and oil.

Oil.

is that if they don't win, Saturday Night Live might stop lampooning them.

You better watch that kind of talk. Sheesh. And in this thread?

But not to miss an opportunity, bless you for trying.

This is the report I first read about the stealth sale, I think it was linked from HuffPo...

http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=5622

Please tell me if it isn't true.

On the assumption that these seeming lunatics might actually possess a strategy instead of merely the ravings they just published, does it stand to reason that if they advocate a massive pre-emptive war by the United States and can rile a bunch of people up about that, what they really might be aiming to do is create enough tension that they can actually argue "justification" and express "relief" when Israel bombs the Iranian nuclear program "before we got around to it?"

Iran is, after all, just a little bit too big to be grabbed by the neck and thrown up against a wall, which is the accepted neocon strategy for showing the world we mean business.

But hey, Israel is actually a country that could argue with a straight face that Iran presents an actual military threat to them (unlike the US), which might even get around that pesky idea that attacking someone just because you don't like them is a war crime on this planet (silly me, I almost forgot the "unless you're the US" exception to that principle). So we give Israel better means of delivering the blow, then we create the environment in which they could be thanked for doing us a favor, and we beat our chests a while and see what happens.

You have to admit, these nimrods in today's WP must recognize that starting a new war with Iran couldn't really be up near the top of many rational people's agendas these days -- so why publish such claptrap now? As cover for some other agenda, it makes sense; as advocacy of a present use of American military assets, it's f*cking ludicrous. Not that "f*cking ludicrous" has been off limits for US foreign policy over the last eight years, but....

to Nancy Pelosi.

Powell's endorsement speech was a breath of fresh air, for which we should all be grateful. It does not erase criticisms of his past actions, but it is a reminder that he possesses great potential for wisdom and courage.

What he did with those abilities in the past is more than a mixed bag, for he aligned himself with those whose malice is plain. Then again, he left the "service" of the Bush Administration (quit or was fired?) and, to be blunt, there's some chance that his experiences in that administration would make him highly unlikely to blindly drink the Kool-Aid of the Blindly Ambitious in the future. His kind of experience and connections could be of use if used well. If he's an unrepentant fascist or a front line torture advocate, then hell with him.

This is a man -- perhaps one of the most important men from an "insider" perspective and one of the most likely to view his perspective on historical events as being a public trust which he should, in the name of Justice and History, be willing to discuss openly in the right circumstance -- who I really want to have put under oath. A public appointment with congressional hearings might provide the most cathartic and important opportunity to really learn what was going on in the Bush Administration. I'd like to see him given that chance. If he refuses to disclose what he knows about the run-up to Iraq, torture, rendition, anthrax, Guantanamo and the like, then the hell with him and he cannot serve again for an Obama administration. But if he makes a clean break, stands up for the rule of law and the Constitution, and tells the truth, I would consider that as going far toward redemption.

He's not an idiot, and he certainly has made his share of egregious decisions and actions. Some may be willing only to presume the absolute worst of the man, and they may be right. But he did not get where he got by being only malevolent and ruthless, the circumstances of his departure suggest at least some kind of awakening, and he undoubtedly possesses information that the American people need to learn. Trying to re-enter the public domain can and should be conditioned upon coming clean, and he may be just dying for the opportunity to do so. I say we let him explain. Then weigh the facts and the explanation.

Hell, I'd offer him immunity for testimony leading to the arrest and conviction of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, wouldn't you?

And in the four corners of what he said in endorsing Obama, he has done the country a service.

"The way fascists get their way in a democracy is by making everyone think their success is inevitable, when really their success depends entirely on the rest of us simply looking the other way."

Your lips to Pelosi's ears. Impeach Bush and Cheney, then deliver them to The Hague for trial and sentencing for their war crimes.

If the American political topdogs can agree that black is white and up is down, what's with the rest of the world failing to agree? We are, after all, simply trying to make the world Safe, you know, making conditions better for people to get along and not worry about being attacked or snuck up on.

Like, oh, I don't know, selling stealth technology fighter bombers to Israel. That should calm nerves in the region, right? Who could argue that a nuclear-armed Israel with undetectable delivery systems might be perceived as somehow unreasonably dangerous by the neighbors? What is anybody thinking?

http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=5622

We have always been at war with Oceania.