TW: A couple of gratuitous thoughts for Friday morning:
1) W. Bush/Cheney et al. publically espoused the 1% doctrine relative to terrorism, as in if there was a 1% chance of terrorists commiting an act the U.S. had to act to pre-empt their actions (Cheney said as much literally on Meet the Press). We spent hundreds of billions on such pre-emptions. Why are the neo-cons et al. willing to do so with terrorism but shriek and moan in re. spending billions relative to pre-empting climate change where the majority of scientists are in agreement? Thoughts?
2) AfPak. This is going to be THE decision of the Obama presidency. Health care is sucking the vast majority of political oxygen these days with a little left over for skirmishes on race, financial reform etc. But once health care falls off the front page by the holidays then AfPak will become THE issue of the day. Iraq was easy in comparison. By 2005 half the country thought it was a disastrous foray, somewhat less than half thought we needed to leave "with honor" (i.e. "surge") in order to cover up the mess. There is no such relatively binary choice in AfPak. Get ready for a rumble.
That is all.
No comments:
Post a Comment