I shouldn't invoke Carter, but I will. The prolonged agony of the Iranian hostage situation (oh, Iran again) demonstrated a lack of leadership. I think the incumbent is more likely to err on the side of excessive restraint circa Carter.
And the whole Biden argument about Iran's uranium not being enriched enough is crap. They have medium-range missiles. Pack a bunch of semi-enriched uranium in the warhead and, while you don't have a bomb, you have a mess.
It is the settled policy of America, that as peace is better than war, war is better than tribute. The United States, while they wish for war with no nation, will buy peace with none"James Madison
It surprises me that both candidates seem to have so much faith in the same intelligence community that led the U.S. into war in Iraq based on completely incorrect information, and more recently bungled the Libya intelligence.
It seems like one of them could have scored points by saying "I'm not about to put the U.S. on the path to war in Iran based solely on speculation from the intelligence community. We've been there and done that in Iraq and I don't want to do it again."
An angle Biden could have worked on Iran would have been to say "Has anyone noticed that Iranian nuclear scientists have been dying prematurely on a regular basis and their nuclear computer systems seem to be having trouble working properly?" After saying that he could flash that big stupid grin and it would actually have been sort of semi-appropriate.
Inside Iran, I'll bet that if the political leadership was told that Obama was being dinged for not doing enough to prevent their nuclear program from progressing, they would be astonished. They might point out that between the targeted assassination of their nuclear scientists, the Stuxnet computer virus and the crippling sanctions, Obama has been far more aggressive on this front that George W. Bush ever was (and that's just the stuff we know about).
In general, though, I'm skeptical of the whole "imminent threat from Iran" narrative. A threat can only be imminent for so long, and then you need to rethink what "imminent" means. We've been wringing our hands about the "imminent" Iranian threat for 10 years now.
One of the things that people often forget about Iran is that while their political leadership is pretty stridently anti-U.S., the Iranian people are not nearly so opposed to the U.S. and western ideas and culture in general. I've known a few Iranians and you wouldn't know they were talking about the same country that the candidates were talking about last night.
Q: “Do you have funny shaped balloons?”
A: “Not unless round is funny.”
MediumTex wrote:
It surprises me that both candidates seem to have so much faith in the same intelligence community that led the U.S. into war in Iraq based on completely incorrect information, and more recently bungled the Libya intelligence.
It seems like one of them could have scored points by saying "I'm not about to put the U.S. on the path to war in Iran based solely on speculation from the intelligence community. We've been there and done that in Iraq and I don't want to do it again."
The major parties have very similar foreign policies, in my view.
In general, though, I'm skeptical of the whole "imminent threat from Iran" narrative. A threat can only be imminent for so long, and then you need to rethink what "imminent" means. We've been wringing our hands about the "imminent" Iranian threat for 10 years now.
Kind of like "LTT are about to crash"...can we devise a PP of foreign policy?
MediumTex wrote:
In general, though, I'm skeptical of the whole "imminent threat from Iran" narrative. A threat can only be imminent for so long, and then you need to rethink what "imminent" means. We've been wringing our hands about the "imminent" Iranian threat for 10 years now.
There is predictive intelligence that the draconian sanctions have indeed worked and that the mullahs are split between developing energy vs the bomb with the uranium.
Last edited by MachineGhost on Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes
Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet. I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
MediumTex wrote:
In general, though, I'm skeptical of the whole "imminent threat from Iran" narrative. A threat can only be imminent for so long, and then you need to rethink what "imminent" means. We've been wringing our hands about the "imminent" Iranian threat for 10 years now.
There is predictive intelligence that the draconian sanctions have indeed worked and that the mullahs are split between developing energy vs the bomb with the uranium.
I wonder if anyone told G.W. Bush about the history of the Iranian nuclear threat prior to his "axis of evil" speech? When he made those remarks, the Iranian nuclear threat narrative had been floating around for almost a quarter century.
Talk about stale intelligence.
Q: “Do you have funny shaped balloons?”
A: “Not unless round is funny.”
AND our intelligency agency apparatus says that Iran is NOT anywhere close to having the bomb.
So who are you going to believe?
"All generous minds have a horror of what are commonly called 'Facts'. They are the brute beasts of the intellectual domain." -- Thomas Hobbes
Disclaimer: I am not a broker, dealer, investment advisor, physician, theologian or prophet. I should not be considered as legally permitted to render such advice!
MediumTex wrote:
I think that Ryan looks like a vampire.
I think he looks like he could be a cousin of Frank Perdue the chicken guy.
My wife thinks he's handsome. I'll try not to think about what that may say about my own looks. :-)
No money in our jackets and our jeans are torn/
your hands are cold but your lips are warm _ . /
MediumTex wrote:
I think that Ryan looks like a vampire.
I think he looks like he could be a cousin of Frank Perdue the chicken guy.
My wife thinks he's handsome. I'll try not to think about what that may say about my own looks. :-)
I wouldn't call him handsome.
About the best I could do would be to say that he seems like a very nice person and he appears to be quite fit.
But being personable and fit are also qualities I would expect to see in a vampire.
Q: “Do you have funny shaped balloons?”
A: “Not unless round is funny.”
About the best I could do would be to say that he seems like a very nice person and he appears to be quite fit.
But being personable and fit are also qualities I would expect to see in a vampire.
There's only one vampiric thing I can see in him, and that's his widow's peak.
If you type his name into google images, Eddie Munster does pop up as an alternate search.
No money in our jackets and our jeans are torn/
your hands are cold but your lips are warm _ . /
Simonjester wrote:
its probably to obvious a comparison but.... aren't most politicians charming and charismatic predators sucking the life blood out of their natural prey the constituent
Maybe that is what I was sensing.
Q: “Do you have funny shaped balloons?”
A: “Not unless round is funny.”
The prolonged agony of the Iranian hostage situation (oh, Iran again) demonstrated a lack of leadership. I think the incumbent is more likely to err on the side of excessive restraint circa Carter.
