Mga app ng Google
Pangunahing menu

Post a Comment On: Steve Sailer: iSteve

"The Corn Bomb Gap"

13 Comments -

1 – 13 of 13
Anonymous Easily Bemused said...

"THE public debate in America and Israel these days is focused obsessively on whether to attack Iran in order to halt its nuclear weapons ambitions..."

Yikes, and here I thought we Americans were all busy debating gay marriage and Obamacare. Even our lamestream media obsesses over "super-PACs" instead of whether to attack Iran.

I'd bet Obama himself doesn't obsess over attacking Iran.

2/7/12, 8:10 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yay, the blind spot about Israel continues.

2/7/12, 9:02 PM

Anonymous Let's! said...

"Okay, so the threat Syria's chemical warheads pose to Israel is kind of like the threat that Venezuela poses to Florida."

Yes, since Syria's nuclear program is now its, um, former nuclear program.

Muslims...seriously...make friends with Israel. What does it cost you, really?

2/7/12, 11:33 PM

Anonymous Wes said...

Isn't most of the world losing interest in military spending because the US is so incredibly dominant? What would be the point? It's a bit of a Pax Americana. I assume nations on the periphery of the Roman Empire stopped trying to challenge the beast at some point.

So, if world ever loses it's Alpha Dog, isn't there likely to be renewed interest in beefing up militaries? As Iraq showed back in 1990, nations are very willing to cross borders and conquer if the can get away with it. At the moment, most countries think they can't get away with it - for now.

2/8/12, 1:18 AM

Anonymous Jacob Roberson said...

As Chavez is showing Stone a corn-processing plant built by Iranian technicians, he deadpans: "This is where we're building the Iranian atomic bomb ... the Corn Bomb."

I laughed. Then I read:

So, he asks this rich and spoiled looking political wife, "How many pairs of shoes do you own?" She immediately recognizes this reference to Imelda Marcos and chews an abashed Stone out for several minutes for his sexist impertinence.

...and laughed some more. I'm imagining Lula da Silva waddling like a penguin on-camera to "break the ice" with Stone. Then, serious interview time.

2/8/12, 7:50 AM

Anonymous Hunsdon said...

Efraim Halevy said:

This is a certain prescription for war, and Israel would have no choice but to prevent it.

Hunsdon replied:

I believe Mr. Halevy meant, "This is a certain prescription for war, and Israel would have no choice but to wage it."

After all, this "certain prescription" differs from today's situation only in that Assad is still in power in Damascus.

2/8/12, 9:25 AM

Blogger Metternich said...

Venezuela has no weapons or manpower to compete with the US.

Syria has more men and more land area than Israel. If Iran comes through for them, Syria may have more missiles and more money than Israel. Syria certainly has allies with a larger head count than Israel.

Israel has higher quality weapons — the US is a better source of weapons than Iran.

It just isn't a simple no-contest situation. Maybe after Assad falls and the Mad Mullahs are taught a lesson, things will even out.

But the Syrian opposition seems to be dominated by Muslim Brotherhood supporters; they'd be automatic allies of Israel's enemies in Gaza and Egypt...

2/8/12, 1:38 PM

Anonymous Hunsdon said...

Metternich said:
But the Syrian opposition seems to be dominated by Muslim Brotherhood supporters; they'd be automatic allies of Israel's enemies in Gaza and Egypt...

Hunsdon replied: Exactly! For all the reputed Ashkenazi big brain syndrome, it seems that few US neocons ever asked the question, "OK, and then who takes over?" (Here I speak about Iraq and Libya, mostly.)

It's kind of like the underpants gnomes.

1. Overthrow existing regime.

2. ?

3. World peace!

2/8/12, 3:05 PM

Anonymous helene edwards said...

A few weeks ago the NYT Sunday Magazine carried a piece by a writer I'd never heard of who managed to interview Bibi, Barak and the outgoing chief of Mossad on the issue of whether to attack Iran. I don't understand why any of these people would speak to anyone but Sy Hersh on the matter, do you?

2/8/12, 4:38 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

The "liberal" new york times beating the war drum again.. hmm strange.. can't figure out why..

2/8/12, 4:40 PM

Anonymous rob said...

After Irak Attaq Dos, one of the radio radicals maybe Sean Hanity, constantly said that Iraq's "weapons of mass destruction"[sic] had all been moved to Syria. That's why the US army couldn't find any in Iraq.

The WMD issue was the neocon casus belli. It is vile anti-Semitism to consider that the neocons were lying then. Syria will wipe the floor with Israel. QED

2/8/12, 7:18 PM

Anonymous Propeller Island said...

"I don't understand why any of these people would speak to anyone but Sy Hersh on the matter, do you?"

Because it's kabuki theater. Some kind of game is going on, most likely the old fashioned good cop/bad cop routine, with Israel playing the bad cop.

2/8/12, 7:44 PM

Anonymous Pechorin said...

"most of the world outside the Washington-Tel Aviv corridor is losing interest in war"

To be fair, official statements of military spending are sometimes understated. There's also a nice little naval arms race heating up in east asia. That said, your central point - on Israeli warmongering - is undeniably correct.

2/8/12, 8:43 PM

Comments are moderated, at whim.
You can use some HTML tags, such as <b>, <i>, <a>

Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.

You will be asked to sign in after submitting your comment.
OpenID LiveJournal WordPress TypePad AOL