writes that, according to Vladimir Mau, president of Russia's Academy of National Economy, the precipitous rise in oil prices in the 70's lulled the Kremlin into believing it could afford to subsidize goods at home while invading Afghanistan abroad. The subsequent collapse of oil prices in the 80's found the Soviets overextended, and their economy collapsed. The lesson here, according to Mau: the more oil you have, the less policy you need. But don't base your economy on high oil prices.
Falling oil prices today would cause the already unpopular Iranian government to curtail the subsidies that are mollifying the population. So, as Thomas Friedman points out, rather than containment, or engagement, ending our oil addiction will kill the windfalls sustaining the rogue state of Iran.
If George Bush would like to take one of our Arkansas National Guard jets and strafe some Iranian nu-cu-lar facilities, I'm OK with that. He will run out of fuel somewhere in the mid-Atlantic, and we could end this national nightmare two years ahead of schedule.
What is this nonsense about a secret plan to invade Iran? Our president hasn't the political capital left to buy a pack of gum.
The fact that our war machine is ineffective at controlling unwilling populations should be obvious to anyone above the order of cockroach. That all the Democrats, and half the Republicans are dead against the concept of a surging George Bush, tells you all you need to know. Except for the "Bilbo Rileys," the Long Island Martinis, the Rush Limbaughs, and the Barney Bushes of the world, the president is all alone in his delusional thinking.
There may have been a time when the US could have gone pop-pop-pop and blasted Iran's nuke facilities to smithereens. But that time is not now. Our commander in chief couldn't fight his way out of a wet wonton.
The best way to roll back Iran's technological advances is to adopt measures that keep oil prices low. Low oil prices will cause the Iranian economy to implode, the food and energy subsidies that prop up the regime to end, and the government to collapse. We've seen this before, in the Soviet Union.
Despite what the aforementioned loyalists will tell you, Ronald Reagan had no more to do with the demise of the Soviet Union than Bonzo the chimp. The Soviet Union broke down from an economy, propped up on high oil prices, collapsing when prices fell. As Thomas Friedman wrote in today's OP-ED column, this whiplash effect was the one-two punch that the Soviet economy could not withstand.
Friedman writes that, according to Vladimir Mau, president of Russia's Academy of National Economy, the precipitous rise in oil prices in the 70's lulled the Kremlin into believing it could afford to subsidize goods at home while invading Afghanistan abroad. The subsequent collapse of oil prices in the 80's found the Soviets overextended, and their economy collapsed. The lesson here, according to Mau: the more oil you have, the less policy you need. But don't base your economy on high oil prices.
Falling oil prices today would cause the already unpopular Iranian government to curtail the subsidies that are mollifying the population. So, as Thomas Friedman points out, rather than containment, or engagement, ending our oil addiction will kill the windfalls sustaining the rogue state of Iran.
If George Bush would like to take one of our Arkansas National Guard jets and strafe some Iranian nu-cu-lar facilities, I'm OK with that. He will run out of fuel somewhere in the mid-Atlantic, and we could end this national nightmare two years ahead of schedule.
posted by R. Reynolds at 8:38 AM
13 comments
