Author Topic: We know all sane people hate King W & now we know why  (Read 1127 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mucho

  • Guest
We know all sane people hate King W & now we know why
« on: May 21, 2007, 03:07:34 PM »

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-ferguson21may21,0,802681.column?coll=la-opinion-center
From the Los Angeles Times
NIALL FERGUSON

The world as Shakespearean tragedy
Judging by the body count, modern global politics look headed for the bloody final act of a Bard tragedy.
Niall Ferguson

May 21, 2007

'ALL THE WORLD'S a stage," observes Jacques in "As You Like It." "And all the men and women merely players."

No sphere of human life is more theatrical than politics. And seldom has the world's political stage seemed more Shakespearean than it does today — in "The Tragedy of King George." To judge by the number of bodies that currently litter it, we appear to be nearing the end of Act V. By the concluding scenes of Shakespeare's greatest political tragedies — "Hamlet," "Julius Caesar," "King Lear" and "Macbeth" — nearly all the principal characters lie dead. So it is with King George, the tale of an unworldly fellow who ascends the throne of a great empire, responds heroically to an unprovoked attack, then wreaks havoc by turning from retaliation to preemption.

The latest corpse to slump lifeless beneath the proscenium arch is that of Paul Wolfowitz, who last week finally announced that he would resign as president of the World Bank. Another central character — British Prime Minister Tony Blair — has taken the political equivalent of slow-acting poison.

Think back to 2003, to the invasion of Iraq. One after another, the politicians who most strongly supported the decision have been ousted from office.

As in "Julius Caesar," the fault is not in the central characters' stars but in themselves. President Bush's dominant character traits — his decisiveness and tenacity — at first appeared to be strengths. But once he had been convinced by his advisors that the attacks of 9/11 furnished a pretext for the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, these became weaknesses.

As in "Macbeth," King George was soon "in blood, steeped in so far" that turning back seemed no more attractive than wading onward. Remember, the corpses that litter this stage can already be counted in the tens, if not the hundreds, of thousands.

And, as in "King Lear," the whole catastrophe has stemmed from a fatal confusion at the outset between the true and the false, enemies and friends. Lear succumbs to the flattery of the ugly sisters, Regan and Goneril, and casts out the blunt but honest Cordelia (not to mention the straight-talking Kent).

The mistaken identity in the tragedy of King George was that of the real enemy in the post-9/11 war on terror. It is almost certain that the hijackers hailed from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Lebanon. The chief architect of the plot, Osama bin Laden, also was a Saudi. Contrast this list of countries with the "axis of evil" identified by Bush in his 2002 State of the Union address: North Korea, Iran and Iraq. Bush was right to target Afghanistan in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 because the Taliban regime was sheltering Al Qaeda's leadership. But the decision to overthrow Hussein was one of history's great non sequiturs.

The real enemy in the global war on terror is not the "axis of evil" but the "axis of allies." Today, the countries most likely to produce another 9/11 are not Iran, much less North Korea, but countries long regarded as (after Israel) America's most reliable allies in the greater Middle East. Step forward, Saudi Arabia (almost certainly still the biggest source of funding for radical Islamists) and Pakistan (definitely their one-stop shop for nuclear weaponry).

There is, in short, a twist in this tale. Before the curtain can fall on "The Tragedy of King George," we need at least three more scenes to decide the fates of three crucial characters: the only principals left standing aside from King George himself.

First, we need a scene in Israel. Since the failure of the war against Hezbollah in Lebanon, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's popularity has been in free fall. His current approval rating is about 2%, by comparison with which King George is a pop idol. Somehow, Olmert is clinging to political life. But he surely cannot last much longer. What happens next will be crucial; if Benjamin Netanyahu returns to power, the probability of a military confrontation with Iran goes above 50%. Remember, Netanyahu compared Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Hitler. "It is the year 1938", he recently declared, "and Iran is Germany."

Then we need a scene in Saudi Arabia. Here the key figure is Prince Bandar bin Sultan, who, as Saudi ambassador to the United States, was one of the leading advocates of the invasion of Iraq. Since October 2005 he has been in Riyadh as secretary-general of the National Security Council, where he is said to be lobbying hard for another attack: This time — you guessed it — on Iran.

Finally, the action needs to shift eastward to Pakistan, where it is the future of President Pervez Musharraf that hangs in the balance. After eight years of military dictatorship, Pakistan's democratic forces are stirring. But watch out — these include the Islamist coalition known as the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal.

You thought this play was nearly over. But Act V has only just begun. With war looming between Iran and Israel, and Pakistan on the brink of an upheaval that could well end with Islamists in power, the worst bloodshed has yet to come.

nferguson@latimescolumnists.com




Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: We know all sane people hate King W & now we know why
« Reply #1 on: May 21, 2007, 03:22:04 PM »
Much ado about nothing.

Mucho

  • Guest
Re: We know all sane people hate King W & now we know why
« Reply #2 on: May 21, 2007, 06:13:43 PM »
Much ado about nothing.

You are quite right. The Bushdiot is a whole lot of nothing.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: We know all sane people hate King W & now we know why
« Reply #3 on: May 21, 2007, 06:54:49 PM »
Silly article for numerous reasons:
1.  The attack on Iraq was not some kind of "mistake" that Bush launched out of fear of WMD, it was a deliberate attempt to grab a major geopolitically strategic asset, and while the cost may seem high to the average American, it is actually dirt -cheap:  the lives of 3500 hillbillies of zero to negligible political influence and half a trill of TAXPAYER money which otherwise might have gone to waste on health care for the bottom 10% of the population, housing, education - - crap like that, which Bush and his pals can buy for themselves ten times over without putting a dent in their personal wealth.  The cost in Arab Muslim lives isn't even worth mentioning - - as far as Bush and his handlers are concerned, those guys were born dead.  And the jury's still out on whether this little caper will succeed or not - - nobody's withdrawing anybody anytime soon.  It's a big gamble - - as long as there's no major shitstorm anywhere else - - Taiwan Straits, N. Korea, Eastern Europe - - Bush and his successors in the "opposition" (BWAHAHAHAHA!) Democratic Party just might pull the whole thing off.  And they've been pretty lucky so far.  China hasn't even as much as flicked a spitball in Taiwan's direction.

2.  Olmert is dead meat and his successor is . . . Benjamin Netanyahu.  Who happens to be on the exact same wavelength as Bush.

3.  The Saudi Arabian government is not in any immediate danger of being replaced from the left and neither is Musharraf.   Even if Musharraf is assassinated (probably a 50/50 chance) his successor will come from the same clique of officers now bought and paid for by the CIA.  Or does anybody think the CIA was so dumb as to put all its money on Musharraf?

4.  Assuming the planets line up for an attack on Iran, a much tougher target than Iraq, there will be the added advantages of Israeli, and Saudi support with Israel being the uninvited skunk at the party - - uninvited but then nobody barred the gate to it either; and at the cost of another 5,000 or 6,000 otherwise useless hillbillies, the U.S. will be where Cheney and his backers always wanted it to be: sitting atop the oil fields of both Iraq and Iran, with as many bases as it wants or needs right in the heart of the Middle East.  And how bad is that for lil' buddy Israel?  How bad is that for the oil industry?  How bad is that for American interests generally when economic rivals like India and China have to come to them to slake their ever-expanding thirst for oil?

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: We know all sane people hate King W & now we know why
« Reply #4 on: May 22, 2007, 12:38:14 PM »
Do you suppose that China could survive the loss of Taiwan as a banker? , just because it converts the whole place to slavery does not replace the loss of the bank.

Taiwan serves as broker too.

If the Chineese leadership is not entirely foolish they will win Taiwan by wooing rather than rape , then they could have their bankers and their honor too.

Might they be entirely foolish?

Foolishness in high places is not really unusual , but the Chineese have seemed level headed for a cupple of decades .

Could China survive the loss of its biggest customer , the US?
 No

Could China survive the default of its biggest debtor?

I don't know that one.
I would hate to find out by experiment .

Can China , or Russia or the Whole of the Middle East survive on the food they can raise on their own territory?

Only Just , no and Hahahahahaa!


Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: We know all sane people hate King W & now we know why
« Reply #5 on: May 22, 2007, 04:23:21 PM »
I don't see the Chinese losing Taiwan as a banker or a broker.  Taiwan's money will stay or leave if there's a Chinese invasion, and if it leaves, the Chinese will have a good legal case for getting it back, but regardless of how well they do in the World Court, sooner or later whoever winds up with the money will have to find somewhere to lend it to and if the deal is right, it'll just as soon be lent to China as anywhere else.  And if those good folks don't lend to China, they'll lend it to countries A, B and C and whoever would have lent to A, B and C  now has to find a new borrower, and guess what? there is China.

"Capital has no conscience and no fatherland."  [John Buchan, "The Thirty-Nine Steps."]  (The rest of the quote was, "And behind it all is the Jew," but that's another story.  I believe in the first part of the quote, and I love"The Thirty-Nine Steps.")

Sooner or later, China will take back Taiwan.  It's a question of strength and opportunity.  They are very patient.  And their strength is growing.

I don't know that the U.S. is a bigger customer of China than the EU, but yeah, they could survive the loss of any customer.  Their internal market is potentially the biggest explosion of consumer purchasing power the world has ever seen.  The question is can the U.S. really survive the loss of a huge volume of inexpensive merchandise from soup to nuts?    Disappoint the American Consumer and you'd have a really angry populace.   They can put up with a lot of shit, lying, incompetence, war-mongering, but I would say, don't fuck with their standard of living.   Ever.  Especially not for political reasons like Taiwanese independence, which nobody gives a shit about.

You also need to ask yourself if the U.S. businessman really wants to be shut out of the China market by his own government?  And would it matter to him if the reason given was the sterling cause of Taiwan's freedom? 

Could the Chinese stand a default by America?  Never happen.  Don't even bother to ask.  Stay in the real world.  Can America stand paying a huge debt load to China?  Different question.  Ask how well the German people did when Germany was paying off its Versailles debts to the Allies.  The rich did fine as always, the people not so fine.

Your food question was ludicrous.  China will trade for its food, the Mid East likewise.  You think Manhattan feeds itself?  It does not.

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: We know all sane people hate King W & now we know why
« Reply #6 on: May 22, 2007, 04:27:25 PM »
"Your food question was ludicrous.  China will trade for its food, the Mid East likewise.  You think Manhattan feeds itself?  It does not."
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]


Your understanding of food and capitalism is perfect, how is it that you do not understand oil and capitalism the same way?